Today we are giving away "The Perfect Approach" FOR FREE!
Simply enter the coupon code:
perfectapproachfree , then the email address
you would like the links sent to and click on
"Unlock Videos". You're welcome!
perfectapproachfree
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

News:

The new Daygame Cafe is open for business! Grab yourself a coffee, take a seat and rest your weary Daygame legs! :) - The Daygame Cafe Management



Discover the secrets to meeting jaw dropping models and perfect 10's, 7 days a week... without having to go to expensive night clubs or use cheesy lines that just don't work

  • A DEAD SIMPLE approach that stops the most beautiful women in their tracks during the day.. and makes them WANT to talk to YOU.
  • The counter-intuitive things you must say and do when meeting women during the day vs when meeting them at bars and clubs. Using what works at night will get you REJECTED during the day.
  • Clever tricks to NEVER RUN OUT OF THINGS TO SAY and how to OVERCOME APPROACH ANXIETY with a simple exercise.
  • INFIELD FOOTAGE of all the Daygame techniques being used on real women out on the streets.

Enter your email below for instant access...

Author Topic: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!  (Read 1662 times)

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« on: January 11, 2011, 02:58:25 PM »
Hi all,

There is no doubt that Alan Roger Currie is an intelligent guy. I think we all have heard or experienced the success of M1 when out there gaming. Most likely, the ones that apply M1 will find success eventually, as we all do if we strive or the PUA god is nice to us and rewards us with a horny girl that crosses our way. This success will build your belief in the M1-technique through positive affirmations as your mind looks for evidence in the real world. That success will make you believe strongly in M1 (or any other technique), especially if you haven't had much success with women before. I myself had great success with 'M1' before Alan wrote that technique down in his book. I credit him for spotting it and writing it down, but he didn't invent it, he simply observed and labelled it. 10 years ago grabbing girls and being very direct with them resulted for me in 10min extractions and the alike. Read the LRs of dollysniff on LSS; that was me 10 years ago except that I didn't have lines and wasn't as good looking ;-)

Without arguing for or against one or the other technique, note that is not hard to accept new ideas and to try them out. If I showed you how to be properly indirect and told you to go completely indirect for one week you would succeed as well and you would start believing that it is a great technique if done properly. Correct me if I am wrong but I think my good friend Tom Torero got about 30 lays last year from purely indirect game. But Tom is smart and he let go off pure indirect game, while never losing the skills he learned from it. His personality was born indirect but he evolved, which separates him from the regular guy.

The real challenge in life is to let go off old ideas that have worked well in the past. If you haven't been 'M1' in the past, but yet got laid consistently why should you let go off old ideas that get you laid? The point is that you will never find out what else works for you if you follow religiously one technique. Maybe something else works even better for you because you are the kind of guy that can easily learn how to build comfort with women. All you need to add then is proper escalation and you will get laid. If you are a beginner challenge everything and don't believe anything. Try out everything, don't give up if it doesn't work for the first 100 times. Find what works best for you.

There is not one golden technique out there. If there was, wouldn't all these self-proclaimed gurus agree with each other? Why do Ross Jeffries (e.g. Weasel Phrases and Embedded Commands) and Mystery (plausible deniability) recommend quite the opposite of Alan Roger Currie? Either of the two parties must be wrong if there was only one golden technique. The fact is that there is many ways to Rome. Buy yourself the freedom to try out whatever way you think may work and find the way that you like the best. I myself like different techniques depending on my vibe and the type of game I do. I had success with many different techniques (watch out for the videos on youtube soon).

Is Alan Roger Currie stupid or why does he seem to miss the point? In my view Alan Roger Currie is very smart and as such I don't think he has fallen for the 'Man with a hammer syndrome'. At the end of the day pick up is business and controversy creates publicity, which again generates business. To be 'M1', Alan Roger Currie has fallen for what I may call the 'Eminem syndrome' splitting the public into M1 or non-M1 followers ;-) M1 is impossible to disprove just like a religion. You either believe in it or you don?t. That's clever, because it generates very loyal followers and thus money, just like the any church out there does. Are you ignorant enough to believe in something that is impossible to disprove? Pick up is an art and is therefore impossible to prove or disprove. All I know is that I get laid!

Remember what you got into this for. Certainly not for the pseudo-academic discussion on M1 or any other technique.

Rule #1: Whatever gets you consistently laid works for you!

Rule #2: Don't forget Rule #1!

My suggestion to Alan Roger Currie & Yad.

It would be very interesting to see who gets more lays out of 100 day game approaches. I bet 100 pounds on Yad, since I have seen Yad and since I believe that actions speak louder than words ;-) Stop the gospel and prove me wrong Alan ;-)

Cheers,
Andres






Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2011, 05:53:29 PM »
Add on:

Another caveat of the M1 theory is that, as any good theory, it is based on an assumption. One assumption of the M1 theory is that:

WOMEN TRY TO MANIPULATE YOU

While that assumption is probably not wrong in certain or let's say most cases nobody has ever pointed out that this assumption itself is actually M4. I.e. I hate women because they try to manipulate me all the time. I have to be M1 to control this girl. That may well turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy and all the women in the world will seem very manipulative, even your own mother ;-)

Isn't it nicer to think that women are beautiful creatures that want to be emotionally lead and stimulated. They appreciate sex and relationships just as much as men do (don't think about your mother now ;-)) and they are not trying to manipluate you. If you can turn a woman emotionally on, however you do that (even with M1) you are winning. You are not winning because you are M1 and because you think that she is a liar and you need to show her who the man is... ;-) If you sense that she is manipulating you, just call it out and tell her that she is behaving like a teenager now. Ask her if she wants to be perceived like that.

Andres

Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2011, 08:22:32 PM »
I see that people read what they want to read.

The problem I have with your entire essay, is that it makes some very wrong and invalid assumptions.

The main one is, I have never tried to suggest that The Mode One Approach is the "only" effective method on the market for approaching women, initiating a conversation with them, and ultimately attracting them and seducing them.  I have never, ever said that.

So I am tired of guys on message boards implying that I have.

To take it a step further, I have never even boasted that "direct approaches are definitely better and more effective (for getting laid) than indirect approaches."  I have never, ever said that.  Anyone who says or implies that I have is a liar.

I am tired of guys on message boards suggesting this.

My thing is simply this:  I am tired of other gurus, dating coaches, and others in this "Attraction & Seduction Community / Industry" trying to suggest that Mode One Behavior "doesn't work," is "ineffective," and will result in women thinking you're "creepy" and/or "rude."

I'm saying, that is BULLSH**. 

People keep hating on Mode One, and I'm not going to allow that to happen.  Simple as that.  I am not going to let people tell lies about Mode One Behavior, or offer assessments of Mode One Behavior that are way off base.

It's really that simple.

Offline law gypsy

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2011, 11:35:49 PM »
betting on gaming, i think they do that at the casino...i don't go there either

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2011, 01:17:44 PM »
Hi Roger,

I am not hating, I am stating my opinion. Maybe I didn't communicate correctly what I meant, which led to a misunderstanding: I didn't mean that you claim that M1 is the only approach that works. Am I correct in saying that for you indirect means that you are a coward with weak behaviour because you are subject to manipulation? If so then that's what I disagree with, because not all girls are manipulative and you can display authority later on in the interaction/relationship.

I have an ear on the street as I am out 3 times a week and I see a lot of guys coming up these days thinking M1 is the way to go. It is very tempting to think that because it is much easier to display M1 behaviour than being indirect-direct; of course skill and calibration is needed for M1 as well, but techniques that don't force a direct yes or no decision are harder to learn because they involve the skill of keeping an interesting interaction up for longer periods.

Roger, it would interest me whether you think that M1 is the easiest technique to follow for a beginner. My thinking is that beginners don't have performance stability. They suffer from AA or they simply don't know what to say or do next. There is no shame in that. I was terrible at the beginning as well. My first direct number close was physically not possible, simply because my hand was shaking too much to push in the number. Needless to say that she never responded to my text. If you recommend to such a beginner to go in with: Hi, I just saw you and I had to come over because you are absolutely stunning. I would like to go for a drink one day. What do you think? (and that is soft M1 in my view) I think it is highly likely that it won't work out for him: the reason is that the girl will either blow the guy out if he is incongruent or not confident enough, or she will most likely test the shit out of him and lastly she will want to have a longer conversation if she is interested, which he will most likely not be able to maintain within the M1 frame.

For exmaple:
So the beginner opens strongly with M1. What happens next? Most beginners don't have the foundation at hand to keep that initial M1 frame because they simply don't have the tools to keep the attraction high and to project a solid sexual frame with clear intent throughout the conversation. They will most likely fall back to chit chat and small talk. If you display M1 at the opening but then fall back to small talk you are on your way of losing that woman because you are not congruent. A lot of times this will also undermine a beginners inner game (vibe, state), as he will have a lot of blow outs and thus negative evidence that will strengthen negative affirmations (e.g. shit, I can't do this. I feel terrible now. I have been blown out 5 times in a row. The sets I hooked went to nowwhere and I haven't slept with a girl for 2 weeks) Note that your state/vibe/unstifledness is one of the most important factors in being successful with women (more to that another day, but vibe and intent are key).

A beginner needs to get out there an interact with women as much as possible. That should be your first priority. Firstly, you need to be comfortable around women that you perceive as attractive. Then you need to build a safety net that you can fall back to if you are running out of things to say or if you don't know what to do next: that is routines and a structure to follow. You will be 75% routines based and 25% freestyle at the beginning unless you are naturally good. Later this ratio will reverse. When you are at the stage of being able to freestyle a lot and you are confident, congruent, calibrated and consistent then I recommend you start incorporating M1 behaviour, because now you have the foundation to stand a chance and be really successful with M1. I would recommend doing one daring thing a day to break limiting beliefs at all times, but don't base your entire approach on daring highly risky and highly rewarding techniques at the beginning. Play it a bit safer at the beginning for the sake of getting more exposure to and time with attractive women, because in this way you will learn more quickly how women think and feel.

Amen ;-)

Andres


Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2011, 04:14:23 PM »
Sorry I meant Alan. For some reason Roger sticks better in my head than Alan :-)

Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2011, 05:23:24 PM »
I can't totally agree with your assessment Andres.

I've seen "beginners" transform toward a more Mode One style of verbal communication in a matter of a few days, a few weeks, or a few months without necessarily employing 'indirect' methods first.

When I started being Mode One, I just did it.  It was like a kid being scared of water, and being scared of drowning, just "jumping into the swimming pool" and taking his chances.  That is essentially what I did.

There are two things that have to happen in order for a man to start exhibiting Mode One Behavior:

1)  A man has to significantly diminish, and eventually, completely overcome his FEAR OF BEING REJECTED by women.

Comment:  There is no way around this.  You will not ever be able to effectively and consistently exhibit any variation of Mode One Behavior if you are dreadfully afraid of being rejected.  Never.

2)  A man has to significantly diminish, and eventually, completely overcome his FEAR OF NEGATIVE REACTIONS, HARSH CRITICISMS, PERSONAL JABS and OPINIONATED INSULTS

Comment:  Men who cannot overcome fear #1 usually end up exhibiting Mode Three Behavior.  Men who cannot overcome fear #2 end up exhibiting Mode Two Behavior.

The #1 problem with most men is that they put way too much emphasis on what a woman is thinking, what they think women want to hear, and how they think women might respond to the various things they say and express to women in conversation.

I don't give a fuck what women are thinking.

I don't give a fuck what women want to hear.

I don't care if a woman has a 'negative reaction' to something I say, or how I say it.

David X is pretty much the same way.

All I care about is, a) what do I want from this woman?  why do I REALLY want to share this woman's company in the short-term and in the long-run?  b) how am I going to express my desires, interests and intentions to this woman?  Confidently or non-confidently?  Straightforwardly or in a beat-around-the-bush manner?  Using PG-13 language, R-rated language, X-rated language or XXX-rated language?  Humorously or real seriously?

That's it.  What do I want to say, and how am I going to say it.  Everything else, I allow to take care of itself and unfold naturally.

So, bottom line is, not all men need to try to use "indirect" methods before slowly transitioning to more "direct" methods.  They just have to negate and neutralize their fears and insecurities.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2011, 05:25:03 PM by ModeOne4Ever »

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2011, 07:43:39 PM »
One of the principles that got me a long way in life is to never give up even if the beginning is hard. Another one is that I rather jump over one foot hurdles than over 3 foot hurdles if there is no additional benefit. I guess our discussion has reduced to the question what is easier to implement for a beginner. I would argue for the majority of people in the PU community it is the indirect-direct approach. On the other hand, if you have natural tendency to M1 behaviour then probably M1. However, indirect-direct is more universally applicable as it is socially more acceptable. At an extreme, how do you go M1 on a widdow at her husbands funeral or on a very conservative girl that is standing next to her very conservative and massive brother at a busstop? Very hard to do unless you are happy to inflict some serious physical pain ;-) But you can go indirect-direct for sure in both situations. Look I am not arguing for or against one or the other. They both come with advantages and disadvantages. I think point 1) and point 2) have to eventually be overcome by anybody who is playing this game, whether M1 or indirect-direct. I don't think that Yad gives a rats ass what the hot Russian mother thinks when he is gaming her daughter infront of her eyes. If he did he wouldn't be able to do it.

The process you follow is your choice. Make sure you meet women and get what you want though.

Direct view
You see her standing at the bar leaning against a corner. Her body is amazing and you can feel the attraction directly. You know you want her badly. Your body doesn't really let your brain think it forces you to go over and talk to her. After a very short introduction you tell her that she is by far the sexiest girl in the bar and that you choose her for tonight because she turns you on. She is irritated but interested. She says something but it doesn't really matter because you already know what you want. You don't ask, but simply grab her hand and tell her that the two of you are going for a drink at the bar. She says wait, but you simply force it by pulling her. She complies and by now her head is spinning because you were so direct with her. She has made up her mind by now. At the bar you have a shot and tell her again that you will have to hit on her because it is your job. She smiles and you know you are in. You have a shot and tell her: just lick the salt off your skin, put the tequilla in your mouth and swallow. She gets it straight away. You go on the dancefloor. Dance for 1 min kiss and start making out. It is on so you tell her let's go. She complies and as soon as you are in the cab it is game over.

Indirect-direct view
Do you know that feeling when you sit with a girl on a day 2 in a bar. You have not stated explicitly your interest in her, yet she completely knows it is on. Why else would you have approached her in the street like that. It is like some magical feeling that is between the two of you. When you look into her eyes she knows you are here for one thing. You have her at the point where you slowly took away your investment and she starts telling you how great she is and how great it is to go out with you and that she truly feels that connection to you. The more she does it the more you retreat and the more she is trying to pull you back in as you keep rewarding her for her efforts. Finally, you have her at the point where she starts stearing the topic towards sex and starts sticking out her titts and asks if you like her shoes just to be able to show you her legs wrapped in tights. You touch her thighs and she knows it is not a coincidence. Her whole body language changes to portray her female features in the most beautiful way. From the moment you met her till now you have managed to create this beautiful atmosphere between the two of you that she has wanted for for such a long time. She is graving for you to make a move eventhough you have not said one serious word about you getting with her tonight. You suggest that you go back to your place to watch your cat do backflips and a last glass of wine. She smiles and you add: but you can't stay long. I have to get up tomorrow. You take it away. Actually, why don't we do it another day. She says: No, I actually have to wait for my train, so let's have a quick glass of wine at your place. I actually have to work too tomorrow. You get to your flat and you show her the cat ;-)

Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2011, 10:59:11 PM »
One of the principles that got me a long way in life is to never give up even if the beginning is hard.

I agree.

Another one is that I rather jump over one foot hurdles than over 3 foot hurdles if there is no additional benefit.

I generally agree with that adage too.

I guess our discussion has reduced to the question what is easier to implement for a beginner. I would argue for the majority of people in the PU community it is the indirect-direct approach.

First disagreement.  For me, it's not so much about which approach is "the easiest."

If I had to pick just ONE or TWO FACTORS that most contributes to me favoring direct vs indirect, it would the issue of 1) Time and 2) Manipulation.

I'm not in favor of any approach that, in the long-run, has a much higher potential for me to end up wasting time and/or money pursuing a woman that may not be genuinely interested in me.

Secondly, I don't like seducing women by lying to them, misleading them, and/or emotionally manipulating them.  For example, I don't like to get women into bed by making them THINK that there is a possibility of a long-term monogamous relationship when in reality, I know for a 100% fact that all I want is a weekend or two of casual sex.

Indirect approaches can be fine for many, but my biggest gripe ... based on my past experiences and observations ... is that indirect has a much higher potential to cause guys to waste time, waste money and end up angry, frustrated and bitter.

On the other hand, if you have natural tendency to M1 behaviour then probably M1. However, indirect-direct is more universally applicable as it is socially more acceptable.

Just like I don't look at direct VS indirect as an issue of "easy" vs "hard," similarly, I don't look at the value of direct vs indirect as an issue of what is "socially acceptable" vs "unconventional."

Taking it a step further, I have found that you get more women's pussies wet by being bold and unconventional than you do by exhibiting behavior that is basic, conventional and socially acceptable.  Women themselves have even told me that.  I rarely, if ever, try to be 'socially acceptable.'

At an extreme, how do you go M1 on a widow at her husbands funeral or on a very conservative girl that is standing next to her very conservative and massive brother at a bus stop?

I wouldn't even approach a woman in an indirect manner if I were attending a funeral for her recent husband.  That is just tacky.  Why any man would approach any woman who just lost her husband in either a direct manner or an indirect manner is beyond me.

As far as the second scenario, I've done that MANY times.  I've hit on women when they've been with their sisters, mothers, fathers, and brothers.  I actually once told a woman TO HER FACE that I was going to fuck her daughter (talk about BIG BALLS).  I only had one contentious conversation with a woman's brother, and that was in the late 90s when I was living in Los Angeles.  A woman's brother came to me and asked me why I was talking to his sister in such an XXX-rated manner.  I said, "because she liked it."

But I must clarify:  You don't have to be X-rated with women in order to be Mode One.  You can use PG-13 language and still be Mode One / Direct.

Very hard to do unless you are happy to inflict some serious physical pain ;-) But you can go indirect-direct for sure in both situations.

I disagree.  You can go direct in both situations, although I would not recommend approaching women in Scenario #1 (the funeral).  Again, hitting on women at a funeral ... particularly, their husband's funeral ... is just tacky.

Look I am not arguing for or against one or the other. They both come with advantages and disadvantages.

I agree with that.  Both the direct style and indirect style have their own set of advantages & benefits, and their own set of disadvantages & detriments.

My evaluation:

General Benefits of Direct Approaches

- You're able to have your interests reciprocated quicker than you would with an indirect approach
- You prevent women from wasting your time if they are not truly interested in you
- You tend to bring out a woman's "inner kinky freak" side much quicker
- You don't have to resort to 'wining & dining' a woman in order to try to "impress" her
- You tend to be perceived by women as a man who has "big balls" and is ultra-confident

General Benefits of Indirect Approaches

- If you are rejected, you won't be rejected as quickly, as abruptly, and/or as harshly
- You give a woman the opportunity to examine and evaluate many aspects of your personality, such as your intelligence, your sense of humor & wit, etc., which can potentially help you if you are not that physically attractive
- You avoid antagonistic and/or contentious responses
- You tend to be perceived as "nice," "sweet," well-mannered
- You tend to generally avoid activating a woman's "Anti-Slut Defenses," at least initially anyway

General Drawbacks of Direct Approaches

- If a woman is not interested in you, she's going to reject you in a much more abrupt manner which could negatively affect those with sensitive egos
- If a woman perceives you as "too straightforward" and/or "too provocative," you run the risk of being harshly criticized and labeled a "jerk" or an "asshole"; This could have a negative affect on you if you have thin skin or a sensitive ego
- If your interest is strictly casual sex, you tend to activate a woman's "Anti-Slut Defenses" quicker
- Women with manipulative tendencies might try to "make a scene" with you in public out of frustration
- Direct Approaches are sometimes harder to execute when a woman is surrounded by two or more people or in massive group situations

General Drawbacks of Indirect Approaches

- More often than not, you end up engaging in a high degree of time-wasting "fluff talk" and "small talk" prior to finding out if a woman is genuinely interested in you or not interested in you
- Many times, you end up going out on "dates" with women who are not really interested in you, and spending money unnecessarily
- You tend to more frequently open yourself up to being misled and having your time wasted by "cock teaser" types, "attention whore" types and "gold digger" types
- You don't tend to be perceived as being as confident or as bold as a guy who uses direct approaches; Women tend to perceive you as a more passive, "beat-around-the-bush" type
- When you employ an indirect approach, but things don't turn out the way you wanted them to (i.e., you didn't end up sleeping with the woman), you tend to feel more angry, frustrated, and bitter

The very last point above is one of the main reasons why I favor direct approaches.  I told Sasha and others in London:  Indirect is cool when I successfully get a woman in bed .... but where I can see the difference is when I get rejected, or don't get the results I wanted or expected.

When I'm Mode One / Direct, and I get rejected, I am able to quickly forget about it.  It doesn't faze me at all.  And probably 90% of my 'Mode One' readers have said the same thing.

When I've been Mode Two and/or Mode Three (Indirect) with women, and I get rejected, I tend to feel very angry ... very frustrated .... very bitter and resentful ... and very regretful.  Mainly because I usually ended up wasting more time and/or money than I wanted to.

I think point 1) and point 2) have to eventually be overcome by anybody who is playing this game, whether M1 or indirect-direct. I don't think that Yad gives a rats ass what the hot Russian mother thinks when he is gaming her daughter in front of her eyes. If he did he wouldn't be able to do it.

I don't use terms like "gaming her."  I'm Mode One because I don't like to play head games with women.  I just like to lay my desires and interests on the table and either have them reciprocated or rejected.

The process you follow is your choice. Make sure you meet women and get what you want though.

Agreed.

Direct view

You see her standing at the bar leaning against a corner. Her body is amazing and you can feel the attraction directly. You know you want her badly. Your body doesn't really let your brain think it forces you to go over and talk to her. After a very short introduction you tell her that she is by far the sexiest girl in the bar and that you choose her for tonight because she turns you on. She is irritated but interested. She says something but it doesn't really matter because you already know what you want. You don't ask, but simply grab her hand and tell her that the two of you are going for a drink at the bar. She says wait, but you simply force it by pulling her. She complies and by now her head is spinning because you were so direct with her. She has made up her mind by now. At the bar you have a shot and tell her again that you will have to hit on her because it is your job. She smiles and you know you are in. You have a shot and tell her: just lick the salt off your skin, put the tequilla in your mouth and swallow. She gets it straight away. You go on the dance floor. Dance for 1 min kiss and start making out. It is on so you tell her let's go. She complies and as soon as you are in the cab it is game over.

Interesting description, but that would not be my version of "direct."  For example, having the drink at the bar would be unnecessary for me.

If I were in a bar, I would just walk up to a woman and say, "I find you very hot.  Very attractive.  I think you and I should get out of here and go back to my place so I can determine if you and I have as much sexual chemistry as I think we will ..."  If she start getting theatrical, I know I have her.  If she calmly says, "no thank you" or "I'm married," I leave her alone.

How much time did I just spend?  2 minutes?  3 minutes?  I don't like for any conversation with a woman to last more than roughly 5-10 minutes unless I know for a 100% fact that the woman is definitely interested in sharing my company.  Otherwise, I want the conversation ended.

Why would the woman be "irritated?"  I find that most women are turned on by direct approaches.  Only women with manipulative tendencies tend to get irritated and frustrated by a direct approach.

Indirect-direct view

Do you know that feeling when you sit with a girl on a day 2 in a bar. You have not stated explicitly your interest in her, yet she completely knows it is on. Why else would you have approached her in the street like that. It is like some magical feeling that is between the two of you. When you look into her eyes she knows you are here for one thing. You have her at the point where you slowly took away your investment and she starts telling you how great she is and how great it is to go out with you and that she truly feels that connection to you. The more she does it the more you retreat and the more she is trying to pull you back in as you keep rewarding her for her efforts. Finally, you have her at the point where she starts stearing the topic towards sex and starts sticking out her titts and asks if you like her shoes just to be able to show you her legs wrapped in tights. You touch her thighs and she knows it is not a coincidence. Her whole body language changes to portray her female features in the most beautiful way. From the moment you met her till now you have managed to create this beautiful atmosphere between the two of you that she has wanted for for such a long time. She is graving for you to make a move even though you have not said one serious word about you getting with her tonight. You suggest that you go back to your place to watch your cat do backflips and a last glass of wine. She smiles and you add: but you can't stay long. I have to get up tomorrow. You take it away. Actually, why don't we do it another day. She says: No, I actually have to wait for my train, so let's have a quick glass of wine at your place. I actually have to work too tomorrow. You get to your flat and you show her the cat ;-)

I'll say this:  Indirect is cool if a) you don't mind investing some time and/or money, and b) if after investing that time and/or money, you don't mind getting rejected or cock-teased (and then rejected).

If you're cool with those two things .... indirect is fine.

The main people who should stay away from indirect are those who....

- Don't like to waste time conversing with women who are not really interested in them;
- Don't like to spend money treating women to free lunches, free dinners or free movies before they know for a fact that the woman is genuinely interested;
- Like for a woman to tell them upfront and straightforwardly that they don't really have any interest, as opposed to engaging in 'manipulative head games' prior to rejecting you

The main guys who should stay away from a direct approach are those who....

- Can't handle being rejected too quickly, too abruptly, or too harshly
- Don't like to have women 'make a scene' with them, especially in front of others
- Don't like to be called derogatory names, such as "jerk" or "asshole" or "cad"

My thoughts.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2011, 02:59:00 PM by ModeOne4Ever »

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2011, 01:42:38 PM »
I actually think we agree more than we disagree. I love M1 and it is a way of thinking rather than a technique. I apply it all the time and I apply it with every woman I meet. I just don't go M1 straight away all the time and I don't verbalize my desires all the time. I think for me being direct means that THE WOMAN UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENTION. I never end up in the friends zone. If anything I overescalate. I think the direct approach does not need the verbalization of sexual intent. The most direct behaviour I have demonstrated at various occasion was simply looking at a girl in a club; she reciprocated the look, I went over took her by the hand, lead her outside the club and had fun WITHOUT SAYING ONE WORD. This same subcommunication I can project onto a normal street approach. If you have a very strong subcommunication and you send and receive the right signals, then it is very rare that the girl will try to manipulate you because she knows if she does that she is breaking the unspoken laws between you and her and girls hate nothing more than being incongruent. If she does try to manipulate all you have to do is tell her: young lady, you are out of bounds. Don't disappoint me or I will have to spank you ;-) She knows exactly that you are alluding to her trying to play games and that she will fuck up with you if she keeps trying to play games. At the end of the night you talk about the 'nice view' from your appartment and the last 'glass of wine'. Of course these are just sexual metaphors for going home for sex. She knows exactly what is going on and so do you. It is essentially irreleveant whether you are verbalizing it or not at this point. That is M1 just communicated not verbally explicitly, don't you agree? You can always go M1 verbally explicit, but you can never go back. So I think of going M1 in terms of an option. I need to have her as ready to fuck as possible before I make my intent verbally explicit. If you verbalize straight away you are applying a hardcore filtering process for the ones that are DTF with you, but you don't give them the chance to change their mind if they are not DTF straight away.

Maybe it is just that some people are better at direct verbal communication and others are better at subcomminication. In either case M1 is applied. So I guess M1 is the bigger picture and indirect vs direct is simply a choice of your channel of communication.

I think the two main advantages you pointed out 1) Time and 2) Money are not really advantages. Let's take Yad as an example: he can bring women back to his house from the street within 30 minutes. Ok, you bring them back within 10 minutes. To be honest, the 20 min difference doesn't matter to me personally. Money wise, I don't really spend a lot of money on girls. If anything it would be spent on a cab, which you need in any case. The way I arrange the meetings doesn't allow for big spending. I am not taking her to some cheesy restaurant buying her flowers or the alike. Ok, the funeral example was too stylized, I agree.

I don't game women either. I meet and interact with them. That is just terminology. Yet, it is always a game in the original sense of the word. You have a desired outcome and that outcome has a probability attached to it. You force that probability of you sleeping with her to be revealed straight away. Your skill is hitting her hard with your confidence, conviction and balls. Whereas I rely on my skill to increase the probability of me sleeping with her by making her want me after she had the chance to get to know me better.

Alan let's end this discussion. I have great respect for you because you truly have conviction and the way you explain shows that you have a rock solid foundation; your material has content and applicability and it is far from the usual rubbish 'game talk'.

I think a person that would have a very interesting perspective on this matter is Badboy. He is very direct, yet he as well says that it is crucial to build comfort with a woman, which is usually done by talking to her about herself.

Well, I am not a big cat as you are, but anyway, next time you come to London, I would like to invite you out for one evening to talk and see how you apply M1 infield and show you what I mean by indirect-direct. At the end of the day we may well agree that we are not doing things that differently.

Thanks for the great exchange of thoughts!
Andres




Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2011, 03:44:36 PM »
I actually think we agree more than we disagree. I love M1 and it is a way of thinking rather than a technique. I apply it all the time and I apply it with every woman I meet.

It doesn't sound like you exhibit Mode One Behavior ALL of the time with EVERY woman you meet.  I think you exhibit Mode One Behavior, as I define it, when it suits your needs at the time.

I just don't go M1 straight away all the time and I don't verbalize my desires all the time.

Then you're not being Mode One.  Read the book again.  Mode One is about the Four Modes of Verbal Communication.  It is not about simply the Four Modes of Interpersonal Communication, the Four Modes of Body Language Cues and Signals, or the Four Modes of Non-Verbal Communication.

Verbal communication with women is the key emphasis of my book.

I think for me being direct means that THE WOMAN UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENTION. I never end up in the friend zone. If anything I overescalate. I think the direct approach does not need the verbalization of sexual intent.

For the hundredth time, I disagree.  Verbal communication works hand-in-hand with non-verbal communication.  That is what works best.  You can be effective with one or the other, but the best method is to use a combination of verbal communication and non-verbal communication.

But if I had to lean toward one or the other, I will always lean toward verbal communication.  That is the only way you can be very specific with your desires, interests and intentions.  You cannot be specific with non-verbal communication.  The best you can be with non-verbal communication is "suggestive."  And 'suggestive' is not specific.

The most direct behaviour I have demonstrated at various occasion was simply looking at a girl in a club; she reciprocated the look, I went over took her by the hand, lead her outside the club and had fun WITHOUT SAYING ONE WORD.

What you just described is EFFECTIVE behavior, but it is not DIRECT behavior.  You exhibited behavior with that woman in the club that was "indirect, but effective."  I've done that before too.  But that is not Mode One Behavior.

This same subcommunication I can project onto a normal street approach. If you have a very strong subcommunication and you send and receive the right signals, then it is very rare that the girl will try to manipulate you because she knows if she does that she is breaking the unspoken laws between you and her and girls hate nothing more than being incongruent.

You are being very idealistic regarding women's behavior.  Most women ... and particularly very attractive, sexy women ... love nothing more than to toy with men and manipulate men.  Women themselves have even told me this.  If there is one thing women love more than orgasms, it is flattering attention.  Women will interact with men just to see how much flattering attention they can get from you.  The second most thing women will manipulate men for is "favors."  Both financial and non-financial favors.

And this why I'm such a strong proponent of making your desires, interests and intentions specifically clear to a woman.  Specific, straightforward verbal communication is the #1 thing that diminishes a woman's ability to mislead you and/or manipulate you.

If she does try to manipulate all you have to do is tell her: young lady, you are out of bounds. Don't disappoint me or I will have to spank you ;-) She knows exactly that you are alluding to her trying to play games and that she will fuck up with you if she keeps trying to play games.

Can you tell a woman that you're going to spank her non-verbally?  Exactly my point.

At the end of the night you talk about the 'nice view' from your apartment and the last 'glass of wine'. Of course these are just sexual metaphors for going home for sex.

I don't like metaphors and/or sexual innuendo.  I like to speak plain language.

She knows exactly what is going on and so do you. It is essentially irrelevant whether you are verbalizing it or not at this point.

It's relevant to ME.

That is M1 just communicated not verbally explicitly, don't you agree?

Actually, NO ... I don't agree.

You can always go M1 verbally explicit, but you can never go back.

I'm not looking to "go back."

So I think of going M1 in terms of an option. I need to have her as ready to fuck as possible before I make my intent verbally explicit. If you verbalize straight away you are applying a hardcore filtering process for the ones that are DTF with you, but you don't give them the chance to change their mind if they are not DTF straight away.

Mode One allows you to lay your cards on the table from the get-go ... and either have your desires and interests reciprocated ... or rejected.

I've had many women "change their minds" with me.  I've had women tell me on Thursday night, "I'm not interested in having sex with you....," only to turn around on Saturday and say, "Can I come over?"

Mode One eliminates, or at least diminishes, the amount of "manipulative head games" that take place between a man and a woman.  Some men love games.  That is why many men love indirect behavior.  They love to psychologically "dance" with a woman.  I don't like to 'dance' or play games.  I like to cut through the bullshit and get straight to the point.

Maybe it is just that some people are better at direct verbal communication and others are better at subcomminication. In either case M1 is applied.

Again, I disagree.  It's like saying, "Regardless of whether you let women know you want to fuck them in an upfront, straightforward manner ... or you let them know in a 'beat-around-the-bush' manner ... as long as they know you want to fuck them, you're being Mode One."

And that is not trueMode One is when you make your romantic and/or sexual intentions specifically and crystal clear to a woman verbally.  Mode One does not involve "guesswork" or "assumptions."  It does not involve suggestive sexual innuendo or "hints."

Mode One is IN YOUR FACE.

So I guess M1 is the bigger picture and indirect vs direct is simply a choice of your channel of communication.

Direct can get you laid.

Indirect approaches can also get you laid.

I would never argue that Direct is the only manner of communication that gets you laid.  I know many indirect guys who get laid.

**************************************************************************
Here is where I am going to introduce my infamous "Hotel Scenario" exercise where the element of LIMITED TIME becomes a major factor in your interactions with women.

The set-up:

Let's say you get invited to a hotel. On your floor are six women. If you use your time efficiently, you will get ONE HOUR to converse with ALL SIX WOMEN (an average of about 9 minutes with each woman). Some women you might end up talking to for MORE than 9 minutes, while other women you may end up talking to for LESS than 9 minutes.

Each woman has different motivations, but YOU DON'T KNOW THAT before you talk to them. Only by conversing with them do you find out what their motivations are.

Here is a capsule of each woman:

Woman #1: This attractive woman only wants to have a long-term, monogamous relationship with you. Casual sex is not at all an option;

Woman #2: This attractive woman prefers to engage in a long-term, monogamous relationship with you .... but she would settle for a 4-6 months of casual, non-monogamous sex with you;

Woman #3: This attractive woman would have a one-night stand with you or weekend fling with you at the drop of a dime ... but she is very self-conscious about being perceived as a "whore," a "slut," or an "easy lay";

Woman #4: This attractive woman is down for having a sexual threesome / menage-a-trois with you and her best girlfriend, but she's not going to just "volunteer" this information ... you have to motivate her to reveal this desire to you;

Woman #5: This attractive woman wants to have an enjoyable, lengthy, entertaining conversation with you .... but she has no desire to date you and/or have sex with you;  She just loves being flattered and entertained, and will try anything to keep the conversation going;

Woman #6: This attractive woman has no desire to date you and/or have sex with you .... but she does want you to treat her to lunch, treat her to dinner, and generally spend money 'wining & dining' her until she gets bored with you and moves on to the next guy who is willing to spend money on her and buy her gifts without her having to give up any pussy; She is going to do her best to PRETEND as though she is interested in you, but in actuality, she barely wants to even tongue kiss you;  Similar to Woman #5, she will do anything to keep the conversation going;

Now .... again ... you have NO IDEA what woman has what motivation. You will only find that out by talking to each one. And remember ... you only have approximately 60 minutes to converse with ALL SIX WOMEN.

What approach would you use to find out each woman's true motivations??  Would you be direct?  Indirect?  Verbal?  Non-verbal?  If you were to be totally non-verbal, how would you find out their specific motivations?

Let me know....

**************************************************************************


I think the two main advantages you pointed out 1) Time and 2) Money are not really advantages. Let's take Yad as an example: he can bring women back to his house from the street within 30 minutes. Ok, you bring them back within 10 minutes. To be honest, the 20 min difference doesn't matter to me personally. Money wise, I don't really spend a lot of money on girls. If anything it would be spent on a cab, which you need in any case. The way I arrange the meetings doesn't allow for big spending. I am not taking her to some cheesy restaurant buying her flowers or the alike.

See, you're missing something.  Even I said that when you get a woman into bed, both direct approaches and indirect approaches can seem beneficial and enjoyable.

When the difference between the two comes more into play is when you get rejected.  If I'm talking to a woman who is not genuinely interested in me, and is going to ultimately reject me, I would rather be rejected in the first 5-10 minutes of the conversation than to be rejected after talking to that woman for 20-30 minutes.

Generally, I don't want to talk to any woman for more than FIVE minutes if she has not given me a definite sign of romantic and/or sexual interest.

Ok, the funeral example was too stylized, I agree.

 ;)

I don't game women either. I meet and interact with them. That is just terminology. Yet, it is always a game in the original sense of the word. You have a desired outcome and that outcome has a probability attached to it. You force that probability of you sleeping with her to be revealed straight away. Your skill is hitting her hard with your confidence, conviction and balls. Whereas I rely on my skill to increase the probability of me sleeping with her by making her want me after she had the chance to get to know me better.

You just essentially described the difference between being direct and indirect.

Direct is when everything about your desires and interests is very specific, and expressed in a clear-cut, straightforward manner.

Direct:  "I would like you to come to my place on Friday night so we can fuck in as many positions as possible, and make each other cum over and over and over again."

Indirect:  "I would like you to come to my place on Friday and check out the view of my apartment, drink some wine, and just generally get to know each other better."

Can both approaches end up with you in bed with a woman?  Yes.

Where you see the biggest difference, again, is if and when you get rejected.

If I'm direct with a woman, and she says, "Sorry Alan, I don't know you well enough.  And I'm not really into casual sex.  I would rather not come to your place on Friday night," then I'm cool with that.  I haven't invested any time or money.

But if I'm indirect with a woman, and I get her over to my place ... and we talk, laugh, and generally enjoy each other's company .... but at the end of the night, she ends up resisting and rejecting all of my physical and sexual advances ... then I'm going to feel PISSED OFF.  I'm going to feel like I wasted time ... and I spent money on wine and food, I'm going to regret it.

This is why I personally don't like indirect approaches.  Too general.  Too vague.  Too ambiguous.

I like to fuck women who KNOW I WANT TO FUCK THEM before we fuck.

Alan let's end this discussion. I have great respect for you because you truly have conviction and the way you explain shows that you have a rock solid foundation; your material has content and applicability and it is far from the usual rubbish 'game talk'.

Just agree with all of my points and this debate will end.   :D

But as long as I say something that you philosophically disagree with, or vice versa, more-than-likely, our exchanges and the debate will continue.

I think a person that would have a very interesting perspective on this matter is Badboy. He is very direct, yet he as well says that it is crucial to build comfort with a woman, which is usually done by talking to her about herself.

Well, I am not a big cat as you are, but anyway, next time you come to London, I would like to invite you out for one evening to talk and see how you apply M1 infield and show you what I mean by indirect-direct. At the end of the day we may well agree that we are not doing things that differently.

Thanks for the great exchange of thoughts!
Andres

I always enjoy an exchange of thoughts and intelligent opinions.

Cheers Mate.

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2011, 07:52:41 PM »
Alan you are a tough mofo I have to say ;-) If we ever go to war together I hope you are on my side ;-)

Ok,

Effective, M1, direct etc. are simply labels and you may use them in a different way from how I use them. M1 is your label and you have complete authority over it. The rest is a matter of agreeing on a definition. So whether something is effective or direct is not to be defined by you unless you state your definition ;-)

I like the idea of congruence between verbal and non-verbal communication. I think so too that you get the message across as clearly as possible if you speak the same language on both levels. M1 is the purest of all filters I know: it finds the girls that like M1 behaviour and that are up for sex with you very effectively.

M1 is a trade off: you are not taking the risk to waste time and money by any means (benefit) for the sacrifice of the women that would sleep with you if you did not display M1 behaviour but interacted with them differently. If your aim is to sleep with as many women as possible, I believe that there are situations in which M1 is better and others in which other approaches work better. In a world of unlimited access to women, like we have today, you can apply M1 because you can simply hit all of the three billion women (few mingers you gotta take on the way ;-)) and staistically a few percent of the women will say yes. That's all you need. Is it a nice interaction? Who cares, it is anyway more honest after you had sex with them. All you miss out on is 'the dance'.

Counter example

You are on a small island vacation and there are three hot girls. You are there for three days. Only one girl likes the M1 approach. The other two want a guy that is not M1 but charms them and makes them feel good over the course of one evening before they put out. If you go M1, two girls will never talk to you again.

M1: 1 lay
Indirect: 2 lays
=Indirect is more effective

Let me know... but let's not get into game theory please ;-)

The biggest plus of M1 I can see is that the supply of women is endless so to speak and if you can sift through a lot of them you will no doubt get some and get some good shit too, because the hotter girls bite on it hard usually. That's effective but not necessarily most efficient. I like the dance and I like to turn a girl around because it takes skill and I have it. For me a combination works out better because I enjoy meeting people and not just telling them that I want to get with them even though I get a buzz out of that, too ;-) Have you ever had a girl that changed her mind last minute? I.e. she agreed on sex and then chickened out? I guess that doesn't happen often, but it can even with M1.

One thing I want know about you: have you always been a natural to some degree? It takes a lot of skill to communicate M1 effectively. A lot of guys don't even know how to start a conversation with a girl. You need to fight a lot of internal battles as a beginner before you get M1 across well. And regular PU theory can help you with overcoming adverse reactions from the women you interact with or the social pressure of the people that look at you when you are M1. That counts especially for all the nice guys out there, that have had the idea that you need to treat women nicely.

Andres 




Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2011, 09:48:55 PM »
Alan you are a tough mofo I have to say ;-) If we ever go to war together I hope you are on my side ;-)

 :)

Ok,

Effective, M1, direct etc. are simply labels and you may use them in a different way from how I use them. M1 is your label and you have complete authority over it. The rest is a matter of agreeing on a definition. So whether something is effective or direct is not to be defined by you unless you state your definition ;-)

I don't totally agree with that.  My definitions of what is "effective" behavior VS "ineffective" behavior might be highly subjective to a degree, but not my definitions of "direct" VS "indirect."

Look in any common dictionary and see how they define 'direct' and 'indirect.'  Look in any thesaurus and see what other words are synonyms for 'direct' and 'indirect.'  There is no gray area.  It is cut and dry.

Direct is when you communicate something to someone, and the person who you are talking to understands COMPLETELY, TOTALLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY what it is you are communicating to them.

Indirect is when you communicate something to someone, and what you communicate is LEFT OPEN TO INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATION by the person you're talking to.  In other words, they are not specifically clear on what your desires, interests and intentions are.

That is not subjective.  Those are objective definitions.

I like the idea of congruence between verbal and non-verbal communication. I think so too that you get the message across as clearly as possible if you speak the same language on both levels. M1 is the purest of all filters I know: it finds the girls that like M1 behaviour and that are up for sex with you very effectively.

When you are dealing with straightforward, non-manipulative type women, it really doesn't matter what approach you use.  Direct or Indirect.  You're going to get the same result.  If a woman is 100% interested in you, you can be either direct or indirect, and she's going to date you or sleep with you.

If a woman has 0% interest in you, it doesn't matter if you are direct or indirect ... she's not going to date you or sleep with you.

The trickier women are the more manipulative types.  The women who are not interested in you, but are PRETENDING to be;  Or, the women who ARE interested in you, but they are PRETENDING NOT TO BE.  With this group of women, I think direct is much more effective than indirect.  Much more.

M1 is a trade off: you are not taking the risk to waste time and money by any means (benefit) for the sacrifice of the women that would sleep with you if you did not display M1 behaviour but interacted with them differently. If your aim is to sleep with as many women as possible, I believe that there are situations in which M1 is better and others in which other approaches work better. In a world of unlimited access to women, like we have today, you can apply M1 because you can simply hit all of the three billion women (few mingers you gotta take on the way ;-)) and staistically a few percent of the women will say yes. That's all you need. Is it a nice interaction? Who cares, it is anyway more honest after you had sex with them. All you miss out on is 'the dance'.

I always say, if you feel as though you have a lot of free time to invest in pursuing women, being Mode One is not that big of a deal.  You can choose to be either direct or indirect ... it really doesn't matter.

My big thing is, I don't like to waste time.  I don't even like talking to a woman for more than four or five minutes if she has not given me a definite sign of attraction and interest.

Counter example

You are on a small island vacation and there are three hot girls. You are there for three days. Only one girl likes the M1 approach. The other two want a guy that is not M1 but charms them and makes them feel good over the course of one evening before they put out. If you go M1, two girls will never talk to you again.

M1: 1 lay
Indirect: 2 lays
=Indirect is more effective

Let me know... but let's not get into game theory please ;-)

That is way too hypothetical for me.  For starters, how would you know (ahead of time) if a woman preferred a direct approach or an indirect approach, before you even talked to them?  That would never happen in real life.

Secondly, being direct and being charming are not antonyms or opposites.  I am Mode One/Direct with women, and I have many women refer to me as "charming."

I can't say that I agree that indirect would be more effective on that "island" example of yours.

The biggest plus of M1 I can see is that the supply of women is endless so to speak and if you can sift through a lot of them you will no doubt get some and get some good shit too, because the hotter girls bite on it hard usually. That's effective but not necessarily most efficient. I like the dance and I like to turn a girl around because it takes skill and I have it. For me a combination works out better because I enjoy meeting people and not just telling them that I want to get with them even though I get a buzz out of that, too ;-) Have you ever had a girl that changed her mind last minute? I.e. she agreed on sex and then chickened out? I guess that doesn't happen often, but it can even with M1.

One thing I want know about you: have you always been a natural to some degree? It takes a lot of skill to communicate M1 effectively. A lot of guys don't even know how to start a conversation with a girl. You need to fight a lot of internal battles as a beginner before you get M1 across well. And regular PU theory can help you with overcoming adverse reactions from the women you interact with or the social pressure of the people that look at you when you are M1. That counts especially for all the nice guys out there, that have had the idea that you need to treat women nicely.

Andres

If guys were being their real selves, they would always know what to say to women.

That is one of my criticisms of teaching indirect methods.  When a guy starts learning various forms of indirect approaches, at his core, he remains afraid of both rejection and criticism.  And that is what holds most men back.

That is why men develop "approach anxiety."  Not because they don't know what to say to women, but they're trying too hard to say, "The right thing at the right time in the right way."  You can't do that with women. 

I just say whatever the fuck is on my mind.  I don't give a fuck.  Being direct takes BALLS more so than I would say it takes 'talent' or 'skill.'  You just have to have the balls to not be afraid of harsh criticisms from women, and not to be afraid of rejection.

Just let the women know what you're REALLY thinking.

Offline Andres

  • Cafe Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2011, 09:12:03 AM »
Hi warrior :-)

This is my last post on this topic because I think we are revolving around the same issues and we won't find a consens since you are M1 only and I am willing to take other approaches into account... I like M1: yesterday I was out with my friend Tom Torero. We were out with this German girl. The guys who follow Tom's youtube channel know her. She is the surfer girl :-) The high maintenance, bitchy, I am the shit type of girl. In reality very insecure, but playing over it big time. She was Tom's girl and I was just hanging out having fun. We tried every technique I know on her: we went into RJ patterns, neck massages, jealousy by hitting on other girls (which worked the best on her as she was getting very worked up), comfort-seduction models a la AFC Adam, freezing her out, making her pay for drinks, touching her in a sexual way, sexual innuendo and metaphors chase cycles, qualification, vacuums... she was blushing, laughing, got nervous, got serious, got turned on... it was all there. Yet, she wouldn't put out. So I texted Tom: Dude, I don't know. Let's listen to Alan. I suggest I go to the bathroom and you go M1. So Tom did exactly that. She resisted. So I took her outside of the bar and told her. What is wrong with you? You cannot have possibly had a better night in months and it is clear that Tom doesn't want to talk anymore. You give all the signs too, so why don't you guys hit it off and I go home and sleep. She says: well, I am looking for someone to show me London. Tom knows that. She was lying: she is looking for a boyfriend. She had many guys in the past and she wants to be loved. Simple as that. She feels like a piece of meat and I can understand that, because that's how I usually feel when I am out at night... all these girls stalking me ;-) So I tell Tom: fuck it man! This is a waste of time. She is up for something serious. Whatever, we hit another bar and I finally go home thinking: man, we could have talked to lots of beautiful girls that night that have sex on their mind. Tom ended up in her bed, they made out, they didn't sleep with each other. She is still playing the game until she gets what she wants. I simply think that Tom is going to get her next time we take her out and do some entourage game, because she will feel that need to act. Then you can make her comply with whatever you want. BUT it will be a long fucking process and I argue that in this case it is simply not worth the effort. M1 would have been the most effective method. Yet, another method will get you laid with her. But you wasted a lot of time and effort simply because your interests are not alligned from the start and you have to make her see things your way. It is possible but it is hard work...

A pleasure Tom... bring me out... show me around... let me be the dancing monkey that creates attraction, but don't forget to put a coin in me ;-) Just kiddin' it was all good :-)

A pleasure Alan! I have to stop because this is inefficient behaviour for me: I am not a keyboard jokey, I prefer going out ;-) Great writing with you!

A.

Offline ModeOne4Ever

  • Cafe Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: 3
  • New around here
    • View Profile
Re: M1 vs Yad Nonsense!! What truly stands behind techinques!!
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2011, 02:51:49 PM »
Hi warrior :-)

This is my last post on this topic because I think we are revolving around the same issues and we won't find a consens since you are M1 only and I am willing to take other approaches into account... I like M1: yesterday I was out with my friend Tom Torero. We were out with this German girl. The guys who follow Tom's youtube channel know her. She is the surfer girl :-) The high maintenance, bitchy, I am the shit type of girl. In reality very insecure, but playing over it big time. She was Tom's girl and I was just hanging out having fun. We tried every technique I know on her: we went into RJ patterns, neck massages, jealousy by hitting on other girls (which worked the best on her as she was getting very worked up), comfort-seduction models a la AFC Adam, freezing her out, making her pay for drinks, touching her in a sexual way, sexual innuendo and metaphors chase cycles, qualification, vacuums... she was blushing, laughing, got nervous, got serious, got turned on... it was all there. Yet, she wouldn't put out. So I texted Tom: Dude, I don't know. Let's listen to Alan. I suggest I go to the bathroom and you go M1. So Tom did exactly that. She resisted. So I took her outside of the bar and told her. What is wrong with you? You cannot have possibly had a better night in months and it is clear that Tom doesn't want to talk anymore. You give all the signs too, so why don't you guys hit it off and I go home and sleep. She says: well, I am looking for someone to show me London. Tom knows that. She was lying: she is looking for a boyfriend. She had many guys in the past and she wants to be loved. Simple as that. She feels like a piece of meat and I can understand that, because that's how I usually feel when I am out at night... all these girls stalking me ;-) So I tell Tom: fuck it man! This is a waste of time. She is up for something serious. Whatever, we hit another bar and I finally go home thinking: man, we could have talked to lots of beautiful girls that night that have sex on their mind. Tom ended up in her bed, they made out, they didn't sleep with each other. She is still playing the game until she gets what she wants. I simply think that Tom is going to get her next time we take her out and do some entourage game, because she will feel that need to act. Then you can make her comply with whatever you want. BUT it will be a long fucking process and I argue that in this case it is simply not worth the effort. M1 would have been the most effective method. Yet, another method will get you laid with her. But you wasted a lot of time and effort simply because your interests are not alligned from the start and you have to make her see things your way. It is possible but it is hard work...

A pleasure Tom... bring me out... show me around... let me be the dancing monkey that creates attraction, but don't forget to put a coin in me ;-) Just kiddin' it was all good :-)

A pleasure Alan! I have to stop because this is inefficient behaviour for me: I am not a keyboard jokey, I prefer going out ;-) Great writing with you!

A.

Interesting and Entertaining story ...

Mode One definitely saves time!