Daygame is not a funnel.
Daygame can appear to be a funnel to beginners. They do sets, they get numbers, they arrange first, second and sometimes third dates, and then they get their lays. On the surface they’re squeezing each lead from one end of the process to the other with an enormous dropout rate. The question is: would that girl who fucked you on the third date have fucked you on the first or second if you’d pulled harder? If you’d pulled harder, would those girls who made it to the second or third dates have been there at all or would they have dropped off earlier because they saw that your pace of escalation outstripped theirs (the battle of the scripts, as it were).
It can appear to guys as a funnel because of their starting SMV and Game. I like the horse and cart analogy. To make a sale you have to actually deliver your product to the market via the horse (Game as a delivery mechanism). You can increase the value of your proposition by simply improving the presentation, say by swapping a donkey for a horse (approaching being attractive in and of itself). You can become an expert driver of the horse and cart (Game being the knowledge base to overcome obstacles like shit tests). And most importantly, the customers provide a feedback mechanism whereby you improve the product itself (pick-up providing the stimulus for a multi-year project where you change everything about yourself).
When most guys start out they own a rickety old cart with a loose axle, full to the brim with piles of shit, pulled to market by a blind donkey and guided by an equally blind driver. The process of practicing pick-up puts paid to that.
A beginner is faced by a vast sea of No girls, followed by a chunk of Maybe girls and some Yes girls. The thing is, the beginner is so bumbling that the Yes girls slide back into being Maybes. This situation makes him think that Daygame is a funnel. He shoots his sets far and wide and then begins the process of fuck up after fuck up. Eventually he lucks into lays and so he’s given the impression that Daygame works as a funnel. That once a certain barrier is overcome then the set is moved through to the next level. In reality he’s just losing the Yes girls and overly failing with the Maybes. Just imagine if you could go back and re-do your first 1000 sets worth of dates.
Now, the barrier element of the beginner’s experience is true: he’ll face more shit tests than an intermediate or advanced because his presentation is all off. The girl isn’t quite sure what he’s selling, and he isn’t either. His heart is still half coddled by the nice, safe mediocrity of his old life and he projects that.
Now once a Daygamer reaches beyond that stage his horse and cart analogy is going to have improved drastically. The presentation is slick and effective, the product is of a high quality, the wares arrive at the market without having suffered damage or accident and he’s there consistently plying his trade.
When this guy turns up to market he’s faced with a much broader split of customers. There are still those customers who just aren’t interested but he can identify that earlier on and doesn’t try to turn them around; he turns them away instead. Then there are the customers who are simply on-board from the start, they like what he has to sell and he simply has to make the exchange. And of course there are the customers who are there to be persuaded. Another skill that the merchant has is to discern which of this middle group are actually just polite members of the first group.
This is where Daygame ceases to appear to be a funnel. The Daygamer identifies the Maybes and sets about trying to filter them into the Yes or No column. As he progresses in his journey, that Maybe chunk gets smaller and smaller and girls are filtered more efficiently. His intention becomes much clearer and is made earlier, not just by how he dresses, what he says or what he does, but by how he holds his face and the kind of look he gives. Everything, all the way from the presentation to the style to the actions are designed to achieve one goal and this message is conveyed effectively.
Daygame, by this point, is more like those carnival attractions where you raise a hammer over your head and try smashing it down as hard as possible. When you’re successful the level goes all the way to the top and you get that satisfying ding! Otherwise the level never really takes off at all. Now there will occasionally be those girls who you have to work on, whether it’s over multiple dates because of some specific obstacle or even just over an hour where you crush her frame, but they are few and far between. Most girls you’ll see as either Yes or No, and the conscious effort you believe you were applying to begin with (consciously applying Game techniques) is now part of who you are.
I suppose I should make the point that this is based on my own experience, though I have had it corroborated by others. There’s also the observation that as the Daygamer becomes more advanced his lay reports appear simpler; that’s because he takes for granted what the beginner finds difficult.
I find that most of my lays come quite easily when looked at in hindsight. I treat them as if they are Yes girls and notice that it was plain sailing. It’s rare that I can actually consciously pinpoint a moment where Game got me the lay and that’s because I have built up my skill and SMV over time; it’s a subconscious part of me now and so it’s ambiguous as to whether the girl was convinced. If she was on the fence and a subconscious part of myself convinced her into the Yes category, was she actually convinced? I ask that question because I would do those things anyway as they’re a part of me. Was her moving into being a Yes set in stone from the beginning?
Now, I still feel my heart race a little faster at key moments of escalation and in the moment I don’t know for sure I’ll get the lay. I just trust in the probabilities and would put good money down on my succeeding; I’d still be a little nervous though.
2 thoughts on “The Horse and Cart Analogy”
> It’s rare that I can actually consciously pinpoint a moment where Game got me the lay and that’s because I have built up my skill and SMV over time
This is a very true point. I think I can sometimes point to where I got her back on track (removed the “no”), but we rarely if ever know why she was a yes.
But, as to your funnel idea… you lost me.
Game is not a “dumb funnel.” It’s not only how much you shove in at the top. And it’s not “rote” once it starts (some out of control sequence of events). You can improve at each stage (fundamentally and specifically), but for me… and I’m not a beginner… it is definitely funnel like.
Approaches > hooks > leads > dates > sex > recurring revenue… with a predictable drop off at each stage. Funnel.
I am super into the concept of LMR. That is in the funnel, near sex. It’s not a PART of the funnel, per se, but it has it’s place in the flow. As I get better at LMR, my results increase… but it still has it’s place in the funnel. Even work I do in advance of LMR… has a place in the “progression” of a given girl from meet to to sex.
The “funnel” doesn’t do any of the work for a man… it’s a description that the numbers tend to drop off at notable stages. That is a classic “sales funnel” view.
What am I missing?
[I understand what you’re saying and of course I agree to the point that girls drop off at each stage. What I’m getting at is that as Game becomes a part of who you are rather than a conscious part of what you do, each girl gains her own pre-ordestined path (to the lay, or not; and I say pre-ordained because in the vast, vast majority of cases – i.e. barring long Game – your skill is stationary during a seduction). What appears to be a funnel is only the “shape” of the number of girls at each stage who drop-off according to whether they decided they were interested enough to fuck after the first 30 seconds of meeting you. TC]
LikeLiked by 1 person