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.
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.
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.
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.