I’ve noticed in person and on the internet that wannabe players are frequently talking at cross purposes. Game is a big big subject of infinite depth, wrapped up in a distortion field of ego and bullshit. It’s also an intensely personal journey where every man must find his own way.

UPSELL!!! My fantastic new deep game video Womanizer’s Bible provides the toolkit to chart your own way UPSELL!!!

I was thinking recently why some men (I’ll call them Former Chumps) find the Player’s Journey to be a life-changing struggle of high drama and near collapse spread over four volumes of a Tolkien-esque memoir….

UPSELL!!! Check out my Balls Deep memoir and upcoming Adventure Sex for my own memoir detailing my life-changing struggle UPSELL!!!

…. whereas other men (I’ll call them Trainee Chads) would summarise their journey as “learned a few openers, put myself out there, and got laid plenty. Cool”. Naturally the fChumps tend to write detailed blogposts, build and memorise systems that are “a bit like looking at a Gothic cathedral or reading Ulysses: you are incredibly grateful that someone has put in the work and created the artifact before you, but it’s hard to fathom precisely how they went about doing it.”* In contrast the tChad is often ridiculing the fChump – “it’s just talking to girls. Dude.”

I recently finished a short coaching session with an American former Marine. That means he has finished USMC boot camp, picked up a rifle and at any time in his service could’ve been sent to a third world shithole to get shot at by camel-riding goat-fuckers hiding behind a line of children in the local mosque. Three days into our street hustling game he commented words to the effect of “this daygame thing might be the toughest thing I ever do.”

Tougher than USMC boot-camp? Tougher than getting shot at in war?

“I’ve got this set, mate. You just keep storming the machine gun nest”

Somewhere on the internet, a tChad laughed derisively. And yet many men say the same thing – setting out on the Player’s Journey is harder than anything they’ve done before, just as it was for me despite me having already earned a tough professional finance qualification, competed in boxing and kickboxing matches, and completed the first three Souls games **

So why the divergence in opinion? I think it comes down to which side of this divide you fall on. Is your Journey a process of:

1. Uncovering a pre-existing SMV and personality that is attractive to women, or;
2. Ridding yourself of a Pussy Repellent virus and then building an attractive man from scratch.

The tChads are normal men with normal social skills and outlook and inhabit bodies that are reasonably attractive to a wide range of women. Some will require more work than others but all are building on a strong base. It’s like cooking a meal starting with fresh organic high quality ingredients. These men already have decent value, they just lack a Value Delivery Mechanism*** Teaching them Game is like having an out-of-shape teenage Usain Bolt show up on his first day of Learn To Sprint School. They have to put in the work but the rewards are almost immediate. There’s never any real struggle.

“Dude, it’s not rocket science. You just say hi and escalate”

In contrast, fChumps are a broken mess and the older they are upon discovering Game the more traumatic the transformation **** Whereas tChad just needs a daygame model and a shove in the back to start opening, fChump needs a complete overhaul of his entire personality and lifestyle. It’s like the difference between giving your house a lick of paint vs ripping out the entire edifice because every wooden board and beam is infested with woodworm and damp. They are not the same process.

• The tChad is fundamentally attractive to women already. He just needs to reveal it.
• The fChump is fundamentally unattractive to women and needs to restructure everything about him.

This is why the Player’s Journey can be so traumatic for many men. They are diving deep into their inner game to confront long-suppressed demons. They are learning entirely new ways of thinking and interacting (what Bodi calls the difference between Digital and Analog communication). They may have decrepit bodies that require extreme diet changes, cutting out all the food they like and changing their brain chemistry to overcome long-standing associations with food and mood. They might walk into a gym for the first time in their life and suddenly realise that gym discipline is, initially, very tough. And they are learning the model and hitting on girls.

Any one of those challenges is big in and of itself. Some faggots spend literally years in therapy and that’s the only thing they do. Others spend years in the gym and that’s the only thing they do. That’s normal – some people only have one “thing” that sucks up all their motivation and willpower. Most don’t even have one.

One…. more…. set

The poor little fChump is doing them all at the same time. Not only that, he has an additional emotional issue: The fear of discovering he’s sexually irrelevant.

In the beginning of a fChump’s Player’s Journey he doesn’t have the reference experiences that pretty girls like him. He doesn’t know if he has it in him to learn all these new things. He worries that the next string of bad blowouts might be the one that breaks his grip on the barrel wall and he tumbles back down into the mass of crabs below him. For a long time, it can be terrifying to contemplate that actually, no, sorry mate but you aren’t going to fuck pretty girls. You missed your window. You were born on the sexual scrap heap and you aren’t getting off it.

The tChads don’t deal with this fear nor that degree of personal restructuring. They do the work and get the results. The fChumps must do far more, far tougher work, and all the time cope with the uncertainty over whether results will ever come.

So, that’s why the fChump is rather self-obsessed during his early years and then extremely proud of his Hero’s Player’s Journey once he’s started banging hotties. The tChad might think those lay reports and +1 tweets are just ego validation. Yes, they are. He just doesn’t realise how vindicating it feels to finally get your leg over the rim of the barrel and roll onto solid ground, forever free of the crabs snapping their claws below you.

* Actual quote from a Daygame Mastery review.

** I only recently bought the fourth, Dark Souls III, so give me time.
*** Term introduced on page x of Daygame Mastery
**** For example, I started aged 34 so I’d already had 34 years of reference experiences built up of “hot girls don’t fancy you” and I’d passed the age window within which a young dog can learn new tricks.

I’m sure most aspiring PUAs are well aware of Robert B Cialdini’s classic book Influence. I’m wading through it right now and I must say it’s a very interesting text buttressed with lots of research and fun anecdotes (although most social psychology experiments are junk and cannot be replicated). So far so good and now that I’m halfway through, it looks like a book I can recommend. However, there’s one rather important caveat: If you’re a cunt, this book will make you more of a cunt, ultimately to the detriment of your game.

Before we get into that, let’s make an example of the first of his six weapons of influence: reciprocation. Cialdini explains it thus: “The rule says that we should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided us”

Cialdini cites research suggesting reciprocity is a universal human trait evolved because it creates high social trust and thus unlocks the benefits of cooperation and division of labour. Societies with high social trust outperform those without – as seen in an obvious comparison between Northern Europe and the Middle East. Cialdini’s best example is an experiment performed by Professor Dennis Regan of Cornell University *. The experimental task was ostensibly about two subjects rating paintings on their artistic merits. The real deal was that one subject was real and the other – “Joe” – was a stooge. Cialdini continues:

“For our purposes, the experiment took place under two different conditions. In some cases…. during a short rest period, Joe left the room for a couple of minutes and returned with two bottles of Coca-Cola, one for the subject and one for himself, saying, “I asked him [the experimenter] if I could get myself a Coke, and he said it was okay, so I bought one for you, too.” In other cases, Joe did not provide the subject with a favour; he simply returned from the two-minute break empty-handed. In all other respects, however, Joe behaved identically.”

After the art appreciation ended Joe asked the subject for a favour – to buy some raffle tickets for a new car at 25c (the Coke was a dime). Subjects who’d received his favour of a Coke reciprocated by buying twice as many tickets as those who hadn’t. Interestingly, while the “no Coke” control group scaled their ticket sales according to how likeable they rated Joe in a post-experiment debriefing, the “received Coke” group bought the same number of tickets independent of his likeability. Cialdini concludes the obligation of reciprocity was triggered and completely overruled likeability.

Cialdini then explains how the reciprocity rule applies to daygame. Sorry, I mean Hare Krishnas offering flowers in airports and refusing to take the gift back. He explains his observations that many travelers will try hard to avoid the Krishnas precisely to avoid feeling indebted, and that once the Krishnas successfully thrust the flower into your hand they will not allow you to return it. They know they’ve triggered the rule and got you indebted.

This is something Gavin De Becker in “The Gift of Fear” calls loansharking. A predator will aggressively thrust an unwelcome gift or favour onto a stranger precisely in order to trigger feelings of indebtedness and thus the obligation of reciprocation. The stranger is now faced with an internal struggle (Do I reciprocate against my better judgement, or risk the cognitive dissonance of refusing the gift and thus risking the identity of being an “ingrate”) and also a frame control battle (“No, I don’t want it” / “It’s our gift to you” / “Yes, but I didn’t ask for it” / “That’s okay, please keep it” / “Take it back” / “No. Please consider a donation”)

The typical stranger just isn’t mentally prepared for that kind of internal struggle and frame control battle – they are just trying to catch a flight. In contrast the Hare Krishna / mugger is well-practiced, mentally prepared, and carries a self-serving ideology to justify their loan-sharking ** It’s not an even battle. I’d be very surprised if you haven’t spotted the parallels to game. Let’s start with a neutral comparison and then trend darker.

Mystery Method does not engage in immediate reciprocation because it’s an indirect style of game. So in the classic MM set the player will make an offhand observation to a group, perhaps an opinion opener. If that gets a response he may drop in a neg against the girl he wants. I quite like MM but it doesn’t work in the daygame scenarios I favour. What’s important for this discussion, though, is that no favour is given. It isn’t until stage A2 (Female-To-Male attraction) that the girl IOIs the player, and thus he will reciprocate with A3 (Male-To-Female attraction) and IOI and/or qualify the girl. This is rather clever in how it flips the script at a meta-level. It just doesn’t work in street game so the London style changes the opening.

Street game requires an early favour to stop the girl: the compliment-tease. A player’s ability to kill momentum and reach hook point comes from pouring in some early value via the act of stopping, the insertion of good vibe into her day, and then stacking forwards with a mythology. By the time you’ve finished those early seconds you’ve done the girl a rather pleasant (but un-requested) favour. She feels indebted and the reciprocation urge is triggered. Usually this will be expressed by her smiling and politely receiving your advance until she decides Yes/Maybe/No.

In the happy-clappy world of unicorns and rainbows this is a win-win scenario because girls like to be approached. Human courtship does not allow girls to overtly initiate seduction so they can only dress nice, put themselves in the mix, and then hope the right man approaches. Even if you’re not that right man, you’ve reminded her she’s sexually relevant and given her a pleasant encounter. Win-win.

The problem is how tempting it is for an aspiring daygamer to misuse the reciprocity rule, to drain girls of the will to live. They’ll plow on despite increasingly strong IODs and constantly hit the girl with “one more thing before you go”. If they are RSD-trained they’ll follow her all the way down the street with a non-stop pestering. So we have now slipped from the win-win of reciprocity to the win-lose of loansharking.

Good daygame will implement all the powerful lessons of persuasion but without the black-hearted exploitation seen by the scammers and Ted Cruz types of this world. Perhaps one of these days I’ll explain how all six of Cialdini’s weapons of influence are hard-boiled into the London Daygame Model. The purpose of game is not to instigate a frame-control battle with an unprepared girl and then to hammer her down until you draw out an unwilling “Yes”. That’s the road to flaky numbers, text-hell, and dates-to-nowhere. If you get very good at it you’ll get some lays that the girls bitterly regret once free of your influence.

If that last sentence got you thinking “fine by me, bring it on” you have some inner game work to do.

As both Lord of the Rings and Star Wars amply demonstrate, the Dark Side is seductive because it’s easier. It’s a set of hacks and tricks that let you plunder the world for a while. For game, the problem is that it rots your soul and pushes you deeper into the win-lose interactions that kill your vibe long term. When your vibe suffers your results will crater and you’ll get longer periods of daygame revulsion.

I always tell students: “Game in a way that protects your vibe over the long term”

Cialdini is just describing the dark side rather than recommending it. He ends every chapter with advice on how to resist such attempts to influence you. Enjoy his book because it really is a fascinating look into the world of professional persuasion but don’t get too carried away with the skills of scammers, fund-raisers, Hare Krishnas, TV evangelists or any other huckster persuaders. Try to extract their tactical wisdom but leave the whole win-lose frame behind or it’ll tank your vibe.

If you think this post was persuasive, you should see my book.

* I dread to think where this position has be relocated under the current regressive Leftist stranglehold on US universities. Probably an affirmative action hire for an immigrant doing Anti-Male Studies.
** If you’ve ever said “Fuck off gypsy cunt I hope you die” to an aggressive gypsy beggar you’ll see spectacular levels of entitlement and ego defence from them. Trust me, I’ve tested this.

Back in February 2015 I recorded the intermediate daygame seminar that would become my Black Book product. I had a bunch of fairly new daygame students in the room and took them through the key technical elements of creating attraction on the street and escalating on dates. While I was in London that weekend and in a seminar frame of mind, I decided to pull the trigger on another project that had been on my mind for over a year – a deep dive into the sociology of Game, red pill and advanced daygame. I wanted to weave together the disparate strands of “underground” knowledge that I’d collected over the years, and create a grand unified theory of Game.

That was rather ambitious. I felt like I could leverage some of my stronger points, what Scott Adams of Dilbert fame would call my “talent stack”:

• High-level post-graduate education
• Ten years working in international finance
• Thousands of daygame sets
• Six years of game theory obsession

How could I get all the benefits of mental masturbation / high theory without falling into the trap most such guys have – namely that they got it all from books and never proved themselves through actually banging younger-hotter-tighter? I got ten keen daygame enthusiasts into a room on a Sunday afternoon and ran a seminar called Womanizer’s Bible with the video camera rolling. Six hours later I emerged, completely depleted. It was fun. The guys enjoyed it.

A PUA forum, yesterday

Rather than release the seminar video, I kept it locked up on my hard drive and instead moved my focus onto a free podcast series bearing the same name. The podcast has been well received. It picks a narrow topic each time and dives deep. Something regular listeners have probably noticed is that it’s episodic in nature – there’s no clear progression between podcasts. I guess it’s like the fable of the blind men and the elephant. Each podcast I show you a different part of the elephant without ever giving a full view of the whole thing. Well, my original Womanizer’s Bible seminar is that full view of the elephant.

So, as I beavered away on my Sigma Wolf projects over winter I put a lot of time into preparing the seminar for release. I decided it would fit nicely as a “VIP upgrade” to the free podcasts. If that kind of thing floats your boat, check it out here for the grand old price of $49

Click on photo to visit sales page