RSS 2.0Should you push every interaction or be social & work the room?
Posted in Nightlife, Pickup on 10/24/2009 03:29 am by DJ Fuji
The other day I got a really good question from “Mike” who commented on The 21 Convention Footage. Which, by the way, is going insane with comments. 72 comments and building lol. It was such a good question and so commonly asked that I figured I’d answer it here.
Mike said:
I just saw this talk and Ratisse’ talk and I have a question about ejecting from conversations, because I see a method conflict.
Fuji makes the point that you should maximize your interactions by staying in them until you are asked to leave but not just when your audience shows disinterest.
On the other hand Ratisse describes a strategy for working bars/clubs/parties where you have short conversations with a good chunk of the people you are not ‘targeting’ . Then while the groups are comfortable, you try and pull away your target. AFC Adam describes something similar, except Ratisse even tries to treat individuals as groups as well. That’s a subtlety.
So is premature ejecltion so bad? You leave so you go on talking to other people. I was at a club last night practicing these quick conversations, but it was before seeing either of the talks and I ended up feeling I didn’t build enough rapport/comfort with them. The groups were too cohesive for me to just break people out of them. I admit I didn’t try to pull them away; instead I just found opportunities where there were 3-sets so I could just get the 3rd person into a conversation alone.
I feel there is a wide rift between these two strategies. I see the pros/cons in each ( differences in rapport and differences in whether you look too needy ) , but could someone shed some light on unifying them with a common principle ?
Hey Mike,
This is a great question. You’re definitely paying attention. Here’s how to reconcile these two seemingly-different strategies.
Ratisse is describing a variation on short-set theory. That is, a specific tactic used to create social proof and oftentimes jealousy plotlines. I use something like this fairly often.
What I was advocating in my speech is focusing on the skill set and pushing every set as far as it will go. The two are not mutually exclusive. They just focus on different goals and different skill sets.
At the risk of oversimplifying things, Here’s a quick flow chart to see which one you should GENERALLY use. For each question, if the answer is yes, go to the next step. If the answer is no, default to staying in set the way I described in my speech.
1. Do you open at least 5 sets per night?
2. Are you in set at least 75% of your night? In other words, if you’re in field for 3 hours, you should be “in set” talking for at least 2:15 of the 3:00 hours.
3. Can you start conversation that lasts at least 5 minutes with at least 50% of your sets?
4. Do you stay in set even when they shows you disinterest?
5. Do you have over a handful of lays (5+) within the last year from cold approach?
6. If you’ve answered yes to all 5 previous questions, try out short set theory and Ratisse’s strategies. Just don’t eject from sets because you’re afraid of rejection. Make ejecting a STRATEGY and not a REACTION. The best time to eject from a set (aside from after orgasm) is, ironically, when things are going really, really well.
If you guys haven’t seen the footage, it’s a nearly 2 hour lecture on “Getting Good at Game,” streamed FREE, courtesy of Dream. Take a look. Comments and questions always welcome.
10/25/2009 at 21:20
DJ Fuji
Thanks for the response
I was answering the flowchart for my case and it looks like I am not ready for short sets yet! I’m at the point where I can usually start talking to people I don’t know, but conversations get blown off early.
I narrowed down a few reasons:
(1) I don’t follow through with high energy interactions ( as you put it, I am not in sets “75% of the night” )
(2) I say something too off and the other people ask me to leave ,
(3) I realize I am not attracted to the people and I excuse myself somehow ,
(4) there is an interruption or
(5) I don’t “make a connection” ,
In case you need examples:
(1) I started talking to ‘everyone’ these days instead of just groups with people who have targets so I would not be standing around silent. So two nights ago when I entered a really crowded bar McSorley’s I started talking to just a guy group. I was making lots of off the cuff jokes and felt the Psych dubbed “cock fest to success” happening. But I suppose I didn’t find an opportunity to convert the “high energy” to chat up girls around us who could have been overhearing our high spirits. I parted the group and without seeing any good eye contact around me I decided to skip out and find another bar.
(2) Last night I was at a hip bar and I learned the consequences of negging the hard way . Just two minutes into a conversation with my friend and these five girls sitting at a table, the alpha accidentally spills her drink into her lap. I think “hey it is time for a tease” and I say to her subordinates, “hey i think you should keep an eye on your friend “. Then immediately the alpha goes “okay good night, we don’t want to talk to you any more”. I go back with “wow someone is getting self conscious”. Basically something backfired really bad . I thought she would try to ‘win my attention back’ , but I guess she didn’t know me enough to think it was necessary. I don’t know but my jokes were perhaps too personal.
(3) I was getting all smiles from a girl in a 2-set I opened at a bar two nights ago. But the place was dark and after a closer look, I found I was not that into her. I continued to order my drink and then went to someone else. I hope I was only seen as being ‘friendly’ . I was also waiting to see if she would start a new interaction, but she was only waiting for me. So perhaps even if she were interested, she was not willing to “go out on a limb” as this was my role?
(4) By now I have opened countless 1-sets who end up seeing a friend and leaving to see them or they just use their “I have to use the bathroom” card. So I am wondering if they are just trying to keep things interesting and seeing if I will open them a second time or are they trying to give me “the hint” that they are no longer interested?
(5) I feel like my interactions are non-substantive and not “fun” over and over again . I can make my male friends laugh all the time and girls whom I am comfortable with too, but not girls who I meet randomly. I remember a few weekends ago I stumbled upon a really interesting woman. I thought I build slight rapport by having known some of her mother-tongue language. I started a lot of kino on the pretense that it was a very loud place. Despite the reciprocal conversation, I did not try any escalation, because I didn’t feel she was “into me” . Maybe she got bored since she broke off the conversation.
10/27/2009 at 02:34
Mike,
You’re absolutely correct in that you shouldn’t do short-set at this point. You should stay in set and push every interaction. Follow the fundamentals. That’s what you need right now.
10/27/2009 at 18:34
Let me twist the usual sense of the word ‘room’ , which is being ‘worked’.
Has anyone in their travels out there experimented with trains/buses as “rooms” which you may work ? That is, can bar tactics be applied ?
And if one were ‘ready’ for short-set theory, would that be applicable ? The radically interesting flattener is that most people are absolutely quiet and will often “tune in” if interesting conversations get started up around them. In this case, can you start talking to some people close to a target of yours in hopes of soon after talking to that target ?
10/28/2009 at 20:33
Omg, why do discussions of game theory sometimes sound like a Dungeons and Dragons conference, or one of those board game championships that Savoy likes?
For crying out loud, a flow chart for talking to girls? Forgive me, but no no no no no. Way too up in the head.
(And I have the utmost respect for DJ Fuji’s work, and his speech was awesome, so don’t get me wrong)
But intuition will get the job done for you and you won’t need to keep so much info in your head or reconcile competing pickup theories.
10/28/2009 at 21:59
Short set theory is for social environments. You don’t want to “work” the room at the grocery store, the metro, or the mall.
That said, you can, indeed, start a conversation with someone and then ’switch’ to someone else sitting next to them. For example, you could be on the train and see an attractive woman sitting next to an older lady with a dog. You could walk up and open the older lady with the dog, chat for a few minutes, and then bring the target into the conversation.
10/28/2009 at 22:07
Because most of the synthetic guys in the game are left-brained, logical thinkers who need skills broken down into step-by-step programs.
Having a flow chart like this is like having a flow chart for picking martial arts. (if you’re 500 lbs, do sumo; if you’re short and stocky, do ground fighting/wrestling; if you have long legs, muay thai/kickboxing).
Relying on intuition is only as effective as said individual’s intuition. For example, instead of teaching a karate student to side step a punch, block, and counter attack, i could just simply tell him to use his intuition and then repeatedly punch him in the face and wonder why he keeps getting hit.
Synthetic intuition is developed through cognitive understanding, repeated exposure, and experience. In other words, you can’t expect a newbie to “know” what to do if you haven’t taught him what to do. If his “intuition” worked, he wouldn’t be a newbie.
10/28/2009 at 22:51
I’ll add that after hearing DJ Fuji speak for the first time a few months ago we went out to a bar few nights later. My goal – Do Not Eject. Never before had I thought/followed this. Approached a three set. Hot HB never fully engaged me, but was cordial, smiled, laughed, some conversation. When she said “Well it was nice meeting you”, while I was having a “comfortable silence”. I playfully responded, oh, is that my queue to stand here and keep talking to you, with a smile. She loved it. In the end I number closed her, and her male friend loved me as well. Playful Persistence I like to call it.
Push_Each_Interaction. If I met her today I would have lead her to a different part of the bar, or to a nearby eatery.
great advice DJ. thanks
11/09/2009 at 15:35
Fuji, can’t seem to find the the streaming vid.
11/09/2009 at 18:03
@Envy: http://www.the21convention.com/2009/09/08/dj-fuji-t21c-2009/
11/23/2009 at 00:32
Hey DJ FUJI,
Yes, I agree that you do need to build some of that intuition. It takes time to just get the “feel” of social interaction. I beg to differ with Erica and I am more inclined to see your point of view.
Yes it would be nice to just go by “feel” but if you don’t know what that “intuition” if you haven’t had it in the first place. Meaning that you need social interactions to see where your words or openings make sense.
I agree with Mike’s flow chart. Once you get comfortable, the flow chart will eventually disappear because you have developed that “intuition” over time and time again with meeting groups.
Thanks,
FAB
01/14/2010 at 22:21
@ Erika Awakening,
what awakening do you have if you’re cutting down the gender oneness?
If you’re awakened/enlightened, you should have smiled by reading DjFuji’s post.
No offence, but I’m just saying. The ‘ego’ needs to be dropped.
As for DjFuji’s response, I agree 100% + .
Short set theory is advanced shit. You don’t wanna be doing short set theory if you don’t have the balls to stay in a set after the set tells you to fuck off.
If you have your good stuff down(the non verbal game), and you can plow through sets and surf them, even if big waves come up, you can use Short Set theory.
It is a very good concept, just work the room because everyone will like you.
However on the other hand, if you’re still in a place where you think ‘oh how should i open her’ , ’should i go over the shoulder or just go kino open them’ .
If you’re at this state, you’ll come across as ‘TRYHARD’ in the whole room.
As for the social proof, you’ll wreck it.
But if you can just subcomunicate that you are the shit and you are truely in the moment, and you’re having fun with everyone, OR RATHER THEY ARE HAVING FUN BECAUSE YOU ARE THERE, then you wanna do Short Sets, and the in the end work your target.
Everything has situational relevance, the field is where it happens.
Do 500-1000 sets with short set theory(if you are entitled to it), and pick whether or not it works for you.
In the end, whatever technique/theory you are using, field test it as much as you can before coming to a conclusion with it.
Working the room works awesome for me, in day games i have double the success because places are quiet and since i engage people like they know me instead of I am ‘walking up to them’ , I am already preselected.
This is going deeper into the insight,
but as long as you have the INTENT to get her, you’ll get her regardless of what you use. Because you WANT her.
peace