The guy in David DeAngelo's DYD seminar, I think he's called Steve,
had the right idea.
"The rating scale is the biggest load of bs ever laid on man, there is
only one rating scale I use, she's either a 1 or a 0. She's
good enough, or she's not good enough"
This is a wise way of looking at things, for many reasons.
When you see a 7.5, you think to yourself "She's cute, I'll approach
and see what happens". When you see a 9.5, it can be easy to get
caught up in the moment and act according to the rating, folding
under the added pressure, "Wow she really is something, I better not
screw this one up".
When you implement the 1 - 0 (digital) scale, this neutrilises the
factor of beauty, or how well you will have to do to close. I
understand that your game will differ for different standards of
looks, but if you treat it as either she's a target or she isn't, it
can be alot easier to approach as the reactions to the girl are
based on your standards, rather than her standard.
Any thoughts?
-AudiTy =o
had the right idea.
"The rating scale is the biggest load of bs ever laid on man, there is
only one rating scale I use, she's either a 1 or a 0. She's
good enough, or she's not good enough"
This is a wise way of looking at things, for many reasons.
When you see a 7.5, you think to yourself "She's cute, I'll approach
and see what happens". When you see a 9.5, it can be easy to get
caught up in the moment and act according to the rating, folding
under the added pressure, "Wow she really is something, I better not
screw this one up".
When you implement the 1 - 0 (digital) scale, this neutrilises the
factor of beauty, or how well you will have to do to close. I
understand that your game will differ for different standards of
looks, but if you treat it as either she's a target or she isn't, it
can be alot easier to approach as the reactions to the girl are
based on your standards, rather than her standard.
Any thoughts?
-AudiTy =o