Hey guys, I'm changing up my game a little bit now. Or actually quite a bit. I've been going direct for a while during cold approaches. I've been doing this because I feel congruent to what am I doing, going up to a girl to talk to her and telling her so.

My results have been mediocre with it and so I'm now looking to expand my pickup skills into indirect approaching, or rather just starting a conversation without telling her upfront that I like her or I think she's cute. Basically I want to build the conversation up to where she is attracted and then go from there.

I have a problem however, since I feel quite incongruent when I go up to a girl and just go "indirect" or start a conversation somehow if I am not really in state. I mean that if I am in state I can open a girl however I want and I am unapologetic and just talk and talk and talk and escalate.

If I am not in such a great mood, however, I get stuck. I feel incongruent. I guess I start overthinking, and my main issue here is that I do not know what I should go for. My intention is to get the girl, to make it on, but if I go in with something else that is incongruent to my intention and I suddenly feel stupid. It's fucked up, I suddenly become reaction seeking, because I want to build attraction and all that, and I don't feel comfortable doing so indirectly. I don't know, maybe I need more practice in this area. A lot of stuff on indirect game says to hide your intentions until at least she shows interest. How can I hide my intentions and still be congruent? I just don't get it.

I feel like a real newbie because I am stuck at the very beginning. I've noticed that with warm approaches I don't have this problem, because it seems more "normal" to introduce yourself and get to know each other, but with cold approaches why else would you be there rather than to get to know the girl?

I use Direct Approaches in particular cases. Usually in the daytime and not if I'm opening a set. It's (to me) more of a one on one, daytime sort of thing.

Whereas indirect is more nightgame (generally speaking) and can be somewhat awkward one on one, but it can be done. It's just different.

An indirect approach that Roosh V advocates in his book "Day Bang" is the "Eldery Opener".

This is a bit more complex than canned openers and canned routines. By the way, indirect game with canned routines/openers is a lot like a computer program with if/else loops.

START/OPEN/IOD/DHV {if IOI=Next else=Restart} {Next; Compliance Test {if COMPLY=Next2 else=Restart} Next2; IOI-SOI/BAITHOOKREELRELEASE/ISOLATE/CONVERSE/KINO/KISS/TIMEBRIDGE or BOUNCE/7 HOURS/C3 MOVE/FOREPLAY/LMR/FCLOSE

So this is kind of a program and it is predictable.

If you are having trouble with that formula, pick it apart and get a composition book. Write canned material for 2 to 3 cycles of ifs and elses. This will become easy once you have practiced for a while.

Otherwise you can use ROOSH V's elderly openers and "notice" something on the woman or something she is carrying and ask her a question about it. Make small talk about it and then use his GALNUC routine which is just several questions that are used to switch gears in a conversation from an elderly opener into more personal territory and a number close.

With Time Bridges you will need to work on your phone game.

But I felt like helping you out with this. I hope I wasn't too confusing.

_________________
That's my $0.02

-Bluesy

Hey man thanks for that, but my question was about something a little different. I know a lot of indirect approaches myself, I know how they work, what they're for, but when someone goes indirect, what is their intention behind the approach? To ask a question? To get to know the girl? The thing is your intention is probably to get to know her, to meet her, but if you're going in with a question you're not really being true to that, are you? At least I feel incongruent with it, but I know a lot of people do it and have success with it, which is why I want to get good at it too.

I understand.

I think intentions are different sometimes.

From a very simplistic point of view the intentions range from getting to know someone new, to adding notches to your belt. Whatever the case the nature of indirect approaches is to "not scare the cat". In other words, sometimes if you are too direct with a woman you will scare her off like if you were trying to walk up to a cat and put your hand on it to pet it. But the cat is skittish and as soon as you lift your hand it runs away. Why? Because the "cat" has been abused before. So basically your indirect approach is like kneeling down, saying 'here kitty' and crumpling your hand up like you have a treat hidden in it. The cat gets interested and approaches you and examines your hand and lets you pet it because it has become vulnurable. But in true fashion you don't betray the kitty's trust. You just give it a loving pet and then go on your way.

So what I'm saying is that indirect approaching is like trying not to scare a cat away so that you can stroke it. Make sense?

How congruent does that feel? Well, to me it's not disingenuous because whether or not I try to "pet the cat" right away and scare it off or "lure the cat" to pet it in a minute, the only difference is my success rate.

Eventually you will work out congruency because you will pet the cat.

_________________
That's my $0.02

-Bluesy