The first quarter of 2019 has come and gone and what did I think about it? I’ve had a handful of dates and a couple of lays from Daygame so the results are fine. In reality it’s this, the second quarter of any year, where you can rack up the results.
My plan was one of increasing activity and I think I let it get the better of me by just a little bit. January: all to plan with one winged session a week. February: also all to plan with one winged and one solo session. March: I started doing three sessions on average each week; perhaps 20 sets on average a week. It doesn’t sound like much so why do I say I let it get the better of me? I’ll explain:
In February I was getting back into the swing of things and I was excited just to be doing sets. That excitement carried me into and through a fair few sets where I was objectively attracted, but not subjectively attracted, to the girl. I think there’s a dichotomy here that’s worth addressing: there’s the set of all girls who are objectively attractive; everyone looks at her and at least says ‘she’s pretty.’ Then there’s a subset of those girls who, to you, are subjectively attractive: perhaps they wear a particular fashion or have a particular look or give you an IOI or have a certain walk or she’s just really hot. They’re all signals that make you really want to approach, not just approach simply because she’s above your minimal threshold for attraction.
But in February this wasn’t an issue for me because I was excited to just be doing sets again. As you can tell from the above, given that I needed excitement to get me over something, that thing wasn’t good for me.
The problem with approaching girls who are ‘only’ objectively attractive is that it kills your vibe. You roll up into set and can already feel it slipping away because your eyes and voice are off and you lack enthusiasm; I admit, some of this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The bad interactions compound bad vibe and you start getting thoughts such as women are so boring. In reality it’s not the girl who’s dull it’s just the conversation you had was flat. If this compounds over a number of weeks you start to see the Daygame process as hard labour with the occasional flash in the pan when you actually open a girl you’re subjectively attracted to or flip a favourable stone.
How to solve this problem of approaching objectively and subjectively attractive girls?
The first might be to ‘embrace the grind’ which when only considering results is a viable solution. You endeavour to flip a lot of stones, perhaps 30 a week, and every now and then you flip a stone which takes you all the way to the lay. But we’ve already covered why that’s not an enjoyable experience: you’re forced to flip ‘objective stones.’ During March I was falling for this problem and then some: it was almost as if I was following a flipping stones strategy except I wasn’t flipping enough stones. My problem was compounded by the fact that I was getting dates from some of those girls, but I didn’t give it much hope of going anywhere.
What’s the other end of the line? To only approach girls that you have a subjective liking for. It’s reasonable and works to begin with because you get the initial vibe boost from only talking to girls you really like. There’s an added dopamine hit since you’ve found some kind of ‘system’ that works as well. There’s also this wonderful feeling of efficiency where you feel as if you’re a sniper going for precisely what you want. It makes you think every time I get a shot on target I score. You never get that bummed feeling from going into a set which you were always iffy about.
This is only a solution to begin with, though, because over time the pool of girls you see as being subjectively attractive will decrease. You’ll only approach off of IOIs and you’ll allow little weasels back into your Game which are effectively saying ‘don’t approach her because she’s not a high enough probability for a lay.’
The solution naturally lies in a mixture of the two: 80% of your approaches you should be subjectively attracted to and 20% you should be only objectively attracted to (remember I’m speaking from the perspective of Daygaming in London). By adding in that little 20% you ensure that your subjective pool doesn’t diminish; it stops you from being too picky.
I’ll stick to the three sessions of two to three hours and adjust my time spent Daygaming if I’m not getting to 15 sets a week. That’s my plan for the next three months and I’m interested to see how it works out. I want to regain the bit of passion which March burned away.