"The problem with most Pick Up theories in the community is that they automaticaly assume you are of less value than the girl"

This is a quote from the late dream-weaver. And this has been a very reasonable criticism of concepts like the DHV and the neg.

I used to be an Indirect game kind of guy, then I learnt how to apply direct game properly and after I had grasped the concepts of direct game, it became a fairly easy way to pick up attractive girls.

BUT. With this, I have to admitt that I am both.

A: Good looking.

B: Tall.

Already, before I have said a word, I have the situation to my advantage with most girls.

-----------

This may seem like an abrupt cut. But it will come into play later.

We have two types of Bitch shield.

Aggressive. - Easy to get throught that becuase you have something to work with.

And Passive. - Complete shut out, the girl doesn't want to converse in any way and will refuse to aknowledge you.

Obviously the passive bitch shielf is the one to avoid. And it turns up during COMPLETE rejection. Not just rejection of your behaviour or as a concept. But rejection of you as a person in her world.

----------------------------------------

The passive bitch shiled, comes up when a girl really does believe you are below her and is the hardest to break.

-----------------------------------------

The indirect approach makes it easier for someone who doesn't look immiediatly high value to hold intrigue and convey some value which would open the set up to seduction, with a lower risk of encountering Passsive Bitch shields.

Discuss.

Excellent point, but if the perceived difference in values is not too great, then direct game could work, since going direct is almost like a DHV. In my humble opinion, at least.

_________________
Don't hate, just dominate.

First I'd like to say sorry this is probably going to be super geeky and a little over thought...with that said:

The actual equation for determining your value in an open system.

U=w(P1)v(X1)+w(P2)v(X2)...
With X= the potential outcome(the gain); P is the probability of the event occurring; and V= the perceived value of the event. The function w is called a probability weighting function and expresses that people tend to overreact to small probability events, but underreact to medium and large probabilities.

when graphed the equation leads us to several conclusions: Gains have a much less effect on the decision (ie. to date you; talk to you) than the losses. and those changes are a sine wave. which means small losses have a much larger relative impact to perceived value than Large losses.

So in the simplest terms a body rock has more impact on your perceived value than walking away.

So indirect game has a solid foundation in decision theories.

We now continue your regularly scheduled broadcasts.
-R

That's really interesting. Funky.

Fin said:
I actually really agree with this (at first I was apprehensive about being so specific and exclusive) from my experience.

Most passive bitch shields I find tend to come when opening group sets. But I've had so many in the past, there are a number of ways to get around it (apologies if I'm digressing here) - but the way I find most interesting and fun is to use the passive bitch shield to your advantage by framing it in a funny way.

So I'd be like "Aaah, so she seems a bit quiet, I bet she's the mastermind in the group, quietly planning out your evil missions" and just bounce of that. Eventually, you'll snag a smile of them, then be like "see, you can smile! You're really cute when you do!" And you set up a reward system for dropping the passive bitch shield. I think I'm talking about the same thing as you, but maybe not.

Going back to the general thrust of the thread...yeah true point about indirect. I think both are great and both have their merits. I think this is a good point about when indirect can be better than direct. And I agree with you.

Playing devil's advocate, I would say if there is this perceived inequality, direct game can still work very effectively by playing the value game if you actually play it well. 'Direct game' is such a broad term and most guys and we all have varying views of what it actually is. There are techniques to manipulate value that would probably be classed as direct rather than indirect.

Indirect really comes into its own when you're picking up in social situations where you don't want to be seen explicitly hitting on women, such as with work colleagues or family. In any case, I think the boundaries blur when you develop your own style(s).

Agreed I do this myself sometimes and im sure probably 90% of the community does as well

I know why i do it and its probably the same with most other guys due to this
I am good looking yeah maybe i have a big head for saying that but i am .

However guys like me focus on imperfections for me its a few scars on my face that i cant get rid of till next year . Im still good looking but it doesnt stop me thinking about the " what if she says no go away youve got scars"

and well ive got over that with the "fxck it response" and pre planned witty remarks.... The crazy thing is no one has ever mentioned my scars yet i still threat on them and im sure most guys on this forum over exaggerate their imperfections and cant go direct due to this.

Well duh. How many guys that suck getting girls did this before they learned about pick up? Like almost all of them?

Ya those things do give you an advantage, but not as I much as I think you do. What gives you the most advantage is confidence and mind set. Your good looking because YOU think that in turn that gets projected by your body language and girls pick it up.

It really depends on how one goes about it really. As it can put the guy into the friend zone right off the bat as well as get a passive bitch shield as well. As the girl may see the guy as too nice, in other words the guy is not being aggressive/alpha enough to grab her interest.

Indirect CAN put you in the friend zone if....

Do you see what I'm saying there?

As far as confidence goes, the advantage of confidence really isn't to do wit how it comes through in superficial things like body-language. Confidence generally communicated in deeper behaviours. Sticking around when your reception was not initially warm. Or maybe just being able to hold a positive frame while someone tries to shoot you down.

Good looks and height are two genetic factors that have been proven again and again to be huge factors in whether or not a person is selected as a partner. But we can't generalise this PU to readily becuase we are after all a group of specialist who are engaging in behaviours very different to your average Joe.

I know what your saying. I guess I should have explain my point a bit more. In short only using indirect game will not remove the passive bitch shield/shit test, but actually encourage it more so as you are using a passive way to get the girl. Its been in my experience with rejection/bitch shields/shit test that girls tend to deliver them in the manner you game them for the most part. I think it would be better to at least inject some direct game if you are going to use indirect game as most girls seem to like at least some alpha characteristics being shown from the guy. And I think indirect game "removes" them by making them more subdued.
True.
I am not saying physical attributes don't matter as they do. And they can certainly give you and advantage. But they only go so far. Confidence seems to be a bigger advantage from my experience.

The whole Bitch shield and shit test thing can't really be put in the same category as overall "rejection".

With the bitch shield it's more a knee jerk responce to pressure. The event of being hit on by someone of the opposite sex is quite an intimidating prospect for many. And it's easier to just bail out. This is a common reason for most bitch shields.

Becuase they don't know.

A: Is he going to leave soon?
B: If he is worth it.
C: Whether this might be scary and uncomfortable for us.

And if the guy doesn't match up to either A or B, or looks like he may make C happen... then It's much simpler to just be cautious and throw up a wall. It's the same phenomenon when you're teaching new guys and they bail out of a perfectly good set, becuase they were nervous and didn't know what to do.

The thing that an indirect approach does is that it relieves the pressure of the interaction. From both parties. And gives a person time to establish themselves as an individual.

Fin, I agree that good looka and height matter and I'm glad that you also stopped with indirect. As for your idea, wouldn't an ugly guy who is confident enough to be direct be more impressive to the girl then a good looking/tall guy doing the same?

I am not saying indirect game doesn't have its use, as it certainly does. But I just think that using it solely with out even a tad mix of direct game will more than likely lead to a bitch shield or rejection. Because as I mention before indirect game subdues the alpha qualities/characteristics that are present in direct game. Both styles gives a person time to establish them selves as an individual. The only real difference is indirect gives you more time.

Well everyone has to be direct at some point. It's not like you can start false disqualifying half way through fucking.

When I speak of indirect, I'm talking on the level, of not immiediatly verbalising or demonstrating your sexual intent. Give something low pressure and then when you've established yourself, step it up in a congruent way.

Stanley, unfortunatly the girls may percieve the ugly guys attempt as sleazy, while seeing our hot guys attempt as flattering.

Ultimatly what you are relying on when using direct game, is your confidence and persistance. But the more value you give off the bat, the more open people will be to you.

You most definatly can be a bad looker, and come in with no social proof. (Should note I sarge solo, so I am used to going direct without any "proofing") and pull it off with direct game. But from a technical perspective, could be a hell of alot easier if you enter low pressure.