Introverted vs Extroverted Daygame

I’m beginning to see a growing schism in Daygame: introverted vs extroverted Daygame. The former is defined by the number farm technique; go out there and in a short space of time overcome your natural introversion to collect a pocketful of numbers, which you gradually whittle down to the lay. The technique is the same when Daygaming in your own city, just that you’ll do fewer sets because there isn’t the time pressure of the Eurojaunt and it’s easier to spot high probability signals in girls you’re used to seeing. This is the style of Daygame that we were all brought up on, that of Torero and Krauser.

On the other hand we have extroverted Daygame: a high number of sets always, not just on a jaunt, and SDLs are the aim. As I see it, the purpose is to filter as much as possible and then let your energy carry the girl all the way from the street to the bed. Filtering is at the heart of the extrovert’s Game because he knows that there are a tonne of girls out there who would love to go for an idate with him, love to kiss him, love to go back to his… but not quite enough to fuck him. He needs to weed out these girls as soon as possible and focus on opening sets to find the girl who will go all the way. This is a problem the introvert faces but not to the same extent, because the good feelz bubble of the extrovert is just so enticing. Because of this there are few bubble burst periods and drawn out chess-like maneuvering. This is the style of Daygame you’ll see taught by Anthony Hustle. I also see this in guys who come from Nightgame into Daygame. They come to Daygame with mindsets like “why go for the number, go for the lay!” or “just stay in set.”

The investment in each particular girl is different. Introverts don’t want to talk to a huge amount of people and when they force themselves to it causes their vibe and their results to deteriorate. There’s a feeling of pointlessness that accompanies each low probability set they throw themselves into. Each set they don’t really want to do is actually moving them further away from the lay, not closer, and so getting laid becomes a function more of time than sets. That’s not to say that introverts can’t have those moments of extroversion when they’re feeling particularly dominant and sociable (i.e. when they’re in state), it’s just not their normal way of being. An introvert would rather invest more mental energy in each individual girl and be more efficient from an approach to lay point of view. There’s a greater appreciation for perfecting the art of Daygame and not making mistakes because they have less shots on target, and prefer taking less shots anyway.

An extrovert would rather filter and therefore invests less on average. For example they use side-stops rather than front stops: the girl has a lot more space and so can walk off a lot easier compared to a front stop. If she stops to speak it means she’s receptive to the approach. The extrovert prefers to open a lot of quick sets because a) it spikes his state, and b), it gets him closer to identifying the girl who’s receptive to his energy and drive. Lower investment is seen again with the few numbers the extrovert collects. He takes numbers less often because the deal he puts on the table with each set is very ‘take it or leave it.’ The numbers that he does get is often because the girl is interested but simply isn’t available logistically in that very moment. In any case, the extrovert doesn’t really want to take the number of a girl and play the text game (he follows the mantra ‘texting is for logistics’) because it distracts his focus from the higher ROI activity: opening more sets. Lastly we have dating where the extrovert is better off escalating a girl fast over one drink because again, he might be better off spending his time elsewhere. That’s not to say an extrovert can’t do these things (comfort, texting and dating), he just needs a commensurately higher return to make it worthwhile.

Where would we be in this analysis without some football analogies, and where better to go than the greatest team ever in club football: Chelsea FC. Introverted Daygame is like counter-attacking football; you hold your frame and play it cool then spot the opportunity and pounce. This is like the Conte era Chelsea where his team was lightning fast in the transition; the ball given to Eden Hazard in a flash then BAM! goal. Extroverted Daygame is like the Ancelotti era Chelsea team; taking the defensive excellence of the Mourinho setup and then allowing more freedom to push forward and down the wings. Each set an extrovert does is like a full-blown assault on the girl with the Daygamer hoping to overwhelm the girl’s frame.

One thing I want to say is that there is no moral superiority to either style. Introverts might hone their skills more than extroverts and extroverts might have a better ‘no nonsense’ approach. In this case what’s best is what’s best for you. Daygame was always introverted until recent developments and in the past extroverts felt a bit lost, as if what they were doing just didn’t fit with them. Now they’ve had their extroversion unlocked and lo and behold they are doing excellently. In fact, their results are often better than introverts but I repeat: what’s best is what’s best for you. If you’re one then it’s not worth trying to be the other; play to your strengths rather than minimise your weaknesses. Don’t be the introvert who sees the extroverts results and then copies their style, instead work on your Outer Game and (progressively more over time) Inner Game.

My prediction is that as more and more content is produced for the extrovert style the two will become more distinct. Battle lines will be drawn and each side will declare their method to be the best. The introverts will increase their skillset and reduce their approach to lay ratio, whether that takes one date or three or even five; anything to get to the mythical one in one. The extroverts will practice even faster escalation; anything to get to a five minute bounce back and SDL. At the end of the day there is no right answer because (and I repeat yet again): what’s best is what’s best for you.

Yours unfaithfully,

Thomas Crown

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Introverted vs Extroverted Daygame

  1. Great breakdown on this key distinction, understanding what styles of game work for your personality are key for men looking to develop what works best for them. I think your predictions make sense.
    Former african-american pimps turned writers like Mikey Royal have made a similar distinction between pimping and macking (an interesting read I highly recommend): https://amzn.to/2Y3J2DV
    I also think extroverts will be well served focusing on night game, which is frankly designed for them. It’s perfect for higher energy guys who want to go for the SDL.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. > I’m beginning to see a growing schism in Daygame: introverted vs extroverted

    I like to see some “types” introduced. Game is not “one size fits all.” And any “this type” kind of nuance makes it all more interesting for me.

    As for your types… I will claim to be neither.

    — Daygame is exhausting, but I like approaching
    — My vibe tends to improve with more sets, more days out (assuming I am getting some positive results)
    — I do a lot of sets…
    — I rarely try for idates or SDLs
    — I “whittle down” the leads, and actually prefer the date model to “fast sex”

    Where I think your EXTROVERT types excel is in high energy. I *can* be high energy, but am usually closer to Sinn’s line that “daygame is a test of how normal you are” – I like to spike a bit, but I like to convey “normal” as well.

    And in terms of TARGETS… I like introverted girls. I think my style has evolved to what I perceive as working with them… I think going direct does a lot of work with those girls, and after that… you have to make them comfortable.

    I think the style you describe as extrovert daygame would work best on extrovert girls… they are ready for a more high-energy interaction… and perhaps somewhat more ready for SDLs

    Like

  3. I often wonder whether we are doing INTROVERTED girls a service by daygaming them. I make the assumption that these kinds of girls are similar introverted guys and are less likely to have sex partners. (Can’t find the study but I think the women who have the most sex are EXTROVERTED and narcissistic – David Buss’ work?)

    In short, from my observations we are mostly sexing the INTROVERTED girls on the street. Some exceptions: girls who are on Girls’ Weekend holidays, girls going to parties, office girls who are the EXTROVERTED type but on lunch break, etc.

    I tend to waver between the different styles on the street depending on the girl, in a similar way to Krauser’s idea of a “belligerent” set. I think you can open a set with tact, politeness and sexual intent for the INTROVERTs, and then transform to high-energy and boldness for the EXTROVERTs.

    I do also think this applies at night – I opened an INTROVERTED Australian girl politely at the bar with a “I wanted to be social with you” and later opened an EXTROVERTED English girl by being leering and being physically dominating (I mean, I mock choked her in public). I don’t think Night Game is binary ether – more of a spectrum as you gauge the girl (and the venue, frankly).

    SDLs are mostly the lonely tourist type – I’ve written about my own experience of this as well as other Daygamers. SDLs are a particularly subset and not all that common. But they can be VERY exciting.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s