Pickup

What places are the BEST to meet women at? Well, it's not dance clubs, the street, or the metro. In fact, those are among the WORST. The best include some places many don't even think to frequent.

Hey guys!

Today I’ll outline the four worst, two limbo, plus six best places to pick up girls.

This list is for the general reader, and the venues aren’t a specific level of difficulty.

Of course, if you’re already cut your teeth in one type of venue and have more experience there, your mileage may vary.

You can mirror a woman's behavior to turn her on, break the pattern she's in, or even get her chasing. They key, of course, is calibrating this to her.

There's a tactic you can use to inject a lot of playfulness and looseness into your interactions with women.

It's a thing I call 'behavior mirroring'.

You've probably done this yourself from time to time. Usually if you've done it, you've done it to be playful, to break tension, or to point out something ridiculous a woman's doing.

All you're doing with it is mirroring for a woman - playfully - behavior that either she herself has displayed, or that women stereotypically display.

You can cover the whole gamut of extremes with this, too: from very subtle mirroring, to outlandish, over-the-top mirroring.

Let's have a look at how it works.

What does skillful indirect game look like, when used to pick up girls? This case study follows a successful indirect club game pick up, from open to close.

As I’m about to close my series on indirect game, I’ve decided to share a report to serve as an example of how I use this game style.

In the comments sections of my previous articles, readers told me I did not share any (or enough) examples of how to use indirect game. Frankly, they were not wrong to request this. After all, examples are good pedagogic tools.

Therefore, I decided to share a report that shows how I use indirect game. I usually don’t write lay reports since they take a lot of time to type (and I’m known to be overly detailed). That said, any good seducer will agree that writing reports about your nights out and reading others’ reports are some of the best tools a seducer can use to become good.

If you decide to read through this long post, I promise you that you will become a BETTER seducer. Not only will techniques be exemplified, but you will also learn how everything comes together. I’m trying to make this a hybrid between a report and a guide.

I’ve written other reports, most using some form of indirect game:

• Picking Up A Girl In A Gay Bar: A Report

• Pulling Off A Lay When You're Sick And Dog-Tired: A Report

• Using Social Proof To Get Laid: A Report (With Demonstrations)

• How To Use Sex Talk, Pt. II: Case Study

The first part of this report covers the preparations, the early time of the night, the “getting back into it” phase when you are dealing with bad state and momentum (as you will see, this night is a bit unique since I was rusty because of the COVID-19 lockdown).

However, if you prefer reading about the interaction with the girl I pulled (I will cover this in great detail with all the juicy information), then skip to part two, labeled “The Wizard Strikes Back.” I would still recommend reading the entire article.

It is possible for you to display intent to a woman without giving away your intentions, so that she may still have room to chase you. You just need the right approach.

Hey guys, and welcome back.

I have been focusing on indirect game lately. I know many of you have enjoyed the series from the feedback I’ve received via PM on the forums. This always makes me grateful.

Others pointed out that the series has not included enough practical examples showing the execution of the techniques. I can’t write an A–Z guide detailing every step of how I run indirect game; that would require me to write a long book sharing all my game. However, I can share a report that exemplifies how I run this.

As usual, this series is becoming slightly longer than anticipated, but I’m the kind of guy who needs to cover every aspect before feeling comfortable moving on. I do the same with my students. I do not move onto their next sticking point to tackle until concepts are hammered down.

And this is what I intend to do with this series. I will try to keep things as fresh and exciting as possible.

Today’s subject relates to indirect game but more precisely, to the questions surrounding communicating and conveying your intentions to women.

Many proponents of direct game claim that communicating your intentions to a woman is key as it sets a “man meeting woman” frame, helping her know what the interaction is about and cutting the crap. It helps set a seduction frame. I see nothing wrong with this. It is obviously a good frame!

But if you have been paying attention to my series on indirect game, you may have heard me say:

• “Be indirect”

• “Don’t display your intentions”

• “Don’t communicate intent directly”

And these hold true, although there is a caveat.

This caveat is what I want to discuss today: showing your intentions is not necessarily bad. You can run indirect game and still display your intentions, and potentially reap all the benefits that follow:

• Screening

• Escalating the vibe faster

• Setting a good frame for seduction

It is a question of what intentions you convey and how. These nuances are what we will cover today in this post.

What type of intentions should you communicate? How should you communicate them? And ultimately, how does this fit into the broader view of indirect game (and what would differentiate it from a “direct game” variant)?

This post will serve as both a theoretical and practical guide. Let’s jump into it.

If she's objecting to something, check yourself. If you have tight fundamentals, persist.

Today we’re going to look at how to handle objections from women.

We’ll do this by breaking down a post from the Skilled Seducer forums.

By the end of this post, you'll know whether to persist or desist with an objecting woman, and how to persist properly where you can.

If you want someone to make the right choice, don't give only one option. Juxtapose your preferred Gold Choice against an okay-yet-inferior Bronze Choice.

I talked yesterday with our sales specialist, Rob.

We spoke about the new coaching page we're setting up, with a video by me that talks about coaching and an option for audience members to book a free call with Rob to discuss coaching packages.

I said how we'd tossed out the initial version of the page, which our writer made about getting viewers to choose a coach.

Instead we made the page totally focused on getting a reader to sign up for the free call.

(by the way, if you want to know more about coaching with Girls Chase, just shoot Rob an email at coaching@girlschase.com -- he'll hop on a call with you to fill you in on options)

And Rob noted that yes, something he'd noticed in years of working with clients: when he talks to a guy, listens to his situation, and tells him, "This is the coach for you. You're going to want to book coaching with this instructor," he closes a lot of sales.

However, if he tells the prospective client, "Here are our different coaches. There's this coach, who is best at this. And there's that coach, who is best at that. There's also this other coach, who's really good at XYZ. Which coach would you like?" he always gets the same response:

"Oh, ah, I'll have to think about it. Let me get back to you."

And then the client never calls him back.

And I told him yes, that's right, Rob! You've discovered an important sales principle: you don't give the prospect too many choices.

Ideally, you only give him one.

One you suspect will be right for him.

And if you must give choices (if, for instance, he isn't sold on the first one you give him), the other choices you give typically must help sell the first choice you offered... not sell themselves as real alternatives.

I call this Gold Choices vs. Bronze Choices.

And it applies every bit as much to your interactions with women as it does to sales.

Caption

Hey and welcome back.

After finishing my latest series on indirect game, I’ve decided to make a few more posts covering aspects of the topic that did not make it into my series or respond to questions and comments that I have seen in the comment sections.

Today I want to debunk the idea that women are always aware of your intentions, as if they were ultra-intuitive super-computers.

This flawed argument is often used as a sort of counterargument to indirect game.

The argument goes as follows:

“What’s the point of going indirect, if she knows that you are hitting on her anyway?”

Followed up with:

“So, you might as well be direct about your intentions.”

I see this argument often, and every time I read it my eyes hurt.

There are false beliefs involved in this line of thinking.

I always wonder how this idea first appeared.

It seems to be a form of projection of male thinking onto women (yes, we are wired differently). And yet I have no clear idea where such notions came from.

What I can say is that this line of reasoning is wrong:

• The first dimension is that "women can sense what your true intentions are – they can sense you are hitting on them". This is false, although there are some nuances

• Even if we were to assume the above is indeed correct (or that elements of it may at times be true), then it is still not a reason for going direct

So, on both levels, the whole argument is flawed, and this line of thought can be safely thrown into the wastebasket.

This is what this post is about, debunking this line of thought by discussing these two dimensions.