Category: Inner Game

Preface

Krauser made major contributions to Daygame, both in theory and in fostering the community itself. A true pioneer and giant of our cult (if you want to call it that). We wouldn’t be here without him, and this is an indisputable fact.

However, in your progression as Daygamer you should eventually cut ties and see him for who he truly is: a human, not an idol. Because to prosper, you must eventually cut off from all influences.

There is an effect that such strong personalities have that they warp people in their view of morality and lifestyle. Such a thing is documented in John Bodi’s books (albeit pathologically).

I personally had some struggle disassociating from Krauser, endlessly comparing stats and achievements. At times, even applying part of his Game where it was not the best idea to do so, just for the thrill of emulation and competition (dick size contest in pure English).

This article will provide criticism, but only insofar as you can free yourself from the gravity of their personalities. It is not meant as demonization or an end-all, be-all critique. So bear this in mind.

Krauser

Krauser was the person who had the most influence on me personally. I never gravitated to other PUAs, and from context, our personalities were a natural match, hence a tailored mentor for my journey.

In particular, his books, Daygame Mastery, Daygame Infinite and the first memoir – Balls Deep – should be mandatory reading for every Daygamer, if not PUA in general. Well, then let’s get into it.

He started incredibly Beta

This is all over Balls Deep and parts of other memoirs. Of course, such influence has dissolved by the time we reach Daygame Mastery in 2014. The main culprits are as follows:

• Slow dates.
• Taking too much pleasure in intermediate results (nudes, kisses, dates, etc.) that are not sex.
• And worst of all: developing long game.

All these points are exaggerated in the Black girl he was chasing in Balls Deep. Which makes a nice story, but at the end of the day is an exercise in tail chasing.

Now, being Beta is not a sin, we all start like that, but emulating or taking parts of his journey is bad when you are not in that spot yourself. His tactic of intermediate results works well for keeping engaged with the art of Daygame until mastery, but for you, the student, disassociate the points that are there for authenticity and narrative from the actual good theoretical points.

Most of his early escapades are just nice stories aimed at highlighting personal development.

He lived in a different world

The thing that people missed is that the world of 2010-2015 (or the pre-first Trump era, where Zog had not amplified his attacks) was not a slightly different epoch; they were a different planet entirely.

Back then, there were no dating apps, the Gender war was more moderate, people were way more outgoing and open (destroyed since Covid entirely), immigration hadn’t flattened everything yet, and people were generally more positive.

In particular, in terms of SMP we can summarize it in the following graph:

Obesity rates by counties

If we include overweights, most countries have increased fatty rates by about 10-20% in the last 15 years. Just consider how much value this adds to thin pussy in terms of market price. Nowadays, just being thin is probably the only requirement to being a 7. Imagine wanting to consider proportions or other metrics.

In short, the sociological and physiological conditions were much better than the craphole we live in now. You simply cannot compare your conditions now with his back then. In particular, and worst of all, Gen Z right now ranges from moderately to fully retarded (depending on where you live). All the vitality and lust for life has left these empty bodies. At its worst, you have this. Most of the adventures he describes in his books don’t exist right now. I am sorry. This type of girl just doesn’t exist right now.

The narratives are constructed

If you are reading his memoirs, then the narratives are constructed. No harm in literary perspective; we all much appreciate a better book, but the comparison is unfair. His books roughly follow this:

• Up to banging a 10/10 (book 1)
• Inner game growth (book 2)
• Mad adventure year (book 3)
• Peak game and publishing career (book 4)

But these narratives have been inserted post fact. The same is true for the hero’s journey that Bodi even admits to.

Living that life was probably hellish and directionless more often than not. And this is not discussed; a backbone of direction is inserted via sleight of hand in the memoirs. This wasn’t the case in the real story.

Krauser even admits it at the end of the first memoir: he was far more unhappy than happy for the first two years. And any happiness he got afterwards was not from becoming good at Game; it was from mental introspection.

The results are rigged

He has a post somewhere that all PUA results are peaks, while the reality on the ground is mostly failure with rare glimpses of success. Infields are inevitably cherry-picked.

Same is true for statistics and his statistics in particular. I am not sure he clarifies it anywhere, but when he claims lays in his Daygame stats, that is all the lays he got in that year, not the Daygame-only lays.

A clear example is here from 2015:

He admits at least one of those was a tinder lay

In particular, his results are lifestyle optimized, take this account from 2013 stats:

The difference from 1/50 to 1/20 is massive, as there is an efficiency claim of more than 150% improvement. Go to London with the same skill set as him, and you will feel like a goose in comparison.

I will stress this again. Nothing wrong with Krauser; he did the best he could given his circumstances. If you make unfair comparisons between yourself and him, that is on you, not him.

Stop following post 2015

Read his story past memoir 5, and you will see pure madness. I refer to his 2015 stats account (or memoir 5). Eurojoints of as low as 3 days. Alternating between UK and Europe over 2-week intervals.

• Makes nice stories: check ✓
• Is pure madness that you should not try to emulate: also check ✓

All the theoretical straight line of improvement (hero’s journey) falls apart here. Six years of PUA lifestyle, and the result was aimless wandering? That is not linear progress, or progress at all, depending on how you count.

He even touched on such dangers in Daygame Infinite. But madness is madness, literary value aside.

He associates with Brooding Sea

“Show me your friend, and I will tell you who you are”

• Do I know Brooding Sea? No.
• Can I attest of his skills? Also No.
• Do I believe him? No.

In short, if you want to make such hard claims of results, quality, and everything you can get from life, you should have evidence to back it up.

Brooding Sea has no such evidence, so bullshitter alarm goes ringing. The only thing he has to market himself is elitism and his association with Krauser.

He might be the big thing; I don’t know. But from what he posses online, he is probably not, and hence Krauser associating with him should ring some alarms about his character as well.

Crazy idea to bring mindfulness to this blog. I don’t personally advocate or actively practice it, but some fundamental concepts are particularly important for Game and we will cover them. Before anything, let’s put everything in order.

Basic Summary

Mindfulness is the practice of bringing your focus on what is called “here and now”, the present moment. Take a moment… breathe… pause and focus on your toes of your legs, move them around… maybe now focus on the feeling of the air in your skin… you can feel it, warm and soft right? Focus on the sounds and the images around you… turn off your brain and just observe. This is the “here and now” – the present moment.

By doing this, assuming you sufficiently turned off your brain from its logical functions, you should feel the world much more vibrant, you should have felt more alive, and with excitement building up inside of you. Crazy right? There are two directions to understand the concept, one stemming from Eastern mysticism with a focus on meditation and the other from a neuroscientific perspective. You can already guess the direction we will take, so strap on for the latter.

The basic idea comes from brain functions. Brain itself is a very recent invention of evolution, and even more so is the ability to use logic (the voice in your head), and even, even more so, is the ability to maintain memory and future projection. The running narrative is that humans are the only animals that can “remember” and “think ahead”; in contrast, all of what we call skill and learning in other animals is akin to Pavlovian response, just hardwired behaviour.

You protest… how is that even possible to be arrogant like this? Well… let’s understand this from an even more basic concept: the concept of theory of mind. For a behaviour to be non-Pavlovian, it has to be able to independently respond to signals. You ring the bell, then there is a processing moment, then the dog decides to salivate or not, depending on whether you gonna bring food to it. That would be the non-Pavlovian version, correct?

For this to happen, the subject (the dog) should be able to understand the setting, think from your perspective (i.e., whether you intend to bring it food or not), and then decide to make the connection that bell implies food is suitable or not for this occasion. If the subject decides to think only from its perspective (“what I think is correct” – without second-guessing), disregarding the rest of the signals, then the pre-established response “bell → food” would automatically dominate all alternatives. Precisely this distinction – perspective shift – makes the difference between a sovereign skill (choose how and when to use it) and a scheduling or input/output task, not unlike how a computer operates. Therefore, for a skill to not be hardwired, theory of mind is a prerequisite.

Ok, we have something measurable now… which animals display theory of mind? Which animals can think from different perspectives? This is limited to only some apes, primates, and dogs. To understand this, think of the following experiment: point with your finger at a toy; if you are with a cat, the cat will just stare at your finger, failing to understand what pointing means. If you are with a dog, the dog will understand that pointing means not the finger itself, but to redirect attention to the direction of the finger, the finger leads to the toy! This is the difference between theory of mind and not.

All well and good so far, but our original objective was to arrive at the concept of past and future. Well, past and future can only exist if there is theory of mind, otherwise, there is no use for the function, it might as well be hardwired. The whole point of past and future is to make an action sovereign, to give nuance to it. Hence, their existence only makes sense if they are practical, and they can only be practical with presence of theory of mind.

However, let us investigate the current literature in memory. Because the concept of memory is not a simple mental replaying of events, it is an active reconstruction of the scene based on limited information. It is not a movie, it is an active process, and a very inconsistent one at that. Time and time again, the malleability of human memory and its own self-falsification is observed. Even when people were 100% convinced of certain facts based on their memory, the reality proved to be quite different. This has been documented in trials and courts, with victims being convinced that the perpetrator was a totally innocent person. Therefore, not only theory of mind is a prerequisite for the usefulness of “memory”, but memory itself is the same as future projection: they are the same mental system. The past and the future are both just a fleeting reconstruction of events in the brain, and in the brain only.

Therefore… what is happening with past, present and future? From our prior discussion, past and future are mental simulations… but does the present exist, or is it also a brain trick? Well… it doesn’t either. The present moment cannot exist as a thing in itself due to the nature of the sense organs: vision, hearing, touch, etc. The sensor, for example, the eyes, has to collect the signal and send it into brain, then the brain has to process the signal into an image. But signal collection operates at different speeds and at different stages of processing. Vision is collected faster than sound (because light travels faster than sound), but has to go through a more complicated path in the brain before it ends up as a mental image. Sound is collected slower, but actually processed faster. Therefore, when you sit opposite to your friend and you watch him speak, the “image part” is collected and processed at different speeds than the “sound” part. But you don’t experience your friend with sound delay, the “image” and “sound” parts are synced…. because the brain is playing tricks on you!

What you experience as “here and now” is actually “just a moment in the past”, the brain collected all the signals, processed them, and synced them together. Fundamentally, you cannot experience the “now” as now; when you experience it, it has already passed a moment ago.

Hierarchies in the brain

Hmm… past/future is a scam… and now is also a scam… so what gives? Well, they are both brain simulations, but they use different systems in the brain. The past/future system is much more recent and hence primitive in its function. Evolution just didn’t experiment enough on it to perfect it. The here and now system, on the other hand, is shared with the majority of the animal kingdom and is quite efficient and effective at its job. This is why you can turn off the voice in your head and still function. However, for our purposes, we will focus on a specific difference between the two systems.

Dopamine

The brain uses neurochemicals to interpret the world, as has been mentioned multiple times in this blog, what we call happiness is a mix of:

• Oxytocin
• Dopamine
• Endorphins
• Serotonin

Unusual release of those chemicals leads to various feelings of happiness, while withdrawal leads to the opposite. In particular, the brain itself becomes accustomed to certain states, for example, if there are 5 units of dopamine constantly released, then the brain will consider this as the new normal, requiring 6 units to detect a difference and translate it as “excitement” (note: the same is true with the other chemicals, not unique to dopamine). The kicker is… that the past/future system only responds to dopamine; it simply doesn’t register the other chemicals [The Molecule of More – Lieberman and Long].

The big happiness shift you feel when you switch to here and now is the perception of the other chemicals in your brain’s thought process and functions. That is why you feel more connected to the world when practicing mindfulness… the effect of oxytocin! Oxytocin is also responsible for the feeling of satisfaction and contentment. Dopamine, on the other hand, is responsible for feelings of excitement, but lacks satisfaction or payoff at the end of it. There is a famous experiment: Scientists hooked up electrodes into a rats brain and connected them to a button. If the rat would press the button it would excite his dopamine centers, leading to the rush/excitement feeling. What happened was that once the rat discovered the mechanism, he became incredibly restless. He would maniacally press the button forgoing food and sleep, eventually leading to his death.

This is the curse of not living in the now; you forfeit your right to oxytocin and the feeling of “enough, I am happy now”. You maniacally chase and chase with no end! You cannot find happiness in your head! You can only find it in the now. If you still don’t believe me, take it from ancient worms [A brief history of intelligence – Bennet]. Primitive creatures that have survived to this day and age, and their functions have been studied by scientists in relation to dopamine/oxytocin. The worms have only one receptor to detect the concentration of food in their environment, not unlike how smell functions for humans. The worms operate on two axes:

• Worm is hungry: excrete dopamine → initiate action, move towards food.
• Worm is full: excrete oxytocin → initiate chilling mode, ignore food.

There is no simpler way to showcase the interplay of dopamine/oxytocin than this. Stick in your head, stick with dopamine, and you operate only in the first mode.

How to do this

Well, we made a case for the here and now. How do we use it in practice? There is no science to it, you just need to train your mind to calm down and focus on stuff positive to now and contrary to past/future. That is where all the advice boils down to. Here are some examples:

• Turn of your logical brain, think nothing at all for a minute or two.
• Slow your movements, focus on the feelings of your body.
• If need, start small, start on your breath or focus on your fingers and tows. Try to move the attention upwards.
• Focus on your surroundings, the feelings and the sounds of people, this will activate oxytocin and take you to present.

Remember, girls are naturally averse to logic, or better put, naturally focused on oxytocin and serotonin. This helps them bond, i.e., understand the social game better, and to later extend care and tend for babies. Especially in Daygame, it is too much to ask them to enter our Male default state (logic), so we enter theirs. It is to our benefit as well, oxytocin naturally speeds up connection, and serotonin naturally establishes power structures (via status), i.e., humor! When coaches advocate to get out of your head, it is precisely for these reasons!

This post is blowing up in size and scope. Stay tuned for part two, where I will analyse the prominent theories on the origins of emotions and their connection to the groundwork established here.

There is much discussion on standards, quality, and so-called style. You need to get girls, but only get girls that are smoking hot, educated (at least be able to recite Homer by heart), and do this while she is begging for it!

Well, practitioners of Game are very likely to find the reality of things quite different out there. They are going to find that rejection is ten-a-penny, style is a fiction, and educated girls are more rare than unicorns (albeit, they do exist). The point I am trying to make, if you can’t lay 6s, then you have no business with 9s. The fuck ladder is real, drop your standards, especially when learning, and aim for the girls that you realistically have a chance.

We will now explore the bottom world of Game, because the “I approached 100 girls to lay a 6” is a reality most of us have to face in our learning career. The general rule is that we first break the quantity ceiling, then we break the quality ceiling. Therefore, indulge shamelessly in what you can get, and focus on getting it consistently, then later focus on improving it.

The myth of quality

There is a long discussion on what is realistically achievable in Game. I am not the best person to consult, as my entire sexual history started with Daygame, barring a few drunken one-night stands; all my lays come post Game. Other, more well-rounded individuals have stronger opinions, which I summarise below:

• Krauser: ceiling is 2 points hotter from the second hottest girl you layed pre-Game.
• Thomas Crown: ceiling is your (current) SVM + 1.

I tend to agree with these empirically; it is long known that Daygame aims at 6s, 7s, and 8s, with 9s being rare exceptions (personally, I can only claim I had two 9s in my career, but what I would call a nine is really strict). Regardless, here I have summarised the ranking scale, so refer to that to put context into the numbers.

However, male autism with numbers aside, I believe this discussion is missing the point. The ranking part makes sense only to benchmark against other Gamers (dick size competition), or to measure your own progress. When it comes to actually getting a lay, the priority should be finding a girl to lay, and then everything else comes second. Public orations aside, no Daygamer would actually pass a lay with a 6, just because she is a 6. He would gladly indulge in it, and bragging rights aside… not fill much differently than laying a 7 (okay, with 8s and above, there is a qualitative difference, I have to admit).

Therefore, based on me, your benchmarking is a function of your past results and the time since your last lay. If you have had no results, or no results in a long time, go and solve that part first before you start seeking 10s again. At the end of the day, every girl comes with an expiration date on how long she will amuse you, but at least the first time is always a thrill. Take it from Heartiste: “You will get bored of sex with every girl you date/love/marry. The only question is how soon”.

The myth of style

Worse and equally prominent on public discourse is the discussion on style, i.e., there is a “right” (read “Alpha”) way to get the girl, then every other way to get the girl is invalid, a cheat, or at extremes… unethical.

Unless you are really sensitive to social criticism (which is a big issue in and of itself), learn to disengage from such discussions. Nature has blessed the damsels with copious amounts of solipsism, so in her head, there is only one way to seduce her… her way! The only question is how much you are willing to engage with her way.

When a Daygamer brags that he finished his first date lay with the price tag of a coffee cup and a taxi ride, it doesn’t mean he used some juju magic to make the girl abandon her dreams for vacation in Dubai. It means for that specific girl, getting seduced over a coffee date was within her realistic realm of possibilities. Thankfully, those girls exist in vast amounts, and that is what makes the frugal strategy of Daygame work… over the strategy of shipping them to Dubai. However, there are also girls who will only accept the latter and will never be open to be Daygamed.

Therefore, if the point above can be so painfully clear, why do people get confused when the same interaction plays out on other axis:

• The speed of the seduction.
• How gentlemanly you have to behave.
• How much of the conversation you have to carry.
• How many PDAs she will accept.

All these are what constitute “style”, do you see the pointlessness now? The only thing that matters is whether you can get her into bed; it is about calibrating to the girl, i.e., playing it her way. All the axes that are not actively harmful to you are indeed part of Game, they are up for negotiation. I have already written in depth about this here. There is no “style”, there is only calibration to the girl.

So what is non-negotiable?

Let us debunk some more myths. What is non-negotiable and why? For example, Game itself asks you to repurpose your entire personality, so why later on maintaining frame and your ID becomes non-negotiable? Same goes for money; getting away cheap has bragging rights, but why do we actively push for it? Men (Betas) have shown pretty clearly that they are happy to spend money on girls.

As hinted above, the only non-negotiable aspects of Game are precisely these: changing too much of your personality for her, and how much money you spend on her. People can delve into trivialities on how the contrary is pedestalizing, but these are just that, trivialities; the core reasons are more fundamental.

Splitting the bill

First comes spending. Well, the coffee date is convenient and fast, but the true goal is to reduce seduction into one axis: charismatic value. When you split the bill half-half, she has only one reason to stay at the date: because she fancies you. Therefore, her feedback becomes true; every smile, escalation, or other little signal she sends is true. Sounds silly spelled like this, but for people who have observed Social Game, will quickly understand that in that setting, many of the smiles, kino, or flattery are fake and part of the grander game of social chess. Girls will act one way but mean something totally different. She might be flirty all evening and give you the harshest of blowouts later. Do you now see the superpower of completely skipping this superficial layer?

Building on top of this (albeit still part of calibration), is the ability to process feedback. When she only judges your worth on charismatic value, and her face drops, you know where you messed up. The feedback is up personal and to the point. She will not act nice to tap on your social power, or because she enjoys your party, she will act nice because she wants to act nice, because she finds you interesting. More than anything, this is why I advocate for always splitting the bill half and half, no matter the situation.

ID and character

Your character will always be a filter. For you to be something, you must forfeit your right to be something else. It has long been documented that girls truly have types, and they have types beyond appearance; they have types based on archetype. Her associating with a certain archetype of man will feed her own self-image and hence something structural that will always exist: she cannot be a rocker if she doesn’t fuck the edgy rockstar, plain and simple. Read the prior essay to understand how girls self-define through association rather than self-generation of values.

Therefore, when Game asks to rebuild your identity, it asks you to do so as a means to an end. When you have rebuilt yourself enough to consistently get results, further molding of ID should happen from self-generation. It will be a massive filter, but it will be a strong hook for the girls who pass that filter. It will be a strong hook for you as well, as it will lead to more honest interactions and relationships. Maintaining a positive self-image is a non-negotiable prerequisite of self-acceptance. Therefore, once you find it after the beginner stage, revel in it; this is you, make your core rock solid!

Conclusion

Game is already hard enough, don’t make it even harder by chasing social ideals and expectations. I would even say that Daygame specifically, requires you to step outside of the clutches of the good society, to become a rebel in your own way.

Well, in that world, there is no shame. Focus on acquiring the skillset and let the results speak for themselves when the time comes. If you are getting 6s when you were getting nothing, that is winning. When you were getting 7s when you were getting 6s before, that is also winning. Let the people demanding perfection try to live up to their ideals first; they won’t. As you should be well aware by now, the Sexual Market Place doesn’t lie: high quality women only mate with high quality men. And to be and maintain high value requires tremendous effort. The guy who lays 10s every week should have an equally deep system for it, otherwise he is just a bullshitter. The only thing that truly matters is what you were getting before vs what you are getting now, focus only on that!

Originally attributed to Tom Torero, this has become a tenet of Daygame. Combined with the discussion on Empathy, these two principles are responsible for much of a Daygamer’s improvement over time.

I was always interpreting this advice at the second level of thinking (“I know, that you know, that I know”), i.e., the Player needs to observe his feelings, in response to the girl’s reaction, to his approach → then all Inner Game issues are magically revealed.

However, after discussions with a fellow Daygamer, it came to my understanding that there are multiple ways that this tenet can be interpreted. If done wrong, it actually leads to regression than to improvement.

Levels of thinking

This discussion has to begin with a Game Theory topic, explaining the depth of analysis in head-to-head adversarial games.

This concept has been immortalised in this scene from the old Zorro TV Series. It goes as follows:

• The villain has two cups, one with wine and one with poison.
• He offers Zorro a cup, which he has the option to swap.
• Then they both drink, and the person who got the poison dies.

It feels like pure chance, right? At the end of the day, Zorro has 50-50 chance of drinking the poison.

This would be true assuming the participants had no intelligence or motives. What really happens is the following: let us describe it from the person who assigns the cups originally (i.e., the villain):

• Villain wants Zorro to die → gives him the poison (Level 0)
• Villain knows that Zorro knows his motives. He assumes Zorro will swap → gives himself the poison (Level 1)
• Villain knows that Zorro knows he will think at Level 1. Assumes Zorro won’t swap to outplay him → gives Zorro the poison (Level 2)

In short, Zorro swaps at Levels with odd parity and doesn’t swap at Levels with even parity.

Therefore, from Villain’s point of view: at step 2N, the Villain gives Zorro the poison, who assumes that he won’t swap. At step 2N+1, he will give himself the poison, assuming Zorro would swap.

From Zorro’s point of view: if he matches the parity of the Villain’s level of thinking (odd to odd, or even to even), then the Villain gets the poison → Zorro wins

As you can see, what started as a 50-50 chance has now reduced to a guessing game. Of course, there are infinite ways that both Zorro and Villain can win, justifying the probability, but thinking probabilistically is the mistake. Thinking Empathetically decides who wins and who loses instead.

Levels of Thinking and Game

Big discussion about something seemingly unrelated to Game, right? The principles of LDM dictate that seduction is cooperative (win-win), rather than adversarial.

Wrong, dear friend, because the levels of thinking don’t apply to Player vs Girl, they apply to how Player gets feedback and how he discusses that feedback with peers.

The Daygame approach

Level Zero: What is

This is the basic and malicious judgment level. I am including it only because it is so prominent. It will be for the mental benefit of the Player to learn to catch it quickly and disqualify the person directing the conversation there.

Level Zero is on holistic value:

• Did the girl reject you → you must suck.
• Did you got a meaningless number through absurd flash Game → you are awesome (the number matters)

At its most deceptive, this is how people judge Game based on outcome, not on intent. Is the girl receptive? That must mean good Game.

Sadly, this is the signal that most people react to. However,… we are here to get laid, so fuck the world. Let others think like this, you go on and ignore them.

Level 1: Why is that

Here is where analysis begins. When you get rejected, it is not because you suck as a whole. It is because some factors of you made you unattractive to her. For example, your vibe was off, your fashion was off, or there was value mismatch between you two.

By isolating factors, the analysis becomes more mechanistic and impersonal, rather than personal. Good, this is the first step towards improvement, but over-reliance here can cause problems.

The thinking itself is analytic vs holistic, however it is not synthetic. Sadly, at extremes, this is prone to fatalism. Browse the average online forum, and people reduce seduction to “height”, or “genetics”, or “social circle”. You get the picture.

Level 2: The factors behind the “why”

Here is where it gets interesting. It is not about the factors working independently, but it is about how the pieces interact with each other in a complete model.

It is how your mentality induces your behaviour that the girl interacts based on her prior body language and value. It is also a guideline of possible girl outcomes vs your prior assumptions and personality intricacies.

This is where failure becomes admissible, because you want failure itself as a filtering mechanism. Not all failures are created equally, and how you manage some failures affects your long-term vibe.

This level is the ideal for feedback in Seduction.

Level 3 and beyond: Calibration

Level 3 and above can be grouped together as Calibration and micro-Calibration. It can be about specific cultural nuances or well-studied body language and personality reading.

You will develop it naturally with Game exposure, but it shouldn’t matter that much when analysing feedback. This is a long-term project that naturally will fall into place with experience.

Every piece at its place

Here is where we connect Game Theory with Seduction even further.

Did you remember the observation that Zorro can win or lose the Game depending on his level of thinking relative to his opponent? The same is true here. Try to analyze a piece of feedback, for example, a Level 3 minute costume at a Level 1 spot… and you get disaster.

The point is that as you go deeper, higher structures are revealed to you, but this should not happen at the expense of the foundations. I am not advocating for intellectual elitism, but I am advocating for a correct level of analysis.

Full Circle

Therefore, we are ready to close the loop on the “Girl is your Mirror” argument.

At Level Zero, this is advice about how this girl reacted. It edges toward monomania and will actually hinder your progress rather than assist it.

At Level One, this is general feedback over big sample sizes. It is averagely useful at understanding isolated changes over long sessions. For example, the new jacket yielded a small spike in results in 20 sets. Maybe this is a good change to adopt.

At Level Two is where the advice shines. As I stated earlier, it translates to: what does her reaction induce in me? If you get overly anxious when she doesn’t encourage your approach immediately, the point is your anxiety, not her reaction. It revealed your Inner Game gap.

The True Value of Game

That final statement is where Daygame will aid your life the most. Emotional progress and stability, i.e., what we call Inner Game, can make a night-and-day difference in the average person’s life.

Take a broken office dweller and give him a superbabe. Or give him a Lambo. Give him both for fuck’s sake… After the emotional spike wears off… you will find the same broken man. Life’s achievements should come at the end of a bedrock of ability. Unearned riches are more adversarial in the long run.

Now take the same man and teach him Game and Independence. He will quit his job and be self-sufficient with half of his current needs. That is the point: Happiness is an Inner Game equation as much as it is induced by the external reality.