[caligula89]

Hey guys, wanted your input on something that has been frustrating me.

On Match.Com, I usually get the phone numbers of 80% of the women that message me back and go on dates with just about all of those numbers.

On the other hand, I have gotten exactly zero numbers off OKCupid from women that message me back. After asking for the number, I get no response back.

I run the exact same game on both: fun first message, 4 or 5 back and forth messages, then "hey, talking on a dating site is so lame, what's you're phone number"

Again, that works great on Match but has a zero percent success rate on OKCupid. What the hell am I doing wrong?

[Timoteo]

(12-10-2012 02:28 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

Hey guys, wanted your input on something that has been frustrating me.

On Match.Com, I usually get the phone numbers of 80% of the women that message me back and go on dates with just about all of those numbers.

On the other hand, I have gotten exactly zero numbers off OKCupid from women that message me back. After asking for the number, I get no response back.

I run the exact same game on both: fun first message, 4 or 5 back and forth messages, then "hey, talking on a dating site is so lame, what's you're phone number"

Again, that works great on Match but has a zero percent success rate on OKCupid. What the hell am I doing wrong?

I think women that join Match are more serious about meeting a guy, because it's a pay site, and all of their marketing is about getting you into LTRs and marriages. On other sites, women are more into getting attention and cock-teasing, and amusing themselves. Check this thread for ideas about approaches that may get you better success on OKC: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-3601.html

[haywire]

(12-10-2012 02:28 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

I run the exact same game on both: fun first message, 4 or 5 back and forth messages, then "hey, talking on a dating site is so lame, what's you're phone number"

Try going for the number sooner, after 2-3 back and forths. I've never tried match, but okcupid is my staple!

[Balkanite]

It's all relative. I've pulled like six numbers off okcupid in the past two weeks. Granted they aren't nines but make sure your aim is calibrated with your profile.

[CrazyBoy]

(12-10-2012 02:28 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

I run the exact same game on both: fun first message, 4 or 5 back and forth messages, then "hey, talking on a dating site is so lame, what's you're phone number"

First of all - I'm not anal about correct English, but some women are. You should be using "your", not "you're".

Secondly, I don't know if they women to hear the word "lame" associated with a dating site. I say something like this - "You seem pretty interesting in your messages, but I feel a better way to get to know each other is to talk - would you be open to a phone conversation some time?" If she says yes, cool, if she doesn't move on.

I've noticed a lot of women on both - I don't use match but they let you search for free.

[Neo]

Girls on match are more serious about meeting someone.

The attention whore heirarchy of dating sites goes like this.

POF > Okcupid > Match.com

I've used all three. POF has by far the lowest class women of them all. Okcupid has a mix, and match.com has the more mainstream type of girl. Lots of working professionals, nurses, teachers, etc. Just regular chicks who want to meet a guy.

It's probably not your game, it's the stream you're fishing in. You're vibe might just be more suited for match.com. I will say this. I do terrible on POF, but great on Okcupid and match.com. Somethings just can't be logically explained.

[caligula89]

I think you're right Neo. I'm going to pay for an eHarmony account when I move at the end of the month and see if it's just that the paid sites get better response rates.

[John Galt2]

(12-10-2012 05:47 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

I think you're right Neo. I'm going to pay for an eHarmony account when I move at the end of the month and see if it's just that the paid sites get better response rates.

Just my $0.02 - like some of the other posters stated, it depends on your game. For myself, I am a highly educated (somewhat cultured) 38 year old professional. I clean up on Match, where the girls are looking to date a guy seriously (most of the time at least) whereas the OKC crowd would be much more impressed with my 6 pack abs than my MBA from the University of Chicago. As far as Eharmony, the crowd might be even more seriously looking than Match but its filled with ugly women. They dont let you search and send you 7 "matches" per day. I literally rejected 2,000 women (I kept track to amuse myself) and was interested and had dates with two women. Not a great ratio, though one of the two I did date for a one year (solid 8 tall filipina). Eharmony is like playing the Lotto...with similar odds.

[Timoteo]

(12-10-2012 09:33 PM)John Galt2 Wrote:  

(12-10-2012 05:47 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

I think you're right Neo. I'm going to pay for an eHarmony account when I move at the end of the month and see if it's just that the paid sites get better response rates.

Just my $0.02 - like some of the other posters stated, it depends on your game. For myself, I am a highly educated (somewhat cultured) 38 year old professional. I clean up on Match, where the girls are looking to date a guy seriously (most of the time at least) whereas the OKC crowd would be much more impressed with my 6 pack abs than my MBA from the University of Chicago. As far as Eharmony, the crowd might be even more seriously looking than Match but its filled with ugly women. They dont let you search and send you 7 "matches" per day. I literally rejected 2,000 women (I kept track to amuse myself) and was interested and had dates with two women. Not a great ratio, though one of the two I did date for a one year (solid 8 tall filipina). Eharmony is like playing the Lotto...with similar odds.

From my understanding, Eharmony focuses on more scientific/personality factors when trying to match people, and basically tries to eliminate looks to a certain extent? Don't you have to answer a ton of questions?

[CrazyBoy]

(12-10-2012 05:33 PM)Neo Wrote:  

Girls on match are more serious about meeting someone.

The attention whore heirarchy of dating sites goes like this.

POF > Okcupid > Match.com

I've used all three. POF has by far the lowest class women of them all. Okcupid has a mix, and match.com has the more mainstream type of girl. Lots of working professionals, nurses, teachers, etc. Just regular chicks who want to meet a guy.

It's probably not your game, it's the stream you're fishing in. You're vibe might just be more suited for match.com. I will say this. I do terrible on POF, but great on Okcupid and match.com. Somethings just can't be logically explained.

I agree with what you say here - I've never used match, but there are quality women on OKC too. I've met a few doctors and lawyers from it.

[titanium]

(12-10-2012 10:19 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

(12-10-2012 09:33 PM)John Galt2 Wrote:  

(12-10-2012 05:47 PM)caligula89 Wrote:  

I think you're right Neo. I'm going to pay for an eHarmony account when I move at the end of the month and see if it's just that the paid sites get better response rates.

Just my $0.02 - like some of the other posters stated, it depends on your game. For myself, I am a highly educated (somewhat cultured) 38 year old professional. I clean up on Match, where the girls are looking to date a guy seriously (most of the time at least) whereas the OKC crowd would be much more impressed with my 6 pack abs than my MBA from the University of Chicago. As far as Eharmony, the crowd might be even more seriously looking than Match but its filled with ugly women. They dont let you search and send you 7 "matches" per day. I literally rejected 2,000 women (I kept track to amuse myself) and was interested and had dates with two women. Not a great ratio, though one of the two I did date for a one year (solid 8 tall filipina). Eharmony is like playing the Lotto...with similar odds.

From my understanding, Eharmony focuses on more scientific/personality factors when trying to match people, and basically tries to eliminate looks to a certain extent? Don't you have to answer a ton of questions?

Yes, it's like taking a survey that never ends. Time consuming.

[east and west]

is there some site in south america? I am on OK cupid, but it doesnt seem big here.

[Apollo2]

Does Match.com have a smartphone app?

OKC and POF do. A lot of younger girls especially use these sites to feed their ego. They're not serious about meeting all but the top 20% of men.

Imagine having 100s of girls hollering at you at your fingertips. You'd probably be flaky too and only respond to the best girls.

I notice POF got significantly harder once everyone had a smartphone around 2011.