Archive for September, 2014

Why Is Game So Hard

Posted: September 16, 2014 in Uncategorized

In my last post I talked about what type of success rates PUAs are actually achieving. There’s more I wanted to say on the topics of success rates, but I didn’t think it really fit into the previous article. I will now put down in words my remaining thoughts on this topic.

When most guys hear the (truthful) success rates of ‘professional’ PUAs who cold approach girls more attractive than them, they are often shocked at how low they seem. They imagined all these guys were, at the very least, getting success rates of 10 : 1 (10 approaches to get 1 lay). I honestly believe that this is very far off the mark. This belief stems from spending 5 years approaching girls, watching pickup videos by ‘pro’ PUAs and meeting / sarging with PUAs of all abilities ranging from socially retarded noobs, through average guys with a bit of game, up to guys who make a living teaching game. There are guys out there who get laid, alot. The big but that follows this is that they have to approach a hell of a lot of girls to achieve this.

I’ve heard many guys online saying they have a 20% success rate, or they know a guy who’s amazing at game that gets virtually every girl. I’ve never seen any evidence of this. I’m not saying it’s true, but I think it’s highly unlikely if the guy is fucking hotter girls and is approaching cold.

Take the video below for example.

It looks amazing, right? Tyler from RSD kcloses a load of girls, acts all cocky with them, picks them up off the ground, makes really bold approaches and is seen leaving venues with them, apparently for sex. Surely, this is proof positive that guys can have a high success rate when picking up girls who are hotter than them? No. What you have to bear in mind is that this is basically a highlight reel taken from over a year’s worth of filming. It’s probably some of the best parts of 100 nights out sarging. When coupled with the fact that he probably didn’t fuck all of the girls shown on the video, you can see that he’s probably opening a lot of sets to get the results he’s getting. I will just add a sidenote here that I do like Tyler’s stuff, and I’m not implying he lies to or misleads guys. He always states himself he has to approach a lot of girls to get enough momentum to do what he does. I plan to attend an RSD hotseat next year.

My point is that these super high mPUA success rates don’t really exist outside of the marketing material in which they are touted. Sorry to shatter your illusions, but if you’re an average guy you’re really going to have to approach quite a high number of hot women to lay any.

So why is it the case that even great PUAs have such ‘low’ success rates? It’s because getting girls who barely know you and who are better looking than you to want to have casual sex with you is hard. Really fucking hard. Why is this the case?

It’s simple economics. I’m not going to deleve into the biological / evolutionary driving forces here, but rather just take a look at the end result and what it means in terms of how hard it is to fuck girls more attractive than you. Imagine that casual sex is a commodity like any other (and before you get whinny about this, bare in mind it is possible to buy casual sex for cash, so there you go). This would make the dating scene a sexual market place. In a given market place, what factor has the biggest influence on price? Supply and demand. Low supply and high demand = high prices. High supply and low demand = low prices.

Lets look at the demand for casual sex partners from the point of view of each of the sexes. To make things clearer we’ll use a busy nightclub on a Saturday night as a microcosm of the world at large.

Supply of male partners for casual sex: Very high as a percentage of all the men in the club. Lets face it. Most men in a club would like to fuck a new girl that night.

Supply of female sexual partners: Very low. Despite what some optimistic people may think, a very small percentage of women in the club want to fuck a new man that night, or even on another night after a date with him. A girl’s physical urges for casual sex are less frequent than a man’s. People may say, “But women like sex as much, if not more than men!”. I agree. But whereas man are much more inclined to have sex with lots of different women, women want sex lots of times but with the same man each time. I’m not saying women are all innocent little virgins and never do dirty stuff. I know they do. They often do it with me. Girls have their R-Selected moments, but they’re rare. The point is that their inclination towards casual sex is lower than a man’s. Far lower. Anyone who denies this denies plainly observable reality.

This all means that when you as a PUA go looking for sex, offering your own sex in return, you’re essentially offering to trade something that is in high supply for something which is in low supply. The market’s going to resist that, and that’s what makes game hard. When half the world is selling TVs, cornering a disproportionately large share of the TV market is no easy task. That’s what a successful PUA has to do.


How do you measure success? Fighters have their wins – losses – draws. Powerlifters have their totals. Sprinters have their best time for a given distance. What about PUAs? PUAs have their open : fclose ratio.

I’m first going to talk about what type of success ratio guys actually seem to obtain, from ‘professional’ PUAs down to normal guys who just go out at the weekends. I’ll then go on to show you why comparing success rates is basically bullshit.

There is one piece of bullshit I have to address before proceeding. If memory serves me rightly Mystery (or maybe Neil Strauss) once said of success rates that an mPUA could open 5 girls and get 5 girlfriends as a result. I’ve seen people quote this on forums as what is possible if you get “really good at game”. This is bullshit. I’m not going to do a detailed breakdown of why I think this. That would be a waste of time; that figure is so obviously impossible.

Lets look at me. I don’t record stats apart from number of lays, so this is one huge stab in the dark. I’d estimate that from cold approach game in bars and clubs my open : fclose ration is somewhere around 30:1 to 40:1. Quite a range, I know, It’s really hard to say without keeping stats. I’ve gone through periods where I seem to be getting laid every other weekend while opening maybe 10 girls I week, but on the flip side I’ve has times where I’ve opened 40 – 50 girls in a few weeks and not got laid. Hard to see through the variance without recording how many girls I actually open. Accuracy aside, I think it’s a figure that shows it’s not really easy for me to get laid. There’s a high luck factor their. At the same time I’m not hopeless. I can get laid fairly regularly if  I put the effort in. Also bare in mind I’m only talking full vaginal or anal sex her. If I included hand jobs and blow jobs the stats would be pretty good, but still not amazing.

Let’s look at some of the pros. Both Tom Torero and Nick Krauser have helpfully posted their 2013 stats for the world to see. If you want the details, check out the links. The summary is that they both have a open : lay ratio of around 30-40 : 1. Roughly the same as myself. Does this mean I as good at game as two well known PUAs who have written books and taught bootcamps on the subject? In a word, no. The explanation of this makes a nice segway into the second part of the post. Success rates don’t mean much on their own, and cannot be easily compared.

The difficulty of fucking a given girl off a cold approach is mainly determined by how physically attractive she is in comparison to how physically attractive you are. Yes, there are other factors, but this is the headline. For the “looks don’t matter” brigade, please note I’m not saying that looks are everything. it’s simply that the better looking the girl is compared to you, the more game you need.

I would say there are the following levels when it comes to fucking girls regularly:

Girls more than a point below you: If you can’t fuck these girls regularly, you haven’t just got no game, but you are doing something weird to actively make them run away. I mean like trying to extract for sex by saying, “Come back to my place. I keep my dead mother’s head in a jar, you can see it! It talks to me sometimes. At night”.

Girls a point below you: You’d think you’d need no game, but you do need some. Just basic escalate and don’t fuck up game, but you can’t be a chode. Girls are hypergamous so they feel entitled to guys at lease a point better than them by default. If your value drops due to messing up an obvious shit test she through at you, or if any neediness comes through, you could loose the lay. There are just too many men who are regularly willing to gladly fuck a point below them that you do have to bring some game.

Girls at your level: You may think you need just the merest hint of game to get these girls. The truth is that girls at your own level of looks will regularly get opportunities to fuck guys better looking than you. As such, you need fairly solid, but certainly not perfect game to get these girls.

Girls a point hotter than you: You need solid game (or some other type of value adding edge, like status within a given group). Bare in mind we’re talking about casual sex her. You’re not offering a relationship, just sex with a guy worse looking than she is. An impossible sell without strong charisma.

Girls more than a point hotter than you: I’m sure it’s not impossible, but very very hard though. If you’re regularly smashing these girls your game is amazing. Or you’re famous.

This then is the explanation of my success rate when compared to some very good PUAs. I’m younger than them and yet on average fuck women less attractive than them,

Looks aren’t the only thing that bares consideration when looking at success rates. There are various different ways to go about playing the game. Each has it’s own advantages and disadvantages. The two methods that will lead to the greatest disparity in success rate are approaching only off IOIs vs cold approaching the girls you want.

Approaching off IOIs alone goes like this. The player will wander around a large nightclub. He will pass by or stand near girls he likes and make a blatant attempt to get eye contact with them. If they reciprocate, he will approach. If not he’ll move on. In addition to this he’ll keep one eye open for any girls that meet his minimum attractiveness standard who may be giving him IOIS (proximity, eye contact). If he gets any IOIS he’ll approach. If he can’t get an IOI all night, he’ll either not approach at all, or resort to scanning for girls who are giving off general DTF signals, even if they aren’t aimed specifically at him.

In contrast to this, there is pure cold approach. This method sees our bold player approaching any girls he finds attractive, regardless of whether they’re giving off IOIs or DTF signals or not. He doesn’t wait for the green light, he goes for what he wants. At first this method may seem inferior to waiting for IOIs, but it has many advantages over it. There are many girls out there who don’t IOI you but who will fuck you if you approach them and game them correctly. They’ll just be more challenging than the girls who do provide you with the approach invitations. This means two things. Firstly, the guy who takes the harder path will almost certainly develop much better game in the long run. While the other guy finds himself gaming only easier yes girls, he will find himself gaming the harder to get maybe girls. Since the hottest fire forges the strongest steel, this leads to a greater ability in the long run. Secondly, although the cold approacher will experience a lower success rate as defined by the approach : lay ratio, he’ll probably achieve a far higher absolute success rate, as measured by total lays. Surely this is better? I know I for one care more about how many new women I get to see naked and fuck than the number of approaches it took make to get them. Don’t get me wrong, getting a better ratio is a very good thing, but not if it comes at the expense of quantity. Finally, since the girls at the top of your potential range will virtually always be maybe girls, the cold approach should see higher quality results.

The difference in success rate of the IOI approacher, and guys who approach women less attractive then them can be huge. Have you ever heard a guy saying he’s got a 10 : 1 success rate? This is obviously far better than the Torero / Krauser 40 : 1. Yet if a guy who is an 8/10 and who only does IOI based approaches on 7s and the occasional 8, he’ll easily get 10 : 1 success rate with maybe only moderate game. If however you’re a 6 approaching 7s / 8s cold, then it’s going to go down dramatically. A 6 with very little game cold approaching girls hotter than him will have an absurdly bad ratio.

Next time you hear people discussing success rates online, realise that it’s bollocks, as this magic number tells you very little.