So I am new to the pua community and have been reading many books on it and the forums.

I was wondering how effective have you felt when using a QUICK direct opener. I would say 75% percent of time for me going up to some girl during the day and saying "Hey,I thought you were pretty cute, I was wondering if I could get your number?" I get the number.

Ive read on direct openers, this has worked for me many many times. But i was wondering what are the pros and cons of this approach

Thanks!

Ive read the book "magic bullets", direct openers are good because you don't need for stories, it's either a yes or no, you force girls to either like or dislike you immediately. The mostly work 50%, you have a higher rate that's nice.

I love direct game. It sets the tone right away and cuts through the bullshit. Check out Simple Pickup on Youtube. All they do is direct game. I'm a huge fan of them now.

direct:
girl likes you - 100% success
girl doesn't like you - 0% success

indirect:
girl likes you - 100% success
girl doesn't like you - 1% success

Statistics favors indirect game.

Also indirect game is a lot harder (story, dhv, time constrain, etc.) and direct game is based on skills developed by massive failure in the field. Direct may become brutal sometimes.

This is my very own opinion!

Well if you're getting a 75% success rate with that line then i would say there are no "cons". Thats actually the highest closing rate I've seen, unless you're bsing.

_________________
A Guide to the No Fap Challenge

The 14 books every man should read. How many of these have you read?

Why massive failure? 0% VS 1% according to you, meaning if you approach 100 girls that do not like you you get rejected 100 times in direct and 99 times in indirect.
How is that of any difference except the tiny statistical?

Al though you were very wrong with those percentages. It is way higher than 1% because when you go indirect she gets more time to know you and sometimes (or pretty often) they change their mind. Way higher than 1% there.

Change this a little from asking into telling (not ordering, but more of a telling rather than asking permission).

Yes.
He is either good looking or bulshitting. So it is not that opener, but his looks that works. Given that we speak about cold or semi cold approaches here.
If he approaches only chicks that gave him signals of interest than 75% is pretty normal.

Adam Lyons made this statistics not me, forgot to mention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqy-w7lFvsE

So this is the old PUA conflict between those who prefer direct game as opposed to those who prefer indirect game. The real answer is to be versatile and improvise. Direct OPENERS in your game has it's benefits as it cuts the crap and gets to the point. It's flaws are that it's frequently NOT interesting enough to get to past all the other competition and set you apart. It also, doesn't give you a place to go if she's not DTF from the start. Thus, you end up playing the numbers game and burning yourself out. Indirect openers when done right can develop interest and allow you to transition into direct game or other types of game or routines. But they can be time consuming and still not give you appropriate results if you aren't comfortable or skilled enough to move past them.

As far as the original poster is concerned, I would ask him to actually get some real stats on his success rate, not just guesses. Actually take a day in a strange setting (not your school/university) like a new night club or mall that you don't frequent and do a numbers count on your pass/fail rate. Then, she how many of those "number closes" end in actual dates vs flakes. If his success is still 75% after his real experiment, then it's direct opener all the way for him.

indirect game can actually give you time to develop the attraction you need so that you don't have as many flakes. when i go direct i often got numbers that were fake or flaked in the end because i didn't take the time to develop a connection. Even if i got a date it was like starting over from cold meeting. i often needed a second date to truly escalate a romantic situation.

I once got into a fight outside a bar, came in and sat down next to a girl, said something along the lines of "I just got into a fight and my adrenaline is really high. Wanna make out?" And ended up making out with her. I like direct approaches. I don't use them all the time, but I'm thinking about using them more.

_________________
Writer, entrepreneur, life coach, man's man, traveler, friend.

CHECK OUT:
http://www.askyourselfy.com

This is what i mean!! I started with PUA and read MM. As you all may know, MM indicates to use opinion openers. Of course, it is al right to start gaming with opinion openers.

After a while I was fed up with these boring opinion openers (since you and the HB know what is going on ). So i stopped using opinion openers, and use the direct openers. And i like it! This is the true PUA style!!

Ok, so based on these statistics why do you say that direct game brings you massive failure compared to indirect while in reality it is juts 0% VS 1%?
Meaning if you approach 100 girls direct you get 100 rejections and if you approach 100 indirect you get 99 rejections?

It does not seem that 100 rejections is massive failure and 99 is not

And speaking about those stats - if they were true there would be no point of doing any PUA. Just think about it - why would you learn all that PUA if you would still get only 1% (vs 0%) chance to hook up with chick that does not like you?
In reality it is not 1%, it is way higher and the reason for that is that chicks may not like you initially but may start liking once they get to know you more, they notice that you are cool, laid back, outspoken, good people, funny etc etc. As opposed to direct game when you hit them straight up and they don't get the chance to know you a little.

That being said I am all about direct and I do not do indirect. Yet I still advocate indirect as being a bit better then just 1% VS 0%
Otherwise it would be just stupid to waste your time indirect for just 1%..

this argument is stupid. when you give binary faux statistics like 100% to 0% you are making a point not sincerely debating any real statistical analysis. The truth is both direct and indirect have their time and place. Try both, contemplating and pontificating without actually trying is sucking your own exhaust.

That stats are made only for openers. If you go direct to a girl that initially doesn't like you she will block you right there, if you go indirect there may be a slight chance that she will respond.
1% represents the chance you can engage her in a conversation. You can go to her and ask her to lend you a napkin, but that was all the conversation you will ever have with her! She will lend you one or she will not, anyway that conversation is dead. 1% also means that you must hit all the right words and "notes" to make her interested in you, you should have a proper opener, you should multithread, great bodylanguage etc. and your chances will improve more and more, but you start from 1%
Worst case, she's there with her boyfriend, if you go indirect you may get her number, only if you know how to handle the situation.
Going after single drunk hb5 on valentines day stats will improve massively, go after a hb10, with her friends or boyfriend and your chances will drop.

Talking about stats is a bit offtopic, but i think i made myself clear why 1%...