I recently finished reading William S. Lind‘s 4th Generation Warfare Handbook. “That has little to do with daygame. Why aren’t you out doing sets?” you may ask, “RSD just put another rambling video with an hour of goobledegook and rehashed ideas to draw in the spivs and no-hopers, surely that’s a better use of your time.”

.
Well, not for me. I may happen to focus my blog on daygame but it’s only a small part of my life. My period of PUA Cognitive Capture has long since passed. [1] Evidently there is still some lingering cognitive capture because throughout Lind’s book I kept thinking this kinda relates to daygame. So, let the mindwank begin.

Artist impression of me thinking

The concept of fourth generation war naturally presupposes the existence of a prior three generations [2] and Lind describes those as follows [roughly paraphrased]:

• First Gen – This began from the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, in which the modern nation states of Europe were created, until the American Civil War in 1861. Think of it like the orderly lines and columns of the Napoleonic Era in which armies meet on a pre-defined battlefield aiming to win a decisive battle.
• Second Gen – This began with the French in World War 1 after trenches, barbed wire, artillery and fast firing guns made open orderly charges suicidal. Think now of the trench warfare of WW1 in which the artillery pounds a position for a week and then the infantry runs in to occupy the battered enemy lines. The goal is to kill enemy soldiers, destroy his equipment, and advance the line.
• Third Gen – This developed concurrently but developed by the Germans and is best embodied in the Blitzkrieg. Defensively, it sought not to hold a line but to instead draw enemies in and cut them off. Offensively it sought to bypass (rather than destroy) enemy strongholds then roll them up from the rear. This is “maneuver warfare”.
• Fourth Gen – This style existed before the Peace of Westphalia and has come back again now that the ordered nations are breaking down. Wars are no longer fought as one state army against another – they are fought by clans, gangs, tribes, and ideological fanatics. There is often no clear distinction between “military” and “civilian” participants. On the ground it resembles the hit and run of guerrilla warfare.

Lind suggests that the first two generations of war grew out of the orderliness of nation states. Having acquired a monopoly on war, states imposed their bureaucratic nature onto war itself. Thus a culture of orderliness was encouraged on the training ground (drills, salutes etc) and on the battlefield (field manuals, rigid chain of command, reliance on orders). The transition from first to second generation was driven by the increased mechanisation of war but the battlefield remained orderly and defined. The third generation sought to take advantage of disorder [3] by relying upon speed and tempo rather than firepower. This required a culture of looking outward at the scenario rather than looking inwards at orderly procedure. When 3rd gen met 2nd gen in the early days of WWII, the former won until it’s tactical and operational advantages were overwhelmed by strategic blunders [4].

So what on earth has this to do with daygame, you ask? Let’s ruminate…….

“She was so rude!”
“Don’t worry mate, harsh blowouts are part of the game”

The key drivers determining war’s passage through the four generations has been linked to the orderliness and coherence of nation states. The Westphalian states were mostly ethnically homogenous, increasingly capitalist, high testosterone, and thus notable for their high social trust and strong sense of shared identity within the nation and also a competitive rivalry with the out-groups of other nations. A man’s primary identification was with his nation and thus he was willing to fight for his country. For the most part he’d be fighting other men from similar countries (i.e. Britain fighting France is closer to fratricide than Britain fighting Sri Lanka) and thus the rules of war took on a relatively honourable tone with many shared values.

.
Then socialism, multiculturalism and feminism happened, in the West, and the colonial lid was lifted from the simmering conflicts in the second and third worlds. These undermined the pillars of order from which orderly war sprang. Nation states lost legitimacy from the ground up from trends such as diversity importing people who identified primarily with a different country and from the top down such as the surveillance state flourishing. Cultural Marxism destroyed the social fabric and now patriotism is a dirty word for many. Oh, and all the men became faggots.

Shoreditch Special Forces

The social collapse that led to Game as an adaptation to the sexual market place is the same as what led 4th Generation war as an adaptation to conflict. The improved technology that changed military strategy leaked into the civilian world to change sexual strategy [5]. Let’s do a rough mapping of the generations of war to dating.

.
First Generation Dating – This is the strategy of your grandfather’s era. A highly ordered society with restrained K-selected social mores included a very specific narrow area in which men and women would be introduced. These includes church groups, Saturday night dance halls, and a Mad Men-esque work environment in which women take bullshit secretarial jobs as office flowers as a way to meet the office men who have the real jobs. Just as 1st Gen war relies upon orderly line and column formations on a defined battlefied, 1st Gen dating relies upon orderly etiquette on a defined space.

.
Second Generation Dating – This is your dad’s strategy. The four sirens of the sexual apocalypse have hit (Contraception, No Fault Divorce, Workplace Equality, Welfare) like a breech-loading rifle fired from a trench but they apply to a generation raised the old way and thus haven’t yet wrought destruction upon the social order. There’s also no diversity, so social trust remains high. Think of it like a loosening of the ‘social corset’. Dating, as with much of social life, loses much of the defined etiquette which delineates acceptable behaviour but men and women haven’t changed much in what they want. Look at a 1960s or 1970s sitcom for a view how this dating works – beta provision still works and rather than put firepower on target as in 2nd Gen war, you are putting value on target through getting a good job, some social status, and following loosened rules of courtship.

.
Third Generation Dating – This is the old school player’s strategy that ran concurrently with your dad’s 2nd gen version. Just as the squareheads [6] relied on speed and tempo to take advantage of battlefield disorder in a world where the cheese eating surrender monkeys [7] clung to more effectively unloading firepower onto target, the old school players relied on setting up an “in” and then milking it opportunistically. Think of your medallion-wearing disco dancers, your rock star, your hippy cult leader, or your racing driver. While the previous generation acts like there is an ordered hierarchy, a static world, and rewards accrue to those who pile up value (e.g. increased promotion prospects at work), the players are slipping past that Maginot Line with a fluid strategy.

“Hey baby….”

So far, so mindwanky. What happens in the fourth generation?

.
Just as modern war is now notable in its lack of structure, lack of uniforms, and lack of trust, the fourth generation of dating is equally guerrilla and it’s players frequently operate on the same shoot and scoot tactics. Urban anonymity combined with modern technology such as smart phones, Whatsapp and Tinder allow the sexual war to be conducted on smaller and smaller levels. No longer do massed armies of males and females meet in a disco hall to mark each other’s dance cards – that level of logistical planning is unnecessary. Instead a girl need only log onto Tinder, alone in the comfort of her own room, to engage the enemy. A player need only walk into a shopping mall to set off his daygame IED on a passing column of girls.

.
In modern dating the battlefield is anywhere and no one is wearing a uniform. The fighters hit and run, often unseen by the passing population.

.
[1] – Don’t take that to mean I’m “beyond daygame”. It’s still a hobby of mine.
[2] – It doesn’t mean you, your kid, your dad and your granddad are all at war simultaneously, thus having all four generations of your family at war. Maybe in Shitholeistan countries that is true.
[3] – I’m sure someone in the comments is going to mention Anti-Fragility.
[4] – Such as Hitler fighting a two-front war, and making a foolish alliance with Japan that drew USA into the war.
[5] – I’m looking at you, cell phones, Tinder, and budget airlines.
[6]- Sorry, Germans
[7] – Oops, slip of the pen

If you thought that was ill-thought out rambling that probably misunderstood the point of its original inspiration you should see my books. They were written with the same slapdash approach in between sessions of Dark Souls.

“Krausersatthva, how do I find vibe?” asks the intermediate grasshopper daygamer. “I have looked hard for it but haven’t found it.”
“Where have you looked?” I ask.
“I read some books on inner game. They tell me many things about my mind, about the conversations in my head and they try to get me to correct my self talk.”
“When you engage in self talk, who is it that is talking? And to whom do they speak?”
“Well…….” the intermediate daygamer thinks, screwing up his eyes and putting a finger to his lip. “It’s my observing ego talking to my base self.”
“So what is it that watches your observing ego talking to your base self? Who is observing the conversation of the observing ego?”

Got you there, you little shit

“I’m not sure that’s the point” he replies. “We could call it a theoretical structure to represent what’s going on in my mind. It need not be literally true. The point is that by understanding the dialogue I can gain some kind of control over it, and steer it in a better direction.”
“And how do you do that?” I ask.
“I learn better self talk. The inner game books give me new things to tell myself.”
“I see” I nod sagely. “So your answer to the problem of being in your head – that is to say of a noisy chaotic self talk that creates anxiety and thus prevents you finding vibe – is to attempt to attain greater control over self talk, and to shackle it under even more conscious control?”
“Yes. That’s mental mastery”
“Is it?” I ask, wishing I had a long beard to stroke thoughfully. “Is that not like trying to calm disturbed waters by swiping your palm across them?”

I visualise myself something like this

The intermediate daygamer looks disturbed. “No, no. It’s not like that at all. It’s a more positive mindset.”
I sip my green tea. A gong sounds somewhere up in the hill, probably at a temple. I decide it is time to nudge my conversation partner in a different direction.
“The problem with finding your vibe is that you can’t find it, because it isn’t there. The very act of trying to analyse, control, and shackle your internal thoughts is precisely what creates the disturbance, and with it the anxiety.”
I’m enjoying this. I continue.
“The way to find your vibe is to look so hard for it that you eventually realise it isn’t there and then give up looking. It’s precisely by turning over every little corner of your brain and rattling off every silly mindset mantra that you realise your vibe isn’t to be found inside your head. It’s only when you’ve looked everywhere there and not found it that you can be confident it isn’t there at all.”
“I’ve done as much as I can. I’ve followed all the advice out there. My vibe still sucks. Sometimes it comes, but usually it doesn’t” says the intermediate daygamer. He looks like he’s about to cry.
“And that means you can stop suffering” I say. “You’ve done the work and you’ve suffered enough. Your penance is over and you can stop punishing yourself for not having good vibe. You are ready to let go and accept the vibe was there the whole time – but it’s out here.” I wave expansively at the world around us. “It’s in the air, it’s in the feel of the sun on your face, and in your connection to the street. It’s in the very absence of all these futile attempts to develop your mindset.”
“You know what” he says. “I feel like the pressure is off.”
“Great. That’s the best time to hit the street. That’ll be £50 please.”

I recently found out that at its highest levels, mathematics is an experimental science. How very very odd! Now, while I was always top of my class in maths at school, I haven’t done any since I was sixteen and thus I’m in no position of authority to speak. I’m just telling you what I heard. From a man in the pub. Nonetheless, it got me thinking. I’d assumed mathematics is the most analytic and most precise of all knowledge systems. I’d thought it was a closed system, tautologically true. I’d already heard Stephen Hawking waffle on about physics as being quite open-ended and exploratory which had come as a surprise at the time [1] [2] [3]. So I start thinking.

Something like this

Much of our male attempt to poke our dicks into pretty females comes down to imposing order and control onto a messy world. Within the daygame community that can express itself in a daygame model, mapping the stages of an ideal type interaction. A model allows someone with little experience to form an expectation and to narrow his seemingly infinite potential choices of action down to a small set that tend to lead in the right direction. A rough model is like a rough map, pencil on the back of a napkin. A detailed model can be more like a periodic table.

.
Unfortunately, the map is not the territory. It always involves high levels of abstraction and the removal of the specifics of time and place. There will never be a daygame model that perfectly describes and patterns the reality of daygame. We just have to do our best. Anyone watching a rank beginner will soon see that a half-decent model is far more effective than nothing at all.

.
So far, so meh. Let’s fly on our intellectual wings, up and away into a higher tier of mindwank. Let’s ask ourselves this question: Do we ever really know what’s happening in a daygame set?

• Do you ever really know if a girl fancies you?
• Do you ever really know what your odds of fucking her are?
• Assuming you didn’t fuck her, can you ever figure out why she didn’t put out?

Lets say a girl appears to IOI you so you open. Sometimes you’ll get the “confirmation” of the IOI because she immediately laughs and hooks, as if your opener was actually the second sentence in the set (her IOI was the inaudible first). But other times she acts like she hadn’t just IOId you. So, was it really an IOI?

Well, was it????

How could you possibly know one way or the other? Even if you explicitly ask her and she denies it, it doesn’t mean it ain’t so.

.
Lets say you’re out gutter gaming and a girl seems to hook well, her eyes wide. You squeeze her hand and she squeezes back. You suggest a drink and she follows you to a bar, but at the last moment refuses to enter.
“I have a boyfriend” she says. “I shouldn’t. Something might happen.”
“Yes, I may kiss you” you reply, doubling down on the r-selection.
“Yes, you may. I can’t.” Then she leaves.

.
How close were you to fucking her? Give it a percentage and then consider a different scenario…..

“I think this one might be 50/50”

You’re back out gutter gaming and meet a different girl. It’s a fairly uninvolved conversation with low sexual energy but she’s smiling, chatting and agrees to a drink. You sit with a beer each as she tells you she’s on a weekend trip from St Petersburg, that she works as a graphic designer, and isn’t it exciting to be here after you only just met. Midway through the first drink you are playing with her hair and you even get a light makeout. You finish two drinks and suggest a walk, which of course finishes at your apartment door. She comes upstairs, telling you she can only stay half an hour. Music on, some making out. She resists when you squeeze her tits but you eventually get her shirt off and a mouthful, but she’s firm about not unzipping her jeans. Then around the half hour mark she puts the shirt back on, swaps Facebooks and disappears unfucked.

.
Now give this set a percentage probability. How close did you come? Which is the nearer near miss?

.
On raw “objective data” the second one is MUCH closer. You kissed her, got her home, and rolled around on the bed. But is that actually closer? What if she’d made a decision early on of “I’ll fool around with this guy a bit but I’m never taking my jeans off”? In that case you were never going to fuck her, and everything that came after her decision was kabuki theatre. In contrast, that first girl may have been thinking “If I kiss him, I’ll fuck him. I’d better not kiss him”. By this formulation, it is the girl’s internal mental state which really determines how close you are to fucking her and a girl who is wavering 50/50 at this “if I kiss, I fuck” stage is arguably a nearer miss than a girl on your bed determined not to fuck. [4]

.
But there is yet another tier of mindwank above even that.

.
A Russian girl once told me “Nick, you are too logical with daygame. Often even we girls don’t know what we will do or why we do it. Often we do it and then don’t even understand afterwards why we did.” So consider in both these situations the girl’s internal mental state wasn’t necessarily etched in stone. The first girl may have flipped between parallel yes/no states multiple times during the set like Schrodingers’s Cat. The girl with a firm resolution to fool around but not fuck may have suddenly changed her mind to either fuck, or perhaps not even begin fooling around.

.
Given this, it helps to relax our hold on the dream of making daygame a precise science and to instead embrace the chaos of the world. Whenever humans are involved you can rarely say “this definitely happened” or “this is why.” The best you can do is assign probabilities, based on adding your experience to that accumulated by the community, to know what tends to happen when certain outward behaviours seem to manifest, based upon your reasonably decent calibration.

.
But you’ll never actually know. And even if you fuck the girl, you can’t be sure if it because of or in spite of your game [5]

If you thought this was uncertain, you should consider resolving it by making certain to buy my book, which is certainly great.

[1] Although perhaps this is nonsense as equally uninformed as his recent blabbing on about how we need to one-world globalist government to constrain “aggression”.
[2] And he claims women are “a complete mystery
[3] And he’s a spazz
[4] Most intermediate daygamers who’ve toyed with heavy r-selection will have experienced “sex on the street” sets where you talk to a girl for five minutes and she leaves without even giving a number, but you were eye-fucking each other so hard you know she was fantasising about your dick. What does that count as?
[5] Though you will definitely know you don’t really care because you fucked her anyway and that’s what really counts.

Jimmy Jambone recently put a post on his blog [1] about why women hate the very idea of Game. It’s an interesting post in his own rambling secretly-DHVing way and focuses mostly on the idea of control. Women don’t like the idea that men can reclaim some control over their dating lives by using Game.

As Heartiste once wrote, “the goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality”. It’s much the same as Rollo [2] writing that for the feminine imperative to succeed, the masculine imperative must be frustrated. One wag – I forget who – suggested the Western world is what happens when the feminine imperative runs amok and the Arab world is the converse, of the male imperative running amok.

Not for the first time, I think Jimmy is wrong [3]

Jimmy’s bird gets angry

The deep-seated visceral fear women have of Game is that it makes them unsure of their ability to discern value. And make no mistake their hatred of Game is borne of fear. Allow me to explain.

In biology, we learn that animals throw out signals of their mate value. Because all is fair in love and war, animals have evolved to exaggerate their mate value by throwing out fake signals. An arms race developed where animals compete to develop sneakier fake signals while learning to see through the fake signals of others. It’s a war of deception.

Women have been faking signals for centuries, such as rouge on their cheeks, corsets, push up bras and high heels. In modern times they’ve gotten fake tits. What all these signals have in common is they are not part of the DNA package being passed on through mating. They are not part of the core SMV proposition [4]. We all know that sinking feeling of meeting a pretty girl in a nightclub, taking her home, and then seeing what she really looks like in the morning [5]. The girl successfully faked signals of her SMV to get her victory.

Women know full well men will also fake signals, whether it’s puffing out their chest and sucking in their stomachs, or fronting about a lifestyle they don’t really lead. For most of the time in the male-female arms race there is detente. It’s the same old tricks and each side knows the other’s capability. Game changes it all. It’s a Trump-esque upending of the established order.

Higher value

Game, at it’s heart, is about emulating the signalling of high SMV men. Sure, do it enough and you’ll eventually become higher value. Nonetheless, for as long as you’re doing game, you are throwing off fake signals [6]. Girls are hard-wired to sniff out the difference between real and fake signalling (PUAs call that “congruence”) and to probe for key information in reaching such a determination (PUAs call that “shit testing”).

The fact it’s hard-wired is the problem. It means they are great at doing it against untrained men. However, it’s like one side of the arms race standing still while the other speeds off with higher technology. Game is that technology.

Girls fear Game because it shakes their confidence in their ability to weed out low value men. They fear getting knocked up by fakers.

[1] Yes, he actually has a blog. It surprised me too.
[2] Now that I’m booted off Twitter I couldn’t thank you personally for that Deep Conversion post a month ago referencing me. Thanks!
[3] It’s more accurate to say he doesn’t give sufficient weight to another aspect of the case, but that way of writing is less likely to trigger him.
[4] Not that I dislike fake tits or heels, mind.
[5] I’ve never been to bed with an ugly woman, but I’ve woken up with quite a few
[6] Feel free to discuss the issue of to what degree the signals themselves constitute value to the woman, such as how there isn’t much difference between “signalling” charisma and “real” charisma itself

“Nick doesn’t seem to update his blog anymore. He only did three podcasts this year. I think he’s done with the Game” says a regular reader.

It certainly looks that way but let me reassure you all I’m most definitely not done with the Game. I have, however, had amended priorities in 2016 over and above regular blogging or doing in-field recordings.

I have a tendency to bite off more than I can chew. Fortunately, I also have the tenacity to push forwards and the completionist’s obsession with finishing everything he starts. Two years ago I started writing my daygame memoir Balls Deep. It quickly became obvious that I couldn’t tell the stories I wanted in the way I wanted to tell them and still keep it down to one volume.

By the time Balls Deep was finished in late 2014 it had only covered the first quarter of my Player’s Journey. “I’d best do this across four volumes” I mused. So I added three more volumes to my To Do list and got cracking writing all three simultaneously, as if I was filming Lord Of The Rings.

What a silly idea!

Two years later and I’m still at it. Back in November 2015 when my winter hibernation began I resolved that I must get these bloody memoirs out! I spent the whole winter writing  volume four, Adventure Sex, which was released this summer (to good reviews too, check here and here). While writing these books I came to a realisation that game was no longer my obsession – writing had replaced it. Here was a highly technical, wonderfully expressive art form in which you can keep improving for literally decades! I’d sit down at the local Costa Coffee with a grande americano and just disappear into the book. Love it!

So let me update you on the status of the quadrilogy.

Volume One: Balls Deep is on sale in both paperback and PDF here
Volume Two: A Deplorable Cad has just been finished. It’s now with the layout designer.
Volume Three: Younger Hotter Tighter is currently a 75k-word draft. It needs a lot of rewriting.
Volume Four: Adventure Sex is on sale in paperback here.

Mock cover. Will change a lot.

So the big news is A Deplorable Cad. I’ve literally just finished the seventh and final re-write this morning, polishing its mammoth 161k words to a fine sparkle. I’ve already received most of the commissioned artwork and now I need to go through instructing my layout designer and then reviewing test prints. My best guess is it’ll be on sale in January, just in time to motivate you fellow daygamers to follow through on your New Year Resolutions to do more sets.

A Deplorable Cad is my best writing. I’ve lavished extreme care on it because writing is my big obsession now. It picks up right where Balls Deep ends. And that is why I haven’t been blogging so regularly in 2016, especially lately. All my creative energies have been poured into this albatross. I’ve written 320,000 words of my memoir this year. Unbelievable, really.

If you like hearing me witter on, come find me on Gab – the only social media company that has yet to lock my account. Find me at https://gab.ai/NickKrauser

Let’s start by saying I don’t mind if you’re a fag and voted for TheCunt. I don’t mind because you lost. You are still welcome at Chateau Krauser, which stands firm despite a recent shellacking from the snakes of Twitter. Whatever your political creed, all are welcome in the daygame journey [1]. I don’t engage in political dialogue on my blog anymore [2] but let’s consider the question on every right-thinking Euro Jaunter’s mind.

What does the Trumpslide mean for daygame?

Earned me £3k at the bookies

1. No nuclear war with Russia
Russia is hated by the globalists because Putin has deftly maneuvered it into a position of relative independence. Therefore Hillary was itching for war, throwing all kinds of baseless accusations about Russian hacking and threatening retaliation. She also insisted on a No Fly Zone over Syria that would require shooting down Russian aircraft with American weapons and thus likely trigger WWIII. In contrast, Trump has expressed a desire to get along with Putin and support them in Syria against ISIS

VERDICT – The fine daygame city of Moscow will not be vaporised in nuclear war, Putin will not withdraw visas, and the world’s greatest pool of hot women continue to stride arrogantly down the street in high heels and short skirts.

2. Ukraine does not join NATO
The God Emperor Trump has expressed numerous doubts about the viability of NATO and has generally presented a fairly isolationist / non-interventionist foreign policy. In contrast, Hillary is fully behind the EU-Globalist eastern expansion into Russia and it was her boss George Soros who funded the coup in Kiev. The EU has expanded eastward and held more territory than either Napoleon or Hitler in their attacks upon Russia. Bringing Ukraine into NATO (and eventually EU) would quickly lead to US military bases on the Russian border, the currently-forming EU Army in bases there and…… well, this won’t happen because Russia cannot under any circumstance allow Ukraine to join NATO. Putin would likely quickly invade Ukraine again and many military strategists predict Russia could take Kiev in a fortnight.

VERDICT – The fine daygame city of Kiev will not be occupied by Russian troops nor the battleground in a war with NATO. Another of the world’s greatest pools of hot women will continue to stride arrogantly down the streets in even higher heels and shorter skirts [3]

3. Reversed Muslim Migration to Europe
With Hillary in the Oval Office the US would continue to meddle in European affairs on the side of the EU-Globalist nexus. Our Western flank would be continually under threat by a hostile power. Hillary has frequently declared she wishes to emulate arch-Cunt traitor Angela Merkel and would thus give her support in importing millions more in-bred subhuman Muslim invaders [4] While hordes of Muslim rapists is likely a boon for Deepak Wayne’s business it’s rather a problem for us fully-human daygamers. The streets would very quickly devolve into marauding gangs of rapist immigrants in all the Old Town squares and train stations [5] that are the rightful property of marauding gangs of plowing daygamers. A Trump victory means our Western flank is secured and with Putin having already secured the Eastern flank, the globalists are encircled and less likely to repel the various nationalist uprisings in Europe.

VERDICT – The fine daygame cities of Central Europe will have considerably improved vibe and girls more open to street stops.

4. No support for future Balkan wars
The first Clinton White House saw Bill bomb Christian Serbia in order to protect the Muslim terrorists of the Kosovo Liberation Army. Since then Serbia has been on the EU’s diplomatic shit list and they are now forcing that beautiful country to heel with crazy demands on homo/tranny participation in government and Gay Pride parades. Trump has no history of violence against Serbia and seems rather pro-Christian.

VERDICT – No likely flashpoints with Serbia and thus the fine daygame city of Belgrade will remain a popular destination for daygamers who want to piss me off by burning it down.

The election was the right kind of near miss

I am not sufficiently au-fair with Philippines and SEA politics so I can’t tell whether fellow shitlord Duterte will respect Trump [6] and re-kindle the hundred-year-old US-Philippines alliance or if Obama losing it to China is permanent. If it’s the former, fat losers who can’t get laid in Europe with white girls will still have an escape vector from which to write pathetic e-books on getting laid abroad.

[1] Yes, even the total faggots on the Left.
[2] Though with Twitter gone, I am looking for a new platform for the next 8 years of Trump-inspired triumphalism.
[3] Likely pestered by less dirty Turkish sex tourists than currently
[4] How many millions before Germans lynch her is something I’m not qualified to estimate.
[5] I haven’t asked girls if this feels any different to an RSD daygame bootcamp
[6] As opposed to quite literally telling fag-traitor Obama to “fuck off” earlier this year

If you thought this post shoved political opinions in your face without you asking, you should see my Twitter. Actually, you can’t because the spaghetti-armed low-T fags banned me for Nuclear-grade Shitlordism. Given that I absolutely had to celebrate the Trump victory, it’s basically them forcing me to do so on the blog and therefore they are to blame. You fag.

There’s an idea that’s been floating around PUA circles a long time, the crux of which is that chasing women is low value. The idea takes many forms. Anti-Game types will usually give it a moral flavour, to say that sleeping around is ‘degenerate’. Married men may tell you it’s more ‘alpha’ to marry a mediocre woman and have sex with her as she ages. You’ll hear it within the game community too – specifically two variations:

1. Just use Tinder. It’s much easier and it gives me more time to focus on my online business, gym, and folding the pocket squares.
2. Get a social circle on lockdown then the women come to you.

In both cases, the man making the statement will look to devalue the very idea of proactively chasing women because, obviously, he’s not chasing them himself. These are self-serving reality weaves. Men with significant cold approach experience don’t need me to explain the obvious, but I shall for newer readers. The “don’t chase” lifestyle has these big problems:

1. Grotty girls. Nature has set up the sexual market place very specifically to be that women put themselves on display, men step up and make a pitch, then the women choose whether to be swept along. A key part is making the pitch. The act of making your pitch shows the girl so much about your character, confidence, and offers a window into your personality. If you remove this step then you are trying to reverse SMP rules by expecting the girl to make the pitch. There is only one consistent way to get girls to approach you – drop your quality standards. When someone (male or female) feels they have a shot at someone two or more points higher in SMV then they lose all shame [1]. Most “no approach” systems of Game boil down to putting yourself in the vicinity of girls two points below you then acting like James Bond while they hit on you.

Tinder is a weaponised form of this. Every man swipes the girls, then the girls filter for the highest SMV guys on there, knowing casual sex is the price they pay for any kind of sexual access to a guy so far above them in SMV. Social circle game is a less extreme version.

2. Slutty girls. Expecting girls to come to you means the girl must have the drive and comfort with seeking out casual sex. It goes against a girl’s hard-wiring to give herself away so cheaply and thus such an approach filters heavily for r-selected girls. Some social scenes are by nature extremely r-selected and thus ‘make-em-come’ will work fairly well there. For example, the USA is the most r-selected country in the Northern hemisphere, New York its most r-selected city, and Brooklyn its most r-selected area. If you then focus on rock or hipster scenes you are in the most r-selected of this filter. This is a massive filter. There are lots of girls in this scene who are going out looking for casual sex and a smart player can figure out how to be the guy they choose. Great. Just know that’s what you’re getting and don’t expect it to work as well in an environment with different filters [2] Also note, r-select girls are rarely as attractive as k-selects. Banging sluts is great fun at first but you soon lose all respect for the women you sleep with and that ruins your inner game. It also puts you in your head over whether you can actually get one of the normal hot girls who doesn’t sleep around.

There is one way the ‘make-them-come’ method can get you decent quality girls who aren’t sluts. It’s the Holy Grail of that type of game, so let’s look at that.

First you must build up tremendous social value and occupy a powerful position within a chosen environment. For example you may start as a bartender in a hip bar then start a popular band, so you have a rep in your area. Perhaps you buy a strip club and hold hire-fire power over dancers. Perhaps you set up weekly house parties and become the ‘connected’ guy who can subtly value-tap every male in the room because you hold the invites. Girls will notice you are the top dog and gravitate towards you. Some of them will be hot [3]

That’s great. It’s getting you laid with hot girls. So the upside to this strategy is obvious. But rather than pretend it’s a panacea, let’s look in detail.

1. Fundamentally, this method is a status play and thus you filter for girls who highly value status. You are wrapping yourself in the clothing of external status and pulling based on that, rather than your character. Of course in that environment you can still show charisma (but you’d have to develop it, and thus include other activities in your strategy). This means you are actively selecting for girls who are impressed with social status. Despite what Red Pillers would have you believe, such girls are a subset of the female population. Most girls do not just seek casual sex with the top dog [4]

The extreme end of girls who value status

However, some of the girls who do are hot so it’s a valid strategy. How do you recognise such girls? brand name fashion, active Instagram accounts, time-consuming make-up and grooming regime. Personally I can’t stand such vacuous girls (nor they me) but plenty of them are hot so if that’s your thing, go for it.

2. This is not a low-effort strategy. You are literally changing your entire life-pattern to create a net to catch girls. That’s no different to what daygamers do, so don’t pretend it’s low value when we do it but high value when you do.

3. It’s not portable. It’s an effective strategy for a man who lives in one city and intends to stay there. It falls apart when he travels. So pick the one which fits your future plans.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying this higher-level version of ‘build-it-and-they-come’ is bad. Done well it’s highly effective. Just don’t fall for the self-serving spiel of its proponents that chasing girls is pussy begging in comparison. Chasing girls across different countries using a charisma-based game will suit men with certain personality types, certain goals, and a certain preferred type of woman. Make-them-come strategies will suit men with a different set of variables and priorities.

Have a look at this video of lions hunting and killing buffalo. Afterwards, pop over to the National Park and explain to them that they are “buffalo begging” and ought to just sit in the zoo and let the zoo-keeper bring them food.

[1] – Just think of your office workmates at the company Christmas party when they are suddenly standing next to the “hot girl” from Marketing. They’ll embarrass themselves. Conversely, if a man has very high SMV then two points below is still pretty. But why isn’t he chasing girls two points above him?
[2] – I suspect many game theory arguments come from applying a model that works well in one highly-filtered environment with a model for a completely different environment

[3] – This is subtly different to being simply a bit shiny in a location full of sluts. Now we mean normal girls who don’t sleep around who are on the look-out for a man who exemplifies the things they value. That’s not the same as a slut coming out to get fucked and choosing the best option that night.

[4] – The PUAsphere gets this badly wrong because most of them are engaged in world-creation. They go to places full of status-chasing girls, in a country known for it, and then try to display status. What a surprise that the only women they succeed with happen to be the status-chasers. They falsely generalise from this to think all girls chase status, because the ones who don’t are outside of the filter.

If you thought this post outlined a case for why chasing skirt is a worthwhile activity, you might like my book. It’s about how I chase skirt.

There are a few stages most daygamers go through as the years pass and the set-count racks up. Over time your relationship to daygame changes. Let’s see if we can make some sense of it.

In the beginning it is exhilarating and scary in equal measure. The idea of walking up to any girl you choose and hitting on her is like a whole new world opening up. You’ll probably get lots of friendly non-sexual reactions from girls because they think it’s cute. You’re like a happy puppy wagging his tail and yelping at them. They don’t perceive a sexual threat so they are comfortable absorbing your happy energy and patting you on the head. Fortunately you’ll miss that subtext and think you’re actually getting somewhere, so you press on long enough until you stumble across a Yes Girl. That success feeds the delusion and the cycle continues.

It doesn’t really matter that your daygame isn’t working because the fact is you’re on the streets and once in a while the numbers game throws you a bone. You’re still getting laid, just not for the reasons you think.

“I literally just saw you and….”

Towards the intermediate level you’ve developed the skills and are doing things competently. You still likely lack calibration and the ability to make sound decision but that doesn’t matter much because the model has taken care of all that for you. Your daygame is more than just the numbers game now – what you do in set actually influences the outcome. It’s unfocused and lacking control, like trying to shoot a target 200m away with a pistol – taking good aim increases your chances but the barrel length means you’re still missing most things anyway.

Finally as you hit the mythical advanced level you see exactly what’s going on and few things surprise you. You can control about as much as you ever will, and everything else is down to chance. On your good days it feels like an opportunity to hit the crack pipe and on bad days there’s a fatalism.

What interests me right now is the energy cost at these stages.

Beginners are typically burning up energy non-stop, walking around in a daze. They have a disconnected incredulity about them like the first time Roddy Piper puts on the They Live glasses. They used to see the streets like a normal person – things with shops, cafes, traffic lights, and a path from A to B. Now they are taking their first steps into seeing the streets as a hunting ground where none of that matters, instead they scan for girls.

One-on-one coaching, yesterday

Most of the energy is burned up by Approach Anxiety, as if they’ve taken a huge adrenal dump. Beginners can feel physically sick and often can’t handle more than an hour or two in field before their legs feels like jelly. I know from my own experiences in 2009 that I’d do two hours then sit in a pub feeling like I’d just stormed a machine-gun nest. It was exhilarating but draining. Like watching a drag race.

Intermediates burn energy like a leaky bucket loses water. It’s more like a constant small flow sapping them. They are already at the point where daygame has ceased to be lulz that you might do now and again. It’s a way of life, a journey, a route to salvation (or whatever). The intermediate is committed and takes it very seriously indeed. Most such men I meet are very serious. They have an elaborate series of affirmations or inner-game tricks, fairly rigid preferred high-probability routes, a settled set of times and days, and frequently a game-plan to work on specific elements in a given session.

They’ve made themselves daygame professionals. It’s serious stuff [1]

Intermediates burn up energy between sets rather than in them. They are constantly switched on and the engine is burning up fuel the whole time. Even if they walk around a mall for an hour without opening it still drains them. Their head is full of self-talk, inner game mantras, an obsession with state control, and all the complexities of the model. This is where the grind hits hardest. The light-hearted puppy dog feel has gone to be replaced by a scavenger [2]

When I walk around with an intermediate guy I often feel he’s carrying an invisible rucksack loaded with bricks. The pressure of daygame wears on him. Over the hours it’ll crush him until he has to sleep it off and recharge for the next session.

Once you come out of the Intermediate seriousness into Advanced, that rucksack disappears. Daygame becomes light, joyful and whimsical. The energy profile changes so that now there’s very little energy burn between sets but once you go to a girl, the afterburners are on maximum. The real art to advanced daygame is to reduce to zero the energy burned in the empty hours when not in set so that all of your energy remains to pour into the sets themselves. That’s like folding most poker hands – without getting frustrated – then going all-in on the good hands.

On my way to Kiev

When you’re at this level you feel like you can be out all day because each minute on the streets costs you nothing. Throw in warm sunny weather and a good wing then your daygame session feels like pure fun.

It’s not always like that, mind. The downside of eliminating the burn rate is that you are voluntarily surrendering some of your control. It becomes harder to open when you don’t feel like it. The maniacal self-discipline you had to just-do-the-ten-sets weakens. That throws up a whole new set of challenges – how can you direct your mood into the sweet spot so that you retain consistency in effort without putting the rucksack back on?

More on that in the next book.

[1] – I’m not mocking this. We all do it precisely because it’s effective.
[2] – I’m exaggerating. There are many times when intermediates are having great fun. I’m trying to describe the pervasive seriousness underlying those sparks of joy.

If you like the thought of wandering the streets chasing women, you might enjoy my book Adventure Sex. That’s pretty much all it’s about.