If I was in a mathematical mood, I might try to estimate how much of a man’s success with women is ruined by his Approach Anxiety. But, that’s too much brain-work so instead I’ll pull a number out of my arse – 70%. That’s probably not far wrong. Most problems in Game can be solved by implementing one simple piece of advice: Open more sets.
Find yourself overinvesting in text message exchanges? Open more sets
Struggle to keep your vibe up in long spells between dates? Open more sets
Throwing away precious time and effort following up luke-warm and cold leads? Open more sets
Scared of escalating in case she blows you out? Open more sets
Don’t have enough experience of street stopping girls? Open more sets
Given how many problems can be mitigated or outright solved by this one piece of advice, the real question is why aren’t you opening more sets. And the answer to that is Approach Anxiety. That’s the real cost to implementing the advice. Fortunately I will tell you – for one day only – the real secret to beating AA. No, it’s not inner game. No, it’s not meditation. And no, it’s not forcing IOIs. All of those are long-term strategies if you want to reduce AA while also making personal progress.
What if you just want a quick fix?
What if you don’t care about improving yourself, you just want to get rid of AA right now, the easy way?
Fortunately there is an extremely effective way to completely blunt the effect of AA. There are only two downsides:
The effect wears off after two hours (three if you’re lucky)
It’s a bit gross
So what is the magic bullet to give you fast 100% foolproof elimination of AA: Drink 25cl of your own urine.
Ryoto Machida, champ
This is something I first learned at a seminar with former UFC light-heavyweight champion Ryoto Machida who has been doing it since he was a teenager under his father’s instruction. His father was a kyokushinkai karate champion who learned the secret while training in an Okinawan dojo. They had picked it up from the Okinawan long-distance fishermen who used it to calm their sea-sickness and fear when going out in rough seas. It has an incredible dampening effect on the adrenal glands.
Basically, it dampens all fear and anxiety to zero.
Hence the karate masters used it before competition or endurance trials, and Machida used it pre-fight. If you’ve seen him fight you’ll have noticed his extremely relaxed demeanour and his ability to retain the higher-level technical proficiency that normally deserts fighters in the ring (that’s why many “gym kings” don’t have successful careers – they can’t handle the amplified adrenalin of a competitive match in front of a real audience).
Just add urine, sugar and lemon
So for the past six months I’ve found a mixture of 25cl of my urine (with considerable sweetners and added flavours to reduce the foul taste) and half a can of Coca Cola has massively improved my centredness in set and better enabled me to turn on the r-selection. So, if you want a quick fix today and to remove your AA follow the secret Krauser AA-Busting Cocktail
Half a can of Coke
Six teaspoons of sugar (heaped)
Dash of lemon
25cl of your urine (if you can stomach it, use your first piss of the day)
Never forget the magnitude of what we are trying to accomplish with daygame: choosing a girl who is minding her own business, interrupting her day, and trying to fuck her quickly offering no more in return than our charisma. If she’s really lucky, she’ll score a free coffee.
Doing that regularly with younger-hotter-tighter is a superpower. There’s an extremely narrow window within which we display a carefully refined, balanced and projected collection of qualities. Central among these is fractionating between “nice guy” and “bad boy” traits, as viewers of Tom’s recent vlog series have seen.
My particular style is to look aggressively r-selected in my style and body language while putting on hard eyes and clear sexual intent. That “bad boy” side is constantly offset by polite language, occasional smiles, mischeivous gestures, and displays of sophistication.
I recently dated a photographer so she wanted to rattle off some posed shots of me. This one perfectly encapsulates the Bad Boy elements I’m trying to project. My mum said it reminded her of James Dean. You are giving the girl her Adventure Sex fantasy, so make it a little larger than life. Lest any of you think I was destined to be this cool from birth, go have a look at the photos of me in 2009 from the Balls Deep serialisation posts. The transformation from Chodey McNumbnuts to the current vintage of Nick Krauser was a painstaking and consciously-implemented process. The whole purpose of this blog has been to chronicle the change.
Taking r-selection seriously: A review of Nick Krauser’s Daygame Overkill by Rouge Engineer
Introduction
When it comes to evolutionary fitness, women are cold, calculating creatures. And brutally realistic: of their partners and themselves. Women may fantasize about securing the attention of an Alpha for life, but alone, in the silence of a room, most women know they’re unlikely to achieve this. With Alphas, the most they can hope to secure is the briefest of moments. Adventurous moments. Moments to last a lifetime. And they do.
Alpha fucks, beta bucks. Secure the genetic seed of the momentary passing of an Alpha, secure the resources of an all-too-numerous beta. Optimal female strategy – at least for the teeming crowd of 6s, 7s, and low 8s (a different strategy might well be optimal for higher 8s and 9s). This fact, this most fundamental of social facts, illuminates much social commentary on the manosphere. The red pill. The forbidden knowledge. But oddly, this knowledge hasn’t been put to work in game itself. Yes, dual mating strategy to talked about in the game literature – but as a basic worldview. It rarely, if ever, informs, shapes, crafts practical game strategy. This knowledge hasn’t been ‘weaponised’. Until now.
Overkill takes female dual mating strategy seriously– and attempts to weaponise it in the form of a set of behavioural strategies devised to increase the likelihood of triggering women’s propensity to engage in quick, fast r-selection mating behaviour – adventure sex – rather than k-selection mating behaviour. Or more simply, to help ensure a certain signal or vibe is given that increases the chances of women responding to you as a perceived Alpha rather than perceived Beta.
The theoretical model
Overkill’s chief theoretical innovation is charting the spectrum between the dual mating strategies. What would the ideal or idealised Alpha look like? What would the idealised Beta look like? Clearly the ideal Alpha would be the ideal Lover – someone a woman fucks for the thrill (conscious reason), for the fitter genes (unconscious reason). Someone anonymous. Someone fleeting. Think the 6 foot 5, masculine, jaw lined, raw masculine vibe guys herding women from the dance floor into the cubicles as effortlessly as shepherds shepherding sheep into the fold. The ideal Beta would be the ideal Provider – someone a woman fucks purely for resources ($$$). Think the ugly, greasy, hunchback desperados walking awkwardly out of knocking shops.
Between these two extremes, these two ideals innocent of any pretence, is 99% of reality: sugar daddies, flings, harems, husbands, good boyfriends, bad boyfriends. The spectrum of rationalisations (“having a sugar daddy doesn’t make me a prostitute” – oh yes it does, luv). Between these two extremes, most socio-sexual interactions operate. This is where men do battle every single day, with themselves, with other men, with women – whether knowingly or unknowingly. According to Krauser, the spectrum between Idealised Alpha (Lover or L) and Idealised Beta (Provider or P) can be charted as follows:
L-range: knowing harem members, fuck buddies (who sometimes are unknowingly members of a harem), r-selected boyfriend, r-selected husband.
(Krauser orders this slightly differently and omits the concept of r-selected husband (perhaps because the concept is incoherent?)– this ordering reflects my own ordering of degrees of Alphaness. After all, securing a woman who is knowingly a member of a harem, accepting being a side bitch, a loyal side bitch – this surely more of an accomplishment than securing the r-selected love of a girlfriend?).
It’s obviously in a man’s best interests to be within the L-range. No question. Yes we have our different preferences. Some would be happiest with a harem. Others with an old skool wifey. And indeed our preferences change with time. Doesn’t matter which particular arrangement we seek: whether harem, fuckbuddy, short-term girlfriend, long-term girlfriend, wifey, the L-range of the spectrum is where to be. We all know the kind of lives that the overwhelming majority of men who occupy the P-range of the spectrum endure.
Now comes the flash of realisation.
Only Alphas will trigger L-range responses – whether she is willing to act as a quickie, as a fuckbuddy or even consciously a member of your burgeoning harem. Geeks, nice boys, average boys, good guys: their behavioural signals will only activate P-range responses. But by definition Alphas are rare. By definition, only rare, Alpha behavioural signals will activate L-range responses: balls, vibe, masculinity, mastery.
The more your game signals such rare traits, the more likely you will activate a woman’s L-range responses. The less your game signals such traits, the less likely those responses will be triggered – which means being defaulted and pigeonholed along the P-range, with all that involves. We now have a solid basis for day game: the best kind of day game – perhaps even the only one worthy of the name game, as anything less would seem to be a mere numbers strategy – will be the day game that seeks to harness and amplify such signal to maximise the chances of triggering L-range responses.
Do existing day game models model this effectively? Mostly they do not. They’ll have some occasional Alpha melodies, bits and pieces of effective signalling, true, but also an incredible amount of Nice Guy noise – noise that drowns out any good stuff. If you doubt this, think about so-called granddad game. This strategy, from a well-know node in the manosphere, is to mentally pretend you’re a granddad and rabbit on and on about topics when talking to a woman. How likely is that to ignite that secret passion for the Alpha male laying deep within each woman’s heart?
Enter Daygame Overkill. Overkill presents not only the theoretical viewpoint above in greater detail but presents a set of behavioural skills shaped by that viewpoint – the practical model, as demonstrated by Krauser over a generous number of infields. What are these behavioural skills? That’s the price of admission and so I wont be giving details here. But suffice to say it’s holistic: not simply verbal communication, words and tonality, but also physical and deep vibe communication, working in unison to spark a vibe and subliminally communicate it.
The practical (demonstrated) model
Broadly, the theoretical model is sound. Accordingly, the practical model should be years ahead of other day game models. In my judgement, it is. It’s pure quality.
Does that mean it’s perfect? Not at all and nor does Krauser even hint that it is. One of joys of Daygame Overkill is that because Krauser discusses the theoretical model in detail, you can refine the practical model according to your own theoretical understanding and experience. For my own part, I believe the practical model has some healthy scope for further development and calibration. In any quest for knowledge, especially forbidden knowledge, this is only natural. In my judgement, some things should be amped up, some things need to be toned down, and some more contextual sensitivity is needed. Action this and the L-signal will be all the more clearer and louder.
(1) Amping up the innuendo– In my experience, eye-contact, touching and innuendos are the workhorses of day game attraction: be or become a natural at this and much of the work is already done. Krauser’s practical model excels at eye contact and touching but innuendo seems underused. Indeed, there are quite a number of missed opportunities for innuendo. One missed opportunity I couldn’t forget is Infield 2, where Krauser is describing the woman as both chocolate and caramel. She is loving it. “First I’m chocolate and now I’m caramel” she purrs. Krauser replies: “It means you’re very sweet”. Sweet? Ok, but how about this: “Delicious. It means you’re delicious”. Say it slowly. With the right kind of smile. Better, right? Small change, clearer signalling.
(2) Toning down micro bursts of Mr Nice Guy – In the Infields, I believe there’s an occasional frequency of micro Mr Nice Guy bursts (spikes?) – which soon adds up, weakening the L-signal. Some examples: in Infield 1, Krauser makes an incredible physical move. I’m not going to reveal it here – the move alone is worth the price of admission. The verbal part of the move begins with “Sorry I needed to…”. However, this could be stronger: in general, “excuse me” is more masculine: “Excuse me, I needed”. Also, at the end of sets, Krauser usually says: “Let me take your number”. Better: “I’ll take your number”. Finally, at the very end of sets, Krauser shakes hands. Better: Kiss cheeks goodbye at least, lips preferably. Especially in Europe, where that’s normal. Small changes, sharper signal. Micro dominance adds up to macro dominance. It might not seem a big deal to us consciously – but subconsciously, which scans for and scrutinizes every bit of behavioural information received, it can be a big deal, that leaky noise that betrays the otherwise silent submarine.
(3) When L-responses present, escalate to new location – Krauser secured the Infield 1 woman within a few minutes. Impressive. But he continued the set for another 7 or so minutes, entirely unnecessary in my judgement, during which the conversation got a little awkward in places, the vibe weakened in places. He scored her on the date on the other day – which goes to show how strong the initial opening and stacking was. But I was surprised the set continued for so long when it was obvious Krauser could have done a same-day lay: she was merely heading to the library, nothing important, he opens and she likes it, she quickly loves it, she was giving off solid L-range responses. At this point, it’s time to say, “Let’s go for a drink”, grab her hand and go. The rest is c(l)ockwork. Done deal. Indeed, she seemed disappointed at the end of the set, as if disappointed the encounter ended with a simple number swap. Even in the Q&A after the infield the question was raised why a same-day wasn’t initiated.
Krauser’s default is to ‘get number, date another time’ – and he has good reasons. One reason is that he doesn’t want to take the risk of spending 3 hours with a woman if ultimately she’s not interested beyond being the entertained (if she’s to flake, better that it happens on whatsapp). Another reason is the opportunity cost of day gaming other girls and collecting other numbers.
I totally understand these reasons. But we should also be aware of the risks this default. In this specific case, because her L-range responses were quickly activated, the continued street conversation started sounding and looking unnatural, awkward. This risked backfiring and shutting down L-range activation. Her L-range activation was quick and strong and so survived this prolonging of the street conversation, but a weaker activation might not have survived. In other cases, weaker L-range activity might be sufficient for a same day lay but unstable, not lasting to the next day (maybe the reason for the ultimate outcome of Infield 2?) – so better to strike when the iron is temporarily hot. This doesn’t mean ‘get number, date another time’ shouldn’t be the default. But it does show the need to be aware of the L-responses and to have the confidence to escalate to a new location quickly once L-responses are activated – exactly as an Alpha would. Once L-responses are activated, the risk of a woman wasting your time when initiating an instant date will be greatly reduced.
Conclusion
Daygame Overkill consists of two parts: the theoretical model and the practical (demonstrated) model. The theoretical based is solid. The practical model is quality. Not perfect (what is?) but quality.There is something for everyone. Beginners will see what’s possible and will save a lot of wasted time on dead ends and YouTube monkeys. Intermediate will upgrade their behavioural signalling, from Nice Guy to Adventure Guy. Advanced gamers will have a basis for understanding why what has worked worked and so a basis for further improvement and refinement.
By giving such a sound theoretical model, Daygame Overkill allows us to refine the practical model according to our own understanding and experiences. It provides a basis for developing our skills – and to keep developing. And all this for standard hourly rate of a whore. You lucky gits.
I don’t half bang on about “taking a risk” and “be playfully racist” when dealing with women. The last thing a hot girl who fancies you wants is for you to reveal yourself as a push-over. Imagine pulling a smoking hot chick in a club, getting her home, and then while you are retrieving a condom she undresses and….. she has a dick. I think that’s how girls feel when the “hawt” guy turns out to be a pussy. So, take a risk.
With girls, no topic is truly taboo. If you’re sharp, you can turn anything into seduction. I once spent a day in 2010 opening girls and just talking about coffee beans until they excused themselves. Of course that was just a theoretical exercise – there’s a definite bandwidth within which optimal topics reside and coffee beans should be no more an one minute of it, maximum. Generally I avoid anything gross that could trigger a gag reflex or physical disgust. It’s far safer to stick to moral taboos. So faeces, vomit and filching are out whereas Nazis, incest, paedos and slavery are in. As an example of how nothing is really off limits allow me to present a short snippet of Nazi Genocide Game.
There are certain changes a man must make in his daygame journey as he progresses through the learning curve. In the beginning it’s pretty simple: approach. Most noobs are terrified of rejection and tangled in a mess of limiting beliefs about what women want and how to deliver it. So on 90% of boot camps and one-on-one coaching sessions the strategy is simple:
Give him some simple lines
Psych him up to dive into opening
And that’s pretty much it. There’s only so much a student can learn when simply walking up to a girl and opening your mouth is a death-defying act. We tried to teach theory on beginner’s bootcamps and it just doesn’t work. The student’s adrenalin is inhibiting any ability to absorb complex information. It’s the same in boxing – first few times a guy spars his technique disappears and he’s suddenly chin-up, flat-footed and swiping air like a clumsy bear.
This problem can be fixed over time. Repeated exposure drills the muscle memory and reduces the adrenalin. Eventually the noob can calm down in set and begin to see what’s in front of him.
Five hundred sets later he’s acclimated to daygame and can start plotting his jump up to intermediate. This is when he must move from “social” to “sexual”. He already knows how to begin a conversation with a stranger, and he can spot when a girl gives him a topic and then run with it. So he gets hook point a lot and many flaky numbers. He’s now become the chatty guy.
That’s not daygame. It’s have a nice chat with a stranger. That’s a valuable skill to have and it represents progress but as an guy at this level can tell you it is immensely frustrating. Once in a blue moon he’ll encounter a Yes Girl who just needs to be gently eased downhill towards the bed but it’s rare. Most of the time he’s getting into interminable chats that end with a phone number to nowhere. If he’s able to do this with hot girls, he’ll have a YouTube channel and offer bootcamps because it’s not until you’re intermediate yourself that you can easily see through the smoke and mirrors.
So the strategy for this guy is also simple: go sexual. As a teacher, I’ll tell him:
Take some risks
Get close to her
Throw in sexual spikes
I’ve noticed the main barriers to a man implementing my advice are emotional, not technical. What I ask from him is technically easier than all the social stuff he’s doing. Really, all I’m asking him to do is take one step forwards, and repeat some simple one-liner spikes. A monkey can do that. The fact he’s already hooking and number-closing means he’s no monkey. It’s an emotional barrier.
“Another human failing stems from the nature of happiness. In the short run, people’s happiness is often shaped more by how many “positive events” occur in their day than by the arrival of one important piece of good news. Winning $100,000 in the lottery feels almost as good as winning $1 million. We therefore look, consciously or not, for small but repeated successes when we should be shooting for “one large win.” It’s easy to see why: Big payoffs come only rarely, and perhaps late in life; in the meantime, who wants to keep on feeling like a loser?”
There are many sweet hits of validation during a ten minute street stop. The first one is when you overcome your AA and open the girl – you get the thrill of having mastered your fear. Next is when you reach hook point, she has just validated you with the “this guy is interesting enough to chat to” thrill. A bit later you collect a worthless number but in the moment there’s the thrill of the number close. It’s all very validating, and by the time you’re five hundred sets in it’s a pretty regular occurrence. It’s also painting yourself into a corner because insiduously, you’ll be moving away from effective daygame. Instinctively you know the following “play it safe” tricks will maximise the amount of validation hits you get in one session of daygaming:
Turn off sexual threat
Let the chat meander towards rapport and common ground
Hide intent
This period is immensely frustrating because you’re “taking action” and “doing daygame” but any time you get laid it’s basically luck. You’re fooled by randomness. The step to Intermediate means taking control of the process again, instituting a tighter cause-effect relationship between what you do and what results you get. And your results will get worse before they get better. Your “easy win” validation hits will actually reduce. We’re now chasing the $1 million lottery, not the £10 scratch card.
I consider myself an advanced daygamer. I’ll talk a bit more about what this entails later, but in this context it means I deliberately court micro-failure. Anyone watching me on the street sees I get lots of blowouts. I have no patience with ten minute chats-to-nowhere. I’ve walked that road and it’s frustrating. Now, I want to find a girl, put my schtick on her and get a quick Yes/No/Maybe answer so I can either try to fuck her or else next her and find the girl who will fuck me.
So I open aggressively, I immediately step in on her, I lay the eyes on, and I bust her hard in the first minute. She knows exactly what I want and that I don’t expect to wait a long time to get it. She also knows she’s free to leave at any time. These days I often see the wheels of her brain turning as she weighs the pros and cons of adventure sex.
The result is more blowouts and more lays. And if I was to post a day’s filming on YouTube the comments would all be “dude, why can’t you get more numbers?”
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!
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
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
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
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
I’ve been enjoying my writing of late. Now that I’ve had a bit of practice in reaching that final full stop at the end of a long book, I’m starting to review my writing style and apply the same concepts of continuous improvement that characterised my apprenticeships in academia, business, and game. So, I’ve been re-reading Teach Yourself Writing A Novel. It’s a good book. Maybe not worth the $169 some sellers are asking, but then again I bought it in Waterstones ten years ago for £7.99
Writing can’t be taught, only learnt. This is because it’s an art not a craft, and most of the progress is internal – inside your head. Consider this quote from the book:
“A novel comprises two aspects: the craft, that is, the mechanics of it’s construction, and the art, namely the quality of its construction. The mechanics of writing can easily be learnt: a page of diagrams can be memorised, a list digested. Quality, however, is more difficult to learn, for it can’t be reduced to a formula. Quality is the indefinable mystery of writing, the relationship between words which is as much the product of the space between the words as the words themselves. A good writer isn’t just a wordsmith, he is someone who can see quality in the world and can somehow translate that on to the page.”
Inquiring minds have probably already tumbled to my game here. It is tempting to see Game as a blueprint, a Mechano set with precise instructions to assemble. Once a guy has tried and failed with that attitude it’s tempting to now renounce Game as “robotic” or “unrealistic”. Like writing a novel, perfecting your game is about learning the rules and then finding the magic that hides between the spaces.
Living the dream
“Apprentices work under craftspeople so they can study their technique, and novel writing requires an apprenticeship just as much as furniture making. At first you find yourself copying other writers, certainly, this was so in my case: my first novel began as a pastiche of many different styles – from Jane Austen to D H Lawrence to Kurt Vonneguy. In the end it is vital you find your own voice.”
While strolling down a Marbella beach in January, Steve and I were chewing the fat of life. A thought came to me that I repeated aloud: “Steve, there’s a big difference between you and I. You’re a hunter and I’m a craftsman. This difference shows up everywhere in our game, our hobbies, and our approach to business.”
Daygame Mastery is a finely-honed artifact, the literary equivalent of a gothic cathedral (to one reviewer). The book is an expression of the same mindset that produced the London Daygame Model that it outlines – craftmanship. I admonish readers to pursue excellence and to admire any and all masters of their craft be it the engineering of a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport in real life or the lovingly optimised 3D engine that renders it on your Playstation 4. When you can appreciate the sights, sounds and tastes of excellence you can radiate with happy vibe.
“There are three qualities an aspiring writer needs in order to have success: luck, talent and hard work. Writing a novel requires stamina. When I began my first novel, I leapt into it as though I was running a hundred-yard dash. A few weeks passed and I found myself pausing to catch my breath. I had barely finished the first chapter. A novel, I realised is not a dash, but a marathon. A few months passed, and I realised my metaphor was wrong – a marathon, even at walking pace, can be completed in a day. Perhaps the writing of a novel was closer to an extended pregnancy. A few years passed and I realised that again, I had got the wrong image. Bar any mishaps, there is something inevitable about pregnancy. There is no such certainty for a novel. You could work on a novel forever without coming to its end – there is nothing inevitable about completing it.”
Herein lies the Player’s awakening as he progresses from the magic pill “let’s get this handled” stage into the ominous realisation of just how large a job he’s taken on. He’s grabbed the tiger by its tail. Having swallowed the red pill and accepted the fundamental principles of game (that your SMV can be raised, and your value delivery can be improved) you can’t unsee it. You’ve blindly walked into hell and can now do nothing but follow Winston Churchill’s exhortation to keep walking. In the Blueprint Decoded, Tyler likens it to clawing your way to the summit of a mountain and then as you stand atop, you can suddenly see a much bigger mountain over the crest – the real peak had been hidden from sight at ground level. Falling down a mountain is easily accomplished by the simple act of letting go. Climbing up is an active strenuous process. There’s nothing inevitable about it.
“Of the three qualities of luck, talent and hard work, it is the last with which you should make friends. The successful novelist is a stubborn, brave and single-minded individual. Antisocial, perhaps; misunderstood, almost certainly; confused and afraid at times, unsure of their talent, regretful of their mistakes, envious of their peers – a successful novelist may be all of these. But he is also a brave pioneer.”
The book then turns to a discussion of how to get ideas to write about.
“It’s a frustrating fact of the creative life that motivation alone isn’t enough to produce a work of art. We need a spark, a germ, a seed. A novel is not a machine – you can’t build one. A novel is more like a bonfire: you can lay as much firewood as you please, but without a spark you’ll get no heat.”
This is how it feels to grind out the sets on the streets. We know Game requires the homework – the laying of firewood – so you’ll read the instructional books, watch others in set and deconstruct them, hit the gym and so on. You’ll schedule time on the streets to talk to girls and begin internalising the method and sharpening your calibration. But at what point does it “click”? When do your results improve and the lays begin trickling through?
“C’mon, I’m overdue a lay”
These things can’t be forced.
“Don’t resist being chosen. I see it a lot with my students: an idea tugs at their sleeve, but they ignore it because they want to write something more noble, or exciting, or intellectual. And generally the results are what you would expect: strained and artificial. But when students recognise the wealth of material they already possess, they can access their greatest asset as writers: their uniqueness.”
Now we’re talking about freedom through structure and of harnessing your creativity rather than forcing yourself into a cookie-cutter daygame robot with the “you look French” and the arm-folding exactly forty-five seconds into the set. While you’re laying the firewood by slavishly implementing the model – the imitation stage comes before assimilation and then innovation – always be alive to the ideas that spring to mind. Don’t ever fear going “off-model” when your muse presents you with an interesting direction to turn the set into a new direction. Just as a novelist has the ability to edit every word later, you always have the ability to open more sets. Take a chance this set. Game to the full extent of your ability and see where it takes you. Even if you get yourself in a tangle, you can reboot any time.
“How will you know if your story is any good? There is no way of telling, short of writing it, but try asking yourself these questions. How excited am I by it? Do I care enough about the issues it deals with to stay with it for six months, a year, two years? Don’t think of the market at this stage. At the beginning, the person you should be thinking of is yourself. Does the story appeal to you? It is you, after all, who will have to write it.”
Game is a hobby for the self-absorbed. You won’t get good by trying to please your fellows, or by trying to impress random people on the internet. You can’t worry about the other pedestrians walking past as you talk to the girl, nor can you really give much care to what the girl thinks. As you begin writing the story of your game it is all about you. You are the hero in your novel.
Later, you’ll need to give more consideration to the other protagonists and bit-part characters. You will have to sensitise yourself to the girls – how they think, what they want, how they react to you. But at no point will you ever subordinate yourself to other people’s interests. At the beginning of the novel, you’re staring at a lot of blank pages. You need to fill them, and that means grabbing your quill and dipping it in the ink. At that early stage the focus is on you – what do you want to write. Write the story you’d like to read.
So, I’m quite enjoying this Teach Yourself Writing A Novel book. I’m hoping it’ll help me refine my craft because that’s one of my sources of flow state.
Hunters will tell you it’s about chasing down the prey in the most efficient manner possible. Nihilists will tell you it’s about extracting the bang on whatever pretext. Both will work and if they appeal to your personality, have at it. When you dip into my work know that you are seeing a different personality express itself – that of a craftsman with an eye for detail and a joy for the process.
That’s the beauty of Game. The blank pages are just a platform upon which to perform your own play. The direction will be an expression of your character. In the beginning you may look to War & Peace or Fight Club but when the apprenticeship is over you’ll have something uniquely your own.
Now try re-reading all the above quotations but replace “writing” with “gaming”.
It’s been cold down on the south coast of Spain these past two days. Bleak grey skies, howling wind, and rain lashing against the pavement as I sit inside a beach-front cafe watching the world go by. Yes, I’m sure your heart bleeds for me. I was sitting there sipping coffee, enjoying a rare break from my 24/7 “immersion experience” in the real-life Steve Jabba Show (ahem), when I began a reverie. Introverts like myself really need some time each day to just stare off into the distance and let thoughts turn over and organise themselves. This time my mind turned towards one question:
What do all effective seducers have in common?
I don’t mean the guy in your group of mates who does better than everybody else with girls. I mean a real live seducer who does well by objective standards. Twenty-plus girls a year of good quality, or single digits of exceptional quality. Is there a common characteristic. I think there is.
They are all exceptional at something.
None of these men are mediocre in mind, body and spirit. Each man will have a different cocktail of attributes so that a weakness in one area is compensated by a strength in others. Just to rattle off an anonymous analysis of some effective seducers I have met (and don’t necessarily like, but I recognise their abilities) and the key area each is exceptional in. Each bullet point describes a different man:
Ripped and jacked physique
Entertaining and impressive verbal dexterity
Tall, dark and handsome
Looks like a heart-throb celebrity e.g. Ben Affleck or Benecio Del Toro (an acquired taste, but it works for him)
Unflappable demeanour in all situations
Socialite with extremely high levels of social savvy and social engineering
Very rich
Genius level IQ backed by wide-reading in arts, philosophy and science
Psychopathic manipulator with no sense of shame
Adrenalin junkie with thrill-seeking reckless disregard for his own life
Adventurous traveller with a million funny stories and a gregarious nature
What you’ll notice from that list is that every single guy has something about him is is waaaaaay to the right-hand side of the bell curve in something. They are exceptional men. Some of them are exceptionally lucky, some of them exceptional cunts. But exceptional nonetheless. Respect the hustle. Here is a portrait of a man who is never an effective seducer:
Works in a mid-level cubicle job from 9 to 5, goes home to watch TV, has a few pints on Friday night, then watches the football on the weekend.
Most of you will now be racking your brains for just what it is you’re exceptional at. Does Call Of Duty multiplayer count? No, sorry. In my case, although my body, face, family background, schooling and social class were all handed to me in a box marked “mediocre” I did get lucky in one key element – an exceptional brain. If you’re one of the multitude of men who weren’t born exceptional and life chances didn’t encourage you further, take solace that there is always one thing you can become exceptional at:
discipline
If you’re willing to commit yourself to it, you can become exceptional through sheer work-rate. You can become one of those men who methodically and relentlessly studies the method, grinds it out on the streets, and constantly re-evaluates himself week-to-week until through sheer determination he can rewire himself into an effective seducer. There’s a few people on the London scene who did exactly that and are now reaping the benefits of sexual abundance. So, if you are not exceptional now it’s a good time to design your “become exceptional plan.” Make 2015 your year. I’ll leave you with two Sherlock Holmes quotes that I read as a teenager and have stayed with me since:
My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplaces of existence. Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius.
I’ve been reading up on football lately. By football, I mean the game where your foot touches the ball, not that weird faggot-rugby-for-blacks that the yanks play. For a long time I’d watched football shows such as Match Of The Day and Sky Sports before a sudden thought hit me – “I’ve been watching this sport for thirty years and I barely understand what I’m seeing.” This was crystallised when watching a Newcastle match with my dad and enduring ninety minutes of him lying on the sofa, arms crossed, spouting unbelievably ignorant gobshite at the television. He’s been watching football nearly sixty years and appears to have absorbed nothing. So, I’d better not turn out like that.
I realised that the live commentators tell you almost nothing – they talk like attention-seeking toddlers, just repeating verbally what is obvious to the eyes: “Ronaldo loses ball to Messi, Messi runs forwards, and is tackled.” Well, thank you Captain Obvious.
In-field analysis, yesterday
So I cast around and got a shortlist of highly-regarded football theory books. I read Jonathan Wilson’s excellent Inverting The Pyramid. After two weeks studying that I had a general awareness of why teams choose their tactical formations and play in certain ways. Now I’m reading Anderson & Sally’s fascinating The Numbers Game which is like Moneyball but for a sport people actually care about outside of the US and Japan. I’m seeing football in a new way. For example, did you know:
The total number of goals a team scores does not increase with the number of corners it wins. The average Premier League team in the 2010/11 season scores a goal from a corner once every ten games. That’s why Guardiola’s teams don’t bother with them and play it short to keep possession.
The winner of any given football match is only 50% determined by the quality of the team. The rest is luck. Comparing the success rates of pre-game favourites per the bookies, basketball and NFL have 68% of favourites win. In proper football it’s only 52%.
Goals per match are almost identical (2.6) in all four major leagues (Premier, Bundesliga, La Liga and Serie A) over the past ten years with an astonishing consistency. This is despite hugely different national ethos and formations.
Darren Bent was the most valuable player in the Premier League in 2009/10 and 2010/11 when players are ranked according to how many points their goals won (i.e. scoring the equalising goal, or the goal that takes the lead in an eventual win). Yes, Darren fucking Bent.
“Really?”
Anyway, I digress. The reason I bring up football is that there is a really interesting chapter on Wigan Athletic and their then-manager Roberto Martinez. The book begins with some simple stats confirming that Wigan has the lowest revenue of any top-flight club – in a sport where the club wage bill correlates 92% to eventual league position – yet upon promotion in 2004/05 managed to remain in the Premier League for eight consecutive seasons and even won the FA Cup in 2013. Per the stats in The Numbers Game then Wigan stood a 95% chance of being relegated in the first five years. Yet they prospered. Why?
The book’s thesis is that Martinez had his team play “guerilla football” to maximise their strengths as a David playing Goliaths. To quote:
“Martinez’s Wigan are not your typical club. In 2010/11, they created goals in extremely unusual ways. They relied much less on traditional open-play goals than most, and did not bother with anything that resembled a patient build-up. In half their games they failed to score from open play at all. When they did, they tended to come from what are known among analysts as “fast breaks” – lightning quick counter-attacks. And the rest of the goals came from free kicks. Their output in both these categories was exceptional. They scored twice as many goals on the break as the average side, and they scored almost four times as many goals from free kicks.”
“Not only did they score from fast breaks and free kicks, but when we calculated the average distances from which Premier League clubs attempted shots that season, Wigan were the overall league leaders. This looked deliberate: their goals came from a longer distance than any of their peers. Martinez was thinking outside the box in the most literal fashion. Indeed, his team had the lowest number of goals scored from inside the penalty area of any side in the league – just twenty-eight, compared to Manchester United’s sixty-nine. He did not place any emphasis on corners – Wigan scored just one goal from a corner in the entire 2010/11 season – because it meant allowing his troops out of hiding and into open sight, leaving them vulnerable. He had his team lie in wait for their opponents and then punish them on the counter-attack. He employed sharpshooters to let fly from distance and snipers to hit free kicks.”
Fascinating.
+1, story to follow
When reading this my mind spun a little. Hmmmmm….. here is a manager who knows his team is outgunned on the normal criteria of the game. He doesn’t have the size or revenue to buy success through normal channels. He knows most of the time he’ll come up short, but he doesn’t need to win every game, he just needs win enough to get a steady supply of points and stay at the top table. Every now and then, such as 2013, he gets some luck and outperforms the biggest clubs in a major competition. But to do this he needs to think outside the box, work hard, and work very intelligently at his own bespoke system. You might spend ninety minutes absorbing pressure from better teams but when that one counter-attack presents itself you can snatch victory. You can drill a series of well-rehearsed set-pieces on the training ground so that when you get that free kick on the edge of the penalty box your whole team is moving with expert synchronisation, every piece in place to outmaneuver the opposition.
Yes, that sounds very familiar.
Let’s change some of the vocabulary. Imagine someone had realised he was out of his depth in the SMP according to normal criteria. He wasn’t young, tall, muscular or good-looking and yet he wanted to bag the same trophies everyone else is competing for. If he went the same tried-and-tested route as everyone else – nightgame, Tinder, online – he’d barely score a point. So this someone thought outside the box and found a system to get by. It was unorthodox. It involved grinding it out and being alive to when those occasional Maybes and Yeses turned up. And once that chance presented itself, he was ruthless in converting it to a win.
Yeah, imagine getting by for five years or so like that. Sometimes winning the cup final.
Krauser PUA 