GIRLS CHASE MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION
• Unlimited access to GirlsChase.com
What does skillful indirect game look like, when used to pick up girls? This case study follows a successful indirect club game pick up, from open to close.As I’m about to close my series on indirect game, I’ve decided to share a report to serve as an example of how I use this game style.
In the comments sections of my previous articles, readers told me I did not share any (or enough) examples of how to use indirect game. Frankly, they were not wrong to request this. After all, examples are good pedagogic tools.
Therefore, I decided to share a report that shows how I use indirect game. I usually don’t write lay reports since they take a lot of time to type (and I’m known to be overly detailed). That said, any good seducer will agree that writing reports about your nights out and reading others’ reports are some of the best tools a seducer can use to become good.
If you decide to read through this long post, I promise you that you will become a BETTER seducer. Not only will techniques be exemplified, but you will also learn how everything comes together. I’m trying to make this a hybrid between a report and a guide.
I’ve written other reports, most using some form of indirect game:
The first part of this report covers the preparations, the early time of the night, the “getting back into it” phase when you are dealing with bad state and momentum (as you will see, this night is a bit unique since I was rusty because of the COVID-19 lockdown).
However, if you prefer reading about the interaction with the girl I pulled (I will cover this in great detail with all the juicy information), then skip to part two, labeled “The Wizard Strikes Back.” I would still recommend reading the entire article.
Comments
Great Article
This maye the article of 2020! Educational, yet very entertaining; explains lots of tech and has a nice reading flow to it. Just my opinion :)
Thanks!
Thank you! This is much appreciated. I really spent lots of times writing this up. And I really had genuine interest in writing this one to be as great as possible- So this is heartwarming. Thank you.
Best,
Alek
I liek this article
Hi Alek I love this article
Thanks
Hey there and thanks.
It is always motivating to hear people enjoy your work.
Not sure if Chase is reading, but I will let him know you enjoyed it.
Best,
Alek
Well..
It's hard to believe you could actually pull her after all that talk and stuff inbetween. To me you came of like a teacher and I think that whole "let me tell you what men do wrong/women need freedom" lesson has been so outdated by now, that I would assume this does more damage to you in most situations. I would be willing to bet that you would fail doing it in 9/10 ocassions.
But to me this was a perfect example why I prefer direct game over this because you risk way more losing or boring her after a while. I might lose a woman too but at least she is out of my system when I approach her directly. In the end of the day you could have got her anyway and way sooner had you been more straight forward because one thing I know about women is that you can't build attraction with them, it's either there or not. You can for sure fuck it up but you can't build it up if she is not interested in the first place. In your case she was so that whole indirect game thing wasn't needed at all.
Too many flaws in the argument - recommended readings
Hi there.
Before I go on, I would mention that you seem to enjoy what you are doing and if what ever you are doing gives you the results you want, I will not be the one to argue. That said, I may have a different agenda to you:
- I want to bang the best girls I can, and not rely on heavy screening (which direct game is, which you hint at yourself)
- I want to maintain a crazy meet-to-lay ratio (1 in 5 average).
- I do not like rejections and if they happen (one in a while) they are of a light nature.
First of all, your argument stats with a weird twist. How can coming off as a teacher be detrimental? That is "authority" frame at its best (and was intentional - but good job pointing out the frame!). Just read Dr. Robert Cialdinis books on persuasion (which are classics) and you will see this discussed over and over again. But don't take my word for it; just pay attention to very clear clues in your daily life. People having that "teacher frame" has seductive power. Just turn on your TV and watch a politician (can give plenty of other examples).
Secondly, may I ask how sexual subjects surrounding dating, sex, relationship are some of the most captivating subjects to human beings - women in particular. It is also well-known from marketing studies that "sex sells" (almost a sociological and social-psychological consensus) . You are free to stand by your words, but it surely goes against very solid scientific researches. But let us for the sake of the argument, claim you are not a believer of science, then I invite you to watch any chick-crack TV shows, or open any female magazine, or just head to a coffee shop and overhear some girl-talk and you will see that the main subjects of conversation is "sex", "dating", "relationships". I think this premise is undeniable. Hence how would such subjects bore her - not only occasionally, but in 9/10 occasions!! (that's quite a bold number!), especially considering you add authority frame to the mix!?
(Also claiming the subject is outdated is also a strange and bold claim, and surely does not shift the current scientific paradigm within humanities and social science - a field I work with on an academic level FYI)
And from there, the argument on why you prefer direct game, because, as you claim "anything else would bore her" simply falls short - and is honestly a quite weak one. I can buy the whole "hard screen" argument, and I agree with it. But this argument is quite weak (for the reasons specified above)-
Secondly you adopt another shaky argument - the good gold "but all you did was useless - since she was into you from the get-go".
I must honestly ask the following questions:
- What made you believe so? You provide no points to back up this argument.
- In general, unless specified by the writer there is no way for you to know. Where you there to know and see?
This type of argument which is nothing new in this community since it serves no other purpose than to attempt to discredit the other persons points and remarks. There is a reason for why any serious and high level pick up forum would ban such argument.
Lastly, your interpretation of "attraction either is there or it isn't" is flawed. Being a close friend with the writer (Chase), I can tell you that he never intended people to have this dogmatic and categorical (but also flawed) interpretation. Yes I agree, you cannot CREATE attraction, but you can build compliance. Attraction is hence not a necessity to get laid. Compliance is. That said, attraction does equal high amounts of compliance (obviously). I have discussed this in my series on indirect game game, as well as elsewhere (forum and other forum posts).
Again, do whatever works for you, but this to me does not seem like solid argumentation. Additionally, your points are bold and controversial and very incoherent with not only known pick up/seduction knowledge (which I know...), but also with very solid scientific findings - but also very known facts (any marketer knows sex sells! and that authority equals compliance). You are welcome to defend whatever position (I am pro free speech), but such bold statements needs to be backed up with more solid justification.
Best,
Alek
Answer II
"I want to bang the best girls I can, and not rely on heavy screening (which direct game is, which you hint at yourself)"
I am not sure what you mean by heavy screening but nontheless girls are still girls, right? Are you saying the hottest girls are harder to bang and need more investment? If so, how come they have high body counts (some say they don't but we will never know for sure)? So I guess average guys need more investment to get with them because they usually only fuck with hot guys? I am ok with that but it would prove that game is not the same for every guy.
" I want to maintain a crazy meet-to-lay ratio (1 in 5 average)"
But the way you do it, you would have to spend way more time and energy to even get to one lay.
"I do not like rejections and if they happen (one in a while) they are of a light nature."
I think it's way easier to overcome a rejection within minutes than after hours of gaming her. Imagine you spent all that time to game her and you start to actually like the girl but she rejects you anyway later because she only sees you as a guy who she can hang out with and talk to. That would make me feel a lot worse than being rejected from the get go.
"How can coming off as a teacher be detrimental? That is "authority" frame at its best (and was intentional - but good job pointing out the frame!)"
I agree in general with that statement. But what are the chances a hot girl in her 20s has never experienced a PUA or even a regular guy trying to teach her at the very first meeting about sexual seduction and what men do wrong with women? I can see it working well with a guy who already gives of the vibe of a player and who has the looks to back it up but imagine some unattractive nice guy trying to pull this off, it just wouldn't come off authentic. If it works for you, i guess you know why. But I have seen so many guys trying to game women like that in their field reports that I wonder how many women are left who haven't been approached like that? I have even seen this kind of approach in movies.
"Secondly, may I ask how sexual subjects surrounding dating, sex, relationship are some of the most captivating subjects to human beings - women in particular. It is also well-known from marketing studies that "sex sells" (almost a sociological and social-psychological consensus)."
No, like I said in my last comment I am all for sexual subjects, in fact I believe it's the only subject that is fun to talk about with women. I don't like to talk to women about sports, politics etc, so I am definitely with you here. What I was against was the way it was conducted but I mentioned that already. I am more of a person who says to a woman "I see you work out" and when she asks how I coud tell I say "I can see it on your ass and legs that you are doing squats regularly - even in the gym...."
"And from there, the argument on why you prefer direct game, because, as you claim "anything else would bore her" simply falls short - and is honestly a quite weak one."
I meant to say it would bore her because she has most likely heard that a million times before. Women do also read about game so they know men are gaming them whenever they try to teach them in a Club about sex and seduction. They obviously they have instincts to know what you are doing. I would even go so far to say, the moment you came back to the latina to actually talk to her after ignoring her first was the moment she knew you were interested. I am sure women can tell.
"Secondly you adopt another shaky argument - the good gold "but all you did was useless - since she was into you from the get-go". What made you believe so?"
She was around you all night long in the club and she gave you a BJ, which means she already was on. There was no other dude she was interested in or who made a big move on her if I am not mistaken. You basically had her. I mean how much time passed between the first time you talked to her until you went home with her? How much time did you spend in the club? Maybe you were sure of her after the BJ that you had her, I can see that.
"This type of argument which is nothing new in this community since it serves no other purpose than to attempt to discredit the other persons points and remarks. There is a reason for why any serious and high level pick up forum would ban such argument."
Well I am glad you didn't because that's why I don't go to PUA forums, they are stuck in their philosophies and don't allow different views. I think that's the whole point of a debate, to see things from different perspectives.
"Lastly, your interpretation of "attraction either is there or it isn't" is flawed. Being a close friend with the writer (Chase), I can tell you that he never intended people to have this dogmatic and categorical (but also flawed) interpretation."
That's just my own oppinion, it has nothing to do with Chase. Just like I don't believe in shit tests, I believe women who shit test you, are not really interested in you, they are just looking for a reason to disqualify you but that's another topic.
"Yes I agree, you cannot CREATE attraction, but you can build compliance. Attraction is hence not a necessity to get laid. Compliance is."
Right but how much time do you need to actually build compiance in general? Do you think you slept with that latina girl because you built compliance in a few hours or because she found you sexually attractive anyway? That's why I asked you how much time you spent in the club talking to her? Doesn't compliance usually take more time to build up?
Bizzy aka NaturalMikey
Bizzy (aka naturalmikey).
For those curious about why I am about so "harsh" with Bizzy/Mikey, may check out numerous of his troll-users on the forums - where he pose as different personalities of different races. You may check his posting history, here is list of his users:
* NaturalMikey
* jonjames
* Mrbolton
* stillgotit (the black guy user)
* LouisVuitton
* Slick
I did not realize until now (until someone told me) that you were naturalmikey - one of the most infamous trolls we have had around here (the forums). At least this time, you do not pose as an offended black guy (despite being white). Are you not fed up with all this at this point?
Yet, I feel obligated to respond to you now, out of compassion to our readers. They expect clarity from me and hence I should provide this. But it helps me knowing that you are not arguing in good faith and that your intentions are malicious. I hope my breakdown here, will show the reader that my claims concerning your trollish are not unjustified. Your comments seemed off from the get-go, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt in good faith, until our IT team notified me.
So here is the break downs:
1. You claim women get bored talking about sex, and when you convey an authority frame. Yet you agreed that both having an authority frame and talk about sex (and relationships etc) were both powerful elements. How then can a girl then be bored? There is a clear contradiction here. PS: she clearly was not bored in our conversation.
2. Now onto your claim that "women have heard of PUA's" - but is a girl so up to date that she is reading Girlschase (only a microscopic % does...). Maybe they have, maybe not. It simply does not matter, because huffington post is not giving them any detailed template on how things work. Additionally, they are much more familiar with direct game (ironically you shoot yourself in the foot here) as unfortunately pick up and seduction has gotten media attention as a result of calibrated guys using DIRECT GAME (not saying direct game is equal to harassment or rape, just that those who happened to be involved were using this style). Most youtube videos and so on, that are about pick up, promotes direct game. If what you are saying is true, then women for sure know of game... but DIRECT GAME, not indirect game. Indirect game is old school (2000's). Yes it is is the in the early 2000's some women were aware of elements from the Mystery Method (negs etc), but only on a superficial level. She wouldn't be up to date with latest tech. Again your comment is odd and inaccurate - and in-line with your past behaviour. (PS: last I was busted for doing pick up was in 2008, after using obvious lines from the best-selling book "the game").
3. And now, for the sake of the argument, let us assume the absurd, namely that women magically knows about the latest tech, written on a side like girlschase (and equivalent sites) that covers a niche market. In which case, why would that automatically make her bored? I have read Plato's books. Doesn't make me bored discussing "The Republic". I have watched the Mandalorian, doesn't mean I do not enjoy discussing it. Again just because something is known doesn't correlate with someone being bored discussing it. Quite the contrary. So even if your point above was indeed correct (which it isn't), it still wouldn't back up your argument that she was bored. And if she was indeed bored, she wouldn't discuss this was as long.
4. Which leads me to the next point: she stuck around and listened, eventually gave a BJ. Obviously a girl who is interest would pay more attention. But you are here mixing cause and effect. The Blowjob (her desire to do that) is not what caused her to listen to my rambles, but the effects of my words. The Hook was cause by opening, not the other way around. The BJ was cause by something I did prior to that. Obviously freebies exists, but as I pointed out clearly in my article, this girl was clearly in attention-seeking mode - so that can more or less be excused. If she was also just looking for dicks, she had plenty of options with guys of better looks, and quite frankly of more sexy vibe than I had.
But what your comment is all about, is basically trying to say "none of what you do works" and "success was more in spite of, rather than because of what I was doing. But this is good old naturalmikey style, and the narrative you have pushed when you tried to troll all elders (what the moves truly were, we will never know).
5. About heavy screening - direct game is focused on hard screening, and losing out potentially hot girls. You even say so yourself: "Imagine you spent all that time to game her and you start to actually like the girl but she rejects you anyway later because she only sees you as a guy who she can hang out with and talk to. That would make me feel a lot worse than being rejected from the get go." Here you say you prefer going in hard and fast, get rejected and move on if things doesn't work out from the get go (note: it may have worked out if you had gone indirect). Regarding the latter part of your statement, there are obviously no guarantees that the girl may not just make you waste tons of time. But even direct gamers are not protected from this - in fact they may go home with a girl and then be dealt with a crap-lots of resistance. Game is at the end of the day all about increasing your odds.
And no, I am not willing to just hit and burn until I find a girl receptive to me. I may have done so in the past, like everybody, but my goals these days (and I am sure many men share equal goals) is to get the girl (or one of the girl) they consider hot (or even, like in my case the hottest). Again, some men are happy with any job they can get, other aim higher.
6. The time I spend on getting a girl depends on the situation and the girl. The style of game plays little impact on this. That said, indirect game is generally more efficient. I will write more on why in some upcoming posts. The reasons are twofold: in case you bump into a girl who is into you from the get go, you will just escalate and show interest (honestly, things won't differ too much from direct game in this case), however in case there is a girl who is not that into you, or WHO MAY BE INTO YOU, but packed with resistance. Dealing with resistance takes time, you know? Hence why I prefer dodging it alltogether.
In the case of this exact report, it took time because of a logistical situation, that would be there no matter what style of game you would have played (although, if I did use direct game, I problem wouldn't even hook this girl). But again, you say so yourself you do not do club game, you said yourself you only spam approached average looking girls on Tinder. So I am not sure how your words even matters at this point.
7. "Do you think you slept with that latina girl because you built compliance in a few hours" - the compliance building process took like 30 minutes. Nice strawman. And yes, I fully believe so. But again, what are my words worth to one of the most infamous trolls?
8. "Well I am glad you didn't because that's why I don't go to PUA forums, they are stuck in their philosophies and don't allow different views. I think that's the whole point of a debate, to see things from different perspectives." - You do not hang on PUA forums much, including our own skilledseducers because you have gotten banned, over and over again.
This will be my last response to you, for obvious matters. Mikey, you know, you are very transparent. You still use the same arguments as before, and constantly trying to discredit others and their material with lame rhetoric (due to your severe narcissism you are unable to see how transparent your moves are).
Bizzy (aka naturalmikey).
For those curious about why I am about so "harsh" with Bizzy/Mikey, may check out numerous of his troll-users on the forums - where he poses as different personalities of different races. You may check his posting history, here is list of his users:
* NaturalMikey
* jonjames
* Mrbolton
* stillgotit (the black guy user)
* LouisVuitton
* Slick
I did not realize until now (until someone told me) that you were naturalmikey - one of the most infamous trolls we have had around here (the forums mostly). At least this time, you do not pose as an offended black guy (despite being white). Are you not fed up with all this at this point?
Yet, I feel obligated to respond to you now, out of compassion to our readers. They expect clarity from me and hence I should provide this. But it helps me knowing that you are not arguing in good faith and that your intentions are malicious. I hope my breakdown here, will show the reader that my claims about you being troll are not unjustified (many readers are already familiar with you). Your comments seemed off from the get-go, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt in good faith, until I was notified it truly was you.
So here is the break downs:
1. You claim women get bored talking about sex when you on top, do so from a frame of authority. Yet you agreed that both having an authority frame and talk about sex (and relationships etc) were both powerful elements. How then can a girl be bored? There is a clear incoherence here, if not a pure contradiction. PS: she clearly was not bored in our conversation.
2. Now onto your claim that "women have heard of PUA's". Is a girl so up to date that she is reading Girlschase (only a microscopic % does...)? Such claim is absurd if you ask me. Maybe they have, maybe not. It simply does not matter, because huffington post is not giving them any detailed template on how things work. Additionally, they are much more familiar with direct game (ironically you shoot yourself in the foot here) as unfortunately pick up and seduction has gotten most media attention lately as a result of uncalibrated guys using DIRECT GAME (not saying direct game is equal to harassment or rape, just that those who happened to be involved were using this style). Most youtube videos and so on, that are about pick up, promotes direct game. If what you are saying is true, then women for sure know of game... but DIRECT GAME, not indirect game. Indirect game is old school (from the 2000’s – do you really think women remembers a style from 10 years ago? A style that is today only used by the most advanced and skilled seducers, and not sold to the mass market?). Yes, it is in the in the early 2000's some women were aware of elements from the Mystery Method (negs etc), but only on a superficial level. She wouldn't be up to date with latest tech. Again, your comment is odd and inaccurate - and in-line with your past behaviour. (PS: last I was busted for doing pick up was in 2008, after using obvious lines from the best-selling book "the game").
3. And now, for the sake of the argument, let us assume the absurd, namely that women magically know about the latest tech, written on a site like Girlschase (or an equivalent site) that covers a niche market. In which case, why would that automatically make her bored? I have read Plato's books. Doesn't make me bored discussing "The Republic". I have watched the Mandalorian, doesn't mean I do not enjoy discussing it. Again, just because something is known doesn't correlate with someone being bored discussing it. Quite the contrary. So even if your point above was indeed correct (which it isn't), it still wouldn't back up your argument that she was bored. And if she was indeed bored, she wouldn't discuss this all along, but seek other sources of excitement.
4. Which leads me to the next point: she stuck around and listened, and eventually gave a BJ. Obviously, a girl who is interested would pay more attention to things you say. But you are here mixing cause and effect. The Blowjob (her desire to do that) is not what caused her to listen to my rambles, but the effects of my ramble. You are turning around causes and effects is just an absurd statement. The Hook was caused by the opening, not the other way around just as the BJ was causes by something I did prior to that event. Obviously, freebies exist, but as I pointed out clearly in my article, this girl was clearly in attention-seeking mode - so that can be excused. If she was also just looking for dicks, she had plenty of options with guys of better looks, and quite frankly of sexier vibe than I had.
But what your comment is all about, is basically trying to say, "none of what you do works," and "success was more in spite of, rather than because of what you were doing”. This is good old naturalmikey style, and the narrative you have pushed when you trolled all elders (what the motives behind all this truly are, we will never know).
5. About heavy screening - direct game is focused on hard screening and losing out potentially hot girls. You even say so yourself: "Imagine you spent all that time to game her and you start to actually like the girl but she rejects you anyway later because she only sees you as a guy who she can hang out with and talk to. That would make me feel a lot worse than being rejected from the get-go." You say you prefer going in hard and fast, get rejected and move on if things don’t work out from the get-go (note: it may have worked out if you had gone indirect). Regarding the latter part of your statement, there are obviously no guarantees that the girl may not just make you waste tons of time. But even direct gamers are not protected from this - in fact they may go home with a girl and then face a crap-lots of resistance. Game is at the end of the day all about increasing your odds while being as efficient and possible.
And no, I am not willing to just hit and burn until I find a girl receptive to me. I may have done so in the past, like everybody, but my goals these last years (and I am sure many men share equal goals) is to get the girl (or one of the girl) I consider hot (or even, like in my case the hottest). Again, some men are happy with any gigs they can get, others aim higher.
Also, I wonder how spam approaching and getting rejected left (a painful process) and right until they find one who bites (who may not be the ideal girl) – is more efficient than approach 2-3 groups of girls, and get one of them? Again, flawed argumentation which only have deception in mind.
6. The time I spend on getting a girl depends on the situation and the girl (it is all about calibration). The style of game chosen has little impact on this. That said, indirect game is generally more efficient. I will write more on why in some upcoming posts. The reasons are twofold: in case you bump into a girl who is into you from the get go, you will just escalate and show interest (honestly, things won't differ too much from direct game in this case), however in case there is a girl who is not that into you, or WHO MAY BE INTO YOU, but packed with resistance. Dealing with resistance takes time, you know? Hence why I prefer dodging it altogether.
In the case of this exact report, it took time because of a logistical situation, that would be there no matter what style of game one would have used (although, if I did use direct game, I probably wouldn't even hook this girl in the first place). But again, you have said so yourself - you do not even do club game, you said yourself you only spam approach average looking girls on Tinder. So, I am not sure how your words even matter at this point.
7. "Do you think you slept with that latina girl because you built compliance in a few hours" - the compliance building process took like 30 minutes. Nice strawman. And yes, I fully believe so. But again, what are my words worth to one of the most infamous trolls?
8. "Well I am glad you didn't because that's why I don't go to PUA forums, they are stuck in their philosophies and don't allow different views. I think that's the whole point of a debate, to see things from different perspectives." - You do not hang on PUA forums much, including our own skilledseducers because you have gotten banned, repeatedly. Not for sharing your views, but by constantly discrediting and attacking other people and their material.
Mikey, you know, you are very transparent. You still use the same arguments as before, and constantly trying to discredit others and their material with lame rhetoric (due to your severe narcissism you are unable to see how transparent your moves are).
I will let the person in charge of the comment section decide whether or not your comments should be removed, and if your current user should be deleted.
Best,
Alek
Troll
I will answer that response of yours tomorrow but man who the hell is Mike and those other 23 troll users?
Please check my IP adress, I am european and have no clue who you are talking about. I used to be Bmontana that's the only account I have ever used here before but I couldn't remember my email so I created a new one. Do your research please
Answer
Oh, I see. Well I didn't go into specifics because I thought it would take too long and nobody was going to read it anyway. But if you allow me I will answer all your questions later because I am about to go to work soon. Btw, I am all about sexual talk, that wasn't my issue at all. But I will answer later.
Hi alek I really enjoyed this
Hi alek I really enjoyed this post and the previous series where I was sold to this type of game but I tell you where I still struggle to understand and I think many others. Being such a subtle game I think you should better explain the use of the non-verbal in relation to the verbal and non-verbal. In the sense of how you accompany everything you say from the tone to the expressions etc. Furthermore, I think that explaining all the glue that exists in seduction is the missing key to understanding and applying the indirect. there is also reading the previous article where you say to show interest in using qualification disqualification speeches etc are ok. But then in practice we who do not have your experience feel lost because we lack that glue. I hope you understand me and answer me or make articles about it maybe it's like transmitting tension and other things, and I've also read the articles but maybe that something missing is possible only through videos in the field I don't know. There is perhaps to understand all these variables such as voltage, calibration etc. expressed in every moment of the interaction would be needed to convey the sharpness and perhaps even the thought behind it .... I know it's a bit confusing as a thing but it's the confusion that I can't explain.
Farek
Hi Farek!
I am happy you enjoyed reading this report, as well as my series on indirect game.
Well as you can imagine, I already covered quite a bit in this report. It is actually currently the longest post on girlschase. It is actually 23 word pages long. I couldn't really add more details into this one - else it would have gotten even long than it is. When I sent this article in for editing, the editor and Chase were like "oh what is this monster" haha.
Additionally, I am more of a verbal guy than anything - so I tend to focus more on verbals than non-verbals (of course my non-verbals are in check and good). And beside the opening part (which I believe I described quite in details surrounding the non-verbal elements) the main emphasis of this report was the verbal game and the way I handled the tricky logistics. Each report will emphasise different things.
The thing with reports is that I cannot just add stuff that didn't take place IRL into it. Not only can I do not do it, but I shouldn't do it if I am want to keep the report as true to the real event as possible. Hence, if I did not use X tech during that particular night, then I can't add it to the report.
As you mentioned, there are plenty of other ways of using indirect game. It is not like I will use every technique or every strategy there is every time I head out. The selection of strategy and technique will depend on the night: the girl, the situation, and honestly, also my mood. Here I had the ability to have a long 1-on-1 talk, and hence the focus on verbal game.
But if you want a report focusing more on non-verbal game, then I would recommend you reading this report:
https://www.girlschase.com/content/sexual-tension-report-1-girl-who-woul...
AND! Next week I will post a report from the week end right after involving more non-verbals and a totally different strategy. Maybe this report will be satisfying your needs! Stay tuned.
Best,
Alek
So I reread the whole series
So I reread the whole series and some related articles and reread the article to make myself clearer.
The point I found is that what I mean can never be expressed in the article. I'm talking about the complexity that is expressed in every second of interaction. To make you understand, tyson could write a book about how to fight but he will never be able to convey what he would convey to me in a video or live. It was the expression of complexity that if you say find a clone of you and make her say the same things she will not get the same result as you if she does not perform all those variables every second of the interaction.
However, I had the intuition that perhaps the best relationship to explain the direct and make them understand the effectiveness is one of the most subtle situations socially ... as if for example you are 18 years old and your older sister has a child and therefore feast of the little son there are the mothers of the kindergarten and you want to try it with one who is therefore married but who often in that context are with her husband with inertia. Or that you go for a visit and you like the doctor. I think that analyzing certain social situations and understanding how to seduce in those contexts can convey even better
But in addition to this I would have some questions re-reading all this stuff that concerns the indirect and therefore not only on the article but on the series:
1) you say you don't use many techniques ... but how many are enough with this style in reality on average? and has the number you use changed over time? I assume that it has decreased and that every seducer must decrease them over time or am I wrong?
2) do you express tension in a non-verbal way when you are in normal speeches and instead when you are in sexual speeches you do not use it? do you balance everything then?
3) during the day or in any situation where you are in a rush, do you use a more direct approach? Because I thought that the indirect force less seduction and therefore the times can get longer waiting for it to start showing interest
4) If you only get compliance if you are interested in some way then we can't build attraction if a girl isn't interested in us? because in the article on attraction there is or there isn't, I understood that even if she is not attracted you can make them conform to you and then she will be attracted but here I understood that if you do not care you will not get conformity. So how to do it?
5) You also have to calibrate yourself based on you but on what? to the style to the type of face, body, etc. and how aggressive you are in total as a figure?
6) since there is a potential of interest that may not be exposed by you, does it make sense to show more interest every now and then to see if it was already ready while if it is not showing disinterest? and therefore in efficiency the proportionality of interest with his is more important or does it matter more who begins to show more interest?
7) if she doesn't show interest how to continue the conversation to get her to build compliance? there if he had shown but then no I take off the interest and continue a normal conversation ...? but what if he never shows it from the start? let's say when I am there since I cannot change fundamentals or simply do not care the only thing to build conformity is to try to use verbal games that are sexual speeches but I must have a minimum of conformity as well as the tracking frames. ... and therefore I cannot use them ... and therefore the only way is to build value in the conversation?
8) alek furthermore reading the report on the non-direct or read that you would have talked more about it in the middle of the article about how to scale for the contact from a social touch to more explicit ... so I went to your account to read the articles in order chronological but now it no longer gives me the opportunity to see all your articles but only the last ones .... there is some error in the site maybe and even the dates of the articles are no longer seen
Great stuff
Thank you Alek for the report. Amazing stuff!!
Your verbals and in-game analytical skills are out of this world man.
I wish I could pull that level of verbals on girls.
Leave a Comment