11th of November
Helsinki, Finland

Playful – check. Curious – guilty. Sexual – guilty. I been reading a book by Sasha Daygame called The Direct Daygame Bible. I wouldn’t say that it has blown my mind, but it has solid content for a beginner. For me it was a good wakeup call since it summarized well that what is wrong with my interactions with women. This applies both to daygame and dates. I have had such a huge volume of women during the period of learning game that it has not come without collateral damage.

Thus, I read from the holy book of carnal wisdom (page 53): “Generally speaking, there are three main behaviors, or characteristics you must exhibit in order to be successful with women. You need to be playful, curious, and sexual. Not one, not two, but a mixture of all three. You may naturally lean towards one of these, which is normal, but it’s important to go with whichever of these you naturally are and work on the others if they are weak. For myself, I was always naturally playful. I would joke and laugh and have a great time. But was I getting laid a lot? No.”  

I really feel this. I am doing great with girls that love my playful side and some of them really get addicted to that. Having a strong playful side has compensated lack of the other two. During going lot of dates recently I have started to show my sexual side more, which has obviously always been there. That has been coming out naturally with girls that like my playful side, but it hasn’t part of the trifecta to get girls initially hooked on me. Now I started to show it more during the first date too. I am also working on bring it out naturally sooner and sooner during the date.

We go back to the source of wisdom: “Why not? Because I wasn’t being sexual and I was too busy having fun to really stop and be curious about other people. So I would only hook up with the small percentage of women who were attracted to the funny/crazy guy. It wasn’t a frequent occurrence! However, once I started shutting up and listening to women I got a lot better at being curious. I started to connect. Finally, I realized I needed to joke less and have more eye contact to get sexual and…that was that! I started having way more powerful interactions, and way fewer flakes.”

This explains it perfectly why I am not showing those other sides – sexual and curious. Playful is just more fun – plain and simple. Yet it is true that intense sexual chemistry and sparkle is enjoyable. More sex and more meaningful relationships sounds good too. I know how to bring out the sexual side and I am confident it has been fixed to a good level soon. Being curious poses a greater challenge but shutting up is a good start. Making open ended questions. What is interesting that I do remember enjoying this part a lot when I had relationships. After sex laying down at the bed and girl opening about her life.

Action points:

• Sexual – sooner and harder. Eye contact, touching and kissing. Leading harder towards a sex location. Persistence.
• Curious – Shutting up. That actual supports sexuality too. Asking meaningful open-ended questions in a progressive manner going from a surface to deeper.

 

14th February 2016
Budapest, Hungary

Many dating coaches offer Skype consultation for a price. One of the opportunities mentioned is critiquing your personal audio infield recordings. I do listen to some of my audio recordings, which is helpful. Though fresh perspective would add value.

I do think that any intermediate or above daygamer is a qualified person to give feedback on another daygamers interactions. Seasoned daygame coach has obviously more abundant infield experience and, therefore, more balanced and nuanced critique.

As I will be immersed in doing daygame for the whole spring, I would like to try this peer-review daygame infield audio recording mastermind. As I envision it working is that two (intermediate daygamer) individuals share weekly an audio recording wit duration of 5-15 mins. Both give a short actionable critique. This idea is especially suitable for predominantly solo daygamer like me.

Audio recordings should be in English. Both fellow daygamer and girl(s) voice should be audible. I use basic earbuds with a mic. I just leave them hanging on the top of my shirt so the mic is nicely positioned outside my collar. Confidential parts are ideally muted but at least, my interactions don’t usually contain sensitive information. Remember this is not a provider game, you don’t share credit card numbers at first meet.

Typically critique should include relevant parts of these:

• open (calm & collected)
• voice tonality (playful, intent, up & down talk)
• language (are you using intelligible English, speaking slowly, is there lulls because of misunderstandings)
• vibe (positive/negative attitude when teasing/challenging, turning girls negative to positivity)
• man-to-woman (any hiding the dick going on, does she know what you want, teasing, challenging)
• holding the frame (buyer vs. seller, your reactions to her shit tests, a girl trying to lead!?)
• self-amusement (do you censor yourself or are you genuinely enjoying the interaction)
• leading (does the interaction seem to flow naturally, are you leader or follower)
• investment dynamics (who is speaking and engaging more throughout the interaction)
• familiarity (does she know something interesting about you that she can later tell to her friends)
• qualifying (do you learn something about her that you like and showed appreciation for it)
• closing (strong)

It should be stated that I do follow predominantly the London daygame model as it is presented in Beginner Daygame but I’ve taken influences from Real Social Dynamics among others. Yet structure and mindset do differ but the previously stated principles are similar. Following a different model is not an obstacle to giving a critique.

But naturally each interaction might be only lacking on few of these components. Critique should be actionable so it should focus on 1-3 biggest sticking points that interaction revealed.

I will be predominantly doing daygame in English until beginning summer. I will be open to doing this until then if successful masterminds occur. The term can be much shorter and should be always revised if it’s still serving both parties. Only win-win masterminds. Questions & displays of interest: vikingflaneur@gmail.com

5th February 2016
Budapest, Hungary

In the first part of Daygame Diagnostics Series, I evaluated my sticking points reflecting my game to London Daygame Model as presented in it’ simplified form in Beginner Daygame (Infield Guide).  In this post, I present more foundational mindset stuff that I realized during the week while going out. Mostly I realize this between interactions not at home.

Standards Too High
First, there is a mismatch between my standards and level value I can project to the girls. End of last year I daygamed almost daily for three months with a wing that had considerable higher skill level and standards. I think this subconsciously affected to my standards. I think this largely explains a drop approach to number ratios. Disclaimer: I consider my standards to be still considerable lower than top daygamers.

This resulted in a discrepancy between the quality of girls that I approached on the streets and my matches in Tinder. At the moment, I can’t be bothered to date lower quality girls I frequently get from Tinder.

I’m sure that once and while I date girls through Tinder unless things progress with girls through daygame. Mainly I think this a good thing, fueling my willingness to approach. This just means that I’m not getting laid with new girls as consistently as I’m used to.

Pressure Off
I subscribed to Lifeloaded (Andy Yosha) newsletter, I think it’s one of the few newsletters that is actually worth to subscribe as it provides original content (as opposed to hitting you immediately with annoying autoresponder series). They had a Seducer Type Quiz that showed me as The Seeker -type. This was the rarest type among people who answered to the quiz, only 4 percent of all responders belonged to this group (it had 15 different types). The Seeker is considered as the  worst seducer type. They have a lot of potential but eventually, they come off as too strong and they scare off girls. I’m not that convinced of the quiz but I consider this insight to be true. I still have work to do to ingrain push-pull to my game.

Instant Dates
I have been quite opposed to doing instant dates but I realized that’s it mostly because I thought that it has to mean taking the girl for a coffee/tea (something I strongly dislike). When I invite her to join me for a walk or to sit on a bench in the mall, the invite comes off as more natural. I genuinely enjoy doing these two.

Screening for Ideal Woman
I largely know what kind of girl I want to meet. I can passively find those traits on girl’s actions but still I’m bad at actively screening those qualities. I need to think questions and strategies how to screen for this actively from the very beginning of the interactions. I have had some very rudimentary tactics to this like asking if she is adventurous or geeky. Yet they are largely ineffective.

2th February 2016
Budapest, Hungary

I have seen and read so much London Daygame Model material and put in the approaches that I have built innate ability to analyze my interactions while infield and after through audio recording. There is a limit to that self-analyzing capacity. I can see if I follow a basic structure or if I’m having right investment levels, vibe, playfulness (teasing/challenging), storytelling and voice projection. But sometimes it’s challenging to look the whole interaction and determine why the girl didn’t give her phone number or flaked.

The idea behind this Daygame Diagnostics Series is to focus on individual skill components of my game that need improving one at a time. Not judging interactions on result basis but acknowledging points of interactions where I lost the girl by doing X. In the case of flake I can point out a compilation of plausible reasons that contributed to the result of the girl flaking.

This post is an arena of compiling data received from a large pool of interactions. Summarizing most common problems. Finding the root cause of the problems – inner or outer game. Finding the process and tools to fix them. Then eventually providing a checklist where I can see infield what I should be practicing.

Diagnostics Method

I think a great resource to start diagnostics for a low-intermediate like me is Beginner Daygame (Infield Guide) by Tom Torero and Nick Krauser. I watched through the video and made extensive notes on it. I compared my notes and what I do infield myself. I present those sticking points.

 

Sticking Points – Part 1

1. Open

• Situation: Sometimes I lack the patience to wait for a good window to approach the girl and I go in on a suboptimal This problem is escalated on the shopping malls and metro stations. Solution: I should just accept that I need to wait for a good spot whether it means approaching inside the store or the metro platform. It’s a bit of trade of since with walking girls you get a better impact than in a store.
• Voice tone: Often my voice tone goes up audibly just for the first word. This happens only in English, not with my native language. Solution: For this I don’t have a straight answer as I’m already calm when I go in. Sometimes I think it just the fact that I run to the girl, I’m in energetic mode. Luckily this is getting better all the time by itself with exercise.

2. Stack

• Creativity: My main issue is that I sometimes overdo creativity with assumption stacks. New assumption isn’t fully structured in my mind and it comes out as a blur. I might stutter with English words. Girls being non-native speakers as well look just confused. Solution: Speak slower. Keep assumptions stack simple and lower standards. Relax and focus on sub-communications. I hope that just of writing these blog post helps my general ability to form clear thoughts.

3. Vibe

• Present: Sometimes I still caught myself thinking ahead. Solution: Be present, listen what girl is saying and let her beauty be a distraction instead of your thoughts.
• Leading: Sometimes conversations fades I if a girl is not giving anything interesting after the stack. Solution: I think the answer here is remaining call, keep good vibe and trying to find in by exploring verbally different topics that she might be able to relate.

4. Investment

• Language barrier: Getting a girl to invest is challenging. One major component is the language barrier. Solution: Try to make the girl comfortable with the fact of speaking a foreign Giver her time, not interrupting here. Be engage to what she says.

5. Close

• OK

These are the sticking points that I recognized at the moment. I will go now work on this infield. Hope to tackle these and find new ones.