Mein Punkt hier trifft auf Auslesespiel zu. Im oberen 10% zu leben es ist für Kerle, die wissen möchten, was es wie, ist oder höher, von den Männern in dieser Welt. Das ist nicht zu sagen, daß dieses vorgerückt wird. Es ist nicht für Anfänger gerecht.
Eine quickie Definition von Gegentakt gerade von der Feder von Swingcat: „Gegentakt ist, wann immer Sie emotional eine Frau weg von Ihnen und dann drücken emotional ihren inch zurückziehen. Jeder Stoß verursacht einen emotionalen Raum für jeden Zug.“ Wir werden dieses heraus füllen, wie wir entlang gehen.
Now let’s unpack the thesis statement.
While you can succeed using almost any combination of push and pull (e.g., 80% push-20% pull, 50% push-50% pull), the combination that will generate the fastest seductions and most powerful connections is 80-20 pull-push or in other words, 80% pull-20% push. This is true only if the following also hold:
a. The man has good fundamentals (good body language, tonality, tight inner game and is hence non-needy, etc.). This also applies if he is physically attractive or is perceived by the woman to have high social value.
b. The woman is unusually attractive in the man’s eyes, and she is confident about her value and attractiveness. This relates to Believability. She needs to be able to be confident enough in her self-worth to accept your advances.
If both those elements are in place, then the fastest and most powerful route to sex is a mix of 80% pull-20% push.
[CAVEAT: If the man only has average fundamentals and the woman is only of average confidence in her own attractiveness and value, then the optimal mix is further down the continuum and closer to 50-50 push-pull.
This is because pulling a woman closer to you emotionally is only effective when you already have a basic level of attraction from the woman. Of course, we all know that this kind of attraction is largely independent of one’s physical appearance. Over 90% of this kind of attraction is attributable to body language and tonality alone. That’s why I call these the fundamentals. Your attitude and outlook are also crucial to pulling off the right BL&T, so I include inner game as a factor for the sake of completeness.]
Pushing a woman away is effective when a woman looks at you and doesn’t expect you to be cocky. It throws her off and is hence funny.
It’s like when a precocious child talks like an adult, using mature and sophisticated vocabulary, sentence structure, etc. It’s unexpected and incongruent with the kid’s image, and hence, kind of funny, and if done right, it’s admirable.
Now imagine a 50 year old, sophisticated-looking man talking the same way. It’s not funny anymore. It’s just normal and expected.
Similarly, when a below average looking guy uses a lot of push cocky-funny, talking as if he’s too good for her and using humorous sarcasm, it’s attractive because the woman begins to wonder, “How can this guy be so cocky? He must have something going for him that I can’t see yet. I’m interested.” And because it’s done in a comedic way, she’s not offended, but rather, intrigued.
Now if a guy who has his fundamentals down (good BL&T), a good-looking guy, or a guy perceived to have high value starts to push her away emotionally, she’s not intrigued. Why? Because it’s obvious why this guy is so cocky. He’s good-looking, high-value, or has an attractive personality. It’s not funny anymore because it’s expected and congruent with his image. He just comes across cocky. For a guy like this to use cocky-funny, he has to really emphasize the humor and really cut down on the cocky part.
Most people overlook the fact that David D. himself acknowledged this in one of his newsletters:
If you’re a pretty good looking guy, you might turn down the cocky, and turn up the funny. Women perceive good-looking guys who act cocky as MAJOR PLAYERS, and too much cocky too soon can backfire on you.”
More accurately, this isn’t just true for guys who are good-looking. If your fundamentals are strong, or you’re perceived as high-value, then it applies just as well to you.
It’s the push dynamic that makes these high-value or good-looking guys come across as too unattainable. For guys like this, it’s best to use the pull dynamic more often and save the push dynamic for that 20% of dramatic contrast.
And obviously, when a guy with good fundamentals, attractive appearance, or high social value is perceived as a “major player,” it is very bad for his Believability.
You can do it the opposite way, of course. You can do mainly push and just a little pull, like 80% push and 20% pull. Or you can be very cocky and only a little funny. Sure, you can get success that way, too.
But for the most part, if your fundamentals are already strong, then:
1) You can get much faster seductions by pulling her in more often than you can by pushing her away.
2) You can get the girl to feel a deeper emotional bond with you by pulling more often than pushing.
Here’s why:
1. If your fundamentals are good, then you will be a relatively DOMINANT, powerful, and confident man. Hence, girls (and most people in general) will naturally feel like following your lead. So when you tell a girl to sit down, she will feel a strong social and emotional pull to sit down. When you’re emotionally pulling a girl in by telling her to kiss you, she will have to work extra hard to resist. Most girls like a strong, dominant, powerful, confident guy, and many girls have the fantasy of “being taken” by such a man. Any resistance they give to such a man is just token.
If you like this post then please consider subscribing to our full feed rss or twitter. You can also listen to all episodes of our radio show on itunes or register for our members only section to see things we can’t or won’t post to the site!
Read More:
1- 2
- 3
- 4
June 25, 2008
The book The Art of Seduction gives a great insight into why Rake’s can get away with this kind of behavior.
June 25, 2008
This is probably one of the best articles I have read on this site. Its like a Tyler Durden post (see http://rsdwiki.com/index.php?title=RSD_Classic_Articles#Tyler); innovative, deep, analytic, yet practical and very thought provoking.
Recently I’ve been somewhat confused - do I play cool and mean and hard to get (Mystery)? Or do I get ‘into state’ and act playful and crazy (Tyler). This article explains the two sides. Also it partly depends on context. The playful, 80% pull mode is great in a party environment. The cooler, more negative approach maybe less so.
The whole thing about adjusting cockiness based on your looks/body language etc is gold, too. Something I may have fallen foul of.
Finally this article encoraches on the edge of something I’ve become increasingly interested in (and would like to see an article about)… ‘Direct Game’ which is basically what these 15 minute natural closes are …
Anyway - excellent stuff and I thank you!
June 25, 2008
Bobby, I actually read and own “the art of seduction” and I must say, it is a great read. however, it confused me because it, in my eyes anyway, tells you to do things that are complete opposite to things that i read from David D, Mystery, etc. I probably just have to read it again, which I do plan on doing.
As far as this article, i really enjoyed it. It touches on the whole 80/20 thing and I really needed that explained…doesn’t mike talk about something similar in his e-book?
Anyway, I have a question. Not to come off as too cocky or full of myself, but i’ve been told plenty of times that i’m “hot”. my problem is, i don’t want to come off as too cocky when doing CF stuff, which is where the whole 80-20 rule comes in I guess, but i don’t want to come off too needy…where’s the balance?
-KillSwitch
June 25, 2008
Killswitch, The balance lies in the magical land called CHEMISTRY! No matter how good looking you are, if your not a challenge the girl will get bored(maybe after she slept with you) or whatever. COcky funny is what creates that subtext for banter and fun flirting. I found is really important in what you are communicating while you say it IE if you day “O I dont think you could Handle me . .” with a sly smirk and coming from a fun happpy place its good but that same line said without a smile or any enthusiam can be taken as very cocky. SO its all about the energy you project when you say it, that is your balance. You also dont want to over do the cocky funny because then you’ll just be seen as some fun party guy flirt but nothing more - trust me I’m in this stage with one chick and it fun but it sucks at the same time.
Peace
June 25, 2008
Great feedback, guys!
Bobby,
Yes, as you can tell from my name, I use a Rakish style, with a little bit of the Charismatic thrown in. I think Zan is also a kind of Rake. Almost all the naturals I’ve met who have super fast seductions are Rakes, and their girls fall really hard in love with them, too. I’m a very lazy and busy guy, lol, so I find the Rake to be the most time and energy efficient style, plus it’s just a lot of fun! Greene’s book is a wonderful resource, too.
sub5tance,
Thanks for the kind appraisal. Yes, I’ve heard that Mystery/Matador and TD/Mehow/Lovedrop have different styles and energy.
Energy, however, is a different question from the push-pull cocky-funny question. You can have high energy CF, and you can have low energy CF (like James Bond). Within the high vs. low energy continuum, you can also have more push than pull or more pull than push. My article addresses the latter issue of the proportion of push vs. pull and the variables involved. I haven’t addressed the energy question in this article, but that would be a good topic for another piece. Thanks for bringing it up!
I totally agree with you that it depends on the contexts.
Killswitch,
That’s a good question about the different types.
Greene’s book starts off with describing the various seductive character types. I’ve noticed that most guys just skip that section, but that’s my favorite section! Guys who do a lot of Push Cocky-Funny are mainly Coquettes, using Greene’s categories. Mystery’s style combines a bunch of different characters, but I’m confident in saying that the Rake is not among them.
It’s important to realize that there are many kinds of seducers and many different yet equally effective ways of attracting women. The questions to ask are: Which character type most appeals to me? Which character types would be easiest for me to adopt?
My article prescribes a more efficient way for certain types of guys (high value, good fundamentals, or good-looking). I feel like a lot of the community’s teachings are aimed at below average guys who have awful fundamentals and don’t come across high value. For guys like that, it can be very helpful to use Push Cocky-Funny. But for guys who have their fundamentals down and are DOMINANT, continually pushing a girl away can make the seduction last a lot longer, like 10 hours instead of 3.
To KillSwitch’s respondent,
Good points! I totally agree on being a challenge. You can do Pull CF and still be a challenge by mixing in the 20% Push and by just being High Value yourself.
Yes, you can look for the balance in the Cocky vs. the Funny. But like I point out in the article, you can be Push CF as well as Pull CF. There are actually three levels at work here: Push vs. Pull, Cocky vs. Not Cocky, Funny vs. Not Funny. You can tweak things at each level. As far as time efficiency, I don’t think Cocky and Funny really speed up or slow things down. It’s the Push vs. Pull dynamic that can really cut time or add time to the seduction.
As far as the Energy question goes, I agree that your game should not be ALL push-pull or cocky-funny, and that in most cases, you will need to slow the pace down in order to form an emotional connection. That goes without saying. But like I said, you can definitely be LOW ENERGY cocky-funny.
Maybe I really should get around to writing that article on Energy.
Thanks for your thought-provoking feedback!
Cheers, The Asian Rake.
June 25, 2008
[...] How to Master Push-Pull and Cocky-Funny (day 11) From: http://www.theseductionbible.com ; After closely observing naturals who are masters at crazily rapid escalations and seductions, and after a lot of discussions with PUAs who have really tight game, I’ve discovered an important enhancement to the simplistic push-pull and cocky-funny concepts. » more 1 [...]
October 7, 2008
Hey everybody, I’m not so good in speaking English but I will try to be understandable.
First, I am happy to find that article, because it’s very interresting, because it a little more detailed than what you normely find on the internet.
Secundly, I like to have more articles that are detailed in that way, about attraction.
I have a comment about the fact that you have adapt you push and pull technique to your aim. You said you could evaluate your aim by looking at her looks, and personnally I’m not totaly agreeing about only looking at her looks, because a women can be confident about herself because of other factors. These factors can be personnallity, arrogance or cocky and funny she is using (we man aren’t the only one who use that stuff), story-telling-abilities, …
These might be factors you also have to look at.
Personnally I think the biggest part of attraction game is the cocky and funny - push and pull
When you understand that part you might be begin with comfort-building, kinesis and emotionnal-connection
Conqterror
PS: srry I’m not good at all in English