How To Assess Credibility of Dating Claims of Online Posters

[curtsilv]

Below are results from a fun social experiment conducted back several years ago (2014). It gives you a pretty good idea of the level of success elite models and everyday good looking guys can look forward to on tinder.

An elite male model matches less than 3% of the time with profiles that he 'likes.' Only 10% of those matches actually message. A normal good looking guy matches only with .5% of profiles he likes. Only 7% of matches actually message. A typical good looking guy had to 'like' three thousand girls in order to get a single message from a female.

http://www.godofstyle.com/is-tinder-racist-statistical-analysis-and-tricks-to-win-the-tinder-game/

Also, keep in mind that the average number of opposite sex partners is four for adults through their mid forties.

https://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/how-many-sex-partners-do-people-really-have/

The data suggests that people who claim to have four or five girlfriends simultaneously are very rare. I've met some guys who have and exactly zero percent are dating hot girls on anything resembling a consistent basis. They sometimes get an 8 here or there but it's rare. The most likely conclusion therefore is that anyone who claims to have a harem is either lying or is being honest but none of the girls they are dating are hot.

Third, here's a video of what I assume is nearly two hours of unedited footage of the famous PUA "mystery" "in the field." I skipped around a bit and it appears as if he had a few pleasant conversations with 5 to 7 caliber girls in looks, then he dances and makes out with a woman who approaches him. The woman appears to be x years of age? Perhaps someone is better at guessing than I am. She is not young. Keep in mind, mystery was acknowledged as the very best PUA on the planet, and this raw footage suggests that on an average night, his best result is with a milf or cougar rather than an elite model, celebrity or pageant winner. He also gets blown out several times.

 

[devilkingx2]

An elite male model matches less than 3% of the time with profiles that he 'likes.' Only 10% of those matches actually message. A normal good looking guy matches only with .5% of profiles he likes. Only 7% of matches actually message. A typical good looking guy had to 'like' three thousand girls in order to get a single message from a female.

Nobody would use tinder if that was true.

The average guy has the patience to like thousands of people when the average guy has no patience to cold approach? i Don't buy that.

Also, keep in mind that the average number of opposite sex partners is four for adults through their mid forties.

More recent surveys say more than that
https://bigthink.com/21st-century-s...e-more-sex-partners-than-women-but-is-it-true

The data suggests that people who claim to have four or five girlfriends simultaneously are very rare. I've met some guys who have and exactly zero percent are dating hot girls on anything resembling a consistent basis. They sometimes get an 8 here or there but it's rare. The most likely conclusion therefore is that anyone who claims to have a harem is either lying or is being honest

1. It's easier to get girls in real life than online dating

2. The average guy puts way less effort into getting laid than a PUA or red pill type which means less results

3. Some of the guys who claim to have harems are also apparently good looking millionaires, so if that's true then they're obviously not comparable to what an average guy is capable of (and there's actually enough millionaires in America to make it viable that a few SS users have that much money)

 

[curtsilv]

Obviously, tinder has millions of users.

You should read the actual study you cited. A large percentage of the respondents do not recall an actual number. They guess. It's not a reliable study in any way shape or form. The study did not even define "sex." They left it up to the respondents to decide. It is a horribly flawed study.

Is it really easier to have sex through cold approach or social circle? Do you have a study to back that up with?

 

[sangheilios]

From what I've seen other men post online, it really does seem like they don't get matches all that often but often enough where they'd continue to use the app, dating sites, etc. I personally think you'd be far better off meeting people in the real world, but the reality for many adult men past university age is that it becomes increasingly difficult to find a woman one would be interested in who is also single and into them as well. Online dating sites and apps are a supplement to meeting women but I think most men have enough sense to realize that it should never be much more than that.

As for guys who claim to be dating loads of girls and have harems, from my observations that is often more to do with exaggeration. Very few men will openly admit that they haven't been on a date or had sex for quite some time, and this is way more common than we are lead to believe. This year I've made a sizable number of new friends and close acquaintances that approach a lot of women on the regular and they often get rejected, flaked on, first dates that lead to nothing more, etc. These guys are average to slightly above average guys with decent social skills.

 

[zekko]

I think there are a certain percentage of men and women who are open to living a sexually free lifestyle, and for the most part, these are the people who are out having sex with each other. Many of them are even married. I don't think you have to be extremely attractive to participate in this group, just good looking enough to provoke some curiosity.

The naturals that I've known have not been overly picky about how their women look. They would go from an HB8 to chubby 3, as long as they had someone to get their release from. Obviously they would take the better looking girl when they could get it, and might just take a BJ from a less attractive girl, but they would rather have something than nothing. They were just constantly looking for their next sexual encounter, that's what was important to them.

 

[devilkingx2]

Is it really easier to have sex through cold approach or social circle? Do you have a study to back that up with?

You need a scientific study to tell you that it takes less than

A typical good looking guy had to 'like' three thousand girls in order to get a single message from a female.

To get a girl in real life?

 

[sangheilios]

You need a scientific study to tell you that it takes less than


To get a girl in real life?

No, he was referring to a study that looked at tinder and the chances of men getting a mutual match on there. It definitely isn't that rare to get a match, but definitely far easier to meet a woman in real life.

 

[marmel75]

Ive never used tinder but I can tell you on POF, OKC, CMB and Badoo its a whole lot easier to meet and match that that. Maybe they should stop using Tinder then.

 

[curtsilv]

I've had good success with online dating. When I message a woman I usually get a response back around 1/3 of the time. Maybe a quarter of the time it leads to dates. The rest ghost, flake, or it's apparently mutually uninteresting. My msg to date conversion is maybe 1/10 for online dating.

I just don't enjoy online dating very much. It's much more enjoyable to meet people at parties over food and drinks.

 

[curtsilv]

From what I've seen other men post online, it really does seem like they don't get matches all that often but often enough where they'd continue to use the app, dating sites, etc. I personally think you'd be far better off meeting people in the real world, but the reality for many adult men past university age is that it becomes increasingly difficult to find a woman one would be interested in who is also single and into them as well. Online dating sites and apps are a supplement to meeting women but I think most men have enough sense to realize that it should never be much more than that.

As for guys who claim to be dating loads of girls and have harems, from my observations that is often more to do with exaggeration. Very few men will openly admit that they haven't been on a date or had sex for quite some time, and this is way more common than we are lead to believe. This year I've made a sizable number of new friends and close acquaintances that approach a lot of women on the regular and they often get rejected, flaked on, first dates that lead to nothing more, etc. These guys are average to slightly above average guys with decent social skills.

There is so much lying and exaggeration online it's basically impossible to believe anyone's account of their sex life. The most successful guys I've met IRL in terms of quantity of lays were mostly hunting down and catching 5's and 6's. They'd get a rare 8 here and there, but it was not the norm. Just about every last serial SNL or high lay count guy I've ever met is hunting down cougars, milf's, 5's and 6's. And that's only the good looking guys. There were times I almost vomited, the girls they chased were so ugly.

I can't emphasize this enough: the 8's and above are in relationships or married for the most part. This notion of the "**** carousel" which is common in mgtow, incel and white nationalist circles is largely a myth. It's just an excuse to hate women and to reinforce otherwise sound observations about the deterioration of marriage and traditional values in general.

 

[Spaz]

I don't do online dating because it makes a man stupid and lazy.

Can't shake off the feeling that a man must be having some serious social deficiency to be going on Tinder..

Not to mention that those women there r all one way or the other rejects themselves.

The only possible manly excuse for a man being on Tinder or similar apps is that he's in a town with a population of 100k and there's only 10 available women around...

 

[Serenity]

It is a horribly flawed study.

This should have been mentioned in your first post. Those numbers just can't be accurate and it's way too low. I'll go along with desired and successful matches being a fairly low percentage, but 1/3000 just can't be accurate even though I don't have a study to disprove it.

Keep in mind, mystery was acknowledged as the very best PUA on the planet

Keep in mind the demographic that even cares about looking up a PUA. It doesn't take much to be considered successful by an audience of mostly dudes who get little to no action from any woman. Many of them also recommend going for less attractive women, like the philosophy being that it's better to fvck someone less attractive than to only chase the prettiest and almost always get shot down. Which isn't the worst long term strategy, it's good learning experience which may improve the odds on more attractive women later.

I also wish to point out once again that behavior and personality is a significant factor. Looks may get your foot in the door a little easier, but even a good looking model needs that little extra to have any staying power.

Lastly I'll say something about your title, how to assess the credibility of dating claims. Basically put them to the test yourself and see what sticks. I have deliberately gone against advice on this forum and from PUA's several times, sometimes the advice was accurate and other times it was not. It may be a result of my local culture or they don't really know what they're talking about, but that isn't the important part. What's important was that I learned by trial and error what actually works and what doesn't. Before this I was just confused, everyone had different ideas and I had little reference experience to judge the credibility of advice received.

It's a catch-22, you need to know which advice to follow to be successful, but you won't know until you already have enough experience to not need the advice for success. So it always comes back to the same when talking about dating and picking up women, experience is far more important than theory. Being tough enough to get rejected for the sake of learning, this is the actual way PUA's did it. They weren't born successful, they learned it the hard way. What they've learned may give some ideas which may shorten the time it takes to gain experience, but there's no way to completely avoid putting in work.

 

[curtsilv]

This should have been mentioned in your first post. Those numbers just can't be accurate and it's way too low. I'll go along with desired and successful matches being a fairly low percentage, but 1/3000 just can't be accurate even though I don't have a study to disprove it.


Keep in mind the demographic that even cares about looking up a PUA. It doesn't take much to be considered successful by an audience of mostly dudes who get little to no action from any woman. Many of them also recommend going for less attractive women, like the philosophy being that it's better to fvck someone less attractive than to only chase the prettiest and almost always get shot down. Which isn't the worst long term strategy, it's good learning experience which may improve the odds on more attractive women later.

I also wish to point out once again that behavior and personality is a significant factor. Looks may get your foot in the door a little easier, but even a good looking model needs that little extra to have any staying power.

Lastly I'll say something about your title, how to assess the credibility of dating claims. Basically put them to the test yourself and see what sticks. I have deliberately gone against advice on this forum and from PUA's several times, sometimes the advice was accurate and other times it was not. It may be a result of my local culture or they don't really know what they're talking about, but that isn't the important part. What's important was that I learned by trial and error what actually works and what doesn't. Before this I was just confused, everyone had different ideas and I had little reference experience to judge the credibility of advice received.

It's a catch-22, you need to know which advice to follow to be successful, but you won't know until you already have enough experience to not need the advice for success. So it always comes back to the same when talking about dating and picking up women, experience is far more important than theory. Being tough enough to get rejected for the sake of learning, this is the actual way PUA's did it. They weren't born successful, they learned it the hard way. What they've learned may give some ideas which may shorten the time it takes to gain experience, but there's no way to completely avoid putting in work.

The lack of validity refers to the other study cited which claims the average man has 14 sexual partners in a lifetime. If you read the study (I skimmed through it), the study states that many of the respondents are guessing or estimating and don't report an accurate figure. Guess whether they guess high or low? Also, the researchers allow respondents to define "sexual partner" or activity themselves, so no one knows if the respondents actually had sex or not. It could be oral sex, fingering or groping or kissing. It's not even an actual study.

The point of posting the mystery video is to give raw data on a night out. This guy was going out every night of the week for well over a decade before he became prominent in the media. Yet his best result is dancing with and kissing a 60 year old woman. This is a guy who is supposedly good looking in addition to having more free time to go out than maybe 99.9% of young adults.

 

[sosousage]

1. if you dont get at least 20 matches from first batch (wait few h after acc creation) of tinder you can stop using it till u get better pics

2. tinder algo is crap and shouldnt be used to judge anything

3. human care about look, this mystery guy doesnt even lift, what do you expect

 

[Serenity]

The point of posting the mystery video is to give raw data on a night out. This guy was going out every night of the week for well over a decade before he became prominent in the media. Yet his best result is dancing with and kissing a 60 year old woman. This is a guy who is supposedly good looking in addition to having more free time to go out than maybe 99.9% of young adults.

Holy sh!t, I didn't bother to watch it at first, but I skipped around to random places in the video just now. This is not game, it's pure cringe! Going out for over a decade doesn't help if nothing is learned, I learned more in a year than this guy has in over a decade.

I was expecting some RSD level game, but this guy sucks! I have just heard his nickname thrown around a billion times ever since I started researching PUA skills, but never looked at any of his stuff before now. He's not a PUA, he's a clown.

 

[devilkingx2]

Holy sh!t, I didn't bother to watch it at first, but I skipped around to random places in the video just now. This is not game, it's pure cringe! Going out for over a decade doesn't help if nothing is learned, I learned more in a year than this guy has in over a decade.

I was expecting some RSD level game, but this guy sucks! I have just heard his nickname thrown around a billion times ever since I started researching PUA skills, but never looked at any of his stuff before now. He's not a PUA, he's a clown.

Mystery is from 20 years ago. Of course his game seems weird because you don't live in the late 90s

 

[devilkingx2]

The lack of validity refers to the other study cited which claims the average man has 14 sexual partners in a lifetime. If you read the study (I skimmed through it), the study states that many of the respondents are guessing or estimating and don't report an accurate figure. Guess whether they guess high or low? Also, the researchers allow respondents to define "sexual partner" or activity themselves, so no one knows if the respondents actually had sex or not. It could be oral sex, fingering or groping or

But the women claimed 7, which is almost double your 4.

Is the average woman rounding up or down? Especially when the study itself says that men round up and include extra things whereas women round down and exclude extra things.

This suggests that the true average should be around 10, since both sides are lying in opposite ways.

 

[Serenity]

It was pure cringe back then, too, as is anything like it, IMO. It is the entire reason I find the term PUA to be moronic.

I always imagined (some) of the guys from RSD when talking about PUA. They at least look like they enjoy it, have fun and have generally better interactions. Mystery just looks like he's trying to prove how intense awkwardness he can endure.

If mystery is what people think of when "PUA" is mentioned I totally get the negative connotations.

 

[curtsilv]

But the women claimed 7, which is almost double your 4.

Is the average woman rounding up or down? Especially when the study itself says that men round up and include extra things whereas women round down and exclude extra things.

This suggests that the true average should be around 10, since both sides are lying in opposite ways.

You obviously did not even look at much less read the study you cited. This is the third time I've pointed this out so obviously facts don't matter to you, but your so-called "study" not only recorded guesstimates of sex partners (completely invalid and unreliable) but doesn't even define sex. It can refer to anything: actual intercourse, oral, or even heavy petting, spooning, kissing or imaginary sex. It's 100% invalid.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Mystery is from 20 years ago. Of course his game seems weird because you don't live in the late 90s

That reminds me of the David D guy whose gimmick was to ask a girl for their email address instead of their phone number....because he was all hip and high tech like that. Can you imagine that line today? "Hey babe, what's your email address?" LOL