Recently I was asked to do a post on how my Daygame has changed since being in an LTR. This is that post.
The first impact is a simple one: I have less time. Less time for Daygame itself but also less available slots for dates. I always prioritise seeing my girlfriend over scheduling dates. There have also been a few occasions where I’ve turned down a couple of seemingly gilt edged opportunities such as girls contacting me out of the blue to meet that evening. Though I do want to point out that me seeing my girlfriend is more important to me than collecting those gilt edged opportunities. I have to think more long term if I want to get the best of both worlds (more on that later).
I’m talking in hypotheticals here so take this with a pinch of salt, but here’s the maths:
- See my girlfriend twice a week: 104 times a year
- That’s 104 opportunities to Daygame and let’s say I’d do five sets per session on average (more in the summer and on weekends, less in the winter): 520 extra sets
- My long term average A:L is about 50:1 and given A:L can deteriorate the more sets you do: five to ten additional lays a year
And that’s taking sexual energy as constant. To put it simply: I can’t take advantage of the kind of sexual drive / momentum single Daygamers can. In fact at this point my Daygame exploits are largely driven by ego gratification. It’s no longer about satisfying a basic male need and instead about trying to be the best Daygamer I can be. There are also some business motivations there because people like to see that you’re practicing the thing before they part with their money.
Given that lack of urgency I’ve learned to be much more efficient and targeted in my Daygame. It’s important for me to be able to spot the opportunities and act on them as they present themselves. Although, I must say, this appears to be a trend for many Daygamers who start their careers with a lot of motivation to approach but then start to approach less and look for more signal.
The other impact it has had is that I’ve increased my focus on SMV and other static/passive elements that I bring to the table. Improving these characteristics gives me more and better opportunities to act on, as per the above.
It’s also taught me how there’s no moral hierarchy to SMV i.e. it doesn’t matter to me which area of SMV someone works hard on if it leads to the same results. As long as she perceives your value to be equal to or higher than hers (together with a baseline competence in all areas) then it doesn’t matter.
The last thing I’d like to comment on is whether I would recommend it. The key issue is this: if you try and go for the best of both worlds, are you willing to risk the worst?
If you’re a pure player or purely monogamous then the decision is made for you. I remember that Torero would talk about the balance between affection and excitement. Krauser talked about pleasure versus happiness.
Going full r-selected is like choosing pure excitement/pleasure but foregoing the warm feeling and emotions which you can share with a woman. Going full K-selected is like choosing pure affection/happiness but foregoing excitement.
Now I know I’m describing extremes here but it’s just to make a point. I acknowledge that even if you’re a pure player you can still draw happiness from other areas of life or have regulars to get affection from. Similarly even if you’re fully monogamous you can get pleasure from other sources such as sports.
I’m at a special part of my life where I can try and pick the optimal point along the spectrum and get pleasure, excitement, affection and happiness. I know that I’ve got player years which I need to get out of my system before I can commit to settling down with kids. I also know that my girlfriend is the kind of girl who I want to settle down with. That means walking the tightrope between the two extremes is a necessity for me.