Game Is Different For Good-Looking Men

by Frost on September 15, 2011

When I started practicing Game, I failed miserably. Women who had been giving me eyes were turned off mere seconds after I had opened my mouth. I spent far too many nights on the last subway, alone, thinking: What the fuck? I used to be good at this.

My problem was that I was following advice that had not been designed for me. The Seduction community was formed by men who were struggling with women. It’s teachings were not designed for tall, good-looking men who already had decent social skills and the confidence to escalate. Game, in it’s early incarnations, was invented and refined by men whose physical and social shortcomings necessitated a scientific approach to seduction. That’s why most seduction literature focuses on sneaky, under-the-radar approaches that are designed to lull women into thinking you aren’t hitting on them.

This kind of approach is necessary if a woman hasn’t found you attractive before you speak to her. If a physically unattractive man starts blatantly hitting on a woman with the first words out of his mouth, it probably won’t go well. He’s forcing her to make an immediate choice to let him hit on her, before he’s shown her any reason why she should do so.

But put yourself in the shoes of the same woman being approached by a different man. A tall, handsome, well-dressed guy who came into the bar with a group of similarly attractive and cool-looking friends. She noticed him when he came in. She’s been glancing at him all night. Finally, he returns the look. Holds it. Comes over to talk to her.

In this situation, it would be completely incongruent for the man to open with some bullshit about his friend’s jealous girlfriend and whether she brushes or flosses first. It would come across as weird, and rightly so. It is weird. The girl will be disappointed and will start to look for an escape from the interaction. I know this is true, because I spent a month putting girls in that situation before I figured out why I kept fucking up. Ironically, I was much more successful once I reverted to acting like my idiot twenty-one year old self, stating my intent to take girls home minutes after introducing myself.

What I had figured out was this: If you’re good-looking and carry yourself well, you’re playing a different game than everyone else. In the terms of The Mystery Method, you have accomplished most or all of the Attraction stages before you’ve even opened your mouth. As long as you don’t fuck up that attraction by coming across as try-hard, you can skip right ahead to building comfort and escalating. Good-looking men can still get a lot of value out of standard game theory, but they also need to refine their own style in most situations.

Hat tip: Real Assanova’s recent post, Approach Women Like A Boss.

{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }

klhznifgyt April 10, 2013 at 12:00 am

yctmxgsffepnuxfouzgjwf, fwknhxhujw

John December 10, 2012 at 11:57 am

Can you tell me how are you doing your game , I’m a handsome man but I was too shy
so I didn’t try to approach women , I changed now but I need good theory.

What is working for you , or how are you doing it ?
I didn’t start approaching yet

Dan December 8, 2012 at 2:52 am

Nice post. FYI, it’s -> its.

Mark September 28, 2012 at 11:09 pm

It definitely gets tougher as you get older too. I think about the countless opportunities I had as a younger man (mainly in my 20’s) Yet, I still complained about not getting laid enough, truth is, I was lazy. There were definitely more than a few nights where I could simply sit and wait for a woman to come and talk to me. Now, suffice it to say, those nights are few and far between! I’m 41 now and definitely look every bit of 37 after partying my way through my 20’s and 30’s.

There’s always a few younger women who are willing to open their legs for a 40-something guy, long as he has a little money. In these tough economic times though, game is something us older guys (who are single and broke) definitely need! I’ll take all the help I can get, nice article.

ArnoldG September 10, 2012 at 5:02 am

Why do I think that you guys are actually talking the same thing with a different perspective and different way of saying it.

I believe there is “game” that is so called “Direct Game”. Which is what greg talking about and Mystery Method is what Frost talking about.

Well, I’m posting the old blog because it is interesting

greg September 25, 2011 at 7:13 pm

Problem is, *inner game* means affirming our personality and being who we are, not what others wish us to be.

So *learning the true desires and motivations of women*, and fitting in with them, is the opposite of *inner game*.

Women want to calibrate US, so learning to calibrate THEM is the opposite of game, inner game – not to mention self-esteem.

Frost September 27, 2011 at 4:30 pm

Was going to respond, but now I’m just writing a post. Greg, obviously I disagree with you about a great many things but I appreciate and respect your thoughtful comments. Thanks for the discussion.



SilentAdmirer September 25, 2011 at 5:43 pm

The equivalent of game in women is: push up bras, heavy make up, fake nails and eyelashes, high heels to make the ass look perky. do guys try to see past it? yes, why do you think most guys prefer low to no make up, because ultimately we are looking for real indicators of health, youth, and beauty that the make up is trying to cover. do these things still fool guys? yes, but in the long term you will get to see the real health and the beauty of the girl when you wake up in the morning next to her.

The same is true of game, it might help in the initial stages to get some attention(not a bad thing), but a guy truly needs to have solid inner game, and a lot of Frost’s articles are really about that. That in my opinion is the real essence of game, to learn the motivations and desires of women, and not some stupid routine. This strictly applies to guys with high IQ, the average Joe is simply not capable of comprehending the subtleties of inner game.

Jack April 2, 2013 at 8:39 am

Amen! Hit the nail on the head!

Gmac September 23, 2011 at 3:04 pm

Hmm, it really puts things in perspective for average looking guys like myself. It’s interesting to see how approach methods can be so different for varying types of men. This also gave me a great idea for one of those “if then” diagrams, only for game decisions. Thanks.

Can’t believe I missed that piss fest above… quite amusing. I’ll have to read through the rest of the comments later.

Jodie September 20, 2011 at 9:56 am

I love this blog. Reading the comments is almost as much fun as the blog itself!

Every guy commenting is trying to show how “Alpha” he is.

Frost you are a genius.

tenthring September 19, 2011 at 1:19 am


There is simply no arguing with you if you have nothing but ad hominum to offer, so this will be my last reply.

“you say you are a nice person by nature, but then say you were TAUGHT to be chivalrous and nice to women by your parents and society. Do you see the cognitive dissonance you are trying to work through?”

Absolutely none. I was always very well behaved from a young age and had a lot of empathy. I was especially well behaved around girls long before I hit puberty and was attracted to them because my parents taught me all the standard chivalry stuff. Hold doors, don’t hit a girl, protect women because they are fragile. In second grade I got in a fight with three boys who were picking on my best friends sister. Are you saying I was trying to get in her pants in 2nd grade?

“Genuine niceness loses you no points with women”

This is not my experience. We will take a very simple example like choosing an activity for the evening. Usually I won’t give a shit what we do, so I will just be nice and let the girl decide. However, despite getting their way this is a turn off for women. When I decide on the activity and lead the girl I get much better results, even when I’m choosing things that mainly interest me and not her.

“are you saying that game is simply stopping door-mat behaviors? Sure, if thats your definition, I have no quarrel. But all the major purveyors of game, Mystery and all the rest, DONT mean just that – they mean faking yourself to win the approval of women. In fact I know of NO website that is *just* about stopping door-mate behaviors. Not Roissy, not roosh, not anyone. Because game is about faking yourself through techniques, as you well know. ”

Once again, if you define game to be “things I don’t like” then you can object to it all you want. I’ve defined game, you’ve ignored that definition, that’s your problem. I’m not going to argue the sky is green because you want to define it that way.

“*Needing to advertise yourself* is a low self-esteem behavior. I get that you really, really, really want to *prove* yourself to women, but that is essentially what the problem is. People with high self-value do not need to *prove* themselves to other people. ”

This is foolish. You’re proving yourself all the time in every facet of your life. You prove yourself to clients, customers, or bosses. You prove yourself to friends, family, and strangers. You’re proving yourself every minute of every day.

Do you go to work in your underwear? Do you meet clients buck naked? Do you pick your nose on a date? No. Why not? You don’t need to prove yourself to anyone right. Your person or your work or whatever will just magically prove its worth regardless of how you present it. Well, good luck if you believe it. I’ve watched enough people lose out on big opportunities because they couldn’t sell themselves, their work, etc due to poor packaging.

“This is a pretty good example of my point about beta guys trying to invent reasons to indulge their betaness – which is emotionally easy for them because it involves no painful growth – while patting themselves on the back for being *alpha*.”

The most hilarious part of this is your describing yourself. Learning game takes work just like any other skill, but you don’t want to do it because it would require a lot of work to break your own beta habits. So better to just decide it doesn’t work. Best of luck Holden Caulfield, you figured out everyone is a big phony.

Frost September 20, 2011 at 11:03 am

tenthring and Andrew, I would recommend not wasting your breath. Greg is not arguing out of a desire to better understand the world. He is fueled by anger at the world for abandoning him, and more potently, angry at himself for letting the minutes of his life tick away while he refuses to take steps towards actually improving any aspect of his life.

Greg, pardon my habit of reflexively psychoanalyzing people, but perhaps you could tell us a bit more about your life, and your experiences with women to date? Also, what do you want in life, regarding women and everything else?

Not trying to tool you, genuinely just trying to figure you out.



Simon September 20, 2011 at 7:40 pm

Frost, pretty poor form, mate.

Greg believes it’s possible to get attractive women without trying to make people think he’s something he isn’t.

What’s so strange about that, that you feel the need to insinuate he’s an angry, sexless, loser?

Squared September 24, 2011 at 12:50 am

Agreed. Further, I’m also not sure how he can reconcile his poor response to Greg with his agreement with iks minutes earlier. Both were essentially delivering the same message.

I believe in self-improvement in all walks of life, including with women. And yet I too believe game is mostly bullshit. Where do I stand?

“but but if you believe in that then you DO believe in game!”

Tsk tsk. No I don’t. Stop shifting the goal posts.

Frost September 27, 2011 at 4:24 pm

So you believe in self-improvement, including with women, but not game? The two are synonymous. Or perhaps you would argue they’re not. If so, please explain how…

greg September 24, 2011 at 6:47 pm

Frost, I want to be happy and successful, what else? And I find that neither is possible withou self-respect, you see.

I feel good about myself when I behave towards women with self-respect, and I am more successful with them too. Since game is a form of supplication and counsels men to lower themselves to women, I am against it. Being authentic and affirming myself are essential to self-respect, and is why women like guys who do that. Which is why game does not work.

I have had ups and downs with women – I went through a period where I supplicated in the socially approved way, sometimes it worked, sometimes it didnt. Worse, it just left a bad taste in my mouth. I decided I would rather stay celibate for the rest of my life than demean myself to women. Some innate pride just rebelled against the doing that.

After learning to become more authentic, the resulting rise in self-respect made me get much better with women. Then I learned about game, and since it seemed to be talking about self-respect, I picked it up. I got much worse with women and I started getting less confident and just feeling worse about myself (even though I was acting all *tough), like in the days when I did when I supplicated to women in socially approved ways. On some level I knew that I was demeaning myself towards women by doing game, and that it was just another form of supplication. I did not get good results with women, either. But human nature has a very large tolerance for cognitive dissonance and ignoring evidence. Again that same inner spark of pride rebelled in me again – and I got better with women again.

What saved me is that I have even at my lowest points a tiny spark of pride which does not allow me for long to demean myself to others.

Its been a helluva ride, but these days I have a much clearer vision about these things, and am in a much better place – I probably had to go through game to see through it, and go through societies bullshit to see through it, and finally be comfortable with being myself.

I see lots of guys struggling towards greater self-confidence and self-respect, and I want to help guys get there without going through the detour of game, which lowers self-respect and makes guys worse with women.

It might not be possible. I have noticed guys have an incredible attachment to low self-respect, probably because its safe and comfortable. Its an incredible case study how guys took game and made it a vehicle for low self-respect behaviors, when the original insight of game was that you should develop self-respect.

Its really quite an incredible testament to the durability and tenacity of peoples attachment to their low self-respect.

Frost September 27, 2011 at 4:28 pm

So correct me if I’ve misread, but do you still plan on remaining celibate for the rest of your life? I don’t ask with the intent of judging you. In fact, I think it’s a fine decision for a lot of older men who don’t have any driving urge to be with women, especially after a lifetime of crappy experiences… divorce and whatnot.

But I think that the emotional fuel for your arguments is the desire to justify that decision. Otherwise, why argue so vehemently against the basic truth that men can improve their dealings with women through conscious effort?



greg September 24, 2011 at 6:27 pm

You still say that your parents taught you to be chivalrous yet you were *naturally* nice – do you really not get the contradiction? Come on, dude. Since you have trouble grasping so simple a a logical distinction there is probably little chance youll really grasp any of the other, equally simple, logical distinctions I make, but what the hell.

No one *naturally* opens doors for other people, they have to be socially conditioned to do that. What I am saying is that most *nice guy* behaviors are the result of social conditioning. You were taught you had to do that stuff to get women to *like you* – much like game teaches you you have to do thing to get women to *like you* – both are an epic fail.

Heres an utterly radical idea – how about not trying to get women to *like you* but just act in a way that YOU like? Not the way society tells you to make women like you, and not the way game tells you to make women like you.

How do you think youde feel about yourself? Do you think you would have more or less self-respect? Do you think women would respect you more, or less?

Now hold on – you are probably just itching to respond *well, what if what *I* want is to act like a doormat to women? Will women respect me then?* Think about that for a moment – do you know anyone who naturally just enjoys being a doormat? Or is it rather the case that people are are doormats because they think thats the way to get people to like them, or because they want to get something from that person? In other words, being a doormat is being inauthentic to get others to like you, because human nature just isnt built to make us *want* to be doormats.

The problem with game is that it tells you not to be a doormat in societys way, true, but it replaces this with a whole set of other doormat behaviors – being extra smiley and complimentary when you dont feel it just to get someone to like you is a society doormat behavior, but being all aloof and stoic when you dont feel like it is a game doormat behavior. Both makes someone elses approval more important than your own desires.

So you define game as just stopping societys doormat behavior – I guess we have no argument then! Oh wait, but below – just like I predicted – you start explaining to me why its necessary to put others approval over your own when considering how to behave. Sigh. I kinda knew youde do that.

So we prove ourselves to bosses, uh? Let me ask you an interesting question – who is in the superior position, you or your boss? Are you suggesting to me that this is who we should view women, as the superior ones who we need to prove ourselves to?

Well, maybe we do need to prove ourselves to women – but then, the idea that women like men with *higher value* really has to go out the window, dont you think? You see, you really DO have quite a good grasp of the social dynamics of *proving* oneself – the inferior does it.

The person with *higher value* does not need to prove himself. In a boos/employee relationship, your boss is the one with higher value. If you are seriously saying this is how we should view man/female interactions, then you clearly dont believe that women like *higher value* men.

But you probably do, because your limitless capacity for cognitive dissonance is matched only by your inability to grasp simple logical distinctions.

You see, tenthring, NOT *proving yourself* is the surest indication that you actually do possess higher value, which is why game does not work – it relies on one massive effort to *prove* oneself, which is just one massive indication that you have *lower value*.

But even more, when I am dealing with a boss, I am not dealing with values, I am dealing with the reality of whether I possess a skill or not. I am not putting HIS values above my own values and trying to change myself in order to fit his VALUES – I am trying to show that I possess a skill. When I deal with a girl, if I change myself to fit HER idea of what man she likes, I am putting HER opinion and HER values above my own, if this is not the kind of man *I* value and am, naturally.

Even with a boss, believe it or not, if it comes to faking my values and opinions and who I am and not just demonstrating a skill, doing so WILL diminish my self-respect and make me less likely to be hired, probably. Shrewd bosses often look for the guy who does not fake himself – even at the risk of offending his boss, and respect that guy more. In the realm of values and personality and not skill, the ass kisser does not go very far, even in business.

So even in business faking yourself is a losing strategy, because no one respects the person who does not respect himself.

As for your other points about nose picking and such, just as it is my right to demand respect from others, I have an obligation to respect others – its the other side of the same coin. If others are pained and hurt by something that is not essential to my values, I show them respect by not doing that, just as I hope they do for me. I agree not to disgust them just as I expect them not to disgust me. But to sacrifice my values and fake my personality to be liked them, that is the same in your mind?

And at the end you say you I dont want to do game because it involves getting rid of beta behaviors, when my whole point is that game is about adopting a whole new set of beta behaviors – I gave specific examples of this , and you did not respond to any of that, so there is little I can say.

iks September 17, 2011 at 1:36 pm

Most of what works in game is just common sense advice– dress well, approach more, don’t be a wallflower, gain some muscle, have an interesting life, don’t be a wuss. Problem is that game is full of all kinds of bs, which is often enough to cancel out the good stuff; and also, much of the good advice is tainted, e.g. you’re not really supposed to actually have an interesting life, just supposed to be able to seem like you have one to show off to chicks– and even if you do have an interesting life, you’re doing it for the purpose of showing it off to chicks to get validation– not doing it for yourself.

I think it’s fair to say game doesn’t work even though it may help some people some times.

Personally, game helped me with losing my extreme social inhibition. I’d always been ridiculously shy and when I found game it helped me overcome that.

But how did game help? Basically by getting me to do something. If I’d stumbled across Dale Carnegie or gotten some help from a psychologist who deals with social phobic people I’m sure I would have gotten better results. Game also included all sorts of ridiculous, useless stuff that made the process a lot less efficient. I’m sure some new age self help stuff would have had the same effect as game. Game is in fact very similar to new age self help and it’s well known that many gamers are infatuated with Tony Robbins, Eckhart Tolle etc.

Here’s how game and self help work. They get you to admit you have a problem, or at least a lack of sorts, and they declare that they have a foolproof solution to it. Then you get a surge of enthusiasm and swallow all their useless advice. You go out and try it– but since you’ve already convinced yourself it’s true you blame all the failures on yourself not following the method and credit all the good results to the method. The only useful things are the burst of enthusiasm that gets you to try stuff instead of sitting on your ass doing nothing, and the few bits of common sense advice that you could’ve gotten elsewhere. All the actual “tactics” are at least 90% pure bs, but a stopped clock is right twice a day.

I do pretty well right now being a well dressed, mid twenties 6’1″ guy with a good build who’s not a complete wussbag or social phobic. I just say hello and talk like a normal fucking person, see if we have common interests and… voila! I’ve dropped all the game tactics like push/pull, indirect, canned stuff, inner game, “being alpha,” etc.

Frost September 20, 2011 at 10:59 am

Perhaps surprisingly, I agree with almost all of this post. Much of game actually is garbage, and the main good it does is get men out in the world and talking to girls. Anything else that did that would change a lot of lives just the same.

That said, the world of game is a big place. Some of it is garbage, most of it is flawed but useful, and a small amount is gold. Find what works best for you personally, and refine it until you’re unstoppable.

Greg September 16, 2011 at 10:47 pm

Andrew, come on, do you seriously think that just because something is popular it has to be true? Do I really have to go through the almost infinite list of stupid things mankind has believed in at various points in history and the stupid things they continue to believe in? You cant possibly be as unsophisticated as you are making out here.

Fact is, people believe in all sorts of demonstrably false things because of wishful thinking or because it makes them feel good. In fact, this phenomenon is so common that popularity is more likely to mean something is false, than true.

I have tried game for years, and know tons of other guys who have too. It just does not work, and when guys start noticing that it does not work they start saying stuff like Frost does here, *oh, well, this particular tactic does not work, but all the other tactics are great*. Little by little, you go through each tactic and realize the same thing – it does not work.

Lots of game *tactics* are actually low self-esteem behaviors, and faking yourself to be liked is probably the greatest low self-esteem behavior of all, which is why game is just another form of *nice guy* and woman-worship. Which is why it does not work.

Andrew September 17, 2011 at 4:11 pm

No, I don’t believe that popularity is an unequivocal indicator of truth or legitimacy. But in this case it is. Game is popular because it works to one degree or another for the guys that give it a shot (apparently it didn’t work at all for you, which begs the question, why did you try it “for years”?). I know this is why it is popular because I have “inside knowledge” – I’ve tried it myself, had success, and know other people with the same experience. It may not make a guy an instant success with women, and it might mean a guy has to learn some wrong stuff in order to eventually learn what really works, but I am not arguing that the mechanism by which it works is perfect. I am saying: if game didn’t exist, there would be thousands of men still sitting in their mom’s basement, or drinking at bars in groups of dudes too afraid to break out of their comfort zone, who instead have gained confidence and had significant success with women – entirely through the use of game.

I can appreciate that “game *tactics* are actually low self-esteem behaviors.” Fine. Got it. Agreed. But this doesn’t mean it is bullshit any more than the entire concept of democratic government would be bullshit just because you or I disagree with some (or even most) of the U.S.’s current policies.

Greg September 17, 2011 at 5:49 pm

That is poor logic, it can just as easily be popular because it caters to wishful thinking and mens desire to believe. Its popularity just has no bearing on whether it works or not – its just not a relevant factor one way or another. At best, its popularity might arouse suspicion in anyone familiar with how intellectual fads work.

You have no idea that it has helped *thousands of men* – there is zero evidence that game worked for them aside from bullshit internet stories. In fact, the best game gurus report a success rate of about 3%, and guess what, we have studies that show that average guys talking to girls also have that success rate to, 3%, so we actually have some evidence at this point that game does NOT work better than just talking to women.

The reason I tried it for years is the same reason you believe in it now, and the same reason Frost continues to believe in it despise writing a post about how one of the major pillars of game does not work – wishful thinking. Its what makes people believe in religions.

So you tried it and think it works – so basically, game got you talking to a bunch of girls (because game tells you to be approaching all the time), and a few slept with you. In other words the law of averages is being called *game*. You have absolutely no way of knowing if these girls would have slept with you had you just talked to a bunch of girls without any *game*. In other words game is a placebo, which at best, gets guys to talk to girls, some of people inevitably like them, which leads guys to say *game works*.

Game could not possibly have made men *confident* with women, or in general, because faking yourself to be liked is a confidence-lowering activity – you are sub-communicating to your unconscious mind that who you are is not *good enough*, which will wreck your confidence with women.

If game tactics are low self-esteem behaviors, then of course it means it cannot work, if women are attracted to men with high self-esteem. Game bills itself as showing men how to act with confidence towards women, but then advises men to behave in ways no confident man would. Democracy does not bill itself as a system that generates policies that everyone likes – if it did, and it did not do that, it would be a failure.

Look, Im in favor of guys getting better with women and developing genuine confidence and high self-esteem, game, however, is an obstacle on that path. It makes men put women on a pedestal and lower themselves.

tenthring September 17, 2011 at 7:25 pm


Have you ever been a salesmen? If you engaged in sales at a high level you would know that it takes a lot of work, and that there are many techniques that increase success rates. Game is just sales techniques for sex. Saying game doesn’t work would be like saying sales techniques and advertising campaigns don’t boost volume. Sure, there are some bad ad campaigns now and again, but overall its a positive relationship.

“Game could not possibly have made men *confident* with women, or in general, because faking yourself to be liked is a confidence-lowering activity – you are sub-communicating to your unconscious mind that who you are is not *good enough*, which will wreck your confidence with women. ”

If you believe this you have so fundamentally misunderstood the core tenets of game that you are completely lost. Game is about realizing how low value women are, taking them off the pedestal, and realizing there is nothing wrong with your natural masculine impulses, raising your own value. If you don’t get that, you’ll never understand the nuances of game.

greg September 17, 2011 at 10:17 pm

tenthring, the problem is that there is this massive disconnect what game SAYS it is about and what it is actually about.

Game SAYS you should take women off a pedestal, but having to do 30 different moves while she sits there judging you is just putting her on another pedestal.

The really poisonous thing about game is that is has this beautiful philosophy which it does not oberve in practice. So guys get to feel like they are *standing up for themselves* while they are free to indulge their beta instincts to pander to women. They get the best of both worlds – they do what is *comfortable*, pandering to women, while telling themselves they are being *masculine*.

You see, this is not at all uncommon in religious or ideological movements. It might even be the norm. In the Middle Ages, the nobility wanted to fight, but that clashed with the religious teachings of the times, Christianity. So a bunch of Benedictine monks got together and invented this philosophy called *chivalry* which basically was an attempt to harmonise the violence with peacefulness.

This way, Knights got to be as violent as they wished while still thinking they could be good Christians. They did what they secretly wanted beneath a veneer of whitewash designed to save appearances.

This is exactly what game is – guys with low self-esteem indulging their low self-esteem tendencies while developing this great philosophy designed to convince them they are being masculine – a philosophy never meant to be followed, but just preached.

Mystery, for instance, has this great idea that you should never invest more in a woman than she in you – thats the philosophy bit – then the practice part is where you do 90 different tricks while she just sits there, amused. See the contradiction?

tenthring September 18, 2011 at 11:12 am


If you properly study game you will start doing less for women, not more. You may approach more, but you don’t invest more. It seems like you have some image of a dude that attends a seminar, reads books, and then goes to a club in a weird outfit, a deck of cards, and 90 openers memorized. I don’t know anyone like that. I’ve never read a book or gone to a seminar. I’ve mainly just read some blogs which focus mostly on talking about the realities of women, not exact techniques. For the most part the only concrete advice I took was to change my body language (slouch less, lean away, make strong eye contact) which was useful in non female interactions as well. I also throw in a neg now and then, but it’s not like I’m trying. I just neg girls at the same rate I neg guys (i.e. when they are being stupid and deserve it), whereas before I never neged them because they were girls and I was a Nice Guy. I also stopped doing Nice Guy favors for girls unless they did something to earn it. So all in all I’m doing less for women, not more.

Andrew September 18, 2011 at 7:31 am


You say…
“Game could not possibly have made men *confident* with women, or in general, because faking yourself to be liked is a confidence-lowering activity – you are sub-communicating to your unconscious mind that who you are is not *good enough*, which will wreck your confidence with women.”

This is the crux of the matter, and where I completely disagree. I do not think that faking confidence is not a confidence-lowering activity. Granted, it DOES entail an acknowledgement of your lack of confidence; but this is a healthy thing and necessary if any improvements are going to be made. Faking confidence does not sub-communicate anything to your subconscious that you haven’t already realized and accepted – otherwise you wouldn’t be doing it in the first place.

Furthermore, faking confidence DOES get results with women, however minor at first – and even if that success occurs because of the placebo effect you described (I don’t actually agree that it does – at least not completely, but this is beside the point). The initial success helps you begin to recognize your own value and builds self-esteem. This in turn boosts your confidence so that the next time you fake it a little less and have better results. Wash, rinse, repeat and eventually you gain real confidence.

Game is popular because some subset of the men who have tried it have experienced this. Maybe you don’t fall into that subset, but enough have that I can say with certainty that “it works.” I am not judging from what I’ve read on the internet; I am judging by the changes I’ve made in my own life and the changes my friends’ have made in theirs. My claim about “thousands” of men is an extrapolation from the instances around me. It is probably a dramatic underestimation.

I am curious how you would suggest a guy improve his confidence. Do you think it is impossible?

greg September 18, 2011 at 6:26 pm

tentrhing – if you all did was stop being a Nice Guy, then that is not really game, is it? Game is the use of tactics and techniques to fake a state of mind and persona that you do not naturally possess. Simply stopping being a nice guy is not *game*.

Look, we cant just call any activity we do *game* – game has to have a precise definition if we can talk about it. The thing about a Nice Guy is that he fakes himself to be liked, not that he is *nice*. If you stopped being a Nice Guy * (faking yourself to be liked through being *nice*), you are not doing game. Game is when you stop faking yourself in the Nice Guy way, and start faking yourself in the Game way .

See what I am saying? If you just stopped doing Nice Guy (faking), but did not start doing any tactics and other fakery designed to impress with your *alphaness*, you are not doing game.

@Andrew – Enormous amounts of confusion in your thinking here. Let me try to clarify.

The first point I want to make is that most – yes, most – game tactics are actually behaviors that exhibit low confidence, so even if game DID pay lip service to the idea of *faking* confidence, a huge part of my beef with it is that the behaviors it suggests are confident are stuff that a guy LACKING in confidence would do.

Its a massive clusterfuck. Being indirect is *faking* LOW confidence, not high confidence, DHVing (the need to brag, however subtly) reflect LOW confidence, not high confidence. Being excessively cocky, or charming, is show-offy and reflects LOW confidence, not high.

So whats being *faked* here? Certainly not confidence. Thats the incredible part – sure, game was developed to *fake* confidence, but it *fakes* the opposite!

Now, either what happened here is that a bunch of low confidence guys who have no idea what confidence looks and feels like dreamed up this dream of what to them – beta guys – confidence might look like. Since they have no firsthand experience, naturally they did what all low confidence people do, they overcompensate.

*Every* single game tactic is an example of overcompensation, an attempt to *impress* – but since needing to impress others is the essence of lacking confidence, it was a massive, epic fail. Every single game tactic is psychologically false through and through – it simply does not understand what confidence *looks like*.

The reason they developed tactics that are so psychologically false is that they started from a psychological contradiction – instead of saying, girls like confident men, let us find out what confidence truly is and what we must do to authentically build it, they said, girls like confident men, how can we *fake* confidence to them without bothering to build it?

Now lets see if it is possible to *fake* confidence or even if that statement has any meaning at all, and why say it is a contradiction, even a malapropism.

Confidence is being *oneself*. Exhibiting confidence means acting out your beliefs and feelings in the real world (who you are). *Faking* confidence makes no sense because either you ARE acting out who you are or you are NOT.

Now, what game really means is *faking the behavior of some random confident guy I know who is good with girls*. If some game guru know a guy who smiles a lot, then that is *confidence*, and you must fake it. If they know a guy who is cold and aloof, then that is *confidence*, and you must fake it. Thats why each game guru has some different idea of *game*. What they dont get is that the essence of what makes these guys get girls is that they refuse to fake themselves to be liked, which gives them *congruence* as their inner world and behavior is perfectly aligned, and which makes them poised and act with decisiveness, as they are not terrified of being *found out*, having their facade collapse, as they have an infallible guide to their actions – their personality, NOT what they think a woman will like.

Now as for DEVELOPING confidence, of course guys can do things to improve that – without question. But what they gotta do is learn to have the courage to be fearlessly themselves, to create congruence between their inner worlds and their outer behavior, to cease acting according to other peoples script, to cease doing things just to be liked, whether it is game, or whether it is Nice Guy.

Nice Guy does not work because it is fake yourself to curry favor, not genuinely being nice. Game does not work for the same reason – it is an attempt to curry favor, not be an authentic human being.

greg September 18, 2011 at 6:28 pm

That should have read *confidence is BELIEF in oneself*, not confidence is *being oneself*.

BELIEF in oneself necessarily implies being oneself.

tenthring September 18, 2011 at 8:07 pm


This is silly. If we define “game” to be “anything I don’t like” then of course it seems ridiculous.

I was a Nice Guy because I’m a nice person, and I was taught from a young age to be chivalrous by my parents and society. I stopped being a Nice Guy when I realized the women I was being nice to didn’t deserve it, and that it wasn’t a few bad women but rather the nature of women themselves. It was their problem, not mine. Here again we have some crazy definition where any guy that is being nice is “faking it”. Well, if we define all guys who act nice as fakers then there can be no genuinely nice people in the world can we.

“game has to have a precise definition if we can talk about it.”

Yes, and I’ve defined it. There are thousands of sites, including this one, showcasing “game” in the way I have defined it. If you reject this definition and substitute your own I don’t see how we can have a discussion about something I have no intention of advocating or defending.

“The reason they developed tactics that are so psychologically false is that they started from a psychological contradiction – instead of saying, girls like confident men, let us find out what confidence truly is and what we must do to authentically build it, they said, girls like confident men, how can we *fake* confidence to them without bothering to build it? ”

Game teaches you to be confident. But having a good product is useless without good advertising. You can be a millionaire rock star with a 10 inch cock that has supreme confidence, but if you act like a dweeb around women it doesn’t matter. The world is littered with confident men that should be catches striking out with women below their league because they don’t have game.

greg September 19, 2011 at 12:46 am

tenthring, you say you are a nice person by nature, but then say you were TAUGHT to be chivalrous and nice to women by your parents and society. Do you see the cognitive dissonance you are trying to work through?

The behaviors that are called* nice guy* in PUA lingo are actually door-mat behaviors – no one does them because they want to be door-mats, they do them because they want to be *liked*, and they think thats the way to get it. Genuine niceness loses you no points with women, and of course genuine nice people exist. *Natural* door-mats dont exist, people have to be educated into being door-mats, or they are door-mats out of fear – but never out of desire. Society does a good job at this, and so does game, in a different way.

tenthring, are you saying that game is simply stopping door-mat behaviors? Sure, if thats your definition, I have no quarrel. But all the major purveyors of game, Mystery and all the rest, DONT mean just that – they mean faking yourself to win the approval of women. In fact I know of NO website that is *just* about stopping door-mate behaviors. Not Roissy, not roosh, not anyone. Because game is about faking yourself through techniques, as you well know.

This is one of the problems with game, the definition will just mutate to fit the argument of the moment. You will tell me its just about stopping door-mat behaviors, and tomorrow you will advise me about my body language, or tell me I have to neg, or tell me I have to DHV, all the while completely oblivious to the cognitive dissonance – thats why I say game pays *lip service* to all sorts of ideals it never observes in practice. It does this so that it can *pretend* to be about male self-respect while allowing men with no self-respect to indulge the emotionally easy way of not acting with self-respect. Just like *chivalry* was a way that violent men could be violent while *pretending* they were living out the principles of a religion that prohibits violence. This kind of thing happens all the time.

You have not really addressed any of the points I raised about why game is self-lowering and does not work, you just asserted things.

*Needing to advertise yourself* is a low self-esteem behavior. I get that you really, really, really want to *prove* yourself to women, but that is essentially what the problem is. People with high self-value do not need to *prove* themselves to other people.

It might be too subtle for you to grasp, but when you *advertise* yourself to others, you DLV yourself, to use game lingo. Get it? Game is one gigantic DLV.

This is a pretty good example of my point about beta guys trying to invent reasons to indulge their betaness – which is emotionally easy for them because it involves no painful growth – while patting themselves on the back for being *alpha*.

Greg September 16, 2011 at 2:30 pm

LOL, you are getting pretty desperate here, dude. The obvious conclusions is that game does not work, not that it just does not work for handsome guys.

You are deliberately suppressing your logical brain here. Maybe this is a stage you have to go through before you give up game. *Oh wait, something is wrong here, this does not work, wait, it cant possibly be that GAME is bullshit, its gotta be some little quirk we can tweak*. lol

You have also completely misunderstood the purpose of *going in under the radar*. The purpose is that showing too much interest in the chic right away lowers your value, which is supposedly just not attractive to women. It should not matter if a good looking guy does this, it should simply make him more attractive.

The truth is, going in under the radar, *indirect game*, does not work for anyone, because it is essentially wimpy and pathetic, and born from a weak state of mind, like nearly all game tactics. You are talking to a girl in a bar and you dont even have the balls to be direct and upfront about your intentions! Very alpha indeed.

The ugly guy probably wont get very far regardless, but what little chance he has would be infinitely augmented by going in direct and unapologetic.

Lol, this was a funny post.

Andrew September 16, 2011 at 9:31 pm

“Game doesn’t work” is possibly the dumbest thing I have seen written on here. If game did not work, the explosion of its popularity would not have happened. You are only reading about it all over the internet because it has taken off, and it has only taken off because men have results using it.

What you mean is that it did not work for you – perhaps because you didn’t need it, but more probably because you didn’t tailor it to yourself. A blanket statement like “Game doesn’t work” is obviously a projection of your own experiences onto everyone else. For someone who can write as clearly as you can, it’s surprising how murky your thoughts are.

Chico September 16, 2011 at 11:04 am

Hi Frost,

What, in your estimation, constitutes tall or tall enough? I’m 5’7, but I’ve been told every now and then that I’m very good looking when I’m in shape (a lot of comments are made about my eyes). I get very masculine facial features and a muscular X-shape (I have huge quads), but I’m not that big overall. To give some reference, I’m only 155 pounds but I’m at a point where I’m benching just over my bodyweight for 3 sets of 10. 210 for 3X10 reps on squats. Does a guy like myself have to resort to cheezy game if I’m about the same physical size (not accounting for muscularity) as many women? I also look much younger (most people guess 16-20) than my age (24, almost 25).

I too, have noticed that my successes have mostly come from being foolish and sometimes drunk. Sometimes it’s just blind luck and I don’t even have to initiate, but that’s obviously not a reliable method. I’ve tried the game thing periodically, but it doesn’t usually lead to results. I can usually gain the girl’s attention, but it ends up in me being taken less seriously over time. Especially if you’re using what is pretty obviously a canned opener.

Frost September 20, 2011 at 10:56 am

I know plenty of short guys who do very well for themselves.

Height is a definite advantage, and it’s true that a good number of taller girls won’t want to date you because you’re shorter. But overall, it just means that you’ll have to grind through a few rejections from girls who for whatever reason need to date a taller man. And you will get fewer lays fall into your lap at 2am when some drunk girl stumbles into you and hops in a cab with you 10 minutes later.

I’d much rather be short and good looking than tall and ugly.

Crunchie September 15, 2011 at 7:43 pm

I want to ask anyone if they have any good links to a site that would tell me how to get the best styles to cut my hair for my face type, or how to dress best for their personality and bodytype.

Frost September 16, 2011 at 11:03 am

If you find anything, let me know! I’d recommend checking out the fast seduction forum’s lifestyle section.

Andrew September 16, 2011 at 9:25 pm

I’ve found various good advice online for hair but you need to filter through a lot of bullshit to find it. If anyone knows a good book I would be interested to know about it too. By the way, more men (i.e. all my coworkers and friends) make mistakes by not adapting their hairstyle to their (receding) hairline; face shape is less important. For example, I’ve read so many places that people with narrow faces need to wear their hair longer on the sides to add width, but this is superseded if your hair is starting to recede, because adding to the sides emphasizes the recession. I am thinking the best resource will probably be a text book from a a hairstylist school. You might try calling a reputable one and asking what text they use to teach. This is decent because it actually gives photo examples:

I have A couple books that have taught me some important lessons on how to dress well. The first is Called: “Details Men’s Style Manual.” you can get it here:

It mostly deals with fit and style, and it has no bullshit in it. However, that book says nothing about color, which is critical. So if you want to round home, check out “Image Matters For Men”:

This book deals with body shape, color and personality, but not as much with style (like the Details one does). Together these two books will tell you everything you need to know. I’ve found that – like anything – learning how to dress well takes practice and risk. Money helps too but it isn’t essential.

I’ve learned a ton over the last few years, shoot me an e-mail if you want advice on anything specific; I’ve probably come across it at some point.

raliv September 15, 2011 at 3:51 pm

my game has transformed more and more into looking my best, being in shape, and being friendly to everyone and knowing how to hold a good conversation. After that, I verbally indicate interest and take bold action.

good post for all good looking men. keep it up.

Frost September 16, 2011 at 11:04 am

If you have the balls to approach and escalate, while avoiding stupid msitakes, I think that’s 75% of game right there. Thanks!

Chad Daring September 15, 2011 at 3:20 pm

This has really got me thinking. I’m 6’2″ in good shape and I dont think I’m half bad looking, and while game and the red pill have done wonders for me, I have been following a more “PUA” like approach, rather then being really blunt and direct. Partially, I admit, because I’m still very intimidated by the idea of doing so. I think I might have to do some personal experimentation with this.

Frost September 16, 2011 at 11:13 am

Yeah man, you’ll be surprised at the shit that you can get away with. Just start trying to push the limits as much as possible, ie telling girls a minute into meeting them that you want to take them home.

whiteboykrispy September 15, 2011 at 12:39 pm


My biggest blowouts ever, the ones that still make me cringe, were early in the game when, like you, I tried sneaky shit and clever openers. I’d get that look, and then quickly get shut out.

I found out soon enough that a simple “hey” was all I needed to start it up.

Frost September 16, 2011 at 11:18 am

Exactly my experience.

It’s kind of a disappointed look, like oh, you’re pretty. why do you have go go and talk like a retard?

But, that;s how we learn, eh?

J.W. Black September 15, 2011 at 8:07 am

You’re going to get some hate mail over this one!

I’m one of the lucky guys who is mildly adept at attracting women (5s-7s, an occasional 8), and I also noticed that some parts of the theory didn’t do anything for me, and actually hindered me sometimes. Gearing it to your personality and natural level of attraction is important to making it work.


J.W. Black

{ 5 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: