Mini-London Number Farm, Daygame Overkill, Yes-Ladders, and Memoir Update

It’s October and to hit my ‘do as well as last year lay-wise’ goal I’m going to need another five lays. As I did with every university exam, I’m leaving it until the last minute. Realistically I’ve got two months to achieve the above and it’s fast getting darker, wetter, and colder. A tall order indeed, but I knew that nothing would happen if I didn’t go out and make it happen. To that end I set myself a challenge: do 50 sets this week, but there were some complications along the way, which you see by first looking at the stats:

47 approaches and 9 number closes.

That’s just shy of (what I believe to be the London average of) 1:5 but way off my average this year of 1:3.5. On top of that the numbers have been damn flaky. In fact, there’s only been one girl this week who I number closed without a) pushing through a boyfriend objection, b) her telling me she was only staying for a few days, and/or c) the set being very short. So what’s different?

In two words: Daygame Overkill. I bought it a couple of weeks ago, worked through all the videos, and now I’m going through them again and taking notes as I go. It’s a new style for me in two specific ways: the opener, and the fractionation.

With regards to the former I’m used to running in and saying:

“Excuse me, I just wanted to say, you looked quite cute, what I noticed was…”

Or something very similar. I assume that I was so used to saying those lines that I exuded the correct aura of confidence and intent (although the intent is spelled out very overtly in that opener anyway). In contrast, by the DOK style of openers I’ve been starting with a teasing observation wrapped up with a compliment. I was floundering a little with that, it felt very hit and miss. Sometimes I’d forget to add the tease in and so it was just an observation (as lame as “I like your leather jacket”).

The whole thing reminded me of how I learned to do compound exercises in the gym. I’d squat, for example, and then I’d read the form guide again later that day. The next time I’d squat I’d have some extra cues to remember in my mind e.g. push your knees apart on the way up. I’d fix that issue, and then re-read the guide until all the kinks were ironed out. When I was running my old opener, I knew it went compliment, observation, tease, which became second nature. Now I’m relearning a lot of the cues.

Another thing that made my delivery hit and miss was the pre-opener. I was still saying “I just wanted to say” until yesterday when I prefaced it with:

“Do you speak English?” or “I hope you speak English.”

Now, you’re probably thinking tell me something new please but this was actually a bit of a revelation. In asking her that initial question or making that initial statement it’s setting up a yes-ladder. The alternative is to chase her down the street and stop her because you just had to tell her fashion is really weird. Throwing in the ‘English’ pre-opener also shows that you’re assuming that a conversation will follow. You’re assuming attraction because why else would she stay there to talk if she wasn’t. On top of that it’s qualifying.

I’ve had it done to me too, as it happens. One day this week, Tuesday I think, I was walking from Tottenham Court Road to Oxford Circus and a homeless guy tried to stop me by asking if I spoke English. I kept on walking and said “I don’t carry any change” but my first instinct was a pleasant buzz: Why good sir! Of course I speak English! I repeat, this is not a new technique, only something that stood out to me personally, but now I can say those words with confidence in their effectiveness because they worked on me too. I only introduced it yesterday but I noticed an immediate uptick in my sets (although it was a ridiculously warm October day and I was with a wing, so I’m taking this with a handful of salt).

The second thing that stood out to me in Overkill was the fractionation. I’ve watched some of Stealth Seduction but because the camera was on the girl I couldn’t see how Tom was moving and where he was looking. Previously, I would keep strong eye contact with the girl and only rarely look away, but now I’m conscious of being on and off in more than just the energy of the conversation (I would still fractionate between comfort and attraction). This is another thing that I need to incorporate into my sets with confidence. It’s as if the shackles of eye contact have been lifted, but now I need to feel myself in the world, and I need to work out what the optimum amount is.

One way in which the DOK style is different, but not entirely different, is the emphasis on vibe. Opening with a straight compliment is a heavy filter and immediately sets out your intent. Now, I personally think that every girl knows that when a guy comes to talk to her on the street, it’s because he’s attracted to her. Doubly so if the guy is wearing a leather jacket and rings. So in a way, opening with a straight compliment is congruent. You look like the sexworthy guy and you’re telling her overtly that you’re attracted to her.

Alternatively if you’re saying “Excuse me, I hope you speak English. Okay good, because I love how you look like a witch,” then she’ll be judging you by a different set of criteria. She’ll be thinking oh he wants to play *this* game (the I-know-that-you-know one). This works best when you can, covertly, convince her that her fashion/walk/etc. isn’t the real reason you’re talking to her, but instead because you fancy her. If you don’t convey this fact enough, she’ll filter you out as not being good enough.

How to overcome this part of the no-filter: a great vibe. How to cultivate a great vibe in the moment? Enjoy the game of trying to wrap up an observation with a tease, arming yourself with it, and then running over to her to test it. The best ones are the ones where you have an internal chortle and think I’m so smart.

Back to my (relatively) abject failure this week: I didn’t have a good vibe. I’ll attribute this to two things: 1) I’ve been reading some philosophy: The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus which has laid an emotional weight on me. I need to analyse it and probably re-read it but there will be a post on this book in future due to its direct connections to the Sisyphean task that is Daygame. 2) I’ve been going to the gym too much. They combined to make me feel exhausted, and that’s before the Daygame even started. There’s nothing I can do about the first point, because it’s read now and I can’t forget it. I can do something about the second, though, so I’ll be changing up my frequency (going for longer workouts rather than multiple shorter ones) which will give my central nervous system a proper rest.

Just to make myself clear: the results of the past week have not convinced me that the DOK style is sub-optimal for me. Theoretically it works at a higher level of Game and so, if done properly, it should allow me to improve the quality I’m getting. Its use by its practitioners shows that it is effective and I just haven’t done enough sets to come to a conclusion yet. I’m determined to use it for a long time in order to work out what I want to incorporate into my personal style. If anything, it’s brought back a little bit of my AA, because I’m not outsourcing my Game to the lines anymore. Instead, I’m putting my creativity on the line, and that’s scary and exciting.

Last but not least: the memoir. Today I finally pulled up the edited draft and started approving and discarding the comments made by my editor. I foresee the final piece being complete in the next three weeks, and the book itself being available at the end of November.

Yours unfaithfully,

Thomas Crown