Add new comment | Girls Chase

Add new comment

Joe London's picture

Hi Chase. Very interesting article here! I have done lots of online/app usage and recently started some direct daygame (around 20 street approaches so far but looking to branch out and try different venues). I have to say that, after reading this article, I think that you're being a bit too harsh on online.

One thing that you didn't account for is cost. It should be considered separate to effort because there are plenty of guys willing to put in the effort but unable or unwilling to schedule it. Real life is expensive in the sense that it takes up a LOT of time. In my sessions, it was 5 approaches done in 90 minutes to 2 hours. The wing who I know who managed to do 20 approaches in one session (continuing his session after I went home) was out a total of 7 hours. When you consider that even the best daygamers are getting just one date every 20-30 approaches, you see how meeting women in real life is very time consuming. Don't forget that we have to add travel time to this too. Online, it's totally reasonable to expect that a guy could work up to 2 hours total time spent on apps/sending messages to arrange a single date. In real life cold approach, the numbers I put there suggest that it is impossible to match that on average. Remember also that the more hours of approach sessions we do, the less time we spend on other things and the closer we are to the guy whose only hobby is picking up women (which we don't want to be, as you said!). I was at a point at which I couldn't work on writing a book or doing research because I had to go for my scheduled approach session. Now is that a good thing or a bad thing you tell me...

Regarding quality, I was able to hide my poor fundamentals online by taking deceptively good photos. Doing this, I got some exciting ladies with e.g. lots of interesting interests, a passion for art or science, a well-directioned career, lots of intelligence etc. out on dates. I found that being an interesting guy yourself can actually get you quite far online. They weren't ugly either. In my daygame adventures, I have found that a guy is totally at the mercy of his fundamentals. If he does not look good, the woman he approaches will feel charmed and happy at his direct opener, but then hit him with "thank you for that; I have to go" very soon. Posture, voice, eye contact, dress etc. has, for me, only served to improve the reception to the direct opener. It hasn't turned a no girl into a yes girl, but rather turned a no girl into a polite and happy no girl. And there "I have to go" girls were much less exciting than the ones I find online! The point is that maybe an interesting, successful or socially savvy guy can do better online than he would in real life, where only his fundamentals, and none of those other things matter.

Thirdly, you do indeed find more victimized or eccentric ladies online. But consider that not all ladies are open to going on a date with a guy who they met on the street. If we restrict to the ladies who are open to it, do you think that we might find a higher prevalence of eccentric or victimized ladies? Just something to consider.

Anyway, this is only from my experience of doing direct daygame on the weekends. I have not tried other real life avenues yet. E.g. social circle could be a world of difference. Overall, I think that you're being too harsh on online.