Proactive vs Reactive Game

Posted: January 10, 2013 in Uncategorized

Most game which is commonly espoused by the seduction community is what I’d call proactive. Proactive game is where you aggressively perdue women who have shown no prior interest in you. A good example of this is totally cold approaching women who haven’t given you an approach invitation in order to have sex with them. This is, in fact the main thrust of the seduction community. I refer to it as proactive because you are going out and trying to make things happen, as opposed to waiting form things to happen to you.

I have a confession to make. I don’t really do this. I practise reactive game. To do this I’ve worked hard on my value to women (mainly looks in my case, but I’ve also made amazing progress in terms of self esteem which telegraphs itself via my non verbals, and a little headway in terms of career). This increased value means I now often get signals from them that they’re interested before I’ve even opened them. I then react to this signals by approaching them. Examples of this are that the vast majority of sets I do in night game are either me approaching after getting an obvious approach invitation from the girl, or the girl approaching me. With online game usually OK only message girls who have viewed my profile, or girls who have messaged me first.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each style of game.

Advantages of proactive game

You are the chooser. You can go after any girl you see, without restriction.
It’s a very masculine approach to game because you’re going after exactly what you want.

Disadvantages of proactive game

Time consuming.
Much higher rate of rejection.

Advantages of reactive game

Good effort:reward ratio. Very effiecent.
Forces you to work on your value. It will be very obvious if you have none as you’ll never get approach invitations.
You get very good at picking up on signals from women.

Disadvantages of reactive game

Less choice when it comes to women.
You probably won’t be reaching your full potential, as you’re less likely to get women at the very top of your range this way.
It’s a more feminine style. You’re likely to get lazy and not shoot for the stars.

I think both styles have their merits, and both should be practised. It would be false to consider the two mutually exclusive.

The seduction communities’ obsession with proactive game often sees guys doing dozens of spam style approaches per week, too often punching above their weight in terms of quality of women approached. This usually leads to a lot of effort spent, and no lays, which in turn leads to the wannabe player giving up on the game. They should balance this with working out which women are giving them signs of interest and approaching them. These women may not be the very hot girls they want, but there will be some who are attractive enough to meet the guys standards and will provide him with some much needed experience. If a guy gets no signals of interest from women, this is a big red flag. It means he has some fundamental issues that he needs to address. Without addressing these issues a more proactive approach would be a waste of time.

On the flip side of this, reactive game can lead to apathy, laziness and not banging women who are at the top of a guys range. The laziness and apathy comes from sitting around waiting for things to happen, and relying on the women to take a more proactive role in the mating ritual. The reason you’re unlikely to get women at the top of your range is because for you these women will all be ‘maybe’ women. These are girls who aren’t blown away by you on first sight, but who can still potentially be bedded by a mixture of persistence and showing them more of your value. Such girls probably won’t initially have enough interest in you to give you signals.

In my next post I’ll show theory in practise as I’ll write up a field report of me reactively serving at a singles night. I’ll highlight how easy it was for me to get a number close by doing this, but also how mixing in a bit more proactive gaming might have lead to a better result.

  1. Jim Bacon says:

    Interesting post. I’ve always wondered about approach invitations. I usually go out in contacts, but my vision is still a bit shit in these. If I can afford it down the track I may get my eyes lasered.

    I mentioned it on the forum, but one time me and my mate where sat down with some people we knew who we’d met while out, and he texted me to say “The girl sitting directly across from you is massively into you, take her number”. I was completely oblivious to this.

  2. Sam Spade says:

    before making my comment, I’ll give you a little bit of context as the internet is a huge catch all and you can disregard a lot of what people have to say as their life experiences, situation, location and basic fundementals can be so out of context/sync to your own – or they can just be plain old weirdos!?

    anyhow……. think I came across you blog from a comment you made on krasuers, and as you are ‘living in the same world’ as me, i.e. London and on the LSS I found your experiences an entertaining read.

    I’m also English, white (which Im assume you are), live in london, older than the average forum guy, in fact older than you, but you wouldnt know it, and have a fair few of the fundamentals in place.

    so my comment – I’ve started thinking a similar way recently, that although I can and often do approach girls who are not aware of my existance till I talk to them, I’ve got to the point of self regard that I’ll often only act on the girls that have already noticed me/given me some eye contact.

    I actually consider it appropriate to my sense of self and self esteem or maybe just my ego – why run around like a bit of idiot when you just enjoy yourself and wait for interest to come to you.

    Then just know the venue the play to your strengh where girls can have the opportunity to notice you by just looking good and having fun…….

    TT and O’neils and PI are so loud, packed and dark that it can be hard to stand out even if you do stand out, where as there as some venue in town where it’s less crowded and dark – so you can be noticed if you stand out.

    course you can rationalise it lots of different ways like you have……… but I know that I get ‘noticed’ by girls so often I don’t have to worry about it……..

    And as long as you know you can approach cold if need be – what’s to worry about or overthink…….

    so in summary I guess Im agreeing with your new way of thinking……..

  3. MikeG says:

    “Disadvantages of reactive game

    Less choice when it comes to women.
    You probably won’t be reaching your full potential, as you’re less likely to get women at the very top of your range this way.
    It’s a more feminine style. You’re likely to get lazy and not shoot for the stars.”

    This is essentially the biggest problem. I disagree with the “you probably won’t” part. You definitely won’t reach your full potential with reactive game. The world has that way of rewarding risk and there is just to many missed opportunities if you are waiting for an approach invitation. I don’t think Time consuming part has anything to do with it(Im not talking about online dating). Anyone reading this blog spends a lot of time as it is on game. Its silly to say its time consuming to approach proactively if your spending x amount of time reading about game. It’s just a fear of rejection. If guys really wanted to maximize time then day pickup would be superior because you can pickup while you are doing things you would already be doing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s