Indirect versus Direct Approach

Be it right or wrong, this is my understanding of the indirect vs direct theory debate, and my views on it.

There is a SWITCH in a girls mind that says YES or NO the SECOND she detects either a verbal or non-verbal signal of interest.

By using direct approach theory (being up front about your desires), she may find this sexually appealing, because you're being confident unlike other guys, and just going for it. This ALONE may cause the switch to trigger to 'YES'. Thus, direct approach theory CAN work. You are attempting to knock down the girl in one move - being upfront. However, if it is not immediately switched, IME, the chick will switch it to 'NO'.

For example, MRSEX4UNYC advises this sytem, because his game is to WEED OUT girls that aren't at near buying temperature RIGHT NOW. This suits his lifestyle, and I don't dispute it gets him many lays. For me, I ENJOY chasing harder to get girls, so I devise this system to get me the girls that I'm interested in.

SO, the difference in the systems are based NOT on whether or not they WORK Rather, they are based on different pickup GOALS.

For me personally, I also enjoy indirect approach, because it can STILL work for girls who were at buying temperature, because I have a good intuition to recognize buying temperature and exploit it. So it works in BOTH cases for me either way.

Not that direct approach theory CAN'T get you harder to get girls. However, it is important to understand that you've flipped the switch immediately off the opener, and

you now risk working against the current instead of with it (her chasing, vs her screening)

In public gatherings, I prefer to HOLD OFF the signal of interest in every way possible, and first CONVEY STATUS and COOL stuff about myself. That way, I can be direct LATER if I want, and STILL get the same "this guy goes for what he wants, he is alpha" thing. However, I'm doing it AFTER she has earned it by chasing and qualifying herself to me, rather than before.

She has MORE TO GO ON to make her decision to flip the switch YES or NO, because she not only says "he's alpha for being direct, so I'll say yes after I screen him", but she's looking at all the good stuff that I've conveyed PRIOR to making her flip the switch and she's chased me PRIOR to having flipped it.

The notion that "if you're indirect you'll be LJBF'ed" is no longer relevant for me personally, because I could NEVER be put into the friendship zone. The reason is that I don't convey LJBF qualities anymore (like back when I was AFC), so even if I don't go immediately sexual with her, she STILL finds me attractive, and therefore when I DO, I haven't done anything to bar myself OUT of sexual communication with her, so its still EQUALLY as effective to if I'd flipped the switch right on the opener.

The idea that indirect approach theory will not close is based on the principle that somehow by not being upfront, the chick PERMANENTELY classifies you as non-sexual material. This is flat out not the case in my experience, but maybe for guys who are still new to field work, they suffer from this because they don't have the alpha stuff internalized well enough, so they HAVE to rely on direct approach theory to be considered as a sexual prospect by the girl. Either way, for PUAs well into their careers, the risk of LJBF should be non-existent, by virtue of their internalized mannerisms.

Peace out bros. I love meeting up with guys and showing this stuff in field, but alot of guys I'll never meet because I'm going back to school full time. So I hope that these ideas reaches people and helps them out, as much as its helped out my game.

Have fun. -TD

By Tyler Durden