[Truth Teller]

Impressive stuff. Of course, this is only going to be used by the white knights/SJW morons as an example of "harassment." Of course, since he's a fairly well put together white guy, they won't scream harassment.

The whole Gawker article reminds me of a white knight in my fraternity. He does photography (only for his sorority "friends") and is about to graduate college while still a virgin. He's also suffering "one-itis" over a 5. When I told him that I consider approaching women during the day fine, he inferred it was "harassment."

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(10-12-2014 04:40 PM)CRR Wrote:  

Gawker translation:

Male Asks Out Thin, Pretty Women. Fat, Unfeminine Women Outraged.

Historical context:

1914: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from their fathers.

1974: Women are liberated! Talk to them!

2014: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from the Big Brother media establishment.

Whether or not they realize it, they're mirroring the morals and ideals of yesteryear -- and blasting women back generations.

This will not have a good ending. This will seep into the culture and women will not only be spoken to like they were in 1914, they'll be patronized like they were then too.

[speakeasy]

(10-12-2014 12:57 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

another reason why I can't fucking wait for the subway to open next year in los angeles.

Huh? There has been a subway in Los Angeles since the early 90s. Well at least the red line anyway. Hot girls on L.A.'s metro are far and few between. It's not NYC where people of all walks of life take the subway. In LA it's 95% poor Latinos. The upper crust, middle class and beautiful people of L.A. wouldn't be caught dead taking Metro. It's a status thing in L.A. whereas in NYC it's not.

[jariel]

(10-12-2014 03:18 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

He claims to have "gone out with" over 500 women. That's 33 dates a year, or 2-3 per month. He could easily be getting 20-30 numbers a month from his technique, and converting 10% of them to dates. From there, a lot of guys get a 50% conversion from date to sex. I'd say this guy has been doing pretty well.

Getting a date means nothing.

A lot of girls will go out with guys they don't even like.

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

[speakeasy]

(10-12-2014 06:57 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 03:18 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

He claims to have "gone out with" over 500 women. That's 33 dates a year, or 2-3 per month. He could easily be getting 20-30 numbers a month from his technique, and converting 10% of them to dates. From there, a lot of guys get a 50% conversion from date to sex. I'd say this guy has been doing pretty well.

Getting a date means nothing.

A lot of girls will go out with guys they don't even like.

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

Yeah, I'm not sure what's so ground breaking about what he's doing. 500 women he went on dates with over 15 years averages to 2.7 dates per month. So that's about 1 date every 11 days on average. If he's doing this shit full time that's nothing impressive. And we don't know what his conversion rate is. How many hours does he spend chasing to get one bang? Without knowing that, this article doesn't mean much. I know guys that hit several new girls a month without having to make pickup a full time job.

[RawGod]

(10-12-2014 06:57 PM)jariel Wrote:  

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

Yep. Data points:

Krauser.
Me.

[Atlantic]

(10-12-2014 07:09 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 06:57 PM)jariel Wrote:  

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

Yep. Data points:

Krauser.
Me.

Me

[jariel]

Ya, I'm clearly not referring to Krauser's conversion rate.

The average guy is not turning 1 out of every 2 dates into sex.

FTN.

[monster]

The dude's a little eccentric. He also apparently got married last year.

Here some vids of his dance game

[Brodiaga]

(10-12-2014 06:57 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 03:18 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

He claims to have "gone out with" over 500 women. That's 33 dates a year, or 2-3 per month. He could easily be getting 20-30 numbers a month from his technique, and converting 10% of them to dates. From there, a lot of guys get a 50% conversion from date to sex. I'd say this guy has been doing pretty well.

Getting a date means nothing.

A lot of girls will go out with guys they don't even like.

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

This. In NY, an average guy with a bit of game can just spam bitches on Tinder and OKc and get a few "dates" every week if he is not very picky or lazy. A lot of these dates will be "no" girls, though, for various reasons. Girls have lots of options too, so they can afford to be picky, especially if guys keep picking up the tab for drinks, appetizers or even dinners (yep, plenty of suckers out there who will even do first date dinners).

I don't know who gets 50% or more lays from dates in NY. If you guys do, I take my hat off, more power to you. I have started doing very cheap or even free first dates because most of them are just not worth the money and time spent. It is a weird place: I get more dates here than anywhere else I've lived, but the conversion rate from dates is the lowest I've experienced.

[Yeti]

A lot of girls, generally in America but I would imagine especially in NYC, don't accord much respect or immediacy to meeting up romantically with a guy.

As an example, when I was using OkCupid I would read profiles where the girl said that she was getting tired of 'the standard drinks at a bar' meetup and was hoping for something more interesting.

Of course, implying that it's up to the guy to think of that interesting idea.

The problem is that although drinks are very common as a first meetup, it's still a very good way to get to know someone well enough to determine whether you may be compatible. When girls do not respect the idea of dating enough to even be satisfied with this most essential, standard way of getting to know someone, and expect to be entertained on a magic carpet ride instead, you know that it doesn't mean much anymore to get a girl out.

[Jack198]

(10-12-2014 01:27 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 12:42 PM)therajraj Wrote:  

Threads such as these make me Envy NY guys.

The sheer volume must make it easy to get leads

Leads yeah. But banging is tough due to logistics. If you're visiting and have a hotel room in Manhattan it's one thing. But if you work in Manhattan you most likely live outside of the city in NJ, Staten Island or Brooklyn. No girl is going to take a 45 minute ride to bang. Bar to bed time and distance should be 5 minutes or 2 blocks.

Don't be fooled by the allure of the city. Shitty studio apartments go for $2k+ a month. You need to make $100k just to be poor.

This is true - no idea what he does for a living, but no matter how you slice it dates get expensive in NYC, even cheap ones. If you want to live the life in Manhattan with a decent (but by no means grand) 1500 sq ft apartment, be able to go to good restaurants & clubs, wear the right clothes, fuck hot chicks, etc. that requires minimum $140k per year, and that's not saving anything, only keeping up with the life. I would indeed be curious to know what his email follow up strategy is and how many conversions to bangs he gets.

But it is a very solid example of day game - and at 48 he's just become my new hero.
Problem is he just told the whole town about it and there will be a spat of wannabes fucking it up for him over the next couple of months/years.

[Jack198]

(10-12-2014 07:21 PM)jariel Wrote:  

Ya, I'm clearly not referring to Krauser's conversion rate.

Ok, minor thread hjack, not being personal but I really, truly want to know .... WHY do so many people, particularly millennials, do this and when did it get started?

From Urban Dictionary:

Ya

Acceptable: Replacement for "you"
Unacceptable: Replacement for "yeah"

The first definition is correct, because "ya" is actually how a lot of people pronounce "you" in a casual conversation.

But using it as "yeah" is incorrect and stupid, because nobody in real life pronounces yeah like "ya". The only people who type it that way are people under 25 who are trying to be cool and fit in with the rest of their e-buddies and Myspace losers.

A lot of them make the excuse that it's easier to type "ya" than "yeah". Yeah right. It's just their way of hiding the fact that they're trying to be cool and fit in on whatever board/forum they're posting on.

At least things like "orly" and "kthx" are funny......"ya" is not. It's just dumb.

By the way, expect all my votes to be negative, because they're all mad that I'm right.

P.S. go read a book instead of wasting time surfing the net or playing video games......you might learn something.
Correct: "Can ya give me an example?"
Incorrect: "Ya, sure"


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ya

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(10-12-2014 08:36 PM)Jack198 Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 07:21 PM)jariel Wrote:  

Ya, I'm clearly not referring to Krauser's conversion rate.

Ok, minor thread hjack, not being personal but I really, truly want to know .... WHY do so many people, particularly millennials, do this and when did it get started?

From Urban Dictionary:

Ya

Acceptable: Replacement for "you"
Unacceptable: Replacement for "yeah"

The first definition is correct, because "ya" is actually how a lot of people pronounce "you" in a casual conversation.

But using it as "yeah" is incorrect and stupid, because nobody in real life pronounces yeah like "ya". The only people who type it that way are people under 25 who are trying to be cool and fit in with the rest of their e-buddies and Myspace losers.

A lot of them make the excuse that it's easier to type "ya" than "yeah". Yeah right. It's just their way of hiding the fact that they're trying to be cool and fit in on whatever board/forum they're posting on.

At least things like "orly" and "kthx" are funny......"ya" is not. It's just dumb.

By the way, expect all my votes to be negative, because they're all mad that I'm right.

P.S. go read a book instead of wasting time surfing the net or playing video games......you might learn something.
Correct: "Can ya give me an example?"
Incorrect: "Ya, sure"


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ya

"WHY do so many people, particularly millennials, do this and when did it get started?"

Maybe it's a secret. A divine secret. A secret so divine that only the Ya Ya Sisterhood would know.

[Travesty]

@ speakeasy and eradicator

How will this new subway line fill L.A.'s subways with hot chicks? If it did NYC would be off my list in the future. Doesn't anyone care about earthquakes? In fact it would put L.A. as the #1 game city in the U.S. easily. Well except maybe Vegas...

[shameus_o'reaaly]

This is pretty cool and the guy is a real inspiration.
For those who live in or visit New York, how do passengers behave on the subway there? Do they desperately try to ignore everybody while reading their Kindle or smartphone, do they acknowledge when someone talks to them?

The London Underground is not the most friendly of places, but even there people try to strike up a conversation with strangers (usually foreigners, I've found). Train game can't be great if you happen to be going somewhere for real, though it's probably a relative goldmine if it's not rush hour.

[Deluge]

(10-12-2014 07:17 PM)Atlantic Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 07:09 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 06:57 PM)jariel Wrote:  

You really think the conversion rate from a date with a chick is 50%?

Yep. Data points:

Krauser.
Me.

Me

Mine is ~40%, but with sub-par logistics.

[Distant Light]

(10-12-2014 12:42 PM)therajraj Wrote:  

Threads such as these make me Envy NY guys.

The sheer volume must make it easy to get leads

IMO New York is blown out of proportion... (Unless you're willing to bang lots of average chicks)

Last time I was out although I was thinking it my boy stated the place will filled with "hobbits and wide chicks". Ironically a community dude from Canada met up for about 15mins and was impressed with the ratio.

Ironically as many girls that were there only 2 were actually "bangable". (I don't like short chicks)

This is because when you compare the top tier clubs and the average daytime setting, it's so skewed you forget what an unattractive woman looks like.

(10-13-2014 06:20 AM)shameus_oreaaly Wrote:  

This is pretty cool and the guy is a real inspiration.
For those who live in or visit New York, how do passengers behave on the subway there? Do they desperately try to ignore everybody while reading their Kindle or smartphone, do they acknowledge when someone talks to them?

The London Underground is not the most friendly of places, but even there people try to strike up a conversation with strangers (usually foreigners, I've found). Train game can't be great if you happen to be going somewhere for real, though it's probably a relative goldmine if it's not rush hour.

Everyones experience is different...

I tend to have music on and just enjoy it. This has resulted in people opening me just due to curiousity as to how I could possibly be raging.

MOST people are like zombies just quietly sitting/standing amongst strangers, due to how I am now I find that very weird. I find most people are "open" to conversation and anything that isn't "just sitting there" will draw attention.

For instance I was once pulling a chick who was about 5ft the people sitting down (about 6 or 7) were discussing amongst themselves the fact that I (tall black guy with crazy hair) am with this little white euro chick...They thought she was underage as in 14-15.

More times than not I tend to meet chicks on the platform than the actual subway ride. Also on the L and G line it's less of a zombie experience due to the hipsters having random jams on the platform along with all forms of eccentric thing.

P.S...For all those living in NY going on dates, a massive waste of time. I've had fuckbuddies and female friends who plan a "date" in sync with meeting me after.

[Hedonistic Traveler]

(10-12-2014 05:44 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 04:40 PM)CRR Wrote:  

Gawker translation:

Male Asks Out Thin, Pretty Women. Fat, Unfeminine Women Outraged.

Historical context:

1914: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from their fathers.

1974: Women are liberated! Talk to them!

2014: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from the Big Brother media establishment.

Whether or not they realize it, they're mirroring the morals and ideals of yesteryear -- and blasting women back generations.

This will not have a good ending. This will seep into the culture and women will not only be spoken to like they were in 1914, they'll be patronized like they were then too.

I always thought this was a sign of changing technology more than anything else. People, especially women, really aren't as good at making conversation as they used to be.

In university I was always amazed at how quiet people would be when we'd be forced into small groups. Eventually I realized people aren't used to talking to each other face-to-face, at least not when sober. Phones and the internet have become a crutch for a lot of people. If you're not already friends then they want nothing to do with you.

So when guys with bad game approach girls they force them into a conversation where neither party knows how to handle themselves. That's why they get labeled as creeps, because they make the girl feel uncomfortable or awkward. Of course if these girls were a little more self-aware maybe they'd realize that being incapable of talking to a stranger is at least partially their fault.

I may be way off-base with all of this, but it seems right. When I travel to poorer countries or even talk to kids at work I feel like they have such better social skills, at least as far as talking to strangers goes. In the US girls celebrate being labeled as "awkward".

I'm young though, does anyone who gamed in the 90s or early 2000s have any comments on how day-game has changed?

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(10-13-2014 06:34 PM)Hedonistic Traveler Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 05:44 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(10-12-2014 04:40 PM)CRR Wrote:  

Gawker translation:

Male Asks Out Thin, Pretty Women. Fat, Unfeminine Women Outraged.

Historical context:

1914: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from their fathers.

1974: Women are liberated! Talk to them!

2014: It's inappropriate to talk to women without permission from the Big Brother media establishment.

Whether or not they realize it, they're mirroring the morals and ideals of yesteryear -- and blasting women back generations.

This will not have a good ending. This will seep into the culture and women will not only be spoken to like they were in 1914, they'll be patronized like they were then too.

I always thought this was a sign of changing technology more than anything else. People, especially women, really aren't as good at making conversation as they used to be.

In university I was always amazed at how quiet people would be when we'd be forced into small groups. Eventually I realized people aren't used to talking to each other face-to-face, at least not when sober. Phones and the internet have become a crutch for a lot of people. If you're not already friends then they want nothing to do with you.

So when guys with bad game approach girls they force them into a conversation where neither party knows how to handle themselves. That's why they get labeled as creeps, because they make the girl feel uncomfortable or awkward. Of course if these girls were a little more self-aware maybe they'd realize that being incapable of talking to a stranger is at least partially their fault.

I may be way off-base with all of this, but it seems right. When I travel to poorer countries or even talk to kids at work I feel like they have such better social skills, at least as far as talking to strangers goes. In the US girls celebrate being labeled as "awkward".

I'm young though, does anyone who gamed in the 90s or early 2000s have any comments on how day-game has changed?

"I always thought this was a sign of changing technology more than anything else. People, especially women, really aren't as good at making conversation as they used to be...does anyone who gamed in the 90s or early 2000s have any comments on how day-game has changed?"

I do. And here is the thing: women were never brilliant conversationalists.

Do you think back in the '90s hair metal chicks were engaging us in sparkling debates about existentialism? No, we were talking about whatever music or clothes were really important then (and totally forgotten now). Even if you look at the TV shows or movies back then, younger women were often portrayed as distant, moody, or bitchy and hard to engage. Because they often were.

The difference now is that women have endless distractions in the form of technology. In 1992, I could keep Dawn or Tasha (actual names -- hehe) amused with my lame stories of going to concerts or delivering pizzas. Now you need to be more interesting or stylish or just plain better.

I hate to say this, but even talking to my ex-wife now is a struggle because she's inundated with annoying smart phone messages from every relative and friend around.

I don't own a smart phone. I have no solution to this. Even if you have the best line in the world and are "hottt," some girls behave toward their smartphones like kids behave with new toys and don't want to be interrupted. Hence, they lack conversation skills because they can't be bothered. It's scary to think now I used to meet women on break from work at the mall, and we'd talk in the food court with absolutely no distractions. Seems like it was a totally different world then.

[eradicator]

(10-12-2014 09:21 PM)Travesty444 Wrote:  

@ speakeasy and eradicator

How will this new subway line fill L.A.'s subways with hot chicks? If it did NYC would be off my list in the future. Doesn't anyone care about earthquakes? In fact it would put L.A. as the #1 game city in the U.S. easily. Well except maybe Vegas...

the subway/metro of los angeles sucks now, I am not disputing this. However, I think the current expansions into santa monica to downtown could definitely attract club girls who want to party downtown but not have to deal with uber/taxis/getting a DUI.

This is my assumption. There are also plenty of commuters.

Only time will tell how much the subway will get used in the coming years/decades.

That was my thinking on saying "wow the subway in los angeles could be a great way to run game on hot chicks." At this point, we just don't know how it will work out.

If it lessens traffic congestion during rush hour, I will be a happy man. If it turns out to be a good way to run game on babes, I will be a very happy man.

[StrikeBack]

From early 2000: they were never brilliant conversationalists (never at any point in history, I reckon) but they weren't anywhere near as rude and socially retarded as they are now. Not just conversational skills, but general social skills - i.e how to navigate in society - have gone to shit.

The other week I was at a conference with many young university students about to graduate. I watched in great amusement as many of them especially the girls tried to find the conference theatre. It's a massive one in a big building, with huge signs everywhere. Why did they have so many difficulties finding it? Because they were all thumbing their phones trying to find an app or a map or whatever it was, instead of peeling their eyes away from the damn thing and looking up to follow the obvious signs.

[Hedonistic Traveler]

(10-13-2014 06:49 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

The difference now is that women have endless distractions in the form of technology. In 1992, I could keep Dawn or Tasha (actual names -- hehe) amused with my lame stories of going to concerts or delivering pizzas. Now you need to be more interesting or stylish or just plain better.

I hate to say this, but even talking to my ex-wife now is a struggle because she's inundated with annoying smart phone messages from every relative and friend around.

I don't own a smart phone. I have no solution to this. Even if you have the best line in the world and are "hottt," some girls behave toward their smartphones like kids behave with new toys and don't want to be interrupted. Hence, they lack conversation skills because they can't be bothered. It's scary to think now I used to meet women on break from work at the mall, and we'd talk in the food court with absolutely no distractions. Seems like it was a totally different world then.

Thanks for the reply, it's exactly what I was looking for.

It's unfortunate how people are so much less present than they used to be. All of this technology is capable of doing such amazing things but at the same time it's destroying the social aspect of being human. Even if these conversations were mundane, at least it was real interaction.

I don't have a smartphone either, I think I'm one of the only 22-year olds I know of without one. It definitely can be an inconvenience at times, and can cost bangs through not having Tinder, but I've just seen so many people get lost in this huge time-suck. I'd always get a little depressed walking into a classroom before class starts and seeing 25 kids hunched over their phones, unaware of anything around them.

It's really not about just getting or approaching girls either. I can't stand going out with friends and having to pose for photos every half-hour. Or going to a concert and having to stare at the screens of 100 phones filming. I was amazed that I couldn't even escape it when traveling. It seems like every other person in a hostel has a laptop or smartphone with them.

I guess despite all of this talk of "unplugging" I have been on RVF for an hour, I guess I'm part of the problem, haha.

[ashraf]

/here is why i call bs:

he gets emails, those are almost as effective as getting a fake number
he recommends waiting at least 60 hours, by then she'll forget you

[RawGod]

(10-13-2014 11:34 PM)ashraf Wrote:  

/here is why i call bs:

he gets emails, those are almost as effective as getting a fake number
he recommends waiting at least 60 hours, by then she'll forget you

I would argue that getting an email was a weaker choice from about 2000-2010 but in the smartphone age email is once again a decent way of getting contact. Nobody calls these days. Send an email and it gets pushed on her phone, just like getting a text/FB/line message. They've all converged and after the initial message girls will ask to add you to their preferred text app anyway.

And with a 60 hour or three day rule it probably isn't optimum to follow it strictly, but doing so won't hurt you much.

The guy is good looking, ticks all the boxes aside from ageing out of the game somewhat (which would be why he's now getting married and writing a book) so nothing he's claimed is outrageous at all. It's more that he could have optimised further if he had tried different things, but he's apparently just done his own thing.