Isn't DayGame a lot easier if you're Chad-tier?

[Sega Genesis]

either you are a super magnetic dude that plays at cosmic level

Im not playing anything tight. Quite the opposite. If you do it right, the environment js the backdrop and slowly fades out as the rapport and connection develop. But as you can see around here, I make friends everywhere I go

Dw3 I believe you and I think this is what @Bigpapa may have been referring to..

The only difference is you're not intentionally "playing" at a cosmic level or any level; it's simply who you are, your energy/vibe and it comes naturally to you.

I tend to be the same, from what I've been told and how people (both men and women) respond to me, so I understand it.

 

[SW15]

if you're meeting them via Online dating 80-90% of first dates will fail and won't land you a 2nd date for any number of reasons I,e, girl is not attracted to you, not feeling the "spark", you may not be attrfacted to her etc. This can get costly very fast.

Using tech methods to arrange dates is the best way to arrange a lot of costly dates that won't result in sex. It's a fantastic way to waste money.

When I go on a first date or even a hang out at my place or hers I do not have expectations to see them again. You can do everything right, bang a girl all night silly, make her *** etc. In 2025 it does not gurantee you to see her again compared to 20 years ago.

The threshold for getting a 2nd date has dramatically increased in the last 20 years. This is because women have so many more options now as compared to what they once had.

So Why not meet somewhere free/cheap? I've been on both sides this year spending tons of money on a first date and not even get a kiss, to having a girl come straight to my house and her doming me up and eating my taint.

The best thing to do is to keep costs down. In terms of daygame, some of those approaches can be zero cost approaches. It costs nothing to approach a woman at a public park or on a trail/path.

All first date costs should be as inexpensive as possible. A lot of inexpensive activity-based 1st/2nd dates can't be done on weeknights, so drinks dates in bars tend to be a default given scheduling. Drinks in bars dates should be kept inexpensive. Some bars will have lower priced drinks than others.

 

[Divorced w 3]

Dw3 I believe you and I think this is what @Bigpapa may have been referring to..

The only difference is you're not intentionally "playing" at a cosmic level or any level; it's simply who you are, your energy/vibe and it comes naturally to you.

I tend to be the same, from what I've been told and how people (both men and women) respond to me, so I understand it.

It’s called BDE

 

[Sega Genesis]

It’s called BDE

Lol I'll buy that (for you), but I don't have a "D" so....

For me it's simply being comfortable in my own skin, a certain warmth and quiet unassuming confidence.

Different sides of the same coin....yin and yang.

 

[BaronOfHair]

"Chad tier" looks, on their own, are about as useful as taking a bottle of Windex to a gun battle with Hezbollah's most sadistic operators. A less conventionally attractive guy who's persona and vocal gifts are similar to

Is, more often than not, going to be far more appealing than Chace Crawford, circa '07

 

[We_ArE_VeNOM]

I feel the same about @We_ArE_VeNOM whom I've also never met.

Wanna meet?

They both have somewhat of a "regal" presence from how they describe themselves physically and for lack of a better word a certain "energy."

Bold, strong, self assured and confident.

I'm not sure I would even trust myself in their physical presence!! Lol

Don't step into my presence, if you value trust in your relationship.

Kidding aside, even without that I know women who don't require a formal "date" or any type of date to 'hook up.'

They love sex for sex and don't even want "more" like being taken out on a date.

Which brings me to ask what is a "date" anyway? The whole idea of it sounds so contrived imo.

One person typically the man formally inviting a woman out to spend time with him? For which he pays, and for what the privilege of her company?

I dunno again seems contrived, ritualistic and phony. Never liked it.

Even with my current boyfriend, 8-9 months in, living together and "in love," I don't recall him ever asking me out on a "date."

We simply clicked from the beginning, and would decide "together" what to do and where to go.

It never seemed like some sort of a "proper date" and wouldn't want it to! It was all very spontaneous, natural and organic.

And I'm considered to be a very attractive "high quality" girl with standards! I just dislike this whole "proper date" BS.

He pays mostly (not always I also pay sometimes) but not because of any sense of obligation or "social norms," but because he actually wants to, he enjoys treating me and receives lots back from me in return!

I pay sometimes for the same reason. It gives me pleasure to treat him for all he does for me in so many ways!

Best relationship I've ever had! Genuine give and take and mutual reciprocity for the sheer pleasure of it, not out of obligation or following a social norm.

Anyway... back to subject. Demographics also may play a role. For example downtown versus high end suburbia.

Downtown at least in my neck of the woods, at some bars or clubs (not all), you might witness people who have just met making out and all over each other practically f*cking each other right there!

They end up leaving together and you know it's to hook up - No Date Required!

JMO, observations and experience.

This is a Hall of Fame post right here.

The women that I've been hooking up with, not only did they NOT expect or require a date for us to hookup...but they weren't even THINKING about going on a date until I made the suggestion later!!

Thanks for co-signing my sentiments, miss lady.

 

[Cheeky_James]

"Chad tier" looks, on their own, are about as useful as taking a bottle of Windex to a gun battle with Hezbollah's most sadistic operators. A less conventionally attractive guy who's persona and vocal gifts are similar to

Is, more often than not, going to be far more appealing than Chace Crawford, circa '07

Baron I had to lol at this .
Someone is surely dreaming here.
i have to ask - have you ever actually hung out with a Chad-tier dude IRL in any environment where there were a lot of women ? i e Bars clubs or even just out walking around a busy shopping street.

I have an old friend , a 5’10” ish cute-faced rocker guy.
Looked similar to Chase Crawford in the face.

girls would constantly be scoping him out and eyeballing him wherever we went. Cafes , shops , bars etc. biggest player I’ve ever met IRL. Always hot girlfriends, always picked up on nights out.

its hilarious to me there is a theory out there that there exists Chad Tier looking guys with “only looks but no game”. Big LOL at that one.

his “game” wasn’t something he did . It was a natural product of something he “was”. Because of his looks.

a Chad tier looking guy doesn’t have to do much except take his pick of the multiple chicks who are eye ****ing him or flirting with him wherever he goes.

if any chick is trying to ‘game’ him he knows how to deal with it. Or just choose another one. As he’s been getting mucho-mucho attention from women since he was a cute faced little kid.

TLDR : a Chad tier looking guy with “only looks but no game” does not really exist IRL, only in pickup advice land.

 

[SW15]

TLDR : a Chad tier looking guy with “only looks but no game” does not really exist IRL, only in pickup advice land.

What you see as "game"? I see seduction as the combination of looks, money, status, and personality.

There can be men with strong looks, but weakness in money, status, and personality.

I have a friend who is now married but put up a triple digit notch count prior to marriage. Looks were his strongest point as he was 6'4" with an above average physique. He also had status as he was a intercollegiate athlete in a country club sport. He was not going professional in that sport and I only met him after his college graduation. His "personality" or verbal game was mediocre in bar pickup situations. It was irrelevant as his looks and status carried him. He got more same night sex from bar approaches than most guys with stronger verbal game.

This guy didn't daygame at all but only did nightgame. The personality factor is likely more meaningful in daygame as compared to nightgame, but looks are #1 in both settings.

 

[Isildur1]

did daygame for 5 years - it was fantastic but with anything it boils down to - you will be able to do slightly better than what your smv is.

As long as you're persistent , and have decent SMV you can do well - but you need to be mentally strong because the rejections are thick and fast. - I've seen male chads and male models give up because they didn't have the mental strength to endure rejection- thats equally as important as your smv. If you're a male 9 but with a huge ego you will do less well compared to a male 7 who is persistent and approaches everyday.

Remember when Tom Torero had his huge successes he literally went out everyday in 2014 every single night for 365 days - you need dedication- simply opening a few women a week isn't enough you really need volume- it wasn't until my third month of doing it that i actually got laid


Say you are a male 7 daygame will give you access to 8s and 9s if you're a male 5 it will give you access to the 6s and 7s providing you work hard you can get results.

 

[BaronOfHair]

TLDR

Your reply fit that bill more snugly than J. Quaid and D. Johnson fit the bill of Nepo baby. As I said, looks are but one weapon in a fella's arsenal. You mentioned Chace Crawford: Recall during Gossip Girl's run, Chuck Bass/Ed Westwick(a less conventionally attractive man than Crawford)had the panties dropping, not only on the series but in RL also

 

[Cheeky_James]

What you see as "game"? I see seduction as the combination of looks, money, status, and personality.

There can be men with strong looks, but weakness in money, status, and personality.

I have a friend who is now married but put up a triple digit notch count prior to marriage. Looks were his strongest point as he was 6'4" with an above average physique. He also had status as he was a intercollegiate athlete in a country club sport. He was not going professional in that sport and I only met him after his college graduation. His "personality" or verbal game was mediocre in bar pickup situations. It was irrelevant as his looks and status carried him. He got more same night sex from bar approaches than most guys with stronger verbal game.

This guy didn't daygame at all but only did nightgame. The personality factor is likely more meaningful in daygame as compared to nightgame, but looks are #1 in both settings.

Well , as we are on a pickup forum , I see ‘Game ‘
as the ability to attract and sleep with attractive women , ie “get hot chicks “

Re this statement “There can be men with strong looks, but weakness in money, status, and personality.”

this is highly debateable tbh. It’s perhaps a very small % IRL, and tbh it doesn’t seem to be a big factor in them getting laid or not . Could they improve on money and status and personality ? Sure. But it doesn’t matter re them getting chicks.

like for example who are these guys you speak of ?

I’m thinking of dumb jock types , they get laid.

Dumb male model zoolander types , they get laid (or are gay).

I know a zoolander type personally, a boyfriend of my exes friend. He’s a male model and broke. His girlfriend is a model and a 10. Women swoon and he’s the talk of every get together when he’s there among them. They laugh he’s so dumb but it doesn’t matter, they can’t stop looking,

The only example I can think of is a guy who is high in looks but somehow autistic or has a brain disorder like Asperger’s or somesuch. That prevents him from getting women,

I can’t really think of any examples of this phenomena IRL. (?)

like you said also your 6’4” friend had mediocre verbal game and it was irrelevant . That’s my point also .

Baron is claiming a less conventionally good looking guy ,with a rich deep sexy voice and “persona” to match that narrator , will trump your friend or similar guy with women.

 

[SW15]

you said also your 6’4” friend had mediocre verbal game and it was irrelevant . That’s my point also .

Baron is claiming a less conventionally good looking guy ,with a rich deep sexy voice and “persona” to match that narrator , will trump your friend or similar guy with women.

My friend was successful based on height, facial aesthetics, not balding, and status as an intercollegiate athletic.

There's no way a less conventionally good looking guy with a rich, deep sexy voice and "persona" would have beaten my friend.

My friend was solely a nightlife venue approacher and mainly got same night sex from his interactions.

 

[Cheeky_James]

Your reply fit that bill more snugly than J. Quaid and D. Johnson fit the bill of Nepo baby. As I said, looks are but one weapon in a fella's arsenal. You mentioned Chace Crawford: Recall during Gossip Girl's run, Chuck Bass/Ed Westwick(a less conventionally attractive man than Crawford)had the panties dropping, not only on the series but in RL also

Baron, Top -tier facial Looks are akin to a super-weapon (unfortunately).
Out of interest I googled that narrator you linked to Aiden Snow, as I had a strong hunch with a growling deep voice like that he’d be a big tall barrel chested dude . Which turns out , sure enough, he is. He looks like an Alpha Male.

so in reality debate is

a Tall Alpha type dude vs a super cute-faced dude

Both sides being different dimensions of “Looks” .

 

[BaronOfHair]

Baron, Top -tier facial Looks are akin to a super-weapon (unfortunately).

I've never denied that looks can be beneficial, same way a Sig 1911 can be instrumental in fending off a home invasion. One still needs to be well coiffed and know how to assemble an outfit, same way one needs to have at least decent aim and sang froid, whilst wielding that Sig


And I should have been more specific, regarding that Chace Crawford analogy... CC was seen as a joke up until fairly recently, while Ed Westwick had women's hearts a-racing throughout Gossip Girl's run

They're both handsome guys, but only one(Westwick)had a virile edge

 

[Cheeky_James]

I've never denied that looks can be beneficial, same way a Sig 1911 can be instrumental in fending off a home invasion. One still needs to be well coiffed and know how to assemble an outfit, same way one needs to have at least decent aim and sang froid, whilst wielding that Sig


And I should have been more specific, regarding that Chace Crawford analogy... CC was seen as a joke up until fairly recently, while Ed Westwick had women's hearts a-racing throughout Gossip Girl's run

They're both handsome guys, but only one(Westwick)had a virile edge

this is a bit confusing now.
So between 2 top looking looking guys the more virile /masculine/deep voiced/ sexier edge does better (?)

Just pointing out the logical fallacy in your original statement of “Chad tier looks, on their own, are about as useful as taking a bottle of Windex to a gun battle with Hezbollah's most sadistic operators”

The fallacy is that Chad Tier looks are never ‘on their own’.

As Chad Tier looks = massive interest from and exposure to women and their behaviour = bountiful skills with handling said women in any situation, including during the day on the street etc.

that’s all.
a Chad tier looks guy who does not know how to be sexy around women..does not exist IRL !!

 

[BaronOfHair]

Just pointing out the logical fallacy in your original statement of “Chad tier looks, on their own, are about as useful as taking a bottle of Windex to a gun battle with Hezbollah's most sadistic operators”

As you yourself pointed out, looks aren't especially useful, without a "virile /masculine/deep voiced/ sexier edge". This really isn't complicated

 

[Cheeky_James]

As you yourself pointed out, looks aren't especially useful, without a "virile /masculine/deep voiced/ sexier edge". This really isn't complicated

huh?
I’m pointing out the opposite.
There is no such thing as “Chad tier looks alone” in isolation in the real world. Chad tier looking nice guy choirboys with squeaky voices don’t exist ourside of TV shows aimed at women. To drive plot lines and emotions etc etc

In the real world
Looks = Behaviours , by logic .
Or else Looks = projections by the female of ‘sexiness’ .
Either /Either
It’s a fallacy either way.

Unless the Chad looking guy is closet gay or his behaviours repell women (austistic or somesuch)
Doesn’t happen.

the original proposition your side was ‘a less conventionally good looking guy’ projecting this virile deep voice and sexual persona to match.

Which has morphed into two handsome guys now in this GG analogy. Thats a TV show not real world.

 

[BaronOfHair]

huh?
I’m pointing out the opposite.
There is no such thing as “Chad tier looks alone” in isolation in the real world. Chad tier looking nice guy choirboys with squeaky voices don’t exist ourside of TV shows aimed at women. To drive plot lines and emotions etc etc

In the real world
Looks = Behaviours , by logic .
Or else Looks = projections by the female of ‘sexiness’ .
Either /Either
It’s a fallacy either way.

Unless the Chad looking guy is closet gay or his behaviours repell women (austistic or somesuch)
Doesn’t happen.

the original proposition your side was ‘a less conventionally good looking guy’ projecting this virile deep voice and sexual persona to match.

Which has morphed into two handsome guys now in this GG analogy. Thats a TV show not real world.

Reference discussion had here https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threads/question-fumbled-bag.284787/#post-3171391

 

[Hamurabimbi]

this is a bit confusing now.
So between 2 top looking looking guys the more virile /masculine/deep voiced/ sexier edge does better (?)

Just pointing out the logical fallacy in your original statement of “Chad tier looks, on their own, are about as useful as taking a bottle of Windex to a gun battle with Hezbollah's most sadistic operators”

The fallacy is that Chad Tier looks are never ‘on their own’.

As Chad Tier looks = massive interest from and exposure to women and their behaviour = bountiful skills with handling said women in any situation, including during the day on the street etc.

that’s all.
a Chad tier looks guy who does not know how to be sexy around women..does not exist IRL !!

No. You can be a doofus, but if you are GL, women will still swarm you.

 

[SW15]

You can be a doofus, but if you are GL, women will still swarm you.

Looks are the most important variable, and especially under age 35.