Canned routines from gamesmen are like rhymes from rappers who can’t freestyle. The best lyricists and artists can spontaneously riff with their instrument, whether it’s spoken word or guitar licks. Thus internal game, and rapier-quick wit trumps all routines.
[Heartiste: There's nothing wrong with a canned routine as long as it's easy to recall and doesn't sound stilted. Canned routines are a great aid to seducers if they can make them sound natural.]
True, but even ‘improvised’ guitar licks are still built upon a solid base of a series of learned patterns that harmonize within a given key of music.
A good musician practices his scales until they’re subconscious, then he can improvise with them. Likewise a good player should cater their learned approaches to the tune of the woman and the environment.
Ya, canned routines are for guys who are starting out. They don’t understand WHY something like Horse Girl works (commanding attention, creating a mystery, building tension, accusing, relieving the tension, roleplaying a reconciliation, setting a frame and callback humor, etc.). But describing the concepts and expecting a newbie to make his own stuff up is a big scary task for the newbie, so PUAs who’ve been around give them structured canned routines to use as training wheels.
Once they get out there and test it all out and start to learn why it sometimes works for them and sometimes doesn’t and they slowly learn to calibrate everything and figure out the internal side of things, then they can drop those canned routines and wing it.
The horse guy in the story is just some guy who’s learning. You can tell just from how she described his opening. He might NOT have the personality for something like horsegirl, that’s what he’s going to be figuring out in the next few months if he sticks to it.
(commanding attention, creating a mystery, building tension, accusing, relieving the tension, roleplaying a reconciliation, setting a frame and callback humor, etc.)
I’ve never come across material that details these building blocks of public speaking and conversation. I also don’t know where examples of routines are.
Commanding attention = body language and voice tonality, try this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsbHpL5OlLE
Creating a mystery and building tension = she doesn’t know wtf you’re talking about with this horse story but you’re presenting it as something very clearly awesome, so she’s intrigued and listens. Watch videos of good story-tellers and your natural friends who captivate their audience and how they build up to a punchline and speak slowly with pauses, etc.
Accusing = “and YOU look JUST like her! ” this puts her on the spot and is a bit of a neg (she should laugh, not be scared/offended)
Relieving the tension and roleplaying = building rapport, here’s where you tell her you wanted to apologize to the weird horse girl for being mean to her and she plays the role of the horse girl while you “apologize” and hug her
Frame/callback humor = Standard game stuff, you’ve set a frame and now you can always reference it and use it as an in-joke between the two of you.
These are all really basic game concepts. Start at http://www.fastseduction.com/guide/ and go from there.
Keep in mind this is really old-school game, like 2004-style shit. There are faster and more efficient methods out there these days that focus on internal game in the PUA community, this old-school stuff was very roundabout and often led to “dancing monkey syndrome” because guys didn’t really focus on their inner game back then and they came off like the guy in the article.
But just because it’s old doesn’t mean it doesn’t work and isn’t based in concepts that work, that’s all I’m pointing out to the poster who decried it as a terrible opener that wouldn’t work well.
I think that the problem with this kind of approach – having this or any complex script – is something you should aim to avoid. It’s so inflexible – and meaningless, unless you get to the conclusion – that you have a good 20 seconds of monologue to deliver, and that’s plenty of time to be sized up, and discarded on any one of a dozen pretexts. It *might* be a good opener if you’re really inventive, but if you’re that inventive, you really don’t need such a specific opener,
* It’s fundamentally flawed because it’s you talking. If she’s interested or engaged, she’d rather be talking about herself.
* It’s unmysterious. You’re revealing all sorts of childhood experiences – nobody’s interested in that except your analyst. It also makes you look like you’re living in the past. Looking BACK.
* The approach looks like you’re (desperately) trying to build rapport. She has rapport with her yoga instructor. She has nothing with you at the moment, and talking about a female that (by implication) was part of your life before you became an adult, is a distraction.
* It’s unserious. We know they’re all like Tiger Beat Fangirls at heart, but you’re not, Alphas have their minds on more weighty issues, with eyes on the future, looking FORWARD.
* If her hamster wakes up, it’ll remind her of how it felt riding the mechanical horse at the shopping mall, not that you might make her feel the same way, given half a chance.
Be mysterious. Be challenging. Be exciting. Cultivate aloofness. Speak slowly,
Canned openings are a great crutch if you lack confidence, but without the ability to evolve the conversation, they’ll do you no good. Wherever possible, push her to do the talking so you can concentrate on the body language and verbal cues that she will see as building empathy, but not conceding ground. You obviously have to do more than stand there and grunt ‘uh-huh’ and ‘right!’. Open-ended questions, that can lead to challenges –
You: Excuse me – do you ride – horses?
Her: Err, what? I don’t understand?
You: Well, I know – well, knew – someone about 10 years ago who used to ride in competitions, and you reminded me of someone she knew.
I hate to break it to the ‘method men’, but this is as far as a canned routine will get you, but you don’t need MUCH more bravery to react to:
Her: No, God, I hate horses! Blah blah blah
You: Well, to tell you the truth, I’m not much of a fan either! I thought all women were meant to like ponies!
Her: OMG! I had EVERY ‘My Little Pony’ as a kid! blah blah blah
You: Well, I can’t say I was that much of a fan. I remember that He-Man was more my style – how many different My Little Pones ARE there?
Her: Jeez, I’m gonna call the cops!
You: Lady, I AM a cop! What’s wrong?
The objective is to get her talking. Once you’ve achieved that, no script is going to help you unless she walks back into a close. Don’t waste time on “101 Killer Closes for Any Occasion”. You only need 3 or 4, and you have to be totally confortable using them. They’re just like a crowbar being used on a door. You don’t know what’s behind the door, and the chances are that it won’t be what you planned. So don’t make detailed plans.
Concentrate on general principles. While she’s talking, you can be thinking. You don’t even have to say a lot – the old rule of 2:1 her:you. The less she knows about you, and the more you know about her, the better.
Open-ended questions, and broad, challengeable observations that aren’t utterly ridiculous.
If you’re near the street, you can usually initiate low-risk kino too, steering her out of the way of other pedestrians – and it’s easier to do if she’s talking.
So, canned routines are like any other bad habit, because they’re a crutch that avoid you confronting a lack of inner game, which you have to master to some degree, if you ever expect to have much success.
“* It’s fundamentally flawed because it’s you talking. If she’s interested or engaged, she’d rather be talking about herself.”
KJ-theory. She’s not interested or engaged yet, you’ve just cold approached a complete stranger. They aren’t walking around dying to spill their life stories to anyone who says “Hi.” (until you have your body language and subcommunications down, where you can get away with big long story openers or simple “Hey, who are you?” openers)
“* It’s unmysterious. You’re revealing all sorts of childhood experiences – nobody’s interested in that except your analyst. It also makes you look like you’re living in the past. Looking BACK.”
This is KJ-theory. It builds a connection, shows vulnerabilty, humility (since he’s apologizing for making fun of the horse girl, go find the full opener to see that part since it’s not in this article), etc.
“* The approach looks like you’re (desperately) trying to build rapport. She has rapport with her yoga instructor. She has nothing with you at the moment, and talking about a female that (by implication) was part of your life before you became an adult, is a distraction.”
You just said the opener was flawed because she should be talking about herself, and now you say she has no rapport with you, so which is it? KJ-theory. Also talking about other girls shows you have interactions with women, which there was an article JUST the other day on this very site about women being attracted to men who other women are attracted to. You’re spouting white-knight nonsense here.
“* It’s unserious. We know they’re all like Tiger Beat Fangirls at heart, but you’re not, Alphas have their minds on more weighty issues, with eyes on the future, looking FORWARD.”
KJ-ing again. Alphas look forward when they need to, but they’re fine with stopping to smell the roses and fuck around. They don’t need to focus on the mission 24/7 because they know they’ll accomplish it. Watch interviews with George Pitt and Brad Clooney and watch how much they just fuck around.
“* If her hamster wakes up, it’ll remind her of how it felt riding the mechanical horse at the shopping mall, not that you might make her feel the same way, given half a chance.”
KJ nonsense. Go pickup some chicks.
This is a great opener when you understand WHY it works. It’s like how a car has wheels, a way to steer them, and an area for a person to sit…the way you shape those together and the forms you put around them can be done a million different ways, but the core structure is what counts. That’s why BradP has a “create your own shocker” fill-in-the-blanks thing in his course, so after you fully understand the core concepts involved in Horsegirl you can create your own openers that use the same concepts but is relevant to your own life.
I actually agree with the entire rest of your post, I just think your views on canned openers are ridiculous and your opinions on this being flawed is based on ignorance. I don’t even use this opener (though I understand it thoroughly), and personally I improvise my stuff on the fly and say way more outrageous stuff than most guys will, but I don’t like someone slandering something useful with bad KJ arguments.
It works for BradP because he delivers it well. He talks slow and deep and captures the chick’s attention, uses massive pauses in his delivery to build suspense, etc. But most guys who read it online just spit it out as fast as they can because they’re worried the girl will leave if they don’t get to the punchline as fast as possible, which sounds to the girl like he’s “all over the place”.
BradP does it in a challenging, accusing (breaking rapport) way. Guys trying to copy just based off his text do it in an approval seeking, needy way.
You can hear his delivery in his “The Underground Dating Seminar” which is one of the better “no fuzzy hats and black nailpolish” PUA products out there in my opinion. He actually sounds like a cool chill guy when he talks and you can see why the things he says work for him. One of his students asks “What if she calls you out on it?” “Doesn’t matter. If you’re like “Hey do you like horses?” and she goes “Isn’t that that BradP line–” “No shut up. DO you like horses?”" He expects them to fall in line, and that’s why it works for him.
Women don’t walk away when you have your subcommunications down and exude alpha behavior (like the vibe that you EXPECT them to listen to you and answer you). You can command “HEY! Come here.” from across a room and just stare the girl down like you expect her to come over, and she will. Same time you can run a 5 minute opener and blab away like Russell Brand. When your subcommunications are down you can do pretty much anything you want.
Don’t get caught up in “canned” VS “improvised” Hang around for long periods of time with any of the naturally social people you know and you’ll find they all repeat their same stories to people (sometimes even to you, forgetting that they’ve told you before) with the same wording, emphasis, etc. ie – canned routines. It’s not a bad thing. The trick is understanding that the routine isn’t magical, it’s what you’re displaying during the routine that affects things.
Anything is better than hanging back and acting confused. Put on some dont- giva- shit armor and press on. This approach, all by itself, registers with the gina-brain.
I’ve seen a few you tube vids where the guys are just messing with people, spitting out stupid, stupid routines, and having success. I guess they were linked to from this site – the guy was doing nerd game, and had to reference nerd shit, like star trek or w.o.w.
Ok, fine – pure bluster and confidence can work.
But only if you are relatively handsome. That can only build on physical attraction – it can’t create it. That’s just being in her face.
If you are of below average looks, you need way more finesse than just standing there and saying “see how confident I am?!”. You need to display and focus on some OTHER attractive trait – not just being physically attractive and confident. Humor, for instance.
You’re missing everything that’s going on in those “Simple Pickup” videos. ( http://www.youtube.com/user/SimplePickup ) Those guys have studied pickup and use a ton of PUA concepts and routines.
What they have isn’t “pure bluster and confidence” and above average looks. There are a dozen subtle subcommunications going on in how they approach women that allow the random/offensive stuff they say to not just work but build attraction.
I won’t get into it all, study pickup literature, go out and approach girls, observe naturals, etc. like the rest of us had to but here are a few things to watch for in their vids:
- congruency. If a girl tests them, they stick to their story and turn things around on the girl like SHE’S the one being weird.
- misinterpretation. They misinterpret everything sexually, that’s why they can be talking about masturbation and 3-ways with girls they’ve only just met, they direct the conversation to a sexual topic in a smooth/funny way.
- frame control. After they say something super offensive, they’ll just stand there and stare the girl down like “ya, I said that.” totally unapologetic and unashamed. A PUA concept is “what you feel, she feels”, so she pings off him to see if he’s embarrassed or apologetic about what he said and when he’s not, she feels like it must be okay. This is why when you go up with an opener you don’t think will work, it won’t work, and when you think it will work, it works.
- breaking rapport. Their voice tonality is loud, clear, and authoritative. They make statements and accusations and don’t sound like they’re seeking the girl’s approval.
- body language. They stand up straight and don’t fidget around nervously and hold eye-contact etc.
There’s a ton of other stuff going on that you’ll see if you study pickup in-depth.
It has nothing to do with their looks, as long as you think that way you’re in the wrong headspace.