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

[characternote]

@We_ArE_VeNOM is the direct game expert

 

[MatureDJ]

One possible explanation for what you describe:

Effective strategies and tactics for achieving a goal are inevitably more similar than they are different. By contrast, the more flashy a and byzantine a "method" becomes, the more INEFFECTUAL it tends to he in practice

It's OVER for ByzantineCels.

 

[BPH]

I don't usually read @MatureDJ 's impulse posts, but @Plinco brought it to my attention because you're advocating for indirect game.

I lost my virginity and got 8 lays in a month strictly from daygame by using different methods .

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but especially considering what just happened to @ValiantMale , I'm gonna call bullsh** early. @Divorced w 3 let me know if this guy sets off your spidey senses.

I could be wrong, but let me see what else you're saying...

I'm right now writing this from a my bed . Just pulled a new woman in under three hours from open to close. Approached her by asking about Starbucks. No compliments at first until she gave me social reciprocity. Then I worked on primal subconscious attraction, managed the logistics, and now she's sleeping exhausted next to me.

Yeah...you know, I have never once finished laying pipe and thought to myself "let me hop on SoSuave to tell people how this works" while the woman is still in my bed.

According to my mentor ( and it's been confirmed by personal experience), there are several things that are wrong with a direct approach:
1. It's not socially intelligent: she knows guys who have experience with women low how to "play the game " so to speak. Picture yourself going to the car lot to purchase a new vehicle and the sales person says: " hi man, Im looking to make some money off of you right now so why don't you bring your ass over there and buy that crappy but expensive car over there?" .
It's literally the same thing " Hi, I have nothing to offer yet but I think you are attractive so maybe we can ****?"

The direct approach is to find the women who are buying and see if they like what you're selling. Using your analogy, you're not selling them "a crappy but expensive car" and having nothing to offer them. She has stepped onto the lot, so she is open to the idea of buying a car. You are competing with the other salesmen (other men) by presenting what you believe to be the best car (you) to them, then allowing them to pick and choose which one they want. If you do not approach that woman, and these other salesmen do, it is highly unlikely she will choose you over them - because she will not know you exist, or whether you're even selling your car.

2. It doesn't allow you to display your value properly. You're basically having tinder in real life. You force her to make a snap decision, and assuming that you're not her usual type, it will be a NO. I am a Caucasian myself but my mentor is a black guy almost exclusively dating model looking white women . In a case like his, he had to be indirect, because a lot of the women he gets with wouldn't give him a proper chance upfront. He looks like a ninja turtle and he's a bit chubby. Being indirect allows him to go under the radar and raise his value over a few minutes first, then strike when the iron is hot.
Similarly if you are on the shorter side, older, or just an average guy with nothing that stands out, being indirect allows toi to raise your value progressively. Even body language cues often take time to register in a woman's subconscious. Why would I elicit a NO from the beginning and then have to fight with her internal rejection, when I can just build trust first , then raise my value progressively?

Or, you waste your time fighting an uphill battle by trying to convince an uninterested woman why she should like you. Is THAT properly displaying your value? You elicit (potentially) a NO from the beginning, so you can move on to somebody who may want to buy what you're selling.

3. Some reasoning behind direct game is the need to sexualize. Which is true. You don't want to be friendzoned . but sexualising doesn't mean you have to lack some tact . I start "accidental" then progressively sexualize over the conversation. The more she gets committed to talk to me and impress me, the more I can stear things towards a more sexual interaction.

This is the only point where we're in agreement. The difference is that you feel you have to arrive at that point by accident, whereas I think you can be way more upfront. You don't have to be explicit and tactless, but the number of times I've had women tell me they thought it was hot that I had the balls to approach them and go for what I wanted vastly outweighs the times I've been blown out by being too forward, too fast.

@We_ArE_VeNOM is the direct game expert

I don't know if "expert" is the word I'd use to describe his approach.

 

[Divorced w 3]

I don't usually read @MatureDJ 's impulse posts, but @Plinco brought it to my attention because you're advocating for indirect game.



I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but especially considering what just happened to @ValiantMale , I'm gonna call bullsh** early. @Divorced w 3 let me know if this guy sets off your spidey senses.

I could be wrong, but let me see what else you're saying...



Yeah...you know, I have never once finished laying pipe and thought to myself "let me hop on SoSuave to tell people how this works" while the woman is still in my bed.



The direct approach is to find the women who are buying and see if they like what you're selling. Using your analogy, you're not selling them "a crappy but expensive car" and having nothing to offer them. She has stepped onto the lot, so she is open to the idea of buying a car. You are competing with the other salesmen (other men) by presenting what you believe to be the best car (you) to them, then allowing them to pick and choose which one they want. If you do not approach that woman, and these other salesmen do, it is highly unlikely she will choose you over them - because she will not know you exist, or whether you're even selling your car.



Or, you waste your time fighting an uphill battle by trying to convince an uninterested woman why she should like you. Is THAT properly displaying your value? You elicit (potentially) a NO from the beginning, so you can move on to somebody who may want to buy what you're selling.



This is the only point where we're in agreement. The difference is that you feel you have to arrive at that point by accident, whereas I think you can be way more upfront. You don't have to be explicit and tactless, but the number of times I've had women tell me they thought it was hot that I had the balls to approach them and go for what I wanted vastly outweighs the times I've been blown out by being too forward, too fast.



I don't know if "expert" is the word I'd use to describe his approach.

Rants about getting off the internet only to be perpetually glued to the internet.

just put him in a box and ignore what he says

 

[plumber]

yes if you are chad type it will be easier. but you might now know it, because your baseline view is from that position.

 

[BaronOfHair]

yes if you are chad type it will be easier. but you might now know it, because your baseline view is from that position.

Even this goes back to a prior point https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threads/what-happened-to-today-women.284338/#post-3163275

The vast majority of fellas we view as "Chads" in the present day DID NOT begin life as such. Even guys born with "pretty features" have to learn how to leverage those features + Work around their flaws

Neither Day nor Night game will bear much fruit, without self-development

 

[frenchflow]

I don't usually read @MatureDJ 's impulse posts, but @Plinco brought it to my attention because you're advocating for indirect game.



I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but especially considering what just happened to @ValiantMale , I'm gonna call bullsh** early. @Divorced w 3 let me know if this guy sets off your spidey senses.

I could be wrong, but let me see what else you're saying...



Yeah...you know, I have never once finished laying pipe and thought to myself "let me hop on SoSuave to tell people how this works" while the woman is still in my bed.



The direct approach is to find the women who are buying and see if they like what you're selling. Using your analogy, you're not selling them "a crappy but expensive car" and having nothing to offer them. She has stepped onto the lot, so she is open to the idea of buying a car. You are competing with the other salesmen (other men) by presenting what you believe to be the best car (you) to them, then allowing them to pick and choose which one they want. If you do not approach that woman, and these other salesmen do, it is highly unlikely she will choose you over them - because she will not know you exist, or whether you're even selling your car.



Or, you waste your time fighting an uphill battle by trying to convince an uninterested woman why she should like you. Is THAT properly displaying your value? You elicit (potentially) a NO from the beginning, so you can move on to somebody who may want to buy what you're selling.



This is the only point where we're in agreement. The difference is that you feel you have to arrive at that point by accident, whereas I think you can be way more upfront. You don't have to be explicit and tactless, but the number of times I've had women tell me they thought it was hot that I had the balls to approach them and go for what I wanted vastly outweighs the times I've been blown out by being too forward, too fast.



I don't know if "expert" is the word I'd use to describe his approach.

A lot of what you said Is not accurate. Feeling a bit lazy to go into all of the details but from what I can remember I will try :
1. As a salesman your job is to sell the car and you DO have to approach the customer. My point was : you should not be so obvious about it. NO salesman goes :" give me your money I'm here to take it, I don't care if you know my product is good or not, just give it to me". That's what you do when you're going direct . You didn't display any of your attractive qualities yet , but you request a sale.

2. When I say "accidental" it's from the point of view of the woman. Everything I do is planned . She feels like it's accidental because the subconscious works in symbols and subtilities, so it's more receptive to progressive framing. A bit like an hypnosis session.
When you say "fighting an uphill battle" you are making exactly my point. You are of the philosophy that women either like you or they don't so you go around "selecting " them by being upfront. That's your right . Just bear in mind that this method does not work for everyone. I tried for two years and I was still a virgin. Was getting rejected left and right except a couple of kiss closes from night game. I also know most guys who play direct game are using a numbers game. I have seen a lot of so called "masters" say you need to talk to 40 girls to lay one, which from my point of view is ridiculous.

Some guys just don't have enough passive value to request the sale upfront, they have to build it progressively. Which is the whole point of GAME.

Finally, for you to assume that I would come on here to bull**** people is a bit heartbreaking. Forget your "Spidey senses " and hit me up in private, I got receipts . I'm not in the habit of lying about this stuff because coming up I met a lot of scammers and pretenders, so I'm allergic to the bs.

And yes, I'm on holiday right now and I'm often bored so I Sto checking around for places where people talk about game to see what's going on. If it's a crime arrest me .

 

[characternote]

cold approach is a game of screening. Not a game of conversion.
We see it all the time in infields where the worlds apparent best open a girl (directly or indirectly) who is clearly not remotely interested. He uses all of his 'game' tricks to try to magically 'create' attraction (through cold reads, negs, DHV's, humour, qualification, 'pushpull' lines etc) but all it ever does is delay the rejection. In other words, it didn't work lol.

 

[frenchflow]

cold approach is a game of screening. Not a game of conversion.
We see it all the time in infields where the worlds apparent best open a girl (directly or indirectly) who is clearly not remotely interested. He uses all of his 'game' tricks to try to magically 'create' attraction (through cold reads, negs, humour, qualification, 'pushpull' lines etc) but all it ever does is delay the rejection. In other words, it didn't work lol.

Bear in mind: it's not because crappy game doesn't work that proper game doesn't exist.

It's a bit presumptuous to assume that what you see on YouTube is the highest level of game OR even the limit of what is possible.

I do convert women regularly. Which is the point of game in the first place . But then again I don't use most of the things you will see on the internet.

 

[Captain Redbeard]

@frenchflow consider starting a new thread delving into these tactics that fly in the face of common wisdom. I'm sure many would be interested to read about your methodology.

cold approach is a game of screening.

This is the exact mindset that you need to have. Screen, screen, screen. There is no such thing as rejection, you are simply screening out the uninterested.

 

[frenchflow]

@frenchflow consider starting a new thread delving into these tactics that fly in the face of common wisdom. I'm sure many would be interested to read about your methodology.



This is the exact mindset that you need to have. Screen, screen, screen. There is no such thing as rejection, you are simply screening out the uninterested.

As a mindset ,you should screen. You are the prize .

But the way you are screening is adaptive. You screen her by making her go through the structure from open to close.

The issue with common wisdom is that it's common. I won't lie, I am not a coach and I don't even consider myself a "game expert " so I don't think I can really break it down as well as my mentor would. But he won't step a foot in a forum like this. I tried to pull him into telegram or discord groups a couple of times he won't go.

1. He doesn't care about being known or getting " validation from a bunch of random guys ". Those are his words not mine

2. He won't give proper advice for free. In his opinion free advice isn't respected or acted upon so he won't "waste his time".

Which is a shame because his stuff is mind-blowing.

 

[frenchflow]

As a mindset ,you should screen. You are the prize .

But the way you are screening is adaptive. You screen her by making her go through the structure from open to close.

The issue with common wisdom is that it's common. I won't lie, I am not a coach and I don't even consider myself a "game expert " so I don't think I can really break it down as well as my mentor would. But he won't step a foot in a forum like this. I tried to pull him into telegram or discord groups a couple of times he won't go.

1. He doesn't care about being known or getting " validation from a bunch of random guys ". Those are his words not mine

2. He won't give proper advice for free. In his opinion free advice isn't respected or acted upon so he won't "waste his time".

Which is a shame because his stuff is mind-blowing.

That being said if you have specific questions, I can try to answer them.

A lot of what he does is based on the subconscious mind . That Includes body language and the emotional progression. The first checkpoint is what he calls "social reciprocity". It's basically when the woman stops seeing you as a stranger and has enough respect or social attraction to consider you being a potential part of her life. Doesn't even have to be sexual yet . I think from what I have seen and read that most guys skip this step.

Being direct sabotages social reciprocity because now that she knows why you're here she's busy finding reasons why not to talk to you . So unless she is sold from the start, THAT is the uphill battle.

 

[characternote]

2. He won't give proper advice for free. In his opinion free advice isn't respected or acted upon so he won't "waste his time".

Which is a shame because his stuff is mind-blowing.

YOU could tell @Captain Redbeard all the amazing secrets. He doesn't need your 'mentor'. DM him!
You are just here to grift people lol. There's nothing new under the sun. Go back to 'seddit'. Surely you've got enough customers from there by now!?!
You are more transparent than you realise.

 

[frenchflow]

YOU could tell @Captain Redbeard all the amazing secrets. He doesn't need your 'mentor'. DM him!
You are just here to grift people lol. There's nothing new under the sun. Go back to 'seddit'. Surely you've got enough customers from there by now!?!
You are more transparent than you realise.

Interesting how me just stating my opinion is "grifting people". Like I said I'm not a coach. I don't even pretend being able to break down these things properly. So I don't see where the grift would come from . Also as I said anyone hitting me up in private will get the receipts. Not caring enough to lie about this ****. This isn't real life folks, just a forum on the internet.

To wrap all this up, think whatever you want to think, I don't care. Will still be living the same exact life I was living before joining here . I just find it weird that people who pride themselves in having a scientific approach, would immediately resist any foreign idea.

 

[Clockwerk50]

Interesting how me just stating my opinion is "grifting people". Like I said I'm not a coach. I don't even pretend being able to break down these things properly. So I don't see where the grift would come from . Also as I said anyone hitting me up in private will get the receipts. Not caring enough to lie about this ****. This isn't real life folks, just a forum on the internet.

To wrap all this up, think whatever you want to think, I don't care. Will still be living the same exact life I was living before joining here . I just find it weird that people who pride themselves in having a scientific approach, would immediately resist any foreign idea.

Bro, you can understand why people are skeptical. You come in arrogantly claiming to know everything and positioning yourself as the only one with this inside knowledge and strategy. You dismiss others, constantly mention this mentor who supposedly taught you everything to boost credibility, and insist you’re not egotistical while clearly trying to appear exceptional.

If you practice this thing called “social reciprocity” or whatever, then you clearly know how to infiltrate social circles, but unfortunately, the way you present it by bragging about the lays, over-defending yourself, and being this mentor’s main nut hugger, it makes it hard to take your stories at face value.

 

[frenchflow]

To be honest, I'm far from an expert. And I'm not even sure to know how to socialize properly. But I do know how to approach a random woman and somehow convince her to go home and have sex with me in a few hours. Not sure if it's related to making friends but I doubt it . I'm still relatively socially awkward in that aspect.

Now , sorry if I came across as aggressive but I was just sharing my opinion ont the topic and I got ganged up on, just because I said direct game isn't efficient. Isn't that strange? Isn't that strange that in 2025 simply stating that direct game is not efficient on a forum makes you a target ?

And yeah I'm definitely that guy" nut hugger" if that's what you call it, the dude changed my life .

If there are more specific questions about the game in itself I don't t mind trying to answer them, but like I said I might struggle to break down these things properly I'm not the expert. I just apply stuff.

 

[Plinco]

This is for clarification, and will give you a chance to respond to this point of view.

According to my mentor ( and it's been confirmed by personal experience), there are several things that are wrong with a direct approach:
1. It's not socially intelligent: she knows guys who have experience with women low how to "play the game " so to speak. Picture yourself going to the car lot to purchase a new vehicle and the sales person says: " hi man, Im looking to make some money off of you right now so why don't you bring your ass over there and buy that crappy but expensive car over there?" .
It's literally the same thing " Hi, I have nothing to offer yet but I think you are attractive so maybe we can ****?"

2. It doesn't allow you to display your value properly. You're basically having tinder in real life. You force her to make a snap decision, and assuming that you're not her usual type, it will be a NO. I am a Caucasian myself but my mentor is a black guy almost exclusively dating model looking white women . In a case like his, he had to be indirect, because a lot of the women he gets with wouldn't give him a proper chance upfront. He looks like a ninja turtle and he's a bit chubby. Being indirect allows him to go under the radar and raise his value over a few minutes first, then strike when the iron is hot.
Similarly if you are on the shorter side, older, or just an average guy with nothing that stands out, being indirect allows toi to raise your value progressively. Even body language cues often take time to register in a woman's subconscious. Why would I elicit a NO from the beginning and then have to fight with her internal rejection, when I can just build trust first , then raise my value progressively?

So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that going indirect allows you to display value before expressing sexual interest.

What exactly is this value that you are expressing? I assume this means being pleasurable in some way. Maybe you could post a summary of a dialogue of a conversation between you and a woman that you seduced as an example of expressing yourself in a pleasurable way.

To be honest, I'm far from an expert. And I'm not even sure to know how to socialize properly. But I do know how to approach a random woman and somehow convince her to go home and have sex with me in a few hours. Not sure if it's related to making friends but I doubt it . I'm still relatively socially awkward in that aspect.

What do you mean by not knowing how to socialize properly, despite being comfortable enough to convince a woman to sleep with you?

 

[Vanderdonck]

Just go out and do it.

 

[Barrister]

Everything is "easier" if you are good-looking. This doesn't apply to just dating either. It is universal - professionally, etc. If you aren't good looking it isn't an excuse though. That seems to be a problem globally is that men think if they aren't a "Chad" it is hopeless for them. I would think with everyday examples literally walking around right in front of them that this notion would be dispelled, but apparently not.

 

[frenchflow]

This is for clarification, and will give you a chance to respond to this point of view.



So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that going indirect allows you to display value before expressing sexual interest.

What exactly is this value that you are expressing? I assume this means being pleasurable in some way. Maybe you could post a summary of a dialogue of a conversation between you and a woman that you seduced as an example of expressing yourself in a pleasurable way.



What do you mean by not knowing how to socialize properly, despite being comfortable enough to convince a woman to sleep with you?

Value :
Social intelligence
Leadership
Ability to get women to try and prove themselves to you/impress you
Fashion cues
Body language cues ( I would say this is the part we worked on the most . He had me go through drills for tonality, posture, eye contact, and even specific facial expressions.)
Emotional intelligence: recognizing specific emotions in the woman and giving them a proper response. For example the difference between a genuine smile and a "fake" smile tells you where the woman's mindset is at , and what to do next .
Mastering different forms of emotional commitment.

Your long term passive value : comes from your last experience with women, including relationships where you set the rules, past sexual experiences, and all the things women did for you in the past in the name of "love". The more you strategically add up on these experiences, the stronger your "vibe " becomes. After a while this allows you to break more rules. In my opinion this is true value .

And a bunch of other things.

To your other point: the more I'm leaning into game , the more I realise making friends and having success with women are mutually exclusive. Two different things.

For women you need to be able to understand female psychology and triggers , as well as the art of progressive sexualisation. This takes some amount of dominance , leadership and speaking your mind . It's a more aggressive approach.

To socialize you often have to tone down who you are to fit the mold and not be offensive to different social circles. You have to " fake" a little bit when it comes to your personal values or opinions . You have to be diplomatic. The key word is "appeasing" people. When we talk about "social reciprocity" when dealing with a woman were not talking about that . We are talking about displaying value and activating triggers in such a way that she commits to getting to know you . It's not really about appeasing her.

Bear in mind I do mostly daygame and I mostly talk to women one on one. Not really dealing with friends yet .