Text Game Clinic – Last Minute Derailment

August 4, 2015

In my previous post I told the story of a Serbian girl who got LMR on my bed after a very fast pull from the first date. Late the next evening she dropped a big shit test on me, which I glossed over in my blogpost. Unsurprisingly, many readers want to know what happened. Given that everyone who posted so far has managed to give sub-par responses to her test, let’s look at what I did and why.

The disclaimer for my readers is this: You weren’t there, you didn’t get anywhere near as much information to base your calibration decision upon as I did. So, I’m not pointing and laughing at your advice. In different situations, that might work. Just not this one.

Ok, so before proceeding be sure to read the previous post to get the context of the shit test. Ready?

High stakes

High stakes

Why bounce her home fast?

ASDgamer suggests I should’ve gone to her friend’s party and ran some version of social circle game to increase my value. No. The KISS rule applies in game as much as anywhere else. The whole point of a date is to get the girl isolated, horny, and close to a sex location. I had all three of these boxes ticked. Going to the party would be a backwards step. It would involve all of the following likely consequences:

  • Her buying temperature drops and the window of opportunity closes
  • Many new unknown variables introduced in people, situation and logistics
  • Highly likely there’s at least one of her orbiters there looking to cockblock
  • All deniability is removed

She suggested the party as a reflexive attempt to derail the train. She knew that she was horny and highly likely to have sex if we went to my apartment and therefore she instinctively triggered the “don’t get fucked” script and tried to derail. This had nothing at all to do with value. Value is one of the most misunderstood areas of game. She hooked on the street stop, played along in vibing, gave the number, replied enthusiastically in texts, came on the date dolled up, and made out with me. This is all confirmation that my value was just fine. Overconfirmation if anything. If you get that far with a girl and still think she’s doubting your value, you need to re-read Mystery Method. Value only matters in getting attraction, and I had plenty of that. By the time she started derailing, it was more of a comfort issue.

She had LMR because it was too much, too fast. As simple as that. So, let’s look at the next day when she drops the shit test on me. I’ll take the reader responses in order and comment, beginning with our intrepid ASDgamer again.

““Life is a beautiful tapestry…Que sera, sera.” Hamster wonders, “What does he mean? He seems very sure of himself. In control.” Builds value.

“The weatherman is predicting a storm of passion tomorrow night…but what does he know” Hamster wonders, “Is he into me?” Provokes her to chase.

Create a fantasy for her hamster to chew on.

The first reply is channeling the right kind of vibe, which is to distract and disorient. This is based on the idea that she’s not really serious with her test, she just wants to throw it out as plausible deniability so she can say to herself “at least I tried to avoid sex. He just kept going, so I couldn’t help fucking him.” I actually took that tack myself in my initial response, as you’ll see later.

The second reply is wrong. it’s far too aggressive and overtly sexual. Her shit test is based on her emotion of “too much, too fast. I don’t want to be obligated to sex” and therefore sending her a text with basically means “tomorrow will be sex” is giving her the ripcord she needs to avoid me entirely. Bad move.

So let’s consider Aunt Jemina

“You just need to say something quite basic which shows that what she said hasn’t really affected you, and also that you’re not putting too much pressure on her.

Example: “Let’s just see how it goes”

Or flip the script: “Pfft. Presumptuous. Let’s meet at X tomorrow at 8.”

The first one is too hopeful and needy. The subcommunication is defensive, accepting that she gets to make the rules because you don’t want to risk rocking the boat. It could work, but it just doesn’t feel right to me. It would be an okay fall-back text if you rack your mind and can’t think of something better.

The second one is similar – could work, but doesn’t feel right. This time it’s too bullying and lacking soft dominance. It’s forcing her into an ultimatum and subcommunicating that you’re someone who will just trampled over any objections. I don’t need anymore hard dominance because I already did a one-hour pull. Her worry is about being obligated to sex if she shows up on the date, because she’s still nervous and wants to retain the “out” to show up but not have sex. Re-read her initial objection: she knows what I want but doesn’t want to commit herself and then get into an awkward date where I get all arsey with her if she says no.

Now we’ll go to ARC

“I would have to agree that it would be pointless. Anytime I meet up with a woman who I have a sexual interest in for a drink I’m looking for one of two things. I either want to fuck her or have her suck my dick. Now if you have no interest in reciprocating my sexual desires then I appreciate you not being a time-waster. However, if there is some attraction on your part which you are willing to acknowledge then I’m sure I can get your pussy wet by whispering in your ear statements like ‘I’d just like to find the nearest motel room so I can bend you over and slowly slide my nice juicy dick in your tight wet pussy’”

This has numerous problems. It’ll work okay within the context of ARC’s overall method, which is mostly overtly filtering for DTF girls [there’s more to it than that, but that’s the relevant bit here]. Within the context of the pick-up that I actually did, here’s where it goes wrong:

  • The message is far too long. It’s making a “big issue” out of something that’s best nimbly side-stepped. Never give the girl a reason not to fuck you – she’s capable of coming up with enough of her own.
  • It’s 100% overt and logical, like you’re talking to a man.
  • Calling her a time-waster immediately makes it confrontational. Remember when a girl derails the train her mindset is “I know I’m gonna have sex with him, so I have to find any excuse whatsoever to avoid it”. Calling her a time-waster is that excuse.
  • Too vulgar for this type of girl.

Sometimes a girl is super-on and you can tip her over the edge with an ultimatum or by amping up her horniness, but I generally avoid that. You quickly end up losing all the strong maybe girls and all you’re left with is the Yes Girls. If you’re willing to squander potential lays in order to save being messed about, that’ll work. I prefer to work the Maybes and risk the time-wasting.

Lastly, let’s hear Walawala’s take

I’d use the line I always use when I get those types or responses and learned from K: “Behave…what makes you think I’d want to…you’d have to wine and dine me, the we’ll see”… That usually diffuses that tension.

This one is overplaying a mediocre hand. She knows full well that I want to fuck her. I picked her up, I pulled her home, I rammed two fingers up her pussy, and I got my dick out. To then say “you’d have to wine and dine me” – even as a joke – is just unconvincing. There is no flipping of the script this late into a pull. The only way the script can be flipped here is if I’m prepared to roll off for several days to give her a fear of loss (which I didn’t have time for) and even then it’s highly improbable.

So to summarise, the tendency in the replies is to be too gamey and evasive, or too overt. Let’s look at what I actually did and why.


Step one was to just brush past the objection on the assumption that’s she’s not serious about it, similar to ASDgamer’s first response. So I just tell her I’m not perverted and then redirect. She seems to accept it so I just finish with a joke, expecting that to be the end of it. This turns out to have been the wrong play – she’s more serious than I thought and I’ve overplayed my hand a little.


Now things get tangled up because she misunderstands me. Usually I’d say it’s good to be “real” long enough to let her know it’s not all jokes, and that I understand her main worry is in being forced to promise too much. I think it was the right play and I got unlucky with her misunderstanding.


So that forces me to stay logical and serious longer than I’d like, to shuttle her to the end of her little wobble and then I return to playfulness as soon as I think it’s possible. That works and it ends well.


So what you’re really seeing here is I overplayed my hand a bit, created a stir, then got a bit unlucky when trying to calm down the stir, but ultimately recovered it. Not the smoothest, but it worked. So now she’s in a holding pattern on long game and my next trip to Belgrade will provide the ultimate answer.

Cherry-pickers, Illusionists, Clowns and Fakes

July 25, 2015

Daygame is a squalid seedy world at times. There’s cool sleaziness when you’re trying to squeeze your dick into the un-corrupted back passage of a Kazahk virgin in your flea-ridden airbnb shared apartment on the first date, but there’s also the bad sleaziness when it comes to misdirecting noobs on YouTube. So, let’s talk about the typical shennanigans that will be encountered by the typical guy browsing YouTube for infields. I’ve split them into four different types of misdemeanour.

1. Cherry Pickers
As any active daygamer knows, the reality on the streets is you fail almost all the time and the lays are rare blips of glory. Exactly what your failure/success ratio is depends on all the intangibles such as your strengths (height/youth/looks/body/aesthetic/charisma/technical savvy etc) and on the girl (hotness/age/nationality/availability/religion etc). One thing that’s almost certain is if someone’s ratios sound too good to be true, they probably are. For example I recently had a guy tell me he only opens the very hottest girls and he fucks 1 out of 5 cold approaches. Sure. Even Leonardo Di Caprio won’t hit those stats (if pure cold approaching).

Here’s the rule for YouTube – Every single guy is cherry-picking his best sets for his channel (including me)

That doesn’t mean he’s a fake. When Match Of The Day shows you the one minute of goals and edits out the other 89 minutes of tedium, they aren’t lying to you. You know football is 90 minutes and is often boring, so you don’t shout “fakers” at the screen. It’s expected. So, expect it from YouTube channels. Different guys cherry pick with different rigour. Someone like Johnny Berba is happy to put up uninterrupted blowout streaks and all manner of mishaps and foul-ups. In contrast the likes of Ed Kahn or Daniel Blake only post the bouncebacks. Now I can’t tell you what % they cut, but I’ll guarantee that you’re seeing the best 1%-5% of their work.

That’s not dishonest. It’s showbusiness. Take heart that you’re not as shit as you think you are because your typical day doesn’t match their highlight reel. Many guys are out on the streets every day with the camera turned on. You’re just seeing the very best of a marathon filming effort. Think of it like a girl’s sole Tinder photo.

2. Illusionists
The cherry-pickers at least show you reality, no matter how carefully pruned. This second category are the smoke’n’mirrors mob who show you one thing and tell you it’s another. RSD are the worst offenders that I know of. Sure, some of their coaches have genuine talent (Julien springs to mind) but you always get the feeling that they are blowing smoke up your ass. Rapid cuts, clips cut mid-sentence, dropped audio, girls walking away with the guy but you never see where to, forced intimacy just long enough to capture it on camera before the girl disengages – There are many editing tricks to make you think you’re seeing something that never really happened. Add in voiceovers and hyperbole and you’re firmly in illusionist territory.

The easist way to spot an illusionist is that he uses editing. Some of these clip editors are as hyperactive as a Taylor Swift music video. If the guy can’t just put the camera in one place, mic up, and leave it then he’s an illusionist. Now we’re getting further towards dishonesty. They have a narrative to present and the in-fields will be forced to fit, regardless of how the set went. And bear in mind these guys are also cherry-picking.

3. Clowns
It’s so tempting to name some of these, but I’ll resist the urge. Some guys are just absolutely hopeless but they won’t turn that fucking camera off. If you’re really new you might not spot them because in your mind the act of simply walking up to a girl and saying “you look nice” is a death-defying stunt. Clowns don’t get good results so they tend to dress up their videos with gimmicks – costumes, weird openers, 30-day challenges, social freedom exercises and so on. You’ll also notice the girls just don’t seem very engaged. Another favourite is to post a twenty minute video where they are talking for fifteen about what you’re going to see, and only five minutes actually seeing it – the material isn’t good enough to stand alone.

I include in this category any guy who’s pulling women less attractive than himself. If you’re teaching guys to scrape the barrel, you’re a clown.

4. Fakes
I have my private opinions on who I think is fake but I’ll keep them to myself. Publically calling a guy out is a serious charge and I’ll not do so without evidence, even though I don’t take anyone at face value when forming my private opinions. Fakes are guys who pay actresses or arrange friends to act roles. These are scripted encounters meant to simulate a real infield so that you think the guy has skills he doesn’t really possess. How to spot one? Unfortunately, noobs are often so uncalibrated and so lacking in experience of what real daygame looks like that their spider sense doesn’t trigger to fakes. Here’s some things to watch out for:

  • Extremely stable camera work with the girl right in the centre frame
  • The camera is already in place before the opener. This very rarely happens in real life because opening happens fast and usually the camera man is rushing behind you to keep up
  • Camera never moves. In reality people walk past, the cameraman tries to get a better angle, the girl looks over and you have to move etc
  • Girl has hooked before the opener has been delivered (she’s been told to hook). Now this does happen sometimes for real, but it’s rare.
  • Stilted conversation, like each is waiting their turn to deliver scripted lines
  • Less artefacts of conversation, such as a girl hesitating, or saying something stupid, or the guy starting a conversational thread then changing on the fly because it’s not hitting.
  • The guy just doesn’t look cool enough or charismatic enough to get a girl like that to react so well.
  • The girl agrees too readily to compliance tests when the guy clearly hasn’t done the right things to get that. Again, sometimes a girl is just so strongly a Yes Girl that it doesn’t matter, but if all the guy’s channel is bad game that gets the girl, he’s faking.
  • You can’t find anyone you trust who has winged with these guys and will vouch for them. Likewise, if they coach they refuse to demo or the demos they do are shit compared to the videos.

I’d love to post some examples of what I consider fake videos, but that’ll start a shitstorm. Those pointers should be enough for you to form your own opinions. There are some very good legit infields up on YouTube. Just don’t think they are presenting a balanced picture of how daygame really goes.

My interview with Street Attraction

June 30, 2015

I just recently came back from a three-week jaunt with approximately 1/3 of it in each of Riga, Warsaw and Prague. It was pretty good. I took the anal virginity of a hot 18yr-old in Riga (she’s in the video below but gentleman’s honour prevents me saying which girl), then SLD’d a Daenerys Targaryen look-a-like in Prague and D2L’d a Tania Russof look-alike three days later. It would appear the daygame gods no longer curse me.

My weekend in Prague

My weekend in Prague

The week in Riga was with Eddie from well-known daygame YouTube channel (and London coaches) Street Attraction. I’d watched a bunch of their videos and been quite impressed with their solid execution of the London Daygame Model. Don’t be misled by the sometimes comical nature of their YouTubing – Eddie does real textbook daygame when he’s in it to get laid (rather than entertain the subscribers). The boys were kind enough to offer me an interview and here it is……

I’m a Man In Demand! – Interview with Christian McQueen

May 29, 2015

I’ve been quiet of late – I’m a bit tired of the game, and I’m trying to get a new video product finished – but I haven’t been completely out of it. Christian McQueen (he of the Vegas hangover experience and Alpha Playboy) was kind enough to invite me onto his podcast. So yesterday evening we blocked out two hours and had at it. I’m pretty happy how it turned out. We discuss daygame, players lifestyle, radical honesty and r/K selection amongst other things.

Click here to go to the podcast

Man In Demand Podcast


Womanizer’s Bible – The gold continues to drop

May 10, 2015

I’ve just uploaded the seventh of my deep-theory Womanizer’s Bible podcasts onto my YouTube channel. Go here to find them. That’s now over four hours of free content covering these topics:

#1 – From Intermediate to Advanced Game

#2 – The Balance Between Nice Guy and Bad Boy

#3 – The Solo Daygame Mindset

#4 – Overcoming Princess Behaviour (lay report)

#5 – How To Catch The Teenage Virgin

#6 – Feel Entitled To Younger, Hotter, Tighter

#7 – How To Do Real Bouncebacks (infield)

As usual, I suggest you subscribe to my channel to get first access to these as they are released.

Beginner Daygame – Free Instructional Video

May 3, 2015

This really doesn’t need the hard sell. Tom and I have put together the perfect introduction to daygame and it’s absolutely free. Click below to watch a 25-minute instructional course. We take you through the simplified London Daygame Model (so simple there are literally just FIVE words you need to remember in-set) and provide multiple infield examples of each stage. If you’ve ever found daygame confusing then this will put everything into it’s place for you.

Okay, good stuff?

Yup, we know. Thanks. Please share this video with anyone and everybody who might be interested or entertained. We want this to get passed around. We want guys to milk this free content for every drop of daygame goodness. If you’re the type of guy who wants everything for free and thinks he can learn entirely from YouTube then this is your first port of call.

So are you feeling inspired? Have you looked at those hotties and thought “yeah, I want some of that”? It’s really not so complicated is it? FIVE words. That’s all you need to keep in mind to get going. Naturally, we’ve broken it all down into more practical steps in the book and given lots of examples. So, for a £10 investment you can have that too.

Book cover BDG

Get your full-colour 130-page Beginners Daygame PDF by clicking here

Yeah, £10. It’s almost a crime to give it away so cheap. Act quick before we recover our senses and add another zero on the end of the price.

Blog at WordPress.com. | The Tuned Balloon Theme.

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 467 other followers