The Daygame Ratios and How to Improve Them

This is a data driven and methodical way to improve your Daygame results.

First record your metrics and then do some quick analysis to find your weak points. Then introduce some new arbitrary rules to fix them. Once you see that metric improving then move onto another. Then try and make the big jumps up in your multiplier (as I discussed here). Lastly, don’t get hung up entirely on these stats and remember that they can be gamed just like any other number, so use them as a guide rather than a perfect assessment.

These kinds of stats are very useful for a beginner to see where they’re falling down but can be applied at any point as a kind of check-in. I myself will be recording stats for my first 100 approaches when I begin Daygame again in March.

Commonly people count approaches, numbers/social media, dates and lays, so let’s look at those ratios first and some examples of how to improve them:

Approach / Number or Social Media

What it shows: pre-approach calibration, in-set persistence, quality of Daygame

Ways to improve it:

  • I think the easiest way to improve this metric is to simply stop approaching the girls who you think are No girls. Are they really worth the effort anyway? Sometimes, but usually not.
  • If you’re a beginner and find yourself chickening out of going for the number then you could introduce an arbitrary rule where you always go for the number close and ask twice even if the set is incredibly short.

Number or Social Media / Date

What it shows: quality of texting (the balance of comfort, attraction and moving towards a date request), strength of set, overall flakiness of numbers

Ways to improve it:

  • If you’re pushing too quickly towards date requests and scaring the girl off then slow down and introduce an arbitrary time or message length before date requesting
  • If you think you’re taking flaky numbers then simply stop taking numbers from weak sets
  • If you think the flakiness is due to the strength of your set try and extend the duration of your sets by a minute and see what happens

Date / Lay

What it shows: quality of your dating, quality of escalation, knowing when to pull (or not)

Ways to improve it:

  • If you think you’re pulling too quickly or too slowly then introduce an arbitrary rule to pull on the first or second date
  • Specifically if you’re pulling too slowly then introduce some arbitrary escalation you’ll try on every date

The common link between all these ratios is the quality of your Daygame itself. That quality rolls downhill and so if you pick the right sets and do them well then that will make the texting and dating much easier.

The next link is that the rules you introduce to fix the issues are arbitrary. Use some easy to follow rules of thumb to brute force your way through some of the issues then look to add some nuance.

So what if you’re falling down at a particular stage and want a further breakdown? Then you could record some of these additional stats:

In-set: stops, hook points

Approach / Stops

What it shows: how commanding your stop is, pre-approach calibration

Ways to improve it:

  • Approach girls who give you more signal before you approach
  • Be more commanding during your stop

Stops / Hook Points

What it shows: pre-approach calibration (better chosen sets will instantly hook more often and quicker if not), opener quality, quality of eye contact

Ways to improve it:

  • Ask less questions / make more assumptions while stacking
  • Be prepared to speak longer than is usual in a conversation and at a measured pace

Texting: responses to your feeler

Number or Social Media / Responses

What it shows: flakiness of numbers

Responses / Dates

What it shows: quality of texting

These two ratios will better help you to identify issues with your texting. For example, if you take some numbers and a certain % respond then you know your flake rate. From there you can work out how many girls go on dates with you given that they responded (i.e. it gives a better impression of the quality of your texting).

Dating: kisses, bounce backs

Date / Kiss

What it shows: smoothness of escalation, consideration for plausible deniability, isolation

Kiss / Bounce Backs

What it shows: judging the correct speed of escalation

Bounce Backs / Lays

What it shows: judging the correct speed of escalation, quality of LMR-busting


The overall point is that you can use your own data to find your own weak points, then introduce some steps to fix them. These ratios are far from perfect; for example a girl might stop and hook but has a boyfriend and won’t give you her number. Then there are timewasters who respond to your messages or even come out on dates but you won’t lay them. Just use these ratios as a guideline and you can start improving your Daygame. Don’t be the guy who has the same exact problem every year and vows to fix it but never does.

Yours unfaithfully,

Thomas Crown

Buy my book, hire me for coaching and follow me on Twitter!

13 thoughts on “The Daygame Ratios and How to Improve Them

  1. “Stats”…you didn’t set any benchmarks.

    This is such a treacherous topic, but…

    I like stats. My basic “sets per month” is something I care about. I have my own expectations.

    Since you didn’t, I’ll go first… Approach to lay:
    — I know guys I trust that have gone 1 lay for 300 approaches… Solid guys… It happens
    — I average 1:50 to 1:150 depending on a range of factors… I was ~1:60 in 2020, over 200 approaches
    — Krauser and Sneaky Tom T used to aim for 1:50
    — Krauser at his best was 1:30 – 1:20… I think that is the upper range
    — Roy Walker is commonly 1:30

    Roy Walker is the Gold Standard. He is real. 1:30 is ridiculously good. He is consistent at that pace.

    I do not think it gets any better than that. Period. Guys that claim to be any better than that are liars. Period.

    (Assuming volume. If you fuck 1 girl in 10 approaches that tells me nothing. Do 1000 approaches and then show me your ratio).

    The reason NO ONE is better than 1:30 (basically) is that your skill / logistics still won’t solve the innate flakiness/chaos of girls.

    The worst of tht liars (I am thinking of one liar in particular, but I won’t name him here) feel okay about their ridiculous lies… because they are aren’t nearly as good as they claim to be, they don’t understand the basic elements of female psych, so the think their lies will fly… And if you know women, even ones that like you, you’ll recognize there is a “floor” for approach:lay that isn’t based on the players skill. It is based in how innately chaotic they are, the nature of logistics, her “mom getting sick,” “the boss called,” etc. Your skill can’t solve for that stuff.

    With that said. Beginners should aim for “1 lay per month from hard work” – that is a standard Krauser put up that would qualify you as “intermediate.” If you’re 1:100, that is 100 sets per month to get laid, if you hit it. If you actually are a beginner, it’ll take closer to 200 sets / month (1:200), which is still doable. As you get better, your ratio will come down – but the volume (200 girls per month) will help you learn what women are really like (and allow you to take chances).

    Last comment here: Dates:Lays ratio is a very good metric to watch. Sets can be “gamed,” phone numbers can be “gamed,” but if you’re not a liar, and are actually fucking girls from cold approach – you’re doing something right. And if you’re dating a lot, but not fucking… something is (and you’re probably pulling some BS earlier in the funnel that is causing your date:lay ratio to look weird).

    Dates:lays… 3:1. Maybe 4:1. That is unique girls… As in “date 3 girls fuck 1,” etc. Maybe 5:1… But beyond that… Get a solid guy to critique your whole game.

    Getting 5 girls out on dates is real work for beginners. If you have done all that, and none of them end up fucked… Get some coaching from a guy with real exp. Have him look at your entire game.

    Until then: Do you “200 sets per month” (classic LDM goal), get 5 different girls out on dates. “3 dates to sex” is totally normal. So that might be “15 dates” total. If you do all that and can’t get laid…

    Get a proper evaluation. Something is off.

    Viva daygame.


    1. My rough benchmarks are in the multipliers post: 3 (advanced), 4 (intermediate), 5 (beginner). At that beginner level then that’s around 125 approaches so about 30 a week which in my opinion is more than enough to learn Daygame (3-4 sessions of 8-10 approaches). I virtually never hear about guys in London doing more than 30 approaches a week (consistently) and so maybe the ~200 approaches a month / 50 a month is more common in other cities such as NY.


      1. @Pancake

        > me smile-crying throughout this vicious personal attack

        Pancake and I know each other, have run Game together. The first time I ever saw that guy do a daygame approach she was HOT, and he got a huge response out of her. (Great ass on on that girl, I still remember her.)

        You are great with women, dude. And a very cool guy in general.

        If it “took you some time” to close a girl via daygame, that was more about adjusting to that style than about your skill with women. I have seen you in set several times. I think you might be “too simulating” in some instances (too much attraction, not “grounded enough”), but that is more about specific sets than a general trend.

        And to you, I’d ask a question that has come up in these comments:

        > — Q: Assuming a guy dates a lot of girls, how many girls should he expect to date before he gets laid?

        > OF COURSE his skill/value matter. But IN GENERAL (as a guideline), assuming he can get dates, how many different girls before a guy gets laid???

        I know you have a lot of online game experience. So that gives you a lot of dates: You “match,” you message, you get her out, and then…

        How many girls should an “average guy” expect to date before he gets laid??? Any personal comments there? Any general comments?

        You’re a guy I would trust on this topic.


      2. Hey, thought I’d give my two cents though you directed the questions to pancake:
        – by dates I mean number of girls who come out on dates as you’ve said. I agree with what’s been said here and on Twitter: if the ratio is higher (worse) than 5:1 then that means something is wrong. This lines up nicely with my multipliers post where I said a beginner has a rough multiplier of 5 (so 5 girls per stage to progress to the next).
        – In terms of actual dates (including meeting girls for a second, third, etc. date) I wouldn’t know the numbers. I’d have to defer to the community standard 2 dates (so that would be anything worse than 10 total dates per lay would mean something was up).
        – Total dates:lay would be an interesting metric to track. Perhaps it would be better to have 1 first date lay and two dates to nowhere rather than going on second dates with two girls and laying one (3 total for the former vs 4 total for the latter)
        – That number might be better than 3 (advanced) but commonly that guy has an in such as local fame or local high status (the bartender as per Twitter)
        – It could also be temporarily worse due to circumstance; e.g. my trip to Prague last year was 7:1 I believe but I was going on more dates than I usually would given the probabilities (I wanted something to come out of my trip)
        – I agree, date: lay is a great metric for judging someone’s Game. It’s easy to take numbers but hard to get laid.


      3. I just checked my spreadsheet. In two “average guy” years of 2017 and 2018, I was 29 lays for 61 first dates during the months I was in San Francisco.
        Almost all of these were online and the majority were straight-to-house dates. The straight-to-house dates were usually screened harder for sexual interest making a lay all but inevitable.
        Of note, during these years I followed up with nearly every girl (e.g. I would still bang her even if I wasn’t really feeling it. I don’t do that anymore so I’m sure my ratio would be much lower).


  2. Good read. I wanted to add that the date:lay ratio could also hover higher if a guy is pushing for 1st date lays or following another burn-the-boats approach. (I think the author has mentioned something like this in a different post.) So the dates would be spread among more than 5 unique girls, but the guy would still be well under “15 dates”/lay since each girl is only 1 or 2 dates.
    I agree that texting can be BS’d — strong/persistent text game is capable of getting weak maybe-girls onto dates (which will then inflate the D:L). Thats certainly been my exp


    1. > So the dates would be spread among more than 5 unique girls, but the guy would still be well under “15 dates”/lay since each girl is only 1 or 2 dates.

      That would mean dating 7+ girls without any of them wanting to fuck… it is possible, but should get a guy to be curious.

      (This is an interesting topic, BTW. I have never actually heard guys have this particular discussion before.)

      And I think my skillset might be better for dating than approaching even…

      But I think date:lay ratio of > 5:1 is the sign of a guy that knows approaching and numbers (maybe some “gimmicky Game” too), but doesn’t know women. It would make sense… learn approach first, numbers next, text next, date next, sex later, good sex beyond that, “recurring revenue” after that… the end of the funnel would be the last part to get “tuned.” Harder and harder to get a volume of girls that far along.

      (Again, why VOLUME is crucial)

      I was an older guy, with a lot of rel exp when I got good at daygame. So… I am always > 5:1.

      And on jaunts… I tend to do as well or better than at home, particularly at the end of the trip… because I do a LOT more game, and I start to stack a lot of dates/action, and my VIBE climbs, so… the girls at the end of the trip are seeing “Super Me” vs a normal run at home. I’ll say this is true for “jaunts” too (but short jaunts have trouble because of time, not even time to work a date model, but that is a separate issue).

      If a guy was trying to do SDL, or insists on pushing hard for sex on the first date no matter what… he will lower his ratio as well as he “blows himself out.”

      I’ll stand by it. I think guys have a lot to learn if they’re over 5:1 date to lay.

      A lot of the screening is done by the time of the 2nd date. She has “accepted” a lot about the guy. If she is coming out twice, chance of sex should be very high IMAO. 3rd date is basically make/break. I have closed several girls after the 3rd date, but not because they didn’t like me or I could escalate properly/smoothly.

      Maybe that is a better what to say it: If you can’t get 2nd dates… you need some improvement (you’re probably low value, or too “gamey” – which is often the same thing). But if you CAN get second dates, and you’re not getting laid… that is also a sign you need to look at your Game.

      There are like 10 different topics in this thread, but all of them are interesting.


  3. @Pancakemouse
    > I just checked my spreadsheet. In two “average guy” years of 2017 and 2018, I was 29 lays for 61 first dates during the months I was in San Francisco.
    I knew you would have an interesting POV.
    So you would have sex with her ON THE FIRST DATE “50%” of the time. Not quite what I was asking, but a very interesting state (especially as you have HIGH VOLUME, so the stat is meaningful).
    I think that is unusually high (as in, you were running good Game). But I know you are the kind of guy that could have these stats. So… if I had to guess… I bet you were “average of 2 dates” for sex (for a given girl). And maybe “you’d get paid if you dated at least two girls” (on average). Also better than average, in my estimation.
    Again, I think you’re much better than most guys. Interesting guy. High value. Very smart. In great shape. Running good game. That is how you produce stats like that.
    > The straight-to-house dates were usually screened harder for sexual interest making a lay all but inevitable
    THIS ^ is an excellent comment that adds some CONTEXT to your stats (which are based on your special skills and high value, which gives us more CONTEXT).
    Good details, man. Thanks.


  4. @ThomasCrown

    (BTW: I responded to Pancakemouse, but WP says “You’ve already said that… might be stuck in your comments.)

    >> I’d have to defer to the community standard 2 dates (so that would be anything worse than 10 total dates per lay would mean something was up).

    I would argue again and again that 3 DATES TO SEX is normal. That is normal. It’s not really about the guys’ skill, it is about the nature of SOME girls. If you date a range of girls, and if you date any girls that tend toward “self respect”, you will see “3 dates” over and over. Krauser and Sneaky Tom saw it, quite often, at the peak of their careers… it’s normal.

    It is interesting, because “non community people” know this too. I knew that number when I was 12. There is something “right” about “3 dates.” And after years of pickup… it is still my expectation.

    Of the last three girls I had sex with, 2 of 3 were on the first date. It definitely happens. I get it. I have had a lot of first date sex… but it is not my expectation.

    Many girls “want time to display who they are” before the fuck (credit: Paul Janka). So they can like you, and want sex, be turned on, love your game… but still hold you back… so they can be sure you can’t actually see who they are before you part their thighs. This is not about “BF/GF” stuff. It’s just healthy “pacing” of sex by girls with more to offer than “only sex.”

    3 Dates To Sex is an expectation I have. I have seen faster/slower, I always escalate… but 3 Dates to Sex is normal and healthy (and a very good sign in terms of the girl’s character). —- My 2 cents.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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