I think it's good to list good guru who actually gets laid and who gave out good advices vs the bad ones that actually harms your game.

Best I've seen infield: Mystery.
Mystery also gave fairly good advices. Qualification, being a challenge are absolutely money advices and it's basically the foundation of almost all community's game. Almost everyone copy mystery.

Most practical advices: Mark Mason of practical pickup. I've not seen a single thing the dude said that i think that is full of shit, which is why i'm here .

Assanova: The dude's advice sometime is money and other time is just fricking weird. However, overall solid advice. Too bad his blog is dead.

DJFUJI: i've met fuji and he's a solid dude. His advices overall is pretty good.

60 years of challenge and Jason Savage. I felt these two advices are basically the same and compliment each other. Imo, the tension advices and focus on sex vs focus on desire by savage have helped my inner game more than anything i've read so far.

Brad P: Brad's greatest contribution to the community is sexual stereotype. It's definitely a HUGE improvement from peacocking and it does work.

Ok, now onto the bad gurus. Imo, these gurus will absolutely destroy your game and whatever resemblance of you as a normal cool guy if you follow their system.

1. Real Social Dynamic: Tyler of RSD. If you want to join the rsd, i suggest you join scientology instead. Personally, I rather meet tom cruise than Tyler again. Yes, even though tom cruise is crazy, he has contribute something to society because he made quite a few good movies in the past. Tyler on the other hand is just fricking weird. There were countless reports of tyler not getting laid by barry kirkey, and other members of Proho. I could go on, but lets' move on to the next guru.

2. Johnny Soporno: The dude is just plain creepy. His advice is a useless waste of time. Do not follow his relationship advice if you wish to start a family one day. The only good thing about him is that no one in the community have any respect for him.

3. Adam Lyons: He got 20 lays and now he's married. Adam's a nice guy, but his credibility is low imo.

4. Neil Strauss: Neils' greatest contribution to the community is the book the game. Had he stop there, i would've put him in the above list. However, by trying to scam people with the annihilation method and other shady shit, he's getting put down here in the shit list. There are countless report neil's game suck.

5.The majority of the21convention speakers. Too many to list. The best way to find out if they suck with women is just watch their body language. If they dont look like one of your cool natural friends, chances are, they probably suck with chicks. No need to follow their garbage advice.

I'd meet Tom Cruise while he's in Les Grossman mode





Playaaaa, playaaa

Wow you've met a lot of gurus. How long have you been in this stuff?

Something I've seen-

A bad "guru" will tell a student to approach a group of girls, and when the student gets "blown out", the guru tells the student he "wasn't giving enough value". Using "value", which is so esoteric a term anyway, as a scapegoat as to why the student didn't get a desired outcome.

A "good" guru can explain the situation, break it down for the student so he easily understands, and then has him implement changes.

It's about results. Good gurus will have students that produce real-world tangible results (e.g. getting laid). Lets be real, this community is about getting girls...someone wanting a epic life-changing experience should probably attend a Tony Robbins convention.

B,
JT

I don’t know why some people have such a high opinion about 60YearsOfChallenge. Aaron Sleazy was outspoken about it when he said that it does not work with girls who are significantly better looking than yourself. When I tried to practice 60 method in clubs, it resulted into an endless series of harsh rejections. After my daygame results during last summer I had huge confidence, but following 60’s advice has completely destroyed all my confidence within one or two months. However, since I’m doing daygame again I’m recovering from that disaster.

Look at Mystery and Style on the other hand. They talk a lot of shit etc., but their (or Mystery’s) method brings results for average guys with higher caliber girls. Or look at Krauser, whose daygame advice brings you results. Same goes for Sinn’s daygame advice. I also liked Assanova’s blog.

All in all you have to go 90 per cent of the way on your own, relying on your own experience and practice, and only 10 per cent of the results are due to "guru" advice.

(05-31-2011 06:29 PM)General G Wrote:  I don’t know why some people have such a high opinion about 60YearsOfChallenge. Aaron Sleazy was outspoken about it when he said that it does not work with girls who are significantly better looking than yourself. When I tried to practice 60 method in clubs, it resulted into an endless series of harsh rejections. After my daygame results during last summer I had huge confidence, but following 60’s advice has completely destroyed all my confidence within one or two months. However, since I’m doing daygame again I’m recovering from that disaster.

Look at Mystery and Style on the other hand. They talk a lot of shit etc., but their (or Mystery’s) method brings results for average guys with higher caliber girls. Or look at Krauser, whose daygame advice brings you results. Same goes for Sinn’s daygame advice. I also liked Assanova’s blog.

All in all you have to go 90 per cent of the way on your own, relying on your own experience and practice, and only 10 per cent of the results are due to "guru" advice.

I don't know about other people, but I rarely if ever think "man that girl is significantly better looking then me". I'm good looking myself, average height (5f9), but still this is not a taught that pops in to my head a lot.

I'm also not really the club guy. I don't really hang out a lot in that environment.

To be honest I think that the best way to get the really hot girls is to go and find them in places where they don't expect to get hit on. f.e. social cirlce(network yourself in a powerfull position) , day game, smaller bars and clubs.

Seriously. The whole "she's hotter than me, so I have to do X" or "she's uglier than me, so I have to do Y" is mostly in your head. And by the way, a lot of very hot girls think they're ugly. And a lot of ugly girls think they're hot. So that REALLY fucks this theory all up.

Looks will always help you, no matter where you are. But chances are that if you do well in day game and bad in clubs, it's because your game sucks in clubs, not because you're uglier than the girls you talk to.

Night game is harder, more complicated, requires more energy and more engagement. Day game doesn't. My guess is the reason why ugly girls seem "easier" in clubs is because they're the only ones willing to tolerate shitty game.

Mark:

Your reply was quite harsh, but that’s okay.

But please answer me a question.

One month ago I posted my streetgame gameplan here, which I put a lot of work and effort into (in field). Some guys here appreciated this, and maybe some can profit from this in their practice. Only in one single subordinate sentence with no relation to the whole bulk of my text I mentioned my height/looks problem, but your reply was almost enterely focussing on that. So I posted something to be seen as a positive contribution overall, and you only referred to the single one thing I mentioned in a negative sense.

Now again in this thread: I mentioned both positive and negative things in my post (i.e., what worked well for me, and what didn’t work well for me), and you only refer to the negative ones.


Why is this the case?

It's tough love, G. Tough love. I appreciate all of the great info and experience you've contributed. So I don't want you to feel like I'm overlooking that. And sorry if it feels like I'm singling you out (I'm not).

The reason I've been harsh on a couple of your posts is mainly because of the nature of the problem I see. Unhealthy beliefs about looks/height are rife in this community, and they tend to spread like wildfire. So I make a point to put them out as quickly (and as harshly) as possible, regardless of who they come from. You could be my best friend in the world, and I'd probably still be just as harsh when it comes to this issue.

Also, on a personal level, the height/looks thing has become pet peeve of mine just because I've heard guys complain about height/looks no less than 8,291 times over the last four years with very few of those complaints ever having much validity. In fact if you read the archive on the blog, you'll see me blowing up about the same stuff in posts from 2009 and 2010. So me getting charged up about this is nothing new.

So don't take it personally. I'm trying to help you here! But there's no reason to sugarcoat it... I'd be willing to bet your problem is poor night game more than it is your looks. It sounds like you seriously over-estimate your looks issues. And even if you're not, looks are something that can be fixed with a good 4-6 months of effort by just about anybody. So unless you're disfigured in some way, blind or in a wheelchair, you don't really have much of an excuse.

(05-31-2011 06:29 PM)General G Wrote:  Look at Mystery and Style on the other hand. They talk a lot of shit etc., but their (or Mystery’s) method brings results for average guys with higher caliber girls.

Is this even true? I actually have never met or seen anybody do mystery method well, with about one exception. Everybody I have seen who claims to be good with mystery method can't close. So, the interactions look cool, but the results aren't there. I know one guy who gets great results with opinion openers, but he gets just as great results when he goes direct, so I don't really see mystery method as being the thing that helps him.

In my experience, 60's stuff definitely gets you blown out more often and more harshly, but also tends to get more results. The thing with going indirect is women don't usually shoot you down hard, but it often leads to interactions that go nowhere.