Sex Talk: The Purity Gambit

[Teevster]

i then went on to explain how patterns can be difficult to use because not everyone is advanced. a lot of the time people forget that people reading these posts have no experience delivering material like this and will likely fuck it up. i don’t understand how this would be a kj post or a troll post. just trying to simplify it for people who may not have used anything more than lines or natural game.

That is a clear form of derailing and slight attempt at trolling. You don't go to a daygame thread to tell them nightgame is better. you don't go to an advanced thread to tell people it is advanced, and hence bad. This thread was not meant for beginners

You are welcome to make a thread about why you think advanced game is not worth it and how there are easier ways to get laid (although with less consistency and all that). But doing so in the thread itself IS derailing.

It is also better that the beginner tries this out, and come back and share his failures. Demotivating people from trying out stuff is counter-intuitive to the nature of this forum (trying out stuff that won't get you into trouble that is).

Coming in and tell people they should not try something because it is advanced is just bad behaviour. If you want to be that "hero" why don't you stick to the beginners forum to save people from advanced threads? Notice also how EVERYONE who commented on this thread are either advanced or intermediate guys. And you did NOT try to simplify this gambit (that would be a good contribution!). Instead you tell people:
- This is too advanced
- Only has an effect of 1-5% (which basically translate into saying that this has almost no effects). Of course you give no reasons for why that is.

But anyway, the biggest problem is that this is yet another form of derail from you.

And of course, I have not addressed your "1-5%" claim, which we all know is total BS.

But I don't feel the need to comment any further on that one.

 

[naturalmikey]

your basically just framing me as derailing. i stand by my comment that this is unnecessary and counter productive to someone who doesn’t have core fundamentals down. i know it’s unnecessary because i’ve never used it.

i’d be curious to what your argument is to the necessity of this one pattern. also curious to here how this could benefit someone who doesn’t have eye contact down and has trouble speaking confidentially when not trying to rattle off a recited pattern.

i confuses the hell out of myself trying to practice stuff that i wasn’t ready for. also using another mans patterns verbatim stifled me and was incongruent. not everyone is on the same level. breaking shit down in a way that’s easier to use could be beneficial for someone new. it would’ve been for me when i was new. sometimes just getting positive reference experiences in the least complicated manner can be far more productive. you can disagree with me if you like. but framing me as a kj or troll isn’t really helping anyone.

 

[Teevster]

I will remind you that you are in T/T forums where people post field tested techniques. Hence the discussion have to be about the technique itself and not about any other overall discussions concerning pick up in general. Your comments are therefore a form of derailing. You are welcome to make a new thread in general about how frames only matter 1-5% or that advanced verbals sucks because it is not necessary or unfit for beginners.

In this subforum we discuss techniques and the techniques themselves.

Keep in mind that not every thread will be about easy techniques, or beginner friendly stuff. Talking about advanced stuff is permitted and desired and they should not be confronted with it not being beginners friendly, just as people should not trash a post on fundamentals for being "a newbie post".

i’d be curious to what your argument is to the necessity of this one pattern. also curious to here how this could benefit someone who doesn’t have eye contact down and has trouble speaking confidentially when not trying to rattle off a recited pattern.

With the same argument, you could also say that things like C/F is not useful because some people are even afraid to talk to women in the first place. Again not every post is for beginners.

I suggest you check out the beginners forum.

 

[naturalmikey]

i never said frames matter 5%. i said that particularly pattern could make a 5% difference. that is actually a huge compliment to the pattern. for one pattern to make a 5% difference is huge. in general frames make up pretty much all of game. without frames you’re relying on luck. i don’t understand why you’re being so sensitive. also, i feel like my input could actually make a difference to someone trying to implement it. using another mans words verbatim doesn’t work for me. may work for some. idk. i really can’t understand why you’re so triggered by my comments. they’re not a jab at you. i was purely meaning to add to the conversation in a way that could potentially help someone who isn’t familiar with patterns but would like to use them. i repeat using verbatim patterns hurt my game and may hurt others. doesn’t mean the pattern is bad or wrong. it means that it may not be congruent to some people the way it is written, but may be useful when reworded. i even said i was going to record myself saying it to memorize it so i can reword it. i think it’s a great pattern.

 

[Watts]

i know it’s unnecessary because i’ve never used it.

N = 1. Congratulations on your success.

Go post a LR (or several) to show your excellent method that doesn't use advanced verbals (seriously, would love to see it).

In the meantime, let those of us who do find it necessary, continue to work on it without your interference.

Thank you.

 

[Teevster]

i never said frames matter 5%. i said that particularly pattern could make a 5% difference.

How can this exact gambit, or pattern (whatever you want to call it) only make a 5% difference, when this gambit is purely on setting some of the most powerful and useful frames there is (mostly agreed upon that sexual as well as non-judgemental frames are one of the more powerful ones - although I will admit there are others).

How can a gambit that relies on framing, which you eventually admit matters a lot:

in general frames make up pretty much all of game.

And yet only have an effect of 1-5% (and again where does these numbers come from - you have not even shared a single reason for why such a number would be plausible guess).

You are welcome to state that something does not work for oyu, but that would require either a full report or at least you sharing a real in field snippet of your time in field using this exact technique. I have seen you doing none.

 

[Velasco]

i’d be curious to what your argument is to the necessity of this one pattern

Can you point out where he said something along the lines of, "do this gambit or else you won't get laid"?

Or was the intention of sharing this field tested gambit to demonstrate how one can set a sexual frame in their interactions right from the get-go?

using another mans patterns verbatim stifled me and was incongruent

Use your own words my guy lol.

it means that it may not be congruent to some people the way it is written, but may be useful when reworded. i even said i was going to record myself saying it to memorize it so i can reword it.

Yeah lol...thought that was obvious but I guess people need to be told they can use the gambits as inspiration to come up with their own material lol. Well...now you know

 

[Skills]

hey guys, i understand were mikey is coming from lets no all get confrontational questioning motives remember i had the same exact issue Mike is questioning in the old forum...

the community moved from routines and gambits, and they were consider useless for a while...

the community moved to natural game...

teevester style although effective could be complicated to the "normal seduction population in USA" that is not advance. (i have brought this point a million times)

my point is you guys are over hammering Mikey (as much as sometimes he could be annoying) i get it....

With that being said, every time i did use one of the gambits (sexual ones) they always ended up in a lay (minus 1 i believe).... So yes the 5% may be bs...

and yes to mikey point they are not needed (but again 9 out of 10 lays when used for some reason)

as for constructive criticism you need to understand stuff (gambits routine)and say in your own words and adapt to your personality and delivery style, and they do not need to be word by word... Also is not about beginner or advance etc...it can be done at the right time, calibration,etc... by anybody (well, yeah maybe not a beginner per se)... But i had guys copy "routines" word by word from my reports all fucked up and get laid lol...

 

[naturalmikey]

not everyone knows that. some people are going to read patterns try them verbatim and say to themselvess “well that didn’t work.” i was clarifying what many may not know.

@Teevster are you telling me i can have a more than 5% increase in my results using that one pattern. that would mean for every 20 girls i sleep sleep with i’d get at least one more. that seems like a lot. i am willing to try it and would be thrilled at a 5% increase. if i could get a 10% increase i would be ecstatic.

also i only said that one pattern is not necessary. not just me but people all over the world are getting laid without it.

 

[Teevster]

not everyone knows that. some people are going to read patterns try them verbatim and say to themselvess “well that didn’t work.” i was clarifying what many may not know.

@Teevster are you telling me i can have a more than 5% increase in my results using that one pattern. that would mean for every 20 girls i sleep sleep with i’d get at least one more. that seems like a lot. i am willing to try it and would be thrilled at a 5% increase. if i could get a 10% increase i would be ecstatic.

also i only said that one pattern is not necessary. not just me but people all over the world are getting laid without it.

Don't mix up meet to lay ratio, and percentage of how much impact something has on an interaction.

 

[Skills]

not everyone knows that. some people are going to read patterns try them verbatim and say to themselvess “well that didn’t work.” i was clarifying what many may not know.

@Teevster are you telling me i can have a more than 5% increase in my results using that one pattern. that would mean for every 20 girls i sleep sleep with i’d get at least one more. that seems like a lot. i am willing to try it and would be thrilled at a 5% increase. if i could get a 10% increase i would be ecstatic.

also i only said that one pattern is not necessary. not just me but people all over the world are getting laid without it.

yes is just a bit rude, to come and say "this is not needed" to the author that took the time, and field tested, trust me i used to do this... Is just nothing good comes out of it, better to make a separate post...

 

[Watts]

are you telling me i can have a more than 5% increase in my results using that one pattern. that would mean for every 20 girls i sleep sleep with i’d get at least one more. that seems like a lot. i am willing to try it and would be thrilled at a 5% increase. if i could get a 10% increase i would be ecstatic.

Don't mix up meet to lay ratio, and percentage of how much impact something has on an interaction.

Strong agree.

Saying "this one thing", anything, can increase your meet to lay ratio ANY specific amount is nonsense.

There are so many things that happen from saying hello (or even, pre-approach) to penis in vagina.

It'd be impossible to quantify, and only the most die hard kj would even try.

The only reasonable statements you could make would be "fix your fundamentals and hook X% more" or "set sexual frames (like this one) and turn strong hooks into pulls X% more" and even that would be really pushing it for anyone with field experience who was being intellectually honest.

 

[Cody Lyans]

Oooh I like it, pure is being free of logical crass reasoning behind sex and embracing the real passion of liberation....
I can put that into use for sure.

 

[Teevster]

Happy to read that you liked man

Best,