Making a coherent model for the Inner Game of approaching is among the most crucial developments of the Player. The approaching is just too emotionally loaded for people to handle, and ego traps are ten-a-penny.
This is all amplified by social media flash game. It is accurate to say that 99% of both infields and short-form content out there is trash and manipulative. Manipulation is aimed at convincing the audience that the Player in question has control and choice over his romantic options.
The reality of things is that control comes from limiting your options. You are asking the girl to enter your frame more deeply. This is the only possible definition of control and pursuing it, categorically, lowers your chances of success.
The same applies to choice: by definition, choice comes from either of 1) Lowering your standards, 2) Excessive hard work, or 3) Luck. That is it. It cannot be anything else, because males are not evolved for choice. Our evolutionary strategy is expansive. Sperm is cheap. We are not supposed to reject girls. If we have to choose, it is by definition, mismanagement.
The Meta-Frame of Advanced Game
Advanced Game is neither about control nor choice, albeit it offers both in the end. It is about calibration and adaptation to the girl. The goal is either to increase your chances of bedding her or meeting more girls so that you have a higher likelihood of bedding them. Having 10 dates with gold diggers that you have to screen out so you can declare your “standards” is not Game; it’s stupidity. You shouldn’t have opened them, or you should have screened them faster.
People shy away from this realization and fall into the choice/control ego trap because it feeds Game’s true purpose. What we really want out of Game is not unlimited access to pussy, it is power over our love lives. This is the root cause of evil, because choice and control are meant to signify power. But they are not power itself, they are derivatives of pre-existing power. Hence, it is about confusing appearance for substance! That is why it is common to see beginners, intermediates, and even advanced Players completely collapse after a string of bad results. The choice/control narrative fosters what is expressed in the following metaphor:
You are going to an ice cream shop with the expectation of buying fruit. You cannot buy fruit there, so you end up with a strawberry ice cream. It tastes like a strawberry, but it is not a strawberry.
In short, wrong expectations and a deep misunderstanding of the Game’s strategy.
What is Cold Approach? What is Daygame?
The discussion has to begin with “what is Daygame”. I personally object to both Brooding Sea’s idea of perfection and Thomas Crown’s idea of value exchange. The first is hyper-focused on Daygame as a skill to be perfected. The second focused on Sexual Marketplace fatalism, with a stubbornness on fair value exchange. Albeit both of these viewpoints can have advantages. The perfection version is pushing for skill acquisition, and the marketplace version is being very pragmatic.
In my opinion, Game is a value delivery mechanism, as expressed in Krauser’s Mastery. The Value can be present in the man, but unless it is delivered, it is useless. You can be a finance bro with a ripped body, but unless you can showcase this effectively in an appropriate amount of time to the girl, the advantages might as well not exist. It doesn’t matter that you have them.
That was Game as a concept in general, now what is Daygame itself? Daygame itself is the strategy we employ for our value delivery mechanism. The street stop and the pitch serve this purpose. But understand this: it is a strategy out of many possibilities, a system that also happens to work. For example, becoming a CEO or a rockstar handles the task of finding leads, advertising your Value, and delivering girls to your bed equally effectively.
All in all, there is Game to be learned and done, contrary to marketplace school. But Game serves a purpose, and it is not an abstract competitive ladder, contrary to the perfection school.
The Value Delivery Strategy
Let us see how this value delivery strategy plays out. Daygame, the London Daygame Model (LDM) at least, inherits three viewpoints:
- It is spontaneous
- It depends on charismatic value
- It is direct
Spontaneity
Spontaneity is what makes it a cold approach. Actually, it is the coldest form of cold approach. But the effects of that spontaneity are not usually discussed. Spontaneity is a measure of your prior value in the eyes of the girl. Actually, this means that spontaneity is inversely proportional to your prior value in her eyes.
When you stop the girl in the street, you literally have no prior value. In contrast with Nightgame, at the club, you are playing the entire room, not the set. When the girl meets you at 1 am, she has had 2 hours to observe your behaviour before you open.
In Daygame, this is impossible. Non-verbals and nice grooming can carry some of the weight, but let’s not kid ourselves. We are exposed to much more response variance than other forms of Game. We can do everything “right”, but at the moment of the approach, still get the nastiest of blowouts. Simply because it was the wrong girl at the wrong time.
Charisma-based
Let us now audit the value expression. Daygame tunnel-visions on charismatic value. Sure, charisma can get us far, but it is not the only attractive form of value. Lifestyle, social dominance, etc., are equally effective and efficient. Therefore, not every girl will bite on our value proposition, and not every guy can showcase value like this.
In fact, the majority of girls are not interested, and the ones who do will probably be introverted and feminine. If the practitioner is not interested in this demographic, this is catastrophic.
Direct
Finally, Daygame is direct. It is what has been called R-selected. The technique is developed with a focus on fast, consequence-free sex. It is intentionally designed to filter for horny girls efficiently. It strips away aspects of the seduction process. For example, we don’t meet her social circle, and we don’t showcase our lifestyle. The statement of sexual interest is delivered early (directness), and escalation is fast-paced.
These are effective at getting girls into our bed, but they are massive filters. Not all girls will be down, and even if they do, they might be down for the one-and-done and not for the dating that comes after. Therefore, the blowout ratio is by design. If the Player wants friendly chats, higher date conversion, or a relationship, other forms of Game might be better.
It stands to reason that learning a skillset is efficient only if we use that skillset often. For the people looking for just a wife or a girlfriend, why go into all this trouble? Never forget Daygame’s premises.
Realistic expectation vs Fiction
To summarise, in Daygame, we have to deal with the increased variance and the limiting factors of our value proposition. Daygamers love abstraction, and Krauser made the Interested-Available axis. I highly recommend his material; the predictive power of that model is very high.
However, our angle of analysis is a tad different. The point is that for a girl to stop and flirt, she has to be both interested and available on some level. The other ones won’t, and we also don’t and shouldn’t want them to do so. Given the variance, the girls who are both highly interested and highly available will be rare. In particular, if we are only assessing by lays, then they will be at a minimum of 1 in 30 sets. I repeat: that is at minimum.
It doesn’t matter if you got her phone number or you went on a date. If your dick didn’t go into her for all intents and purposes, it is the same as a 20-second blowout. Here is where the cracks of the popular narrative begin to show. When you hear the crazy stories, notice how often they are about a number or a date, not about a lay. By themselves, they mean jack-shit. Winning is winning, and losing is losing. To nail the point, here is a poker analogy: it doesn’t matter if you win a pot with a Royal flush or 10-high; what matters is what was in the pot. A 20-minute flat set means nothing compared to a 2-minute sexually charged set. And it doesn’t matter if it took 10 blowouts to get there. What matters is that you found the set.
Pre-approach into Perspective
We arrive at the bird’s-eye view of calibration and pre-approach. As described earlier, the information we seek before opening is on her availability and her interest level. That information is not always available. Access to it is highly valuable, especially for Player statistics. This means, sometimes, even high stats are smoke and mirrors. There is a world of difference between true cold-calling and some prior intel. This is why even A/L is not always indicative of skill level (albeit this statement is pushing it).
Availability is usually gauged through a pre-approach filter. For example, openness to the world, speed of walking, or her ovulation window. Interest level is gauged by IOIs. For example, a flirty look or a quick eye sparkle.
But this is not the best way to find out her Interest and Availability. The most efficient way to find out is to go and stop her. You will get the answers. It is okay to go and get blown out. Getting blown out is an outcome of your value, vibe, and variance, none of which is under control at the moment of the street stop. As long as you are not failing at the Game fundamentals (lack of technical skill), her response is beyond your control; your responsibility ends here. Over-analyzing only burns emotional energy.
The Monk
In short, nothing guarantees the girl will stop and talk to you, and if she doesn’t stop, you cannot “play”. There is nothing you can do about it; you should accept this. This is Game Stoicism at its highest form. It doesn’t matter if the good set comes in 10, 20, or 100 approaches; the opportunities eventually will come.
Tom Torero pioneered poker analogies, and they hold. It doesn’t matter when you will get a playable hand in poker; you have to fold most hands. What matters is how you play that hand once it inevitably arises. If a Daygamer complains about getting 10 blowouts, it is akin to a poker player full-tilting after being card dead for 1 hour. Do you not see the stupidity behind this?
Of course, what makes Daygame blowouts harder is that your ego is involved, but state control is fundamental in Game anyway. Better learn it sooner than later.
Bottom Line
Accept that the majority of factors determining whether a girl will stop or not are outside your control. That is okay, and it is by design. It is by the strategy of Daygame and the value proposition it provides to the girls.
The good news: it is also irrelevant if you need 10 or 100 approaches for a lay. The upside of winning in Game is tremendous. I would even go so far as to say that the guy getting irregular lays is happier. To him, they mean more than to the advanced guy, measured by how much they change his life.
Of course, don’t even think of striving for worse results, but I am being pragmatic here. Just understanding the correct thought patterns can help you plow through the rough times and focus on the areas that will improve your Game.
Finally, I want to reassure the reader that we all get cold periods — there is an argument that Daygame results happen in bursts — so learning to brave fruitless periods is a mandatory skill in the long run.
