My 2015 Daygame Stats

(similar posts showing my stats in prior years: 2013 and 2014)

If there was a word to summarise my year it would be burnout. Finally, after a little over six years in the game, I have lost my love for it. Or at least, I’ve experienced frequent periods of losing the love to balance out other periods where I was still 100% let-me-at-’em.

It was either one or the other all year

It was either one or the other all year

Let’s have a look at my measurable stats for the year. As usual, only the lays are certain and everything else is an estimate. The opens could be as high as 750, I just wasn’t counting.

  • Opens: 670 (Prague 160, Zagreb 40, Warsaw 150, Riga 50, Belgrade 120, Kiev 150)
  • Numbers: 167
  • Dates: 50
  • Lays: 15*

That’s pretty weak, right? As with most things in social research it all depends how you count it. Stats are not objective facts anymore than the smell of a hotdog or the pattern of clouds in the sky are facts. Any time someone gives you a statistic what they are telling you is: somebody, somewhere, counted something. Let’s look at mine starting with the single biggest driver: the amount of time I spent on the road.

  • 2014: Six months / 26 weeks / 7 trips / 5 cities
  • 2015: Four months / 18 weeks / 8 trips / 8 cities

Let’s also factor in how much time I was in any given city each trip:

  • 2014: Minimum 3 weeks, maximum 6 weeks. Average approx one month.
  • 2015: Minimum 2 days, maximum 3 weeks. Average approx ten days.

So from a position of statistical inference the biggest impact on my game was logisitics. Whereas in 2014 I’d been rolling up to a city and living there for a month, in 2015 I was hitting multiple cities for short bursts and then not returning for several months. This had the combined effect that I had a less total amount of time on the road, and considerably less time per trip to try to close out my leads. As we’ll see that was a decisive influence on both my results and on the style of game I employed.

Keen notch-hunters will probably ask: why did you set up a travel routine that’s obviously going to hobble your results? Well, burnout……    Before getting into the other major stat, let’s break down the results of the girls I did actually bang.

  • SDL: 3
  • SNL: 1
  • First date lay: 4
  • Second date lay: 5
  • Third or later: 1
  • Long game: 1

Unlike prior years I had a clear bias towards moving fast, as you’d expect from my smash’n’grab travel pattern. All of them were in the same country we met and all but two (the long game lay in Belgrade, a second date lay in Prague) were on the same trip we met.

  • Youngest: 17
  • Oldest: 27
  • Average: 22 (an 18 year difference)

While the final notch count was weak, I most definitely made progress on the YHT scale by pushing my average age down a couple of years and also the overall quality was pretty high. The oldest bird I had sex with was thirteen years younger than me, an SDL with a Russian blonde in Prague. For a bunch of them I was older than their own mother.

There were only two 6s and both of those were fast lays that make great stories (the first being a one-hour Tinder lay in Krakow where I spoke exclusively about Dark Souls and Dead Rising before saying “I don’t want to see you again, but if you want to come home to fuck, I’d quite like that” for the extraction, the second being a 30-minute SDL of a Warsaw 18yr old who I rawdogged then did in the ass). There were five teenagers and I’d say seven of the girls would be considered legit 8s by the PUA Adjudication Committee. No 9s, unfortunately. Still, the highlights were very high.

  • Slavic: 8 (Ukranian 4, Russian 2, Latvian 1, Belorussian 1)
  • Balkan: 3 (Serbian 2, Hungarian 1)
  • Central Europe: 4 (Polish 2, Czech 1, Slovak 1)

This is a simple case of where I was travelling and what kind of girl I like. Central European girls are pretty dirty but also not especially hot. As I ventured further East into the FSU it was tougher to score but the quality was much better.

  • Virgin: 0
  • 1 or 2 men before me: 2
  • 3 to 10 men: 4
  • More than 10: 1
  • Didn’t ask / didn’t tell: 8

Now we’ll get to the second major influence upon my overall results. Take a deep breath and prepare yourself for this number……

  • Near misses: 22

Yes. With twenty-two different girls I had a girl hot, horny, up for it and yet just didn’t manage to get my dick into her. The reasons were varied: Two virgins were too tight to squeeze my dick in. Another virgin let me get it halfway in then freaked out (that was a 20yr old almost-SDL thirty minutes after approach). Another virgin was wanking me off in the lobby of my apartment building but refused to come upstairs. Another virgin was on my sofa with her breasts in my mouth when she got LMR (that would’ve been a one-hour SDL of an 18 year old who admitted she hadn’t even kissed a boy before). There was also a 17 year old Ukranian virgin who was grinding me on my bed on the first date but wouldn’t take her jeans off, and then when I went back to Kiev she’d gotten a boyfriend and wouldn’t even kiss on the next date.

Just typing that above paragraph brings tears to my eyes. That’s six near misses just with virgins, the oldest of whom was twenty years old. Imagine getting so close so many times and then nothing.

  • Failure due to LMR at sex location: 19
  • Failure due to unexpected outside forces: 2
  • Failure due to logistical errors: 1

It’s simply unbelievable how many women were in my bed or on my sofa and just wouldn’t fuck. The funny thing is it wasn’t due to me suddenly losing my ability to close, but actually the reverse. I was pulling girls so fast that they were getting to the hand-on-dick-in-sex-location stage much faster than they could handle.

Slow down, take a number, get them on another date you say?

I think at least half of these near misses would’ve been flaky numbers had I just run the street game and walked off with her digits. Instead, I blew up the love bubble, played a momentum game, expertly chose my moments to escalate and lead, and then almost took them at the flood. It was an exercise in creating something out of nothing. Like almost building an atomic bomb from a disposable lighter and a rolled-up newspaper.

But oh my fucking god was it frustrating! Still, we live and learn. I’ve become so used to near misses now that they barely phase me. I’ve had that rollercoaster ride and it’s familiar to the point of boredom.

I’ll do another post going into the psychological reasons why I kept sabotaging my own game in an attempt to amuse myself and retain interest while struggling with periodic burnout. But for now, those are the stats. Make of them what you will.

* There were also 8 repeat girls from prior years, but they don’t count towards the score.

My 2014 Daygame Stats

As noted in my previous post, I’ve been reading The Numbers Game, a statistical deconstruction of football. It’s been inspiring in its analysis, giving that sense of intellectual power that comes when you realise a vague, complex, artistic activity can be data-mined and understood by the intelligent application of a statistical mindset. Regular readers can imagine the direction my mind turned.

While I’d love to do a rigorous data collection exercise for the sport I love – adventure sex – I fear it’s far beyond the scope of one man. The sports analytics community is hundreds strong with many full-time staff at sports clubs and tremendous technology. So, daygame will have to wait. However, in the spirit of Christmas let me offer you my 2014 stats. As with last year, only the lays are a 100% reliable number. Everything else involves a degree of estimation because I didn’t keep records.

Working on my new book

Working on my new book

Opens: I racked my memory to estimate how many days I went out each month and roughly how many sets I did per day then multiplied one by the other. I was dormant throughout Q1, barely opening. Q2 I hit it hard in Russia, Serbia and Czech Republic. Q3 was so-so, and Q4 I had a final roll of the dice when I wasn’t crippled by toothache. This opens number is accurate to the nearest 100. I’d have liked to have opened more but all manner of things derailed me.
Numbers: I tend to get one phone number or social media add for every four girls I talk to. This hasn’t changed from last year. I rarely bother asking if she doesn’t seem keen. So this total is just ¼ of the Opens estimate
Dates: I tend to bang half the girls I get onto a first date, so this is just double the lays number with a few added on because of a bad run in Russia. In Russia I had a run of dates-to-nowhere in April, whereas in Prague in November I banged 4 of the 6 girls I dated (one of the LMR knockbacks was, and remains, a virgin so I don’t feel too bad about that one).
Lays: This number is exact. I kept notes and it’s memorable enough that I don’t really need the notes.

  • Opens: 480 (London 50, Russia 100, Serbia 150, Czech 100, Croatia 40, Hungary 40)
  • Numbers: 120
  • Dates: 50
  • iDates: 15
  • Lays: 23 new girls, 8 repeats from prior year

So that’s one lay per 21 opens. It sounds about right. I always do better on the road and I was barely in London this year. It represents an almost doubling of my efficiency from 2013, and the girls averaged about a half point hotter. So, improvement. Unlike 2013 (which was very consistent), my anecdotal feel for 2014 is that my results were volatile. Nineteen (82%) of my lays came within four of the months (April, May, July, November) when I was most active and least hindered by illness or outside interference.

  • SDL: 1  (a virgin)
  • SNL: 1
  • Day 2 lay: 6
  • Day 3/4 lay: 12
  • Long Game lay: 3

Compared to last year that’s a bit slower, I think mainly because I wasn’t getting London tourists so I was dealing with more chaste girls and also my average trip length went up from two weeks to one month meaning I was no longer in a hurry to close. Nothing went beyond the third date (D4) except the Long Game. I was also doing “marking time” coffee second-dates of an hour which hit the numbers but don’t really take much of my time. Let’s consider the geographical distribution:

  • Sex in same country we met: 22
  • Sex in different country to open: 1

And for the Long Game:

  • Sex where she came to London for me: 1
  • Sex where I went back to her country: 2
  • Sex where we both went to a neutral country: 0

Now lets get to the ages. I’m 39. The average age of girl I slept with was 23, making a 16-year average age difference. More stats:

  • Youngest: 19
  • Oldest: 30
  • Number of girls under 23: 13
  • Number of girls over 23: 10

I fucked six 20yr olds and three 19yr olds, which is very pleasing. Let’s consider nationalities (not ethnicity). I’d say the Slavs and Balkans were the hottest as usual, averaging 8s. Overall I think eleven of the girls were legit 8s (I feel some pride having them on my arm), three were 6s (not too proud of myself) and the rest were 7s. I’m very strict on what I call a 9 (gobsmacking beauty that turns heads everywhere) there were only two girls who might be called a nine but I think they didn’t quite make the cut. I had a few nines on dates.

  • Slavic: 12
  • Balkan: 8
  • Western Europe: 2
  • Anglosphere: 0
  • Latino: 1

The nationality is heavily skewed by my choice of holiday destinations. The furthest West I visited was Czech Republic. I never left Europe and missed the opportunity to pick up the more diverse London crowd. Now lets consider the self-reported chastity of the girls involved. I interviewed most of the girls after sex to find out all manner of things, such as when they decided to fuck and how many men they’d had before me. Bear in mind these are self-reported numbers and girls aren’t entirely truthful (to put it mildly). I think I got more truth than a k-selected guy but I’d take these following numbers with a pinch of salt.

  • Virgin: 3
  • 1 or 2 men before me: 5
  • 3 to 10 men: 4
  • 10+ men: 1
  • Didn’t ask / didn’t tell: 10

Just over half the girls gave me an answer, the others I didn’t ask (except for one I asked and she didn’t tell me). The virgins I am certain of because I felt the hymen break and saw the blood. I suspect two of the “didn’t ask” were over ten based on how comfortable they were with the seduction and sex. The rest I put under ten based on same criteria. But you never really know. I’ve also racked my brain for near misses. I only count them as a near miss if the girl was totally up for it, had her hand on my dick, I’d had my hand on her pussy, and she’s either agreed to come to my place or we’d been in a sex location. It’s a bit of a muddy definition but every single one of these girls I was certain I was going to fuck and then it fell apart at the last minute:

  • Near misses: 7
  • Failure due to LMR at sex location: 5
  • Failure due to unexpected outside forces: 2 (both virgins)
  • Failure due to logistical errors: 0

So in summary, I had to do approximately twenty opens to bang one low-eight who was sixteen years younger than me. I’m pretty happy with that. That’s basically two day’s graft for a new girl and not many dates-to-nowhere. I also had greater retention of girls from prior years still wanting the Krauser D. Importantly, my results continued to improve on almost every index. I’m not sure how I’ll manage to outperform that through 2015 but generally if I turn my mind to something, I figure it out. I’m inclined to go for higher quality, less work, and less notches this year.

Guest Post: Tom Torero’s 2013 Daygame Stats

‘Tis the season to be nerdy. Krauser’s asked me to compile my 2013 stats into some sort of document for a free blog post and reader devouring historic preservation. After his selfless proof-reading of my forthcoming daygame travel book, how could I say no?

Like him, I didn’t keep exact records for number of opens, number of contacts or number of dates. The lays I wrote down and are thus 100% accurate. 2013 was a year of epic travelling for me teaching bootcamps and students in 25 countries and daygaming in 31 cities, from New York to Moscow. I got 30 new lays in total.

I was lucky enough to travel with some solid mates and wings. My travelling compadres included Krauser (in Vilnius, Prague and Belgrade), Jon Matrix, Yad, Sam Django, Dave Diggler and Martin from the daygame.com team.

However, I did very few daygame sessions for myself. A lot of my time on the streets was with students (I taught 28 bootcamps, 64 private students and 2 week-long residentials). As part of the coaching I demoed and got numbers, but the only personal full-on number farming trips I had were with Krauser (Lithuania, Prague), Sam (Sweden, Prague) and Martin (New York). I’m not going to estimate how many girls I opened as I really don’t have a clue, but I know it was much lower than 2012 and 2011 back in London.

I estimate that in addition to the above, I did 25 full days of daygame for myself (with the above wings). Including all the numbers from demos while coaching studentsm, I collected between 280 and 300 contact details. I estimate that I went on around 70 – 80 dates. I did much fewer i-dates than in previous years because for a lot of the interactions I was demoing for students.

New flags captured were: Iran, Portugal, Egypt, Serbia and South Korea.

New lays with flags I’d already got were: Great Britain, Russia, Germany, Italy, USA, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Poland, Turkey, Brazil, Spain, Sweden and Finland.

The dating breakdown of the lays was:

SDLs :8

D2 lays: 10

D3+ lays: 12

I’m 34 years old. The oldest girl I slept with this year was a 34 year old MILF in London. The youngest was an 18 year old university student in New York.

Number of girls under 25: 18

Number of girls over 25: 12

The quality of the girls (as testified by my wings) was above average as I pushed myself through a self-imposed ceiling. 2 of the girls were “6s”, 17 were “7s”, 10 were “8s” and 1 was a “9.”

The 9

The 9

Lay highlights included fucking the 21 year old “9” Go-Go dancer from Riga (see above), 3 new girls in 3 days, SDLing a cabin crew assistant from Turkish Airlines and laying the first girl that I approached on my last trip to New York. I also had a MMF with a flatmate.

Memorable failures included near-misses with two different potential foursomes (one with Sam in Prague and one with Krauser in Belgrade). I got punched twice (once by a girl’s husband in a Moscow club and once by a girl’s friend in Istanbul). I lost out on a lay with a “Yes Girl” model in Prague when the hotel I was staying at wouldn’t let her in as a guest.

My plans for 2014 are to open, date and try and close far fewer girls but of a consistently higher quality, pushing for more “9s.” After 150+ lays I’m done with the Notch-Count Hyena. It’s time for the Quality Control Lion. Grand, noble, patient, doing less but catching a tasty meal.

"Good work, my son"

“Good work, my son”

I thought I’d sign-off by answering three predictable chode comments in advance that are often thrown in the direction of Krauser and I:

“You only travel / open / sleep with foreign girls because English girls are harder”

Girls are biologically all the same – if you’re a chode in your home country you’ll be a chode abroad. The real reason we travel / open / sleep with foreign girls is that they’re hotter. Don’t try daygame abroad until you’ve nailed the skillset where you live as it’s harder away from home: you have to act fast as the nomadic lover instead of the provider boyfriend, logistics and time are against you, you have to manage your state (which has an unhealthy focus on outcome through necessity) and you have to deal with the stresses and strains of travel. I’ve slept with many English girls (check out the lay reports in my first book) and daygame / dating works exactly the same.

“Girls sleep with you for your money / passport / accent”

High value girls sleep with high value guys. End of. The “pussy paradise” you’re imagining doesn’t exist, it’s a White Knight fantasy of a place with desperate girls that need rescuing from local guys. If you believe it’s so easy, go and try it. Paying the bar bill in some tittie bar and taking home a hooker in Thailand this is not. In places like the FSU, girls are much harder to daygame than in London. Many countries have cultures and religions where fast dating and quick sex is very rare. You’re trying to achieve in a few days what it takes local guys months or years to achieve. In many ways, western men are lower value than locals in FSU countries because of Feminism and sexual hangups. Go to Serbia and observe the men who you’re going head-to-head with . You’re also competing with the provider chumps offering these girls trips to Dubai or rides in their Ferrari. Remember that Moscow has the most billionaires in the world.

“You spam approach and open thousands of girls to get a date or a lay”

I wish I had the energy to open thousands a year. The more you do daygame, the more lethargic you get. In 2012 and 2013 I also continued to experience “Game revulsion” as I burnt out from all the travelling and teaching. I did a fraction of the opening I did when I was learning Game in 2010 and 2011. Compared to the guys in clubs who I see opening every set as part of their smash-and-grab beasting, or the approach machine robots I see on Oxford Street at Saturday lunchtime, I open like a pensioner on weed.

Happy 2014 to you glorious bastards – onwards and inwards 😉

Tom Torero

My 2013 daygame stats

In the new book I write quite a lot about expectations and reality in daygame. It seems only fair that as 2013 draws to a close and I sit in my dressing gown sipping coffee, running a hot bath, I should offer some summary statistics for the year. Most of these numbers rely upon estimates because I didn’t keep notes. Only the final laycount is 100% reliable.

My New Year's Eve

My New Year’s Eve

Opens: I racked my memory to estimate how many days I went out each month and roughly how many sets I did per day then multiplied one by the other. The only months I’m absolutely sure of are February (in Brazil, did almost nothing), April (I actually kept notes that month, I was very active), May, November and December (very little work). The rest is a blur. Most times when I do a “full session” I’ll open 10-15 girls. Some days I do one open, get an idate and then I’m finished. This opens number is accurate to the nearest 300.

Numbers: I tend to get one phone number or social media add for every four girls I talk to. I rarely bother asking if she doesn’t seem keen. So this total is just ¼ of the Opens estimate

Dates: I tend to bang half the girls I get onto a first date, so this is just double the lays number.

Lays: This number is exact. I kept notes and it’s memorable enough that I don’t really need the notes.

Opens: 1,000

Numbers: 250

Dates: 60

iDates: 15

Lays: 27 new girls, 3 repeats from prior years

So that’s one lay per 37 opens. It sounds about right. I think it’s 1 in 20 on holiday and 1 in 50 in London. Now lets categorise the lays.

SDL: 5

SNL: 3

Day 2 lay: 7

Day 3+ lay: 7

Long Game lay: 5

So there’s no particular pattern there. Let’s consider the geographical distribution:

Sex in same country we met: 25

Sex in different country to open: 2 (the two long game lays in neutral country)

And for the Long Game:

Sex where she came back to London: 1

Sex where I went back to her country: 2

Sex where we both went to a neutral country: 2

Now lets get to the ages. I’m 38. The average age of girl I slept with was 25, making a 13-year average age difference. Only one girl didn’t tell me her age, a Brazilian who didn’t speak English. I’d estimate her as mid-twenties. More stats:

Youngest: 20

Oldest: 30

Number of girls under 25: 14

Number of girls over 25: 13

Let’s consider nationalities (not ethnicity). I’d say the Slavs and Balkans were the hottest, averaging 8s. Overall I think twelve of the girls were legit 8s (I feel some pride having them on my arm), four were 6s (not too proud of myself) and the rest were 7s. I’m very strict on what I call a 9 (gobsmacking beauty that turns heads everywhere) and though I dated and made out with a few I never banged any in 2013:

Slavic: 9

Balkan: 4

Western Europe: 4

Anglosphere: 2

Latino: 6

Other: 2

I’ve also racked my brain for near misses. I only count them as a near miss if the girls was totally up for it, had her hand on my dick, I’d had my hand on her pussy, and she’s either agreed to come to my place or we’d been in a sex location. It’s a bit of a muddy definition but every single one of these girls I was certain I was going to fuck and then it fell apart at the last minute:

Near misses: 12

Failure due to LMR at sex location: 6

Failure due to unexpected outside forces: 3

Failure due to logistical errors: 3

I’d say I’m pretty happy with those stats. There’s room for improvement but at the quality I’m tapping, it’s nice to know I only have to open 40 girls to get laid once. That’s basically two or three day’s graft for a new girl and not many dates-to-nowhere.

My year’s stats in review

I’ve long believed that I should be ending each year in a better position than I started it according to whatever metrics I deem relevant. My pillars of finance, health, career, social, girls…. whatever it happens to be. The metrics will change over my life cycle and according to interests. A man’s life must be an arrow travelling forwards. He needs a mission. Should you ever take your foot off the pedal then the forces of lethargy and mediocrity will take root.

That’s a long-winded way of saying I was thinking about my girl stats for 2012.

Long-suffering readers will be aware how the tone of my blog changed in late 2011 as I went through a cycle of game-revulsion. I changed from the high-approach/high-adventure phase to a low-approach/maturity phase. At the time I thought it was a permanent shift, now I’m not so sure. Perhaps its cyclical. A couple of weeks ago I started reading Tom Torero’s daygame book and it rekindled the old hunger. Like when I walk into a boxing gym and smell the dried sweat on leather, hear the thumping of bagwork, the whistle of a jump rope and I’m immediately in state to train. I was reading his lay reports, his joy/obsession for going out every day, and it reminded me how much I enjoyed it.

The greatest

The greatest

2012 was the year I switched gears. 2010 was brute-force approaching to get the sets in the bank, with some decent success. 2011 was more brute-force but developing the artistry side and upping the quality. But by the end of 2011 I was still thinking “it shouldn’t have to be such hard work”. There must be a way of making it all easier and more efficient. Thus 2012 I worked hard on lifestyle, masculine value, and removing my niggling career doubts. I cut the approaches right down. Here’s my stats. Estimates because I never tracked numbers.

  • Approachs: I’d estimate 250 in total, about 200 outside of the UK. Of the total about 150 went nowhere, 20 idates, about 100 numbers/facebooks with vaying degrees of flakiness.
  • Dates: I had day twos with about ten girls who I made out with / got sexual with but didn’t actually bang. There were another five girls where the day two went nowhere at all. The remaining dates led to sex.
  • Sex: Seventeen new girls, plus a few continuing on rotation from 2011.

Overall the lesson is I had more sex, better sex, more fun and with higher quality girls. Nonetheless I gradually got the nagging feeling of scarcity as I stopped approaching. It’s important to feel abundance in lead-creation, not merely abundance in having regulars on rotation.

#85 – The Shadowers, Donald Hamilton BOOK REVIEW

Matt Helm

Not lacking essential vitamins

Another bloody Matt Helm book. I think I could start writing them myself at this point, so familiar am I with the formula. Surprisingly, I’ve started to realise they are more like murder mysteries than spy thrillers. Jason Bourne this isn’t. Whereas the latter is all about double-crosses, triple-crosses, chase scenes and whatnot, these Helm books nearly always come down to a small cast of suspicious characters, one of whom is the Soviet agent doing all the mischief. Helm’s primary exertions are always based on smoking out the opposition so as to identify them. Once he does so, killing them is the easy part.

I guess that’s the advantage of operating on home ground. He hasn’t yet been asked to go behind the Iron Curtain.

Helm doesn’t get any rest, I’ll tell you that much. I just finished my thirtieth day of residential daygame coaching yesterday and I’m a bit tired by it. It’s intensive stuff because I spend all week with a guy [1] as we go through a high-pressure activity. The client is fully committed and ready to work hard, as am I, so we get a lot done. At the end of each in-field day our legs ache and our brains have melted.

I’ve done it six times this year and don’t for a moment think I’m complaining about being overworked or something. However, six bursts of frantic high pressure activity is rather draining, and that’s just chasing skirt. Imagine doing the same six jobs but the subject was Cold War espionage and you were up against highly-trained merciless assassins. That’s rather more stressful than having a silly tart give you an eye-roll blowout.

The Shadowers is the seventh Matt Helm book and he’s getting all this done in less than four years. I think he should have a word with his shop steward or the ACLU. He might have a case for compensation due to unsafe working environment and excessive hours.

This story begins with Helm on a well-deserved holiday in Florida and it’s obvious that if he’s paying his hotel room monthly then he’s wildly optimistic. His girlfriend has a high-speed night-time car accident, running her coupe off a corner and tumbling down a hill. It looks like an accident [2]. Distraught, Helm asks if there are any jobs going around that could take his mind off the grief. Yes, there is. His boss Mac sends him off on a counter-intel op. Word is out that a nasty old Jew [3] – famous for running effective spy networks for the Soviets – has set up a new ring in the USA. The plan is to shadow key employees of the US Government and armed forces so that they can all be murdered in one small window of opportunity, preventing them defending the USA from Soviet attack.

Think of it like this scene in Breaking Bad, but with world domination at stake.

So Helm is given a cover identity to marry a key female scientist and he must then spot her Soviet shadows, capture one alive, and get information leading to the current identity and location of this nasty old Jewish spymaster [4].

As you’d expect, the story proceeds with misdirection, dark manoeuvres, and Helm trying to ascertain just who among a short list of suspects is the Soviet agent. He displays his usual trade craft in second-guessing everyone, setting clever traps, and playing possum when threatened. I really like seeing it. Donald Hamilton has a way of making it all feel real and blindsiding you without cheating. You always get the feeling Helm wins because he’s more experienced than the opposition and can out-think them. It’s never like The Destroyer or The Executioner who simply rely upon being faster on the trigger.

It’s fair to say that if you’ve read one Matt Helm book you’ve read them all. I’ve done seven in a row now and they are each of about the same quality and same structure. Yet I’m still not tired of them. As soon as I closed this I wanted to move onto number eight in the series. I think I’ve found my favourite spy series.

If you live in the USA and would like a cheap, no-fuss way of buying my books in full colour you should have a look at my new sales site here. Sadly, the company cannot yet fulfil orders sent outside the USA. For that, consult my usual products page.

bernie-sanders-tax-returns-hypocrisy

“Matt, there’s a Jewish agent who has infiltrated the USA and set up a network of young traitors who are working tirelessly to seize control of the US Government to turn it against Americans.”

[1] Who has paid me an obscene amount of money that I have to justify by the quality of my coaching.
[2] What, you suspect foul play? Damn, you’re good at this espionage racket! Nothing gets past you, buster.
[3] Not Diane Feinstein, or Paul Krugman, or Bernie Sanders. That trio of traitors are much too high-level threats to the USA for a man of Matt Helm’s paygrade. Helm assassinates mid-level traitors such as a Ben Shapiro or a Jordan Peterson.
[4] I know, he’s better off just posting something on Twitter and then seeing who reports him to the Safety Council.

#2 – Easy Death, Daniel Boyd BOOK REVIEW

Having just finished Dumas’ The Vicomte De Bragelonne I needed to take a breather. It’s a huge novel with a broad historical sweep. Much of the story concerns the courts of King Louis and his top nobles, and when the action decamps to Newcastle, England [1] it still brims with politics and intrigue. The romantic spirit in which it is written bombards the reader with flowery language and elaborate ornamentation. I checked Amazon for volume four, Louise De La Villeire and thought wait! Let’s break things up a little. With that in mind I resolved my second book of the year would be the polar opposite….

Easy Death

Readers, I introduce you to Easy Death. A short, low-class, grimy crime novel following a gang of small-town desperadoes pulling off an armoured car heist in the winter of 1951. It’s everything The Vicomte De Bragelonne is not. Where Dumas plots long carefully-coordinated intrigues, Boyd plots fast tawdry double-crosses. Where Dumas attends grandiose fetes held in castles in summer, Boyd has bottom-feeders crawling through the snow in the forest. It’s also just 236 pages of regular paperback so I read it in a single day.

Many of us are dissatisfied with modern mass-market fiction. Books reflect the spirit of the times, and popular books in particular. To be popular a book must get signed by an agent, pass the SJW-infested green-lighting in a publisher, get a marketing budget, and then appeal to the average moron who buys it [2] The Japanese have a word for an odd characteristic of the publishing business:

Tsundoku: The acquiring of reading materials followed by letting them pile up and subsequently never reading them.

We are in a strange situation where many top-selling books are total shit and it doesn’t matter because the buyers aren’t reading them anyway. I tried a few of them, like Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code and Steig Larsson’s Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. They are appallingly badly written, failing to meet even the most basic threshold of author competence [3]. This is why I like older books. It’s a myth that book-writing is improving over time. Even a simple run-of-the-mill crime potboiler like Easy Death is written with greater poise than most of this year’s bestsellers.

Beggars Belief

Good, Commie filth, childish nonsense, brilliant, outstanding, childish drivel, mom porn, brilliant, okay, fake propaganda

I discovered the Hard Case Crime series ten years ago when I was drawn to the lurid painted cover of Max Phillips’ Fade To Blonde, the second in the series, in an Oxfam bookstore. I was immediately hooked. The editor, Charles Ardai, was faithfully reproducing the vibe of old 1950s pulp detective fiction. Half of the series are old books, sometimes out of print for fifty years, that are ‘remastered’ with new retro covers, and the other half are good crime writers publishing their new books especially for Ardai [4]. I started reading the series from volume one onwards and noticed something odd.

I liked almost every book.

Different authors. Different stories. The only things the books had in common were (i) the theme (ii) the cover art and…….. (iii) the editor. I realised that Charles Ardai likes exactly the same crime novels that I do and he’d built an entire business upon dusting them off and presenting them in pretty, simple paperbacks. It was like having a personal shopper doing all the work for me! I’ve now read over 80 of them and have no intention of stopping now. So, Easy Death is the latest one to pass through my hardboiled detective fiction assembly line.

hardcase2

Thank you, sir, for providing me with literally hundreds of hours of quality entertainment

My first thoughts upon reading Easy Death were how effectively it conveys the situation. A local hood has hired underlings to hijack an armoured truck a few days before Christmas. Naturally, being hardboiled, things soon fuck up and spiral out of control. The entirety of the book takes place over twenty-four hours and never grows stale. Boyd keeps us continually aware of the foreboding snowy weather and lets it affect the plot constantly: characters make bad decisions because they don’t want to go out into the cold, a cop can follow a getaway car because of snow tracks, a ranger doesn’t buy a cover story because it doesn’t fit the weather, and characters trapped in deathly-cold scenarios take risks they wouldn’t in fine weather without the hypothermia clock ticking down. Snow isn’t merely window-dressing to the plot – it has a greater impact than any individual character does.

Speaking of characters, Boyd switches viewpoints a lot. Half of the book is in first-person from the cop chasing the robbers and the rest is third-person for the other characters. Boyd is especially good at foreshadowing. A chapter from one perspective will omit a detail or present a scenario that doesn’t feel quite right, and the next chapter has a different perspective that fills the blank and suddenly it all falls into place. I can’t give examples without spoiling the book, but take my word for it, it’s clever and it greatly improves dramatic tension.

I find good hardboiled crime fiction isn’t any where near as nihilistic or tawdry as it’s made out. Good writers have a way of teasing out nobility from the decisions characters must make. Dumas often slaps you in the face with it: high-ranking nobles expound at length on moral virtue and musketeers give soliloquies on duty and honour before crossing swords. I like it, but subtle it isn’t. Boyd puts at the moral core of Easy Death the unlikely teaming up of the first-responding cop and the stubborn female park ranger who guides him through the forest. It’s not a buddy movie. Their interplay is handled with subtly and depth, is never twee, and makes the same use of dramatic foreshadowing outlined earlier. They are likeable characters with complex morality.

Lastly, one reason I’m drawn to hardboiled fiction is the way characters influence plot development. Any of you who watched Prometheus or the most recent Game Of Thrones series were probably throwing things at the TV screen.

“People don’t act like that!”

There are few things as annoying as a character behaving completely out of character because the writer needs the plot to develop and can’t think of a better way than for a character to be retarded. Think of those elite scientists in Promotheus who see a really suspicious oil-covered swimming alien snake and think, “you know what, let’s take our protective gear off and start prodding it”. Think of Daenerys Targaryen finally returning to her ancestral home, right next to the base of her mortal enemy, and then taking the first small boat to its beach without first sending scouts [7]

Free hugs

“I don’t require bodyguards. I shall enter alone and unarmed!”

Hardboiled fiction rarely suffers this problem, for two reasons:

1. The writers aren’t idiots. Every character is on the make and has an angle. Plotting and scheming bubbles below the surface from page one to the end. It’s part of what makes it ‘hardboiled’. Thus writers are acutely aware of how their characters will be ruthlessly self-interested and plan every move as carefully as a Hungarian Jewish billionaire.

2. The escape clause to the above is likewise built into the theme. Hardboiled deals with low-life scum and desperados in desperate positions. Therefore if you need a character to act retarded, you’ve always got some junkies or crash test dummies who can be cannon fodder for your plot. Additionally, you can simply have a scheming character miscalculate his odds.

Anyway, to conclude. I thoroughly recommend the Hard Case Crime series and this book is a solid entry, about average for the high standards of the series [8]

If you like how I think about books you should see how I write them. Go check out my author profile at Lulu.com for my textbooks and memoir series here.

26855544_10208924147015666_1984948094_n

That’s a LOT of Hard Case Crime on the top row

[1] Yes, I loved that both volumes two and three resolve major plot points in my own home town. That was a very nice surprise to read in a French novel written in 1845, and nice to know Newcastle is the spiritual home of history’s greatest heroes then as well as today.
[2] If this sounds catty, look into the “bought not read” stats for book shops. I forget where I read them, so here’s a link to something I did find.
[3] Brown is especially bad at dialogue, and for giving the “travelogue” descriptions of location that every author is taught not to do. Larsson can’t write remotely believable characters and his plotting is nonsensical. That’s aside from his main characters being empty vessels for his own awkward gamma wish fulfilment.
[4] Sometimes big names too. Michael Crichton’s old crime novels written under a non-de-plume have all been reissued by Hard Case, and Stephen King has written two books specially for them. Max Allan Collins has also had all his old Quarry books reissued to support the new TV series of Quarry [5]
[5] I’ve watched all of season one and it’s excellent. Gritty hitman drama set in mid-70s.
[6] After reading the first 65 volumes in numerical order, I only disliked these three: Robbie’s Wife, A Diet Of Treacle, and The Corpse Wore Pasties. They aren’t bad books, I just couldn’t get into their styles.
[7] Don’t get me started on how retarded the last two seasons of Game Of Thrones have become. And how fat the weird-faced female cast have become.
[8] “Which entries do you like most?” Well, I’m glad you asked: Top Of The Heap, The Wounded And The Slain, Slide, The First Quarry, Passport To Peril, The Venom Business, Grave Descend.

Somebody has to fuck them

Fat girls are like lamposts to me. I don’t notice them unless I happen to walk into one by accident. They are just part of the furniture. The same goes with women over thirty – I just don’t really see them. They are like blurry silhouettes walking past me. It was only a few days ago that I learned Post-Wall women actually have personalities, hopes, dreams and all that kind of stuff.

Bloody hell! Really?

Furniture. Quite a nice rack.

Furniture. Quite a nice rack.

So presumeably fatties, uglies and oldies have a sex drive too. Hmmmmm. I wonder what they do to satisfy that drive. Obviously it’s not getting satisfied through me. I’d always wondered if fat people find each other attractive, or if sex for them is like us looking at a undercooked 99p Morrisons pizza and deciding “I’m so hungry and I have to eat something.” So I turned to the internet and tried to calculate how many unattractive women are out there getting fucked.

Step 1 – Demographics
These statistics break up the European Union population into age cohorts. Now, these stats aren’t perfect because the age buckets are less than ideal (17-25 and 25-54 is the important split) but we can use it as a rough proxy. Realistically, girls can still be reasonably hot up to 30 years old and except for a couple of indiscretions I think 17 is a bit young for me. Also, presumeably these stats don’t include illegal immigrants but again that’s not relevant because we’ll have hopefully murdered them all soon, removing them from the sampled population.

So, there are 11% of women who are young enough to bother with and old enough to be legal. There are an additional 42% who are young enough to be sexually active but too old to bother with.

Step 2 – Wild Assumptions
Let’s pull a number out of my arse for how many of that 11% group are hot or at least pretty. We’ll make the cut-off a 7/10 because 6s always have an element of shame. Based on my own eyes I’d say about 15% of English 17-25 year olds are fuckable without shame, rising to 25% on the Western half of the continent and then 40% when you go east. I’m not saying “hot”, just good enough that you don’t have a meltdown every time a sex flashback hits you.

So, using my magically statistical skills I’m gonna say 33% of women in Europe aged 17-25 are worth fucking for sport. Apply that to the 11% and we have 3.63% of the total female population are officially Younger-Hotter-Tighter. Let’s be generous and round it up to 4%

european-union-population-pyramid-2014

Step 3 – The Chilling Truth
The inverse conclusion is that 96% of the women having sex in the European Union are not above the “shame” level. There are varying degrees of shame between a plain-looking 19yr old butterface all the way down to a green-haired landwhale eating her 36th birthday cake, or the basement level of a 53yr old ex-hippy using Guardian Soulmates to temporarily dampen the cries of her barren womb. But only 4% of the sexually active population is YHT.

Let’s apply that to the next time you hear a lurid sex story from a friend or on the internet when no evidence is offered about the quality of the girl. What’s the likelihood she’s one of the 4%?

Step 4 – The Preening Joy
You really don’t need to be feeling jealous that everyone is getting laid better than you – statistically, they aren’t. If you compare yourselves to the top players (whether Game-trained or non-community) then of course you’re going to get a feeling of relative poverty. Take solace in the fact that even if you’re only knobbing a couple of 7s a year, you are outperforming probably 96% of men.

Not 96% of young, game-aware men. But the world is full of dweeby, boring chodes servicing unattractive women.

Best Daygame Theory – The Overkill Discussion part 1

I’ve spent the past week in Prague whiling away my time in a pleasant manner. I spent a couple of days servicing my rotation, then Tom Torero rolled up with a cameraman and we spent two days filming infields. A couple of near misses with local ladies ensued and by the time rain and cold sapped all the fun out of the streets, I’d also hung out with a US guy who’d learned the ropes in stateside and was now on an extended Euro-Jaunt.

Phew! A busy week!

While rambling on to this US guy about daygame I was once again reminded how deep the skillset is. Imagine sitting Gary Kasparov in a bohemian Prague cafe for a few hours and encouraging him to discuss chess – the gambits, the meta-theory, it’s relationship to real life (he actually wrote a book on that topic), and the way personality expresses itself in your game. I think those few hours would quickly spill over into days.

Now, Kasparov is rather better at his chosen skillset than I am at mine but the point is that daygame is deep. I’m sure nightgame is too, but I don’t know so much about it.

You look very.... oh, fuck it. Coffee break!

You look very…. oh, fuck it. Coffee break!

A fortnight ago I solicited a few intermediate daygamers to watch my instructional program / theoretical exposition Daygame Overkill and to use it as a launchpad to relate their own theoretical insight. My instructions were quite broad, words to the effect of – “Here’s a free login. Watch it, relate it to your own infield experience, and pick up some themes to explore. Don’t worry about being positive – in fact, try to make some real criticisms to encourage debate.”

Over the next week or so I will be posting three different daygamer’s thoughts on Overkill. I hope this will stimulate some discussion and I strongly suggest my readers chip in with their own thoughts in the comments (which I’ll respond to). Some of the themes we’ll hit include:

  • Fine tuning your style to fit women’s dual mating strategy
  • Differences between relying on verbal and non-verbal communication
  • Choosing your targets wisely
  • How my personality reflects itself in set, and how yours reflects itself differently to mine

So without further ado, here is the first essay from Tom Juan – A UK-based guy who has been enthusiastically hitting the streets for a year now…….

I managed to watch all 335 minutes of Daygame Overkill within the space of two days (let’s just say I had a flexible two days, and even found the time after one of my now pissed off never to visit again f-buddies left my flat just last night!) and so the timing of this arriving on to my virtual desk was perfect, needless to say… And with one or two other slack, “take it or leave it” f-buddies on my rotation, I watched Daygame Overkill with much anticipation and with much hunger.

The key question: Has this hunger to learn something I’ve never seen expressed in such a “simplified” manner been sated? All will be revealed…

But I PROMISE I have absolutely tried and tried to cut this review down to a bare minimum, which isn’t easy considering I had 3,000 words of notes to work from (I’m a fast typer since I used to be a Direct Response Copywriter)… And notes that require expansion as the theme Krauser raises in a mostly eloquent manner (beside the occasional ball-scratching and pint-swigging), is simply fascinating. This theme centres around a level of masculinity that us as men in the 15% of Western societies where we are overall exclusively monogamous, have forgotten. Or never dared to even explore fully… And in my one year of feeling lost and confused because I simply can’t and don’t want to settle down (been there, done that), with this product, my justification to be a man is concreted more fully.

The Introduction

Upon starting to watch this, I was impressed by the film-worthy motion graphic titles, introduction clips and feature film clip, even though this was a little “over-egged.” Then on to the introductory Welcome video before the main event… How does a noisy bar presentation fit it into these slick motion graphics??? This seemed completely juxtaposed to the incredible film-like introductions.

That aside, since I’m sure there are downsides we can accept considering Krauser isn’t your “bells and whistles” kind of chap, this product seems to potentially go hand-in-hand with his book or virtual book (can you call it an ebook?), Daygame Mastery, which he later explains is a reference book, not a tips and strategy guide. And that Daygame Overkill is a simplified version of this book, so if you need the theory (nope – just download directly into my brain by watching what you do please), then to refer to the book to delve deep into the who, how, what, why etc.

So is his book Daygame Mastery needed to work alongside Daygame Overkill?

I think the overall suggestion is no, but it depends on whether your the kind of guy who needs to have it laid out in complicated jargon, or if like me, you “get this stuff” on a deep level just by seeing it explained on a simplified level to camera– but again, we all have different learning abilities so although he didn’t say this, it might be a good idea to read it if just watching clips and following his reviews of the infield footage isn’t enough of an explanation.

The most groundbreaking thing about this intro video and product in general, in a nutshell, is the “K” selection vs. “R” selection concept, one which in my acute awareness as a learned daygamer (aware of who else is out there), has never been explained and triggered on a deep down “AHA!” moment in me before. And this is the most eye opening thing about the product because it makes you feel okay about wanting to fuck a lot of women… to put it bluntly.

In a nutshell, Krauser is bringing up the comparison between the nice guy boyfriend daygamer to the lover, sex-based daygamer i.e. R-selected.

Lover / Provider discussion in the Welcome introduction

Lover / Provider discussion in the Welcome introduction

The only other time I’ve seen this explained is in one of Tom Torero’s videos where he delved into the lover vs. provider model, but he just said everything overlapped and there was no black and white, whereas Krauser is the living, breathing example of the black yet still being “kind of normal” at the same time, unlike the R-selection comparable RSD hyper-dudes who don’t ever seem to come down from PUA night game-centric, American (mostly) yes girl fucking heaven… Still valid, but not so relatable.

What Krauser is good for, is being relatable as someone you could meet in a pub and have a beer with, even if he filmed his infields with a hangover…. wtf??? And has a pint in hand in the venue of his talk while going through the Q and A section…

Okay for Beginners?

So it begs the question… is this product any good for beginners??? Or does someone need to be out on the streets getting flaky numbers after being that “nice guy” first before realising that this is the holy grail for him, to stop those boring first dates where you don’t even try and kiss her (wtf?) and get either friend zoned or boyfriend zoned (I don’t know which is worse)… Personally I’d say the latter, as a complete newbie probably won’t get the entirety of this. Unless, he has the sex drive of a tiger on heat, and just wants to take a bit of a short cut that might cut out the pain, yet not allow the excitement of knowing how to overcome the obstacles a newbie nice guy daygamer has… and even knowing this stuff, it will take time becoming socially calibrated enough to get away with a lot of the stuff Krauser is showing.

Even I will have to have my results damaged by changing my ways since I will be trying a new method and although my long term success will be better (including SDL’s or first date fucks which I’ve had only one so far), I might find it less congruent in the beginning and therefore this will affect my results. And for a newbie there is still that initial “wtf do I say to a hot girl?”, let alone “how do I do what Krauser does?” bumps to get over…

So as an ideal goal to hit, it’s great for anyone. But for someone to go out and practice this stuff, it really is an intermediate product.

What if you want a girlfriend? And has he done any market research?

Krauser assumes that having a girlfriend is a bad thing – yes I personally 100% agree but what if there are guys out there who would be happy settling for a hotter, tighter and younger gal to fuck every night and get a pad with, and who knows, have kids with (let’s just say I was one of those guys since I’m a father to two beautiful boys), until of course they get married, they both get bored and they probably get a divorce (got the t-shirt). But aside from that, some relationships work, so what if there are guys genuinely gunning for monogamy?

Therefore I think he should explain that even if you want a girlfriend, it’s still better to be that r-selection boyfriend who is the prize, rather than the nice guy daygamer K-selection boyfriend. Put simply, you can “choose” with this approach, rather than “settle.” Krauser also takes the general stance that most men are K-selected daygamers, rather than r-selected. How does he know this as gospel? Personally I think that a lot of daygamers mix the two, and get it right when they throw in a larger percentage of r-selected, which I have done with the girls I’ve closed way more quickly in the past.

So instead of classifying most men as “K” selected, he should take more of a subjective perspective and see it as fluid ie. most guys will be K-selected in 80% of their sets, but the ones where they are r-selected (20%) will be the ones that net them the quick results i.e. not having to go on 3 dates or more before you get to fuck her. And it’s this fluidity that is missing in his explanation, so instead of being black and white, he should see it as it is – a mixture of the two, and suggest that to improve results and get more success, up the r-selection vibe and diminish the K-selection vibe. Maybe it’s because he doesn’t coach and sees the world through his own eyes (fair enough), but a wider perspective here would have been better in my view.

It’s true as Krauser suggests that most guys are non-sexually-threatening and therefore it doesn’t lead to sex, just nice conversations and numbers, because the women are still getting validation and attention, although she will never text you back, but it’s simply within us naturally as men to be r-selected as well so we can’t help but play on that when we are at our best. Therefore it’s simply about being aware of how to bring our r-selected best version of ourselves, rather than learning something that is acquired like school children – my point being, that the r-selection traits are already within us! It’s just about learning how to draw them out… (try not masturbating for as step one!).

Breaking the model down in the Welcome video

Breaking the model down in the Welcome video

So let’s get to the juicy part – the talk and the infields!

Krauser explains that the infields consist of 10 girls in Zagreb, Croatia within the space of 3 days, October 2014 and within a 1 mile square radius of each other. The first question in combination with alarm bells that hit my brain was – why only over 3 days? Why not commit a week to get the cream of the crop absolute best out of this guy and WITHOUT hangovers… (wtf???) Regardless, he ramps up the theory and makes it really clear about being “social savvy,” “secret society” (I fuck hot girls all the time and I know that you know that I know that you know that) and the powerful sub communicator, rather than “wanna fuck!??” approach and style.

He also brings up his average stats as around 1-in-30, which is twice as good as mine so at least I know I’m watching the right guy to help me improve my results two fold… (everything is crossed). In part 2 of the talk, Krauser points out that everything you do should point to the r-selection. You want her to think you’re the bad boy or asshole… because that box is where all the action happens, even if she’s taken since she knows you won’t give up the game when she fucks you on the side etc – ie. you won’t care about her boyfriend and try and steal her away.

He also talks about risk taking, “birdsong,” that mixing up r and K will really hurt your results, the importance of being the guy who can handle being anonymous, covert sexualisation and how he mixes this in with fractionation. And finally, the cold, hard, fact, that if you go down this path, you are a service provider in “adventure sex.”

Nuff’ said…

Then the talk comes to a penultimate moment where you are about to see evidence of Krauser’s recent lays…. then, Nooooo! Why can’t we see proof of these “younger hotter tighter” girls!?? I’m totally deflated by that… on advice of his mum? (as written in text on the video to cover up these obviously explicit images)… Yet this then raises the question… Shouldn’t his “mum” be telling him not to do any of this full stop? Instead of “just” the part where he proves the type of girl he’s laid for the past year? – and a part which you would have thought would solidify Krauser’s reputation even more firmly, rather than piss you off and make you want to think he’s not so great because of the simple frustration at being denied these, and because you want to be inspired by these pictures so you are driven to succeed with the “younger, hotter, tighter” types yourself…

That’s at least how I felt at this point. So I urge Krauser to include these even if it’s a special VIP bonus that you have to pass some kind of test to access.

Part 3 of his talk expands more about vibe and goes on to explain the 4 pillars of daygame alongside more of an elaboration on covert sexualisation, plus an analogy between poker and daygame – “lose small but win big!” And finally, the importance of compliance tests – I can’t wait to start putting this one into practice! (Again, something I’ve done without realising but never consciously knowing – this will allow for escalation). The Q and A section is where Krauser has a pint in his hand and he starts scratching his balls occasionally… classy! Seriously, leave it alone! And he provides a continued explanation of “vibe”, integral to success in daygame (you can’t be a miserable bastard and succeed).

Infield Overview, in Brief…!

It’s clear that these infields were filmed by his mate Bojangles and were not of a professional quality, not that this is always an obstacle but you want to get the best for what you pay for right? The content however is the most important thing but it seems this was an unplanned affair which turned into a product – sometimes the best way to go, but it would have been nice to know that a little more care and planning (especially as three of the infield analysis’ were filmed from the same pub he filmed the introduction from – just a little budget I’m afraid) had gone into this product you are paying good money for…

With the ten infields, I’ll be honest… I was impressed by six of them, and two of them I thought were at the level of MPUA. Four (maybe three because it’s good to show him ploughing with an out-and-out “no” girl) of them simply shouldn’t have been included, for various reasons. I could go deep into each one and pick it apart bit by bit, but it would make this review double the length, and it would also kill the mystery. However his analysis of himself is great – concise, to the point and elaborates on areas where it’s important to do so.

You also see Krauser calibrate differently to different women and environments. The two where he had results were obvious as to why he got those results, and one in particular would have eaten any novice daygamer alive! Yet she seemed to get a taste of him within a few days of the interaction… He only goes into minute detail where he has diagrams ready within the video on one of the sets, and with the other one that I was blown away by, you can’t see her face which is a real shame, but with the way she was talking, she must have been a 9 or a 10. This makes me think – why didn’t Krauser have a pocket camera as well as the “from a distance” camera perspective?

Underground seduction, yesterday

Underground seduction, yesterday

There are certain things Krauser does that you would never notice unless they were explained, especially in the nuances and sub-communication, and for the sets I was impressed by, I would watch those again once or twice just to ensure I’ve fully soaked up what I need to learn to allow me to progress to the next level by implementing the same. As mentioned earlier, why not hit the streets for at least 1 or 2 weeks, not necessarily going out every day but having a good range of infields to choose from instead of having to include four sets that in my opinion shouldn’t have been included.

He is showing us the kind of “no” or “maybe” girl in one of these, but I actually think he could have done better in three of them (one was just your typical “no” girl), for example not getting the hook point before suggesting a coffee/date/number? Come on Krauser… And not seeming to have built rapport on three of them enough for them to be a solid fuck close, as he does date two of the four but it doesn’t really go further other than a make out.

I’m being super critical because of Krausers reputation and obvious results in the past few years, which obviously I wouldn’t apply to just anyone, but if further explanation is required I would be happy to provide it.

Conclusion

My conclusion is that this product is definitely worth buying especially if like me you are intermediate and so far work hard for the number and then have to work hard for the eventual sex… And because this is groundbreaking in that no one else has so far had the balls to elevate this r-selection theme to this level before, in a way that is relatable, it’s probably the only product out there that will cover both the theory and the practical with conciseness and a few laughs (admittedly Krauser is funny), so I would buy it just on that basis.

The in-fields could have been better – two are bloody amazing and four are really good, but four of them disappointed me… So if those four were replaced with good, solid sets where the results speak for themselves, he could make something already ground breaking “even more” groundbreaking.

The six that were awesome-to-good are worth watching more than once so that you really get the nuances, that won’t ever be explained in a YouTube video and leave you even more clueless as to when you started, so you are basically paying for his own analysis which certainly has value.

The one question remains…. What does Krauser do on a date to secure the sex? Maybe a sequel that covers this is soon on its way to your inbox…. Watch this space

Tom J

Thanks Tom. I hope this stimulates some debate in the comments. Daygame Overkill is on sale and available here. Further discussion pieces inbound soon. You can read more about Tom and watch his infield videos at SmartSeduction.com

Balls Deep: Chapter Three, The Daygame Grind (3 of 3)

The grind continued all through September. I took a week off work to spend ten straight days daygaming, ten sets a day minimum. There’d been too much half-assing it, so I wanted massive action. Mental pressure was willing me out because deep in my gut was a sickening dread at being blown out by a procession of girls and perhaps peering into the abyss—that I’d never get good at this. Eugenia had inadvertently knocked my confidence. So every day that week I followed the same ritual, trying to impose the illusion of control onto the scenario.

I’d go to a Caffè Nero and sit on the big brown leather sofa watching the Blueprint Decoded instructional videos on my laptop until my sexual desire/desperation overcame my anxiety/avoidance. For example, the first day:

Monday 14th September. My mind was full of big plans and motivational self-talk. No excuses, I was going to turbocharge my stats on approaches. It didn’t matter how I felt, or if my wings were busy, I’d go solo and just plow through. Received wisdom in the community is you are a noob until you’ve completed one thousand sets. I was at about four hundred and very impatient to improve. Having a full-time job restricted my daygame to weekends so the solution seemed obvious— take time off work.

I’d spend the first hour in Caffè Nero reading. It was still not quite lunch time and Covent Garden was deserted so I didn’t feel like I was descending into avoidance. Finally, I stepped outside and straight into a hot Belgian dancer. I opened weakly, but she stopped and chatted. She was in a hurry to get to the Pineapple Studio for a dance class. I knew something about that stuff so I rambled on about dance, contemporary dance, how my dancer-ex had a careless grace in her movements from all the dancing. Blah, blah, blah. She was not interested, and my attempt to take her number led to an awkward refusal.

It only took a few minutes to shrug that off, and I saw a dusky Mediterranean girl walking through the market. She stopped briefly but either didn’t speak English or was seriously unimpressed. She smiled, waved her hand dismissively, and disappeared without a word. Next was an English girl carrying shopping boxes. She didn’t stop, but smiled, thanked me, and said she was late getting back to work. One more open got me a stop but nothing doing.

Damn. My forehead actually felt tight, such was my poor state. It was like the skin was too tight for the size of my skull. I’ve since learned that is how to recognise when I’m pulling the “creepy face” caused by poor state.

I persevered. On Shaftesbury Avenue just past Forbidden Planet an Asian girl came towards me. She was young, and had just started her first day as an intern in a fashion magazine. We chatted a bit. I was too talky and too outcome dependent, but she didn’t seem to care. She checked the text she was writing as I approached, so I told her off for not paying attention. She giggled and twirled her hair. I made a mental note to self–set arbitrary boundaries and playfully tell a girl off for breaching them. She gave me her number but never replied to my texts.

Another instant date to nowhere

Another instant date to nowhere

I got myself blown out a few more times on Oxford Street before a hot English girl gave me her Facebook. It was weird because the whole time I was thinking she was wanting to get away, and I was struggling and just talking into the space, yet it was five minutes or more in conversation and after getting her Facebook I kept her another few minutes talking about her Geography Uni course she was about to start her second year in. It didn’t go anywhere. It’s common for beginners to think the length of the interaction is directly related to how strong the resulting contact details will be. This isn’t correct. Ultimately, you’re trying to create a particular emotional impression upon the girl while also ticking off checkboxes marking particular signals she needs to give you to show she is available and into you. If you accomplish that in two minutes the number will be stronger than if you dither around chatting for twenty minutes but fail to accomplish it. So while advanced day gamers can quickly take solid numbers (or eject when it’s not forthcoming) it’s common to see beginners getting dragged into over-long conversations that go nowhere.

The last approach of the day was a pleasant failure. I opened a hot Lithuanian in Carnaby Street. She was ambling around aimlessly, which I took as a generalised approach invitation. My forehead was really tight, and I was having a tough time. My vibe was horrible, but I was determined to just press on and grind out the sets. She stopped, smiled, hair twirled, and indulged me for ten minutes. I could almost visualise a hologram of a graph between us showing a downward slant as I continued to lose my confidence throughout the whole thing. I tried to take her number and she was very explicit: “I don’t want to exchange details”. Fair enough, on that performance she really shouldn’t have.

I was getting some good reactions but no success

I was getting some good reactions but no success

The first day of my daygame “vacation” resulted in talking to ten girls, taking one number, and one Facebook. Neither of those two girls replied to me. At the end of each day I’d analyse the work and write a blogpost of my learning points. Self-diagnosis is a crucial skill for seducers because no-one else is going to help you. Quoting my blog, this is what I felt I’d learned:

  • I felt crap but took right action anyway. Good work.
  • Even with shit state I still had good enough fundamentals to get one decent number.
  • I didn’t worry too much opening sets. The poor state was once in-set. Only a few months ago I wouldn’t even open five sets when in good state.
  • While in set I knew consciously all the mistakes I was making, even as I couldn’t stop making them. The biggest one was outcome dependence. I really wanted to get numbers and was worried the girls would walk away and leave me feeling shit.

Lesson learned. Back out tomorrow.

It was also this week that I went to an LSS talk at London Bridge on “game for men over 35” organised by a guy called Curran. It seemed perfectly pitched to me, but I was so lacking in entitlement that I worried I’d be refused entry because at the time I was thirty-four. I actually emailed Curran a few days before to ask if it was okay. As if they’d check my passport and throw me out!

The event was unremarkable, held in an upstairs function room of a pub by Tower Bridge. About thirty older gentleman packed the pews while a short ginger guy called London Playboy gave a talk, then Curran and then a lanky Scotsman with the online pseudonym of Skeletor. His real name is Colin and, though neither of us knew it then, he’d become a major figure in my journey. At the time I was very impressed with his presentation about identity and how to change it. I tried to get pally with him afterwards on his smoke-break but there was a ring of eager older gents two-deep around him that I couldn’t penetrate.