Direct vs Indirect game: Reflections about Mode One Direct a



Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Post new topic Reply to topic   Board index » Tools & Techniques of Game: Meeting, Attracting and Seducing Women » Approaching and Opening




Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:30 pm 
Offline
New to MPUA Forum

Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 3:57 pm
Posts: 1
So I recently read Mode One books by Allan Roger Currie. I was fascinated by them and certainly sold by the concept that the model proposes.
The thing that captivated me the most is the beautiful and fascinating concept of game efficiency that the author portrays as a result of using this model.

Also enticed by the argument that being “Mode One” eliminates all manipulation attempts from girls, which in fact it does.

So being the scientific player that I always strive to be, I went out to test the model and concepts in the field.

As it seems that there is a “debate” among newbies and not so newbies about which is better between direct vs indirect I decided to share my thoughts about this issue and hopefully help some of the less involved in game have a better understanding.

These are my reflections:

1. The Mode One model consists primarily of letting women know straightforwardly, specifically and honestly what your intent with them is (which is to have sex with them) within the first 5 minutes of conversation but sometimes as fast as in the opener depending in the situation.

You: When would you like to share my company one-o-one?
Her: (Blushes) Oh… you are confident! What would you like to do?
You: I would like to take you to my house and fuck you really hard until you have a full body orgasm.

This would result in various answers by the girls in certain categories:

The yes girls or reciprocators – Will agree and fuck you.

The Maybe yes girls or pretenders – Will put a prude front and play hard to get to which you should be able to past through with more mode one statements and dirty sexual talk to arouse her.

The Maybe no girls or timewasters – Who will attempt to condition the sex and goat you to invest resources (time, money, etc.) in them in exchange for the promise of eventual sex.

The no girls or rejecters – Who will simply reject you.

2. In theory and according to the author, this approach would be free from manipulation from the part of the seducer and would also limit and eliminate the manipulation attempts by the girl to the seducer. This would therefore constitute a “Truly honest and direct approach”

I disagree and agree with this claim and argument.

I disagree with the claim that this model is not manipulation and that is free of all manipulation from the seducer’s part. This would be a misunderstanding of what manipulation/persuasion is and entails.

When you approach a girl being direct and stating your sexual intentions as the model proposes, it is NOT that you are being non-manipulative, but at the contrary, you better have one HELL of good manipulation skills (Frame control to be exact) in your command to be able to pull this off successfully or you will fail miserably unless the planets are aligned at that precise moment and the girl is a yes girl.

This model basically is advanced manipulation/persuasion taken to the extreme. It is frame control at its finest.

If you have an unbreakable frame and AWSOME verbal frame control skills you can say whatever the fuck you want and you will be able to pull it off.
This model is that. Period.

It is a misunderstanding to assume that the author is *JUST* stating his intentions honestly and straightforwardly.

A more in-depth analysis of the author’s language usage by a well versed manipulator/persuader will readily be obvious the common frames used in the seduction community as the prize frame by or the cocky & Funny frames as well as other sexual frames.

He is imposing the frames ala brute force to the girl in a situation in which either she bites the frame or she ejects.

This is persuasion and it is advanced stuff which I would not recommend a beginner to go through to start with. It is too fast, too strong, too early, too advanced.

Now regarding the elimination of the girl’s manipulation attempts, in that I agree. It is really beautiful to see all the girl’s manipulative frames just clash and force her to either enter or leave to yours. Is just beautiful and exquisitely fast.

3. It is important to define what a direct opener or approach and an indirect one would mean to eliminate confusion and stupid comments and rants, so I devised a useful frame to test the opener and determine if it could be considered direct or indirect and therefore solve this issue once and for all.

I call this frame test “The Gay Test”. It is simple. For any opener that you would like to use make yourself this question “Could a gay ask this or say this and still come across cleanly as being gay?”

So for example the opener used by the London guys like Tom Torero, Krauser and such: “Hi, I literally just saw you and I think you look really cute/nice…” would be an indirect one, not a truly direct one.

Why? Because it is allowing the girl’s mind to doubt your intentions. A gay fashion designer or a model hunter gay could easily say that and have absolutely no sexual intentions with the girl. Hell you hear that coming from the mouths of the fags all the time!

So that is NOT truly direct game.

Now, the opener statement: “I want to suck your nipples and slide my hard cock inside your warm, wet pussy” would be direct as it conveys clearly the sexual intentions and would not pass the “Gay Test” above.

Using innuendo would also NOT qualify as direct because again a gay could be teasing her little friend by saying that (and they do) without actually having sexual intentions.

So saying: “I wonder if you have tattoo somewhere private… (With a cheeky smile and a low tone of voice)” would still not be direct as it *COULD* be understood plainly without sexual subtexts.

You can also think about it as a direct statement being a binary request of yes/no intent.

Ex. Do you wanna fuck? = Yes/no.

Giving a compliment is NOT a binary intent request.

Ex. You look cute! = Aww thanks.

4. Where does Mode One comes from?

*ALL* seduction models are based on sales and persuasion models (AIDA, High probability, Hard sell, etc.)

The Mode One model would be an application of the “High Probability Prospecting & Selling Model”.

Where you basically disqualify prospects until you sell them instead of using persuasion and pitching.

Now, for the high probability prospecting model to be effectively applicable to a sales campaign in a market, the market would require some essential conditions that would also apply to our discussion here:

a) There is a HIGH concentration of potential prospects/suspects in a market. A BIG list of leads in marketing terms.

b) The prospector can go through that list in the most time efficient manner possible without any or VERY little waste in order to quickly find prospects.

c) (This is important) The prospector has the capability to revisit the previously contacted suspects. In other words there can be persistence in calling the same guy more than once.

d) Your product/service is a commodity. The potential market has NO ISSUES WHATSOEVER in purchasing your product/service.

Now let’s turn this into seduction and how this has to do with Mode One and direct approaches vs indirect…

a) For a direct game model based on the high probability model of quickly disqualifying uninterested, mildly interested or manipulative prospects to be effective and yield results, it REQUIRES that the market/ access to potential girls is large enough for you to have many options to disqualify.

In other words if you live in a small city you are fucked.

Also a social circle, a gym, a party or other small market would not be suitable for this model.

This would be an excellent model to use in a place like New York or perhaps California where there are Millions of girls walking all day long. So you can disqualify a lot and still find an enough amount of yes prospects to make the grind worthwhile.

Paul Janka followed an approach also based on the high probability model in New York.

In Montreal for example, although big city, it is not so big to be PACKED with girls and also in the summer EVERY fucking body goes out of the city in vacations so it is pretty deserted!

Not to mention that there are A LOT of fucked up bitches like feminists and psychos which would be quickly disqualified as potential sexual prospects.

So if you live in a city with a BIG ASS population, this model would be great for you. If not consider a more conservative approach.

b) Now I am assuming that you are taking seduction seriously and you are jotting down your statistics and ratios right?

Well you need to know how much time it takes to meet a new girl or make a new approach.

In my case it takes me about 11 minutes per approach. So that means that making 6 approaches would take me approx. one hour of time in the field being mode one.

Being Mode One forces the girl to choose if she wanna fuck REALLY fast and therefore MANY, MAANY refuse.

So that means that I would have to go through quite a lot of girls to find my perfect yes girl. Let’s say 200. That means 20 hours of grinding would yield me 1 yes girl, and if logistics are not perfect or if I just fuck it up by A FUCKING BIT. Then is gone and another 20 hours have to go by to find another one.

That is tough.

c) In my experience so far, the high probability model or the Mode One direct approaches cannot be effectively applied to cold approaching in the streets because you only have ONE FUCKING CHANCE!

If the girl at that moment of your approach in the street was put off by the directness (and I noticed this when I was testing the model infield) and she backs off or walks away then you are fucked. She is gone. You will NEVER see her again.

With this I do no mean that the model does not work, on the contrary I have seen positive responses and also I am pretty sure that once you say that to the girl she takes a bit time (also mention by Allan Roger) to cook the idea in her head and process it and then reconsider her initial negative reaction and then actually look forward to you fucking her. BUT that takes TIME for her to process the new approach style who nobody does and the problem is that in the streets YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT SECOND CHANCE NOR TIME!

If she is gone from your presence even for 30 seconds, she is gone. You are fuucked. Cause you can’t follow her after that direct statement or your frame is all fucked and all possible attraction she could feel for you for being a strong ballsy alpha guy would go through the window and transform into a feeling of eww he is a creepy following me!

So you do not have time and you do not have a second chance. If she gets just a TAD put off by your directness you are fucked. Good luck!

d) Now with something that covers persuasion, directness and indirectness.

Commodity - a product/service that is the same as other products of the same type from other producers or manufacturers. It is easily accessible.

HETEROSEXUAL SEX IS NOT A COMMODITY FOR GIRLS (nor guys). Period.

The Direct Model or Mode One model would work BEAUTIFULLY if heterosexual sex was a commodity, or in other words, if there were no issues related with having sex as it would be in a natural state like animals.

BUT… It is not.

The fact is that heterosexual sex activities have so mother fucking much propaganda and conditioning against them that girls and guys literally can’t fuck anymore.

For a girl considering having sex with a new guy, a mammoth of fears, insecurities, rules, and shit come to her mind from the years of propaganda that has implanted in her little mind that the guy who wants to sleep with her probably is going to kill her, rape her, torture her, her friends will ostracize her, she will lose all social standing, she will lose respects, yada, yada yada.

ALL THE PROPAGANDA SHIT.

She has MANY reasons (illusional of course, but still valid for her) to be NOT motivated to have sex with a new guy that a “NO” answer is the most probable to come from her little mind after a high pressured situation of a direct approach.

The YES girls are a truly miracle of nature that have LESS fucked up frames in their mind about socializing and sexing due to experience or less exposure to the propaganda.

AND they have just the logistics in place for the sex to happen.
In other words, YES girls that accept to fuck you after asking them to fuck you are the ones who literally the fucking planets aligned for you to fuck.

They will be FAR in between.

The maybe girls, you will need one hell of a frame control, arousing sexual dirty talk and (most importantly to street cold approaching) TIME to get them to accept the proposition.

So girls have A LOT of issues to fucking a new guy in their little minds. A LOT!

Their mental issues are bullshit but still a problem and obstacle.

In theory in a perfect world without the propaganda and social conditioning against heterosexual behavior this would not be the case, mystery method and other game material would not exist and we all be doing mode one approaches and fucking like rabbits.

Actually that is what happens in the “gay” communities. That is what they do, they do mode one because gay behavior is not only not punished nor conditioned against but rewarded and encouraged.

So you will observe that a “gay” person just goes and asks to one of his sexual prospects if he/she wanna fuck and then they fuck if he/she wants, to which most of the time they do.

That unfortunately is not the case with heterosexuals, we have it tuff.
That is why persuasion/manipulation to fuck girls is used. It is for their own health and well-being and ours.

SEX IS GOOD FOR BOTH.

But it is tuff to get the ho to cooperate! :b

CONCLUSION:

I really LOVED Allan Roger Currie books. I think they are VERY informative and very useful and I 100% recommend them to any aspiring and advanced player. They have a lot of gold.

The direct model of game is VALID and it CAN work in certain contexts.
Being more indirect gives you more leeway to achieve the outcome that you want (which is I hope a WIN-WIN one) when the context is more risky.

There is no such thing as seduction without some sort of persuasion/manipulation. Get the fuck over that already! The point is to fuck for her good and yours, the end justifies the means. Period.

I would recommend for a beginner to study indirect first and get well versed in seduction/persuasion first.

Once you understand well what a fuck is a frame and how to keep it and impose it then you can try hard core mode one.

Resources I would recommend for non-direct: Roosh of course, Msytery, Tom Toreo, Krauser, etc.

My 2 cents. (:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: