“Study: Pickup Artist Training Works.” It’s based on evolutionary biology, so should we be surprised? Most skills can be taught, including being attractive, even if the myth of natural clouds our ability to learn and apply.
Guys love numerical rankings and arguing over differences in rank, and we apply our natural inclination towards women: thus the well-known “Hot Babe” (HB) scale, although fortunately most guys aren’t so anti-social that they say “HB.” She just a “7” or maybe “low 7” or “high 7.”
To my mind, chicks below a 5 aren’t even noticeable, typically because they’re grossly fat or just old or have something else seriously messed up about them. A 5 is usually fat, old, or both, but has something redeeming that makes her of faint sexual interest. You’d probably want to deny f**king a 5 to your buddies, but she’s not impossible. A 6 is okay. There’s typically something off about her, but you’ve probably done worse (I’ve done worse). If you’re in a drought or you’re sexually inexperienced, 6s might be great for you. Today, I have been turning down marginal notches, but as a younger guy I picked up quite a few marginal notches and that was the right/smart thing to do, simply to build up my experience with women and sexual skills. There is probably something alluring about a 6, so you should find that thing and focus on it, especially if you’re inexperienced.
While there are obviously exceptions, inexperienced guys often build up to high 7s, 8s, or 9s. How do you build experience as a guy? You sleep with more chicks. The more chicks you sleep with, the more you realize chicks are just humans too and the better you understand female psychology (as well as sexuality/sex skills, which many guys are deficient in). Chicks can also sense the desperation that comes off guys who don’t get laid. If there are no chicks good enough for you, then you are either in an all-boys school, on a Navy warship, in prison, or in some other kind of military situation. For guys in normal social situations, there are going to be some chicks around who are or should be “good enough” for you. If none are “good enough,” lower your supposed standards.
7s are average cute girls. You’re happy to nail them. There are a huge number of 7s around. There’s something distinctly attractive about a 7, and that something can be variable. Often it’s just youth and/or being height-weight proportionate. The variety of 7s make them hard to generalize about.
8s are like 7s but with good proportions. Nothing is out of place. Her face is nice. Very few 8s persist past age 30. 8s are also uncommon… maybe they are more common in Eastern Europe… I just don’t have access to many 8s, and I’m pretty suspicious of online guys who say they’re routinely getting with 8s. That’s not impossible, especially for a good-looking, social guy in college… just not real likely. Most guys like to inflate the value of a given chick, particularly if other guys online will never see her.
9s are like 8s but with ideal, hourglass proportions, youth, and a pretty, symmetrical face. Very few 9s persist past age 26 or 27. 9s are rare. If a guy claims to be regularly dating a bevy of 9s, he has an inflated sense of value or is himself very rare, like a high-level entertainer, etc. I meet very few 9s.
10s… can’t change a thing. Not sure they really exist. I’ve heard guys say, “a 10 is just an 8 or 9 you haven’t f**ked.” Makes sense to me.
Most of the chicks I’ve been with have been 7s. Cute chicks I’m happy to be with but not all that special in pure looks terms.
In my view, you can’t properly rank/rate a chick till you’ve seen her nude. I’ve seen hundreds, maybe thousands, of chicks nude, live in person (have not f**ked the vast majority of them, but I have seen them via sex clubs). Clothed chicks can go either way… sometimes up a point or two because they’re wearing baggy/unflattering clothes, or are just tight all round, or sometimes the opposite way, because they’re wearing flattering clothes, push-up bras, etc. I’ve initially thought a chick is a basic 7 only to find a high 8 underneath those clothes and I love that feeling. Opposite happens too, though, as it did with Low-cut top girl recently.
How a chick looks is also correlated with but not perfectly linear with sexual chemistry. I’ve found high 6s and low 7s with whom I have better sexual chemistry than 8s. Obviously it’s very satisfying to f**k a really hot chick. Some guys also say really hot chicks are worse in bed… I may have once believed that, but as I became more sexually dominant with practice, I stopped believed it, as now I tell a girl where to go and what to do. If she’s on her knees or bent over a couch, with a handful of her hair in my fist, she will likely perform just fine.
Better yet, I don’t tell her what to do, I pick her up and put her where I want her. Or I tie her up, put cuffs on her, blindfold her, and play with her until she’s in a deep sexual state. It’s been a while since I’ve had truly bad sex. To me, bad sex used to happen when I was uncertain and the girl was uncertain, inexperienced, etc. Just being dominant and directive is not enough to ensure GREAT sex, but it can bring almost any acceptable girl up to “pretty good.” I think chicks know / can sense this. Chicks like it when they can tell the guy just sort of expects to get laid, but, at the same time, he’s not real bothered if he doesn’t. He’ll get the chick next time, or, if she wanders off, he’ll get someone else. That’s the right attitude to have. Not demanding, but lightly worn expectation. I can’t precisely describe how to cultivate this aura.
Haven’t been able to find enough appealing books to read lately… I’ve been on a run of badly written SF novels that I don’t complete because I feel like I’ve already read them and, worse, the writer is a worse writer than I am. So I picked up the Nick Krauser book A Deplorable Cad. This section, about “Beckster” (Robert Beck) reminds me of something similar but adjacent to what I do:
He’d read the old Alt-Seduction forum then go out in-field to nightclubs to try it out. After two years of what were, by his own admission, “hard work and brutal lack of success,” he cracked it and became a good player . . .
His major ruse was to set himself up as a club promoter and then go out in the street, handing out cards to hot girls and getting their numbers.
From there, Beckster would invite chicks to the club. The chicks “would experience Rob as the king of the club who knew everybody and was treated with respect by the staff,” because club promoters can get paid to bring in chicks. He’d then find other players and wannabe players and get them to bring in chicks. On top of that, “Rob put yet another layer . . . which not only made his pulling easier but also greatly enhanced the perception of his cold-approach pick-up skills in front of the students who’d paid him a fortune in coaching fees.” By being the boss of a bunch of chicks, other chicks would see him as high value… then he’d go around to pick up the other chicks in the club. Then multiple chicks would “all compete against each other to vie for his attention.”
An interesting strategy. I admire it, though it’s not for me because I dislike clubs. The only other person I’ve read who seems to have a good read on clubs is Good Looking Loser, who writes “An Introduction and Major Misconception about Party ‘Club’ Game (The Scene – Hollywood, USA):”
Groups of people meet at a designated house to “mingle”, drink and do drugs – 1 or 2 hours before going to a nightclub. (pre-party)
These groups of people take as few cars/taxis (or limousines) to go to a nightclub where they have ALREADY BEEN PUT ON A VIP/GUEST LIST by the nightclub promoter that they ALREADY KNOW. (enter club)
They get in for free, have a COMPLIMENTARY table and access to a significant amount of FREE alcohol that their promotor has reversed for them. (club)
At some point in the night, usually just after that the alcohol runs out and/or girls dance for 90 minutes, the group will leave to a PRE-PLANNED AFTER-PARTY which is usually, but not always, at the pre-party house. (exit club)
Most solo guys or small groups of guys are never going to break off one of those chicks. The marketing job of the club, however, is to convince guys that, with enough money spent, that might happen. I personally would prefer honest prostitution to this kind of slight-of-hand, but there must be enough guys to bite the bait to keep the industry going.
Krauser does not like this form of game either:
This is known as Entourage Game, and Beckster invented the modern version of it. It’s pretty much the opposite of what I do. He builds an elaborate structure based on many moving parts that elevates him to a position of situational high status in an environment where girls go to party. I roam solo on city streets picking off girls who know nothing except what I convey in one-to-one conversation.
Krauser also has another friend, Mick, who is also not like me:
He enjoys chatting to strangers for the sake of it, whereas I hate it. He’ll start up conversations no matter where he is – to a supermarket cashier, a barber, his car mechanic. In contrast, I’ll say the minimum necessary to be polite. That’s how his style developed, and it makes him excellent at bar game because he doesn’t view all of this chat as work.
I am somewhere between Krauser and Mick, but I view most random chat as closer to work than pleasure, which is why I don’t much like working the bars. I have done it before, sometimes somewhat successfully, but usually in semi-warm atmospheres (e.g. after a work conference meet up, that kind of thing).
I also don’t like normal clubs, but I am somewhat like Beckster in that I discovered, or was initiated into, a kind of workaround, in my case through sex parties and sex clubs, where everyone has been pre-filtered for interest. The upsides I have written about quite a bit. There are some downsides to what I do:
- Many people, even when they know intellectually that they are not monogamous, do not want to see their friend or partner banging another person.
- If a guy is hunting the hottest girls, the ones who are 8+, he is not likely to find them. I have seen some, but they are rare and in high demand. If a guy brings high 7s and 8+ girls, however, he will be the king of his local scene (I have played this game very successfully).
- A guy still needs to find a compatible chick. This version of lifestyle or ecosystem must be layered onto existing game for it to work.
- A guy will be evaluated very directly based on his body and sex skills. If either are lacking, everyone will know it because everyone will see the guy nude and fucking. Because (almost) everyone gets naked and has sex at these clubs and parties, I have an unusual amount of experience in evaluating how chicks look clothed and unclothed. Many chicks who seem one way clothed turn out another way when not.
- Doing it well takes some amount of work. There are no shortcuts.
The main advantage to what I do is volume, sustainability, and of course many people have group sex fantasies… I just happen to live them out. Consensual non-monogamy also helps me retain chicks who would otherwise want to know, “Where is this going?” Overall, I find these trade-offs to be worthwhile. What I am doing is not totally unlike what Beckster is/was doing.
Another advantage: I am satisfying many chicks’ fantasies, which they will never satisfy on their because they are chicks and most chicks need to be led most of the time. Most chicks are not self-motivated or self-starters, so they need a guy to activate their sex drives.
Another thing, neither good nor bad: I tend to get and retain sexually adventurous chicks. For guys who have a thing for inexperienced chicks or virgins, he will not find them at the sex clubs. Note that many sexually adventurous chicks still present as “classy,” if you like that sort of thing. And many chicks who present as trashy are still hard to get in bed, based on my experiences. Just like guys who dislike game say that game guys are only getting “bad” or “damaged” girls, guys who think that every sexually adventurous girl looks like a gutter rat will be surprised.
I like reading about other guys’s systems. I actually draw from a couple ecosystems (I have not written about everything I do), so I am somewhat unlike the game guys who hit new cities and begin cold approaching. But the Krauser and Tom Torero books are the most complete descriptions of game I have ever read, rivaled only by some of the original Neil Strauss and Mystery books. It is surprising to me that no one else has produced comparably detailed works. Maybe that is because writing a book takes a lot of energy for little reward, apart from the ego reward. The majority of guys out there learning how to be a player would be well-served to quit hunting for kernels of utility online and read the Krauser books.
I feel like I am still learning from them. I don’t do a lot of cold-approach daygame, so they are not likely as “useful” to me as they will be to other guys who are learning to chase tail, but they are well-written and informative. The book written by an obvious expert in his field is often interesting to me, even if I am not directly in the field. I see the world differently after I read them. I like Nassim Taleb, even though I don’t wish to be a Wall Street trader, as he was. The Krauser and Torero books are written by experts. The most annoying part of the Krauser books is the fact that they are not readily available digitally. It seems that they can be found online, but I would prefer to just click the Amazon button and be done with it. Life is too valuable to be scrimping over a $20 book. Most of the Torero books seem to be on Amazon Kindle, which I appreciate.
If there are comparable books that I’m missing, please let me know in the comments. If you are an experienced game guy, think about writing a book.
One other thing I forgot to add: Krauser says, “This was a period when I was getting to meet all the ‘name’ PUAs in London and while they all had something I could learn from, I was struck by how strange they all were. It was like a little boy’s club. Our house of cads in Hampstead looked sane in comparison.” I’m guessing that I come off as more normal than most hard-core PUAs, albeit cerebral or nerdy if I let those parts of myself peak out. When I find a pretty girl who likes to read and isn’t a twit, I get very excited. Most pretty girls who like to read are looking for a guy who isn’t a stereotypical nerd but who isn’t a frat-boy jock. Pretty girls who like to read have dating problems similar to mine. So when we find each other, it can be beautiful. I am much smarter than most good-looking gym guys (I am not so good looking but I do all right… certainly not good looking enough to make the game easy) and I am much better looking than most nerdy readers, programmers, or engineers. Ms. Slav and I connect well because she’s an extremely pretty girl who is also smart, and so her and I match immediately.
I can do well with basic chicks age 25+ who are starting to think about longer-term things, but if they are kind of dumb I get tired of them after a couple months of sex. They often become too much like having another kid around, which I don’t need in supposedly adult women.
Overall, I think I am more normal than the hardest-core PUAs, but considerably less normal than the average person.