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.