hey guys, been learning mystery method for about a month, understand a lot of it, have a hard time implementing it. in other words, i'm still pretty rough around the edges. i want to get into nlp, but i know it's a lot of work. should i brush up my mystery method game and get it to where it's solid, or should i just leave it as it is and dive into nlp? i think the style of pickup that will work best for me is day game, approaching lone wolves, or two sets. from what i understand, nlp is probably a better way to go for that type of situation, so as you can see, that's why i'm wondering which direction i should take from here. thanks.

Gunwitch Method.
www.gunwitch.com

Just do it http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... +it+speech.
Plain and simple, just get out there and do it. You only get better with practice. I will tell you this, learn it, then go out with the intention of f'ing it up. You won't be able to do it. It's amazing. Remember, it's all a learning experience.

Chief, can you elaborate on Gunwitch? I've heard that he's quite intense and uses a very intense inner sexuality to accomplish seduction. Can you write a little on that, sir?

_________________
"There is no greater pleasure than to kick a girl out of your bed when it is no longer clear who is fucking who."

thanks chief. i had read some gunwitch material a few months back, but had a hard time getting into it. but i checked out the link, and the style of writing is much smoother, much easier to read. got through just a little bit and can tell this is what i need right now. thanks again for the link.

I personally think it is better to study the traditional methods of pickup like mystery method before learning NLP and SS.

I knew all about NLP before I started pickup but decided to learn SS last out of the well-known methods. I think this has made me a better PUA.

I am compelled to remark, Gimble, no offense, I just found it funny that what you remarked as traditional methods, like mystery method, popped up on the market after SS... unless I've got my timeline wrong again. hehe.

But, yeah, Gimble seems to have taken a nice path,
SS is based on hypnosis and NLP so, if you're a hypnotist or NLP Practitioner or something equivalent to that; SS may be easier for you.
If not, you'll feel less like a freak sticking to "normal" methods, as SS has some pretty outright lewd patterns.

I read an article in Playboy actually, I think I found it through the SS site, where the guy confessed he was really shocked of the things he was told to say to the girl, because it seems so obvious she's gonna spot it and freak.

It's a fun article, if you're interested in learning it I would try to track it down.

Anywho; regardless of what way you chose, it takes dedication and "hard" work. =P

Big Bad Wolf, you might benefit from buying a dictionary, because "traditional" does not mean "old". This wonderful item can also help one learn how to spell, for you will even find my second name in the book, and realise that it does not contain an 'i'.

Ok, but why is SS not a traditional method? For a long, long time it was the only method.

And, yes, traditional does imply "old." Buy a thesaurus.

_________________
"There is no greater pleasure than to kick a girl out of your bed when it is no longer clear who is fucking who."

For the record, taken from Merriam-Webster:
As you can see, assuming you people can read, the word "traditional" can be related to the past, but does not have to. There are different ways one can use the word, just like many words, so can we please stop the English lesson and get back to PUA?

Jesus Christ.

To answer your second point:
I totally disagree. Perhaps it was the most structured and marketed method, but there were already "guides" and books such as the lay guide and 'How to pick up girls' by Eric Webster in 1970.

On a side and more interesting note, a lot of the aspects of SS that aren't related to NLP are in my opinion, rather lousy. For instance RJ strongly advocates the use of the gay opener, even how to pretend to be convincingly gay. In fact a lot of his openers are very full on and in my opinion compliment the girl too much. But that's just my opinion. I guess when you're got RJ's NLP-based techniques down it doesn't really matter what you open with.

Only cuz you're a fucking idiot:

Entry Word: traditional
Function: adjective
Text:
1 based on customs usually handed down from a previous generation<Ruben had a traditional Passover meal at his grandparentsʼ house>
Synonymsclassical, conventional, customary
Related Wordsauthentic, established, fixed, historical; common, habitual, orthodox, usual; ancestral, historic, old-time, old-world; aged, age-old, ancient, hoary, old, venerable; ageless, dateless, immemorial, timeless
Near Antonymscontemporary, current, modern, modernized, new, present-day, updated, up-to-date; futuristic, hot, latest, mod, modernistic, newfangled, new-fashioned, red-hot, space-age, ultramodern; nonconformist, nonorthodox, original, progressive, revolutionary, unorthodox, unusual
Antonymsnontraditional, unconventional, uncustomary

2 tending to favor established ideas, conditions, or institutions<a family that is very traditional when it comes to institutions like marriage>— see conservative 1


As concerns your comments on speed seduction, you only further your misunderstanding of SS and it continues to surprise me that Chief gave you a sticky to answer SS and NLP questions.

_________________
"There is no greater pleasure than to kick a girl out of your bed when it is no longer clear who is fucking who."

Poor you. I don't think it's even worth going down to that level of childishness to comment. I apologise for your immaturity. You can always PM me if you have anger problems, I'm happy to help out buddy. Really.
I like the way you don't point out anything specific. I am happy to be challenged on every comment I make. I don't think it's fair throwing vague ad hominem remarks that don't get anyone anywhere.

Hopefully next time you post you have cooled down and remember what it is to be an adult, assuming (perhaps wrongly) that you are over 18.

so what you guys are saying is, instead of learning MM better, or getting into NLP, i should buy a dictionary and read it instead? cool, thanks guys.

Although you probably are on to another PUA form by now, i recommend you stick with MM and learn it as well as you can. If you want a change of pace, but within the same ideals to keep it simple, study Style's method.

If you get too many people telling you "Try this way," and it doesn't quite work for you, you will jump top another, and another. You'll never get skilled with any and won't have much more success than just being yourself. You'll get frustrated and quit the whole thing and be convinced the whole PUA community is a sham.

Stick with the path you started until you get to its destination. Then learn other paths.

Allow me to clarify my first comment on this thread. I say, read everything and learn whatever you can. You will find that MM is one algorithm and SS is a different one. The two, however, are not mutually exclusive. For example, I love opinion openers. I like to approach seduction like a ninja and come in under the radar. However, it just depends on the circumstances and my mood. If I'm in a store, I'm a lot more likely to be more direct. One thing I do that I think is really good is that I will try everything. If someone says to do a certain approach, do it. Try them all out. Only by experimenting will you learn what works best for you. Eventually you will develop your own style and approach.

As to Mr. Gamble, your posts reflect a superficial knowledge of NLP in general. You attach much more significance to the "fake it like you're gay" approach than Ross does. That's just one approach of many. You make is sound like that's his main opener. I would argue that he advocates the "what can I observe about this woman" approach much more. This shows that you really haven't studied his material that much.

_________________
"There is no greater pleasure than to kick a girl out of your bed when it is no longer clear who is fucking who."

RussianBear, thank you for pointing out something specific rather than swearing at me this time. Let me quote myself:
I phrased myself very carefully because I knew that you would say exactly what you said. I said "a lot of the aspects" that "aren't related to NLP" are lousy. I said "FOR INSTANCE" ...gay opener.

I did not say I like you say I do, and furthermore I said "for instance", I didn't say "RJ's main opener is". So i don't think I make it sound like his main opener at all, as you wrongly accused:
Do you have any more misconceptions about my knowledge or myself?

Thank you for your time.