Just came back from a date with an Italian girl who works in fashion. Very r in terms of her dress sense, tattoos and jewelry, but as I found out on the date: 27 years old. That means that her body agenda is working against, what I think, is her r inclination. Probably if I met her seven years ago it would have been a first date lay, but this was a standard coffee then drink.
The first venue was some simple get-to-know-you conversation, with all the standard “alpha” body language and Jon Matrix style demeanour.
Second venue was the same pub I took #45 to, where I ran through my escalation, went a bit deeper with the rapport, and kissed her. She let it happen but it didn’t go very far; certainly not into makeout territory. I decided that tonight wasn’t going to be the night. I kissed her outside the pub as well, and it got a bit further, which is useful information for the second date (if there is one). Then I dropped her off at the tube station and seeded the next date; I didn’t set a day in stone, but indicated that I wanted to see her again. The date was two hours long on the dot.
What’s occurred to me recently is how important that first venue is. Last year, I was skipping it out and trying to do one venue, one drink pulls. It worked on some girls, ironically the younger and more desirable ones, but turned me into a one trick pony. Having that first venue has been vital in me expanding my repertoire and playing a better Game: a), it lets us get the comfort chit-chat out of the way so that she can tick that box off from her own set of milestones, b), I can calibrate off of what she tells me and how she’s acting, for example, is she letting her hand flick my arm and is she leaning forward to speak? And c), it lets her fall into my frame.
This is nothing new to Daygamers but I want to stress how vital it seems to be, especially part c. I think that a lot of guys exhibit two distinct styles: the immovable object and the irresistible force. These aren’t mutually exclusive, because every great player shows both; it’s more to do with how you go out and get the win.
The immovable object, the style I identify with more because it fits my personality, passes shit tests by going down the non-reactive route. They play a kind of social trust Game where good behaviour is rewarded with their own good behaviour. Bad behaviour is only tolerated for a certain period of time, and often isn’t fought with classic “Game” techniques. The IO Daygamer believes in a set of social etiquettes which, when broken, are considered extreme red flags. He wins the day by not conceding, but then scoring one or two goals which are delivered with precision. I think you can tell if you’re this kind of Daygamer if the girl you’re seducing seems to bubble under the surface; her eyes smoulder with desire.
The irresistible force style Daygamer passes shit tests with agree and amplify. They’re creative people and capture the girl’s mind with their ascorbic wit. This type of person has an excellent knowledge of the Game toolkit and can apply it as an art form. They make the girl feel as if she is on an incredible adventure and in doing so blow her away. They’re characterised by taking the fight to her. These are the kind of guys who have the best stories and are doing incredible things, pulling lays out of seemingly nowhere. I imagine this kind of Daygamer makes girls giggle insensibly because they are so full of excitable energy.
I want to stress, a great Daygamer is able to do both, but it’s an interesting way to start thinking about your own particular style, strengths, and weaknesses.