Thoughts on the state of game in the US post COVID: QBFs, plus a new day game model.

Posted by

The infamous QBFs

A LOT of girls are still with their quarantine boyfriends.

Redquest was right about that early on–any girl who was a 6 or better was going to shack up with a guy and stick with him through the duration of the pandemic. Girls don’t like being alone, so if she was in a relationship or on the edge of one it pushed her to go all in, and any girl who was single back in March 2020 found a guy quick among her orbiters, or on OLD and called it good.

This isn’t the kind of relationship most girls are willing to throw away for a quick fuck. Women can be brutally cruel when it comes to choosing men, but breaking up with a guy you rode out the pandemic with after spending hours upon hours together locked up and bonding, isn’t something that’s going to happen the first moment she decides (or realizes) he’s boring.

No, two things have to happen first:

  1. She’s got to see that she has options.
  2. She’s got to have logistics–a lot of girls who were going to college, working as waitresses or baristas, etc., are still living at home in the burbs and/or don’t know exactly what they’re going to do going forward.

That’s a lot of uncertainty, another thing women don’t like, so until some of these questions are answered and she has a better idea of what’s going to happen going forward, she’s not moving on.

Long story short, the market is A LOT smaller than it was pre-COVID. Now at some point, that’s going to shift back as things return to normal. My guess is this starts happening to a fair degree in the fall, when girls go back to school or work in the city. We’ll see another cohort drop off around or shortly after the holidays, as people start to ask “is this serious/is he the one?” and she’s forced into realizing, “no, he’s not.” At some point over a long enough time period, girls are either going to marry the QBF, or get bored with him and want new experiences and relationships and sex with other guys.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that if you’re a single player, things are more difficult right now than they normally would be–but eventually things will return to normal. Because women are women: there’s a reason the divorce rate is 50% and 80% of all divorces are initiated by women, and it’s because on a long enough time frame, most guys lose interest in their eyes and they want to fuck other, hotter, more interesting bros.

On how to make Cold Approach more viable: American Day Game?

Disclaimer: cold approach works, and every guy should learn how to do it–what follows is not me saying day or night game isn’t worth it; rather, what I’m pondering is if there’s a better way to do it that’s more efficient and effective. Also, I’m gaming in the US. What I’m proposing may not seem relevant in other places, but it sure as hell is here.

One thing that makes cold approach difficult in the modern era is that it’s simply not the way people meet anymore. This is especially true of day game, because in night game at least it’s kind of understood that guys still sometimes ask chicks out and/or take them home. But if we’re honest, it’s pretty rare that a girl gets hit on during the day by a random stranger, both because most guys are pussies, and because smart phones have taken over our lives and a lot of people have become social morons who can’t talk to another human being.

As I’ve been getting out there with regularity doing the July Century Club, I’ve noticed two things in particular:

  1. Girls still absolutely love the attention–if you’re in the right environment and fit/stylish and socially calibrated, they’re still happy to talk and take the compliment, etc.
  2. The idea of giving their number to a random guy on the street is odd, and I get the sense that no matter how good your game, a lot of girls just aren’t going to do it. Ever. It’s a bit silly, because they’re perfectly willing to go on a date with some random guy off a dating app who may well be married, a drug addict, crazy, etc. But in the modern age that’s how things work, so girls go with it for the most part. As RedQuest told me today, “complaining about girls being irrational is like complaining it’s hot in the summer in Arizona.” He’s right, so what needs to change?

In this light, I’ve been rethinking the London Day Game Model (LDM). First, let me just say: it works. It’s what I teach. It’s as good a framework as we have for this stuff right now, and it accomplishes a lot of what needs to be done for a successful cold approach.

That said, it was created for use in London, where there are a lot of EU girls traveling who aren’t going to be great at English (why it’s good to go direct), and because they are traveling or new to a big city, more down for hooking up with a random guy. It was also created for guys doing Euro jaunts into Central and Eastern Europe, where the same dynamics are at play, only in this case it’s the guy who’s traveling. Makes sense: all my same day lays have been with girls from out of town, traveling alone.

But for guys here in the US, or even in other parts of Europe, Asia, and Australia, approaching women who live where we live, there’s a different dynamic, and I wonder if the LDM is really the best way to go here.

For one, my experience leads me to believe that opening American girls directly isn’t the ideal way to go. Why? Because it’s too arresting, too abrupt. Women here aren’t used to men being this bold, and while there’s no doubt they like it, the fact is that a direct approach comes across as low value; after all, men are not to be trusted–only a naive, foolish, silly girl would just go out with some random asshole off the street because he told her she was pretty.

So it’s better if it’s more casual, starting with a tease or observation, then a fun conversation where at some point the guy states his intent as if the realization has just hit him, “you know, you’re actually pretty cute.” Seems to me that American girls are a lot more likely to get coffee or drink with a guy who doesn’t show his cards right away; a better story to tell her friends: “oh, yeah we were just chatting, but he seemed really cool so I’m going to get a drink with him–here’s his IG (see below),” as opposed to, “he told me I was pretty on the street, so like a stupid girl who’s cheap and easy I’m going out with him.”

Two, I think that this is where getting her number, but also following her and having her follow you back on IG is money, because it builds COMFORT–you’re a real/normal guy, with friends, family, etc.–which is key, because the approach and randomness of meeting a stranger is so out of place for her.

Remember: this is not normal.

This doesn’t happen to her very often, especially outside of a night club. People meet now through OLD or social circle, and anything outside of those modalities is going to be viewed with some level of suspicion. So the point is to make this as NORMAL as possible for the girl, and a good way to do that is for her to know more about you–hence the social media connection via IG, or at least a business card or website she can visit to ascertain that you’re someone worth knowing. Additionally, if it’s a good account with strong pictures that DHV, you’re also building value.

The other thing I wonder a lot about is if, because American girls are so narcissistic by nature, Goldmund’s camera game or something along the same lines is something to utilize. Let’s face it: in the modern era, it’s all about clout and followers and being a cool guy who “gets it.” Her entire world revolves around IG, social media, SnapChat, and texting. She’s on her phone–a lot–and if you want to stay on the radar, you need to be some part of that world. So whether it’s being able to send her pictures you’ve taken of her, or appearing to do something in line with a larger purpose for yourself, or being able to offer her some experience or opportunity she would not otherwise have, it seems to me that if this is associated with getting her number and dating, there’s a much great chance she’s going to reply to texts and come out on the date.

I know guys on Twitter and in the Red Pill/Game community hate social media (not a huge fan myself), but it’s 2021. If you don’t have an IG, you’re a fucking dinosaur to a woman in her 20s. Any cool guy she wants to hang out with is going to be a part of that world and understand that world–and the higher quality photos and more followers you have, the better. Or go ahead and play it cool, but you’re going to miss a ton of quality chicks for stubbornness and being an old man. Again, it’s 2021: church girl Christians have tattoos and wear Vans and post ass pics on IG–and let me remind you that if you’re in it to be a player, it’s not all sundresses and classiness. Like, if she’s truly classy and chaste, she’s not going to fuck you anyway.

Anyway, going back to day game: the simple answer for an American girl is this–you’re just some random ass guy she met on the street. Who knows what you do or who you are? The only thing she knows, if you do the LDM, is that you want to fuck her (girls are many things, but when it comes to that stuff they aren’t stupid). So of course a high percentage of them flake out.

Keep in mind, a lot of this is hypothetical–something I’m going to test going forward–so it’s entirely possible I’m wrong. And again, it’s not that the typical cold approach aka LDM can’t work, because it certainly does and can: I just got laid a couple days ago doing just that.

But as society evolves, the player needs to evolve as well, and let’s face it: if there was a way to reduce the flaking and rejections, even by a 5% margin, it would be a massive advantage. So why not try to build a better mousetrap?

If you guys have any thoughts on how to develop an American Day Game/Cold Approach model, let me know–I’m going to try some of the stuff I’m describing and experiment with different approach models and tactics. Feel free to leave suggestions or ideas in the comments, and let’s treat this as a brain storm or a collective problem: we’re not here to criticize or bitch, but to work together and collaborate on how to make meeting women more effective and efficient.

Love you guys, and as always, thanks for reading.

3 comments

  1. With all the love and respect in the world… I am just going to swing away and argue here. It’s been a long time since I argued with you, RPD… so let’s do it.

    > only a naive, foolish, silly girl would just go out with some random asshole off the street because he told her she was pretty.

    Oh, come on. How could you even say this. You know it’s not true… you sound like a guy who doesn’t understand (and I know you do).

    Of course this works. It works now. It’s worked during covid (for guys that had the stones to keep approaching). It has always worked… at reasonable percentages, based on the guys value (just like all Game). It’s not “easy,” but there is no “easy” Game.

    And she doesn’t date you because you said she was pretty… she dates you if you’re solid, attractive guy… “a compliment opener” is just the first line. 1% of the stop. We know all this. This is all more than proven.

    >> because the approach and randomness of meeting a stranger is so out of place for her

    It is unusual… that is what makes cold approach so awesome. “It’s just like a movie.” And that is true now… but it also what they have been teaching for as long as I can remember – way before LDM. Lance Mason called it the “movie moment.”

    So… we can try to be “normal,” but is that attractive? No. Is it even fun? Not for me. Do you need to be “normal” to pickup girls… no.

    > The idea of giving their number to a random guy on the street is odd, and I get the sense that no matter how good your game, a lot of girls just aren’t going to do it
    > Remember: this is not normal.

    Right. This is why approach:lay ratios (for guys that aren’t complete liars) is relatively high (except for Roy Walker… don’t ever compare yourself to Roy Walker). A good working rule is “99%” of girls will say no. And if you start with that… assume that is TRUE… it doesn’t really matter why they say no. Have things changed so much a solid guy can’t find 1% yes? I don’t believe it. I know from personal exp that is not true.

    >> all my same day lays have been with girls from out of town, traveling alone.

    Here^: Can guys reading this spot the flaw in this argument? A SDL and the potential of daygame (or direct game for that matter) are not the same thing at all. Separate argument. SDL is even harder (low returns) than trying to get with girls via a DATE MODEL. SDL is hard (and is a “r selected” mans Game, that mostly works on “r reselects” girls).

    I am about 50:50 for SDLs… local girls vs tourists. I agree, SDL is a better option with tourists – you have time constraints. But saying “it’s hard to get SDLs” is not the same thing as “direct cold approach during the day doesn’t work anymore.” That does not follow.

    >> It was also created for guys doing Euro jaunts into Central and Eastern Europe

    It was mostly created by Yad… a local guy in London, doing “big city approaching.” Some tourists, some locals.
    All the jaunting came later. It’s big city Game. It works in every big city. This is not even debatable. I have done cold approach, and gotten laid, in SF, Shanghi China, Tokyo Japan, etc. Every place I have tried (except NYC, because I only had 6 days, and I still got two girls back to my room).

    I am old, and not that good looking. It’s game. It works. It has nothing to do with “Europe” (but it works there too).

    I’ll double down and say BECAUSE it’s during the day, and BECAUSE there is no alcohol, and BECAUSE it is direct, it is more powerful. Sometimes… that helps. Only a clear, bold, solid guy would even try. And that is the kind of guy she wants to date. The sober, daytime, street approach ITSELF is proof of who you are. That is a big part of why it works.

    > But for guys here in the US, or even in other parts of Europe, Asia

    My wing Sundance and I used to wonder if daygame just couldn’t be done on “local girls” very well. Well, I can tell you – at least in Japan, during Covid – I am only dating local girls now. And it works (even during Covid, I have closed 4 girls from cold approach during Covid).

    And (and I’ll write about this somewhere else): Jaunts give you a way to END relationships, and a reason act fast. Not only does daygame work in Asia (I have personally proven the model in Japan and China), but if you stay (which I am doing now), the rels last, and if you’re not that into her, you have to break up (which I am not used to) because you’re not moving on as the jaunt ends. I have had to break it off with two girls now… daygame pickups. Yes it works. Yes it’s real. Yes it works on local girls (of course it does, it’s not a “trick,” it’s a way to show value, that’s it).

    > in the modern age

    This is the thing I would say to guys in Game… the more you think anything “modern” will help you, the farther you are from the truth. Nothing in Game has changed, or ever will change. OLD is just traditional game, via message – it’s still the same. And daygame, most certainly, is ancient and effective.

    Do these things always stay the same? Of course they do.

    What is RPD doing here? He is starting the direct vs indirect debate… which is also TIMELESS. It’s a good debate (that doesn’t have much to do with daygame). I have seen this debate 1000X. Even the debate that, doesn’t change. Same, same, same. Get used to things “not changing.” Indirect is fine… valid, no dis. I don’t like it.. and since I have had this argument 1000x times, I could give my reasons, but I won’t. Indirect works. Direct works. None of it works without value…

    And none of that has changed because of covid or feminism or blah blah blah. Game does not change. There are no “hacks.” What really works – will always really work.

    If a guy is wondering about this… don’t start with “you.” Start with CHAD. Chad gets laid, right? Of course he does. Do you really think Chad is any different now than he was 10 years ago? 100 yrs ago? 1000 yrs ago? 10000 fucking years ago?!!!

    No. It’s game. Game helps you deliver your value to girls. That is it. No value, no game, no sex. Nothing changes.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. >> And she doesn’t date you because you said she was pretty… she dates you if you’re solid, attractive guy… “a compliment opener” is just the first line.

      Archetype theory. For “a certain type” of girl, what she can tell her friends about the approach is equally as important as how attractive you are (assuming you’re a sub-Chad-lite).

      >> So… we can try to be “normal,” but is that attractive? No.

      The most attractive thing to normal girls is doing socially acceptable things. If you want a normal (American) girl, you pretty much have to meet her in a normal way.

      Direct, London Daygame approaches filter for loners, quirky girls, and introverts, of which there are minimal.

      >> It is unusual… that is what makes cold approach so awesome. “It’s just like a movie.”

      It may be awesome, and it may be fun, but that doesn’t necessarily make it effective. Again, the mainstream girl doesn’t want a movie moment – she wants something that her friends would think is acceptable.

      >> This is the thing I would say to guys in Game… the more you think anything “modern” will help you, the farther you are from the truth. Nothing in Game has changed, or ever will change.

      Daygame has been dying (=declining in effectiveness) for years, and the pandemic has only accelerated this. I have a post outline written about this and I imagine you’ll have many comments.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s