Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 73

Discussion Topic

Juggler Method
by Tyler Durden
I know that Papa has taken a Juggler workshop a few months ago, and he tells me that this is the
Juggler method. If this has been updated, it would be good if the more recent workshop dudes
(sexpdx, bl, mmasters, etc) could post about the updated model.
_______
JUGGLER METHOD, BY JUGGLER:
This may be counter-intuitive to you, but you want the conversation about YOU. What interesting
things you have to say, what stories you have to tell, what you think about her, your method of
revealing dark secrets from a girl's subconscious, etc. Not about her. It's about you.
Talking about clothes, negging her, asking about her life etc. will work for a short time. But then
she will see the pattern of what you are doing, she will see you working and she will shut you
down. That way only works for chicks with a low self-esteem.
The fuel that drives a conversation is curiosity. You must always prepare for that to be present.
Yes you can keep a conversation on life support by being curious about her. And if done well, it
can work. But really, hot girls get talked up about themselves all the time. Many guys try the
busting on her approach. Really beautiful women have been hit on by guys since they were
thirteen. She can see you coming a mile away. You must turn the tables and get her curious about
YOU, get her coming on to YOU.
Your instinct when you meet a girl should always be to hook her curiosity and have her asking you
a question. That is the beginning of her chasing you. That is Juggler method.
That is actually not bad stuff. But you need to hook after her laugh. You did get a laugh here right?

You: "a small African country. I going to have to fill many positions in my new government. Let's
see... (look at her appraisingly) What job would you be good for... (she is curious as to what you
think she should do in your 'administration'. Stretch it out.) I think you would be my... minister of
education."
Her: "Why education?"
You: "Just look at your fingers (take her hand). Go into palm reading or
jewelry powers routine.
Story telling works just the same way - you want her to ask to hear them. Figure out all your good
material and find a way for her to work to discover it.
You do not want to EV her. You want HER EVing YOU. The purpose of EV is to find out a person's
values and then appeal to those things. Let her be the one trying to align herself with YOUR
values. You are the fucking prize. Then she will chase you, then she will close you.
-Juggler

I've tested Juggler method extensively (literally, for WEEKS), and have met and spoken with
many students to get a good perspective on it.
In this post, I want to discuss my impression and views on:
-what it is
-why it works
-where do I disagree with Juggler
-what are the differences and similarities between what I do and what Juggler does
It would also be good to get Juggler in on this, if you're reading bro. If Juggler responds, I'll
reciprocate by getting Mystery to reply back also, because it could make for excellent discussion.
MY IMPRESSIONS:
WHAT IT IS:
People will often read me commenting to the effect of "Attract the chick until she tries to get
rapport with YOU"
This is the virtue, IMO, of any effective pickup method. One reason I've criticized SS is that it
recommends FLUFFING the girl, and eliciting her values.
I disagree with this, as does Juggler.
For any FIELD EXPERIENCED person, I doubt I'd get disagreements on this.
If you ask girls questions PRIOR to having established VALUE in her eyes (even if its simple
curiousity), she will become disinterested and often leave.
Juggler suggests making statements to solve this problem, which I agree with.
WHY IT WORKS:

Most guys who try to pickup a girl will walk up and start asking her questions to show interest in
her. Very AFC.
The reason that Juggler method works is that by just making statements, you give the girl very
little reason to leave.
In fact, you're disclosing things about yourself, and most decent people (yes, including HBs :)... )
will stay and listen.
If you become a good conversationalist, you will find yourself getting rapport with girls quickly.
So long as you have the FUNDAMENTALS down, such as good bodylanguage and a
charismatic/alpha presence, this rapport can translate into genuine attraction very fast.
By NOT asking questions right away, you give the girl no reason to walk away, and you AVOID
generating bad emotional states in her such as "why is this guy hitting on me?" etc etc..
She'll then try to get rapport with YOU, and you can get into a conversation.
The best part, IMO, is that she feels like she EARNED it. I'm not sure if Juggler agrees, but that's
what I've noticed while testing his way of doing things.
Also note, that JUGGLER IS CANNED. He simply uses CANNED stories from HIS LIFE and HIS
VIEWS and OPINIONS.

WHERE DO I DISAGREE WITH JUGGLER:


I agree with EVERYTHING that Juggler says in terms of his METHOD. I feel that its a strong
method with few flaws - for guys who have FUNDAMENTALS down.
I DISAGREE with what Juggler says about being genuine, as it does not cause problems for me nor do I think that anything that I do is not genuine.
So, IOW, I agree and USE his METHOD, but disagree with the follow Juggler tenets:
-don't use negs
-don't bust on girls using C&F
-walk right up to the target, don't use group theory
-don't ever use other people's material (although as people have seen by how much new material I
post, I make up almost all my own material, and most often from my own life.. but that's because
I think that my material is BETTER, and not necessarily that I disagree with using other people's)
Why do I disagree?
NEGS:
In my experience, when you're dealing with ELITE calibre HBs, negs are what attracts.
I've picked up models and strippers, and they have always gravitated towards me the second that I
negged them.
In my experience, girls of this level seem to INTERPRET negs as GENUINE BEHAVIOUR.
Why?

Because it doesn't occur to them that somebody would do this intentionally to pick them up. I
have never met a girl who appeared to clue into this, and I have met many girls.
C&F:
It's been my experience, as well as David D's, CPowles, Mystery's, Rick H's, Zan's, Badboy's etc etc
that C&F is a great way to attract women.
Busting on girls brings seems to bring out their 'girlygirl' instinct.
I close girls like this ALL THE TIME, and it seems so obvious to me.
I'm actually surprised that I'd get any argument from this, since it seems so obvious to me. But
I'm open-minded to hear what people have to say on this.
APPROACH THE TARGET DIRECTLY:
Juggler argues that the target will lose interest if you focus on her group, and actively ignore her.
Perhaps she'll think that you hadn't the courage to approach her.
Instead, he suggests simply walking up to the target, and approaching her directly.
If you are GOOD, and can run an intriguing conversation, she will be interested, and her friends
will see this. They will not cockblock.
I disagree with this, and although I would LIKE to believe it, I have tried it many times, and it has
not worked.
I also would figure that I can run a Juggler style pickup as effectively as many of his students,
because I play the game EVERYDAY, and I LIVE this stuff... I really like Juggler's posts, so I've
worked hard on developing the skillsets that he's recommended.
So if I can't do it, after field testing this M.O. EXTENSIVELY, from where I'm sitting its just hard
for me to get how anyone else could. Still, maybe some guys CAN attract an HB9 or 10 from a
club, by approaching her directly, on a CONSISTENT basis. But I have never met anyone who
could.. (I often still go at the target, but the friends must be addressed at some point)
It just doesn't seem to work like that.
Still, I appreciate that this can be a FRUITLESS debate, because Juggler will say "well dude, I can,
so that's your problem", and I'll just say "ummm dude, that's nuts"
So I'm not really sure how to resolve this one over the internet. Maybe in Boston.
YES, in Boston, I would really like to see this, and I'll GLADLY eat my words if I could see this,
because it would be amazing and I'd learn alot from it.. I'm still new to the game, and I never
hesistate to admit when I'm wrong because to me that's a sign of PROGRESS in my game. So if
any students will be there, please let me know if you see me there and show me what you learned
from Juggler.
DON'T USE OTHER PEOPLE'S MATERIAL:
As I've stated in the "What is genuine" post, I have no problem using other people's material, and

I get good results.


Although most of my material is my own, I have no problem using that of other people's.
This 'not genuine' thing doesn't affect me, because I generally don't like talking to girls about ANY
topic that interests them, because my interests are typically not those shared by girls (see the
post).
So I generally feel, and thus PROJECT, the same level of 'genuine', regardless of how I do pickup.
Also, my pickup method is that I am a COCKY BADBOY who likes to PARTY. This 'disclose my
true self' thing is unnecessary for me to attract girls, because I am party guy in a college town, and
this stuff is UNNECESSARY.
The girls here like COCKY BADBOY guys, and those who don't I just gauge it down which is very
easy for me.
Another thought, Juggler, if you're reading this: What do you think of CPowles game (heavily
canned)? Having winged with him, what are your thoughts?
MY MAIN SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES FROM JUGGLER:
My pickup style is similar to Juggler's in that I make statements, and don't ask questions.
Also, that I have stories about my life, which I will hook her to ask about.
Like Juggler, I don't use gimmicks. However, having seen many people, such Toecutter, Mystery,
etc, use them effectively, my opinion is that gimmicks are GOOD.
I am just too lazy to learn them myself because I am good at maintaining centre of attention
without them. So I don't use them because I don't need them, but see nothing wrong with using
them personally. They seem to be fun, and girls like them. So long as you can CONVERT the
attention that they give you into attraction (which any PUA should be able to, I think) then they
are fine, IMO.
Still, I don't use them, so perhaps I shouldn't talk. I'm speaking only from what I've seen others
do.
Also, all of my canned material are either C&F lines and jokes (NOT canned routines), or they are
stories from my life (like what Juggler suggests), which I agree with. I suppose I am similar to
Juggler in that sense, because he has his GF-test, 'life as a movie', and other similar stuff he'll use.
I'm also similar because I use stories from my own life. However, I DIFFER in MOTIVATION for
this, because I use my own stories only because they are EASIER TO REMEMBER, and NOT
because I think that they are more genuine.
I've never had a girl figure that I wasn't genuine on occassions that I have tinkered with other
people's material, because I am a PARTY GUY and girls want FUN and PARTY. So they don't
really care either way.

-TD

I agree on the talk about yourself not hers. Now depending where you are at some point in time if
she wants to share her life with you, I would listen. Yet the interview of the girl, it sucks.
Get them to ask you questions, qualifying you which means that they have some basic form of
attraction, answer them the right way and she will start to volunteer information to you about
herself, qualifying herself. Once that last process starts meet, kino and fuck you already seduced
her, now it is only a matter of overcoming resistance.
About canned routines etc. If you can deliver them as to appear genuine, you are home free. If
not, oooppss. Also my fear when guys read routines here that include sample lines the girls uses to
react, is that if the girl doesnt react the way the canned routine proscribed, that they are lost.
Especially when doing canned routines, you have to very flexibel to take it to anywhere depending
on how the girl reacts. Don't just eject because your routine failed.
About SS. SS is using NLP to put embedded commands, ambiguities etc. into a girls mind. The
problem with SS is that this is the goal and not a method so the whole encounter is framed
towards this. This makes for the bad way of handeling things. Now doing the NLP stuff as a
method while doing your own game works wonders. It's amazing what you can get away with. I
have debriefed girls who encountered a few of the top SS guys, and it really hits home. One girl
told me that she became very hot and had wild erotic dreams about the guy. Now she didnt fuck
with him. SS doesnt bring the closing techniques, it depends too much on the girl acting on her
newly commanded feelings. Again that while the techniques are just that: the techniques,
greatness comes with the level of skill the techniques are used. In the end only your level of skill
matters not the techniques.
What I learned from Juggler besides the talk about you and not her, was his way of having full
emotional relations with his girls. In my understanding a lot of Juggler's use of genuine has to do
with genuine emotions. It is one thing to deliver IC smoothlessly, it's another if not only the girl,
but you too feels the IC. To lay the girl it is probably better not to have genuine emotions, but for
the quality of your own life, for me, it matters a lot. The trick off course is to have the emotions
without it hurting your ability to lay the girl.
Proto
TD will you PLLLEEEASSSEE STOP working so hard at this shit.. trying to find the time to read /
use it all and learn from it.. your building an exponential curve that i feel i'm never going to get
up.. because it keeps churning new stuff out at a faster and faster rate...
Keep up the good work !
AC
"Nada ha cambiado, excepto mi actitud, por eso todo ha cambiado"
What's up, TD.
I HAD to be on the board when you posted this, LOL! I'll type up a few things that jump out at me
to comment on for now.
On 4/14/03 7:02:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:
>People will often read me
>commenting to the effect of
>"Attract the chick until she
>tries to get rapport with YOU"
>

>This is the virtue, IMO, of


>any effective pickup method.
Agreed.
>One reason I've criticized SS
>is that it recommends FLUFFING
>the girl, and eliciting her
>values.
>
>I disagree with this, as does
>Juggler.
>
>For any FIELD EXPERIENCED
>person, I doubt I'd get
>disagreements on this.
Agreed.
>If you ask girls questions
>PRIOR to having established
>VALUE in her eyes (even if its
>simple curiousity), she will
>become disinterested and often
>leave.
>
>Juggler suggests making
>statements to solve this
>problem, which I agree with.
Agreed.
>WHY IT WORKS:
>
>Most guys who try to pickup a
>girl will walk up and start
>asking her questions to show
>interest in her. Very AFC.
Agreed.
>The reason that Juggler method
>works is that by just making
>statements, you give the girl
>very little reason to leave.
>
>In fact, you're disclosing
>things about yourself, and
>most decent people (yes,
>including HBs :)... ) will
>stay and listen.
>
>If you become a good
>conversationalist, you will
>find yourself getting rapport
>with girls quickly. So long
>as you have the FUNDAMENTALS

>down, such as good


>bodylanguage and a
>charismatic/alpha presence,
>this rapport can translate
>into genuine attraction very
>fast.
Agreed except I don't think Juggler himself has what I would call an "alpha" presence and his
criticism of me was that I was TOO alpha. Then again, everyone on these boards seems to have a
different idea of what is or is not "alpha".
>Also note, that JUGGLER IS
>CANNED. He simply uses CANNED
>stories from HIS LIFE and HIS
>VIEWS and OPINIONS.
If by "canned" you mean telling a story he has told before at some point then okay, but he doesn't
think of them as "routines" that he runs in order to get some REACTION.
>NEGS:
>
>In my experience, when you're
>dealing with ELITE calibre
>HBs, negs are what attracts.
>
>I've picked up models and
>strippers, and they have
>always gravitated towards me
>the second that I negged them.
I have gotten negs to work only a few times EVER, but it hasn't been something I have worked on
a lot. I like negging MYSELF better. Ever try that?
>In my experience, girls of
>this level seem to INTERPRET
>negs as GENUINE BEHAVIOUR.
>
>Why?
>
>Because it doesn't occur to
>them that somebody would do
>this intentionally to pick
>them up. I have never met a
>girl who appeared to clue into
>this, and I have met many
>girls.
I think it works because of self-esteem issues on the part of the chick. Or rather, a sense of self
based on how they appear to others.
>APPROACH THE TARGET DIRECTLY:
[snip]
>Still, I appreciate that this
>can be a FRUITLESS debate,
>because Juggler will say "well

>dude, I can, so that's your


>problem", and I'll just say
>"ummm dude, that's nuts"
>
>So I'm not really sure how to
>resolve this one over the
>internet. Maybe in Boston.
Approaching groups has more to do with the physical positioning than anything else. If you CAN
go for the target first, definitely do but the hottest girls are seldom in the most approachable
positions in the group.
In Vancouver that chick from the whole "lime guy" situation was the hottest girl in the club. And
she was in a group in an approachable position. Juggler opened her and talked for maybe 30
seconds before he ran off to find Stormwolf leaving me with her and I was able to coast in very
smoothly on the rapport that HE had created in that short period of time. When we left the club
he didn't even remember what the hell he had said to her. Had he been actually TRYING to make
something happen there, I am sure he could have gotten her very attracted to him. Apart from
that situation there were a multiplicity of other situations where he had a group of girls in the club
quite into him.
Actually, TD, *I* have never seen ANYONE approach a group and address the WHOLE GROUP
with some scripted opener and end up laying a girl in that group. I know it has happened, but I
have never seen it. My best friend here in Portland (LJ) is a natural and he always seems to either
approach the target directly or if there there is a guy in the group he approaches the guy first. So,
either Juggler's way or LJ's way is how I do it anymore. Addressing the whole group has always
been problematic in that it leads to conversations that don't go anywhere. Another problem is that
almost every club I go to is by far too loud to talk so that more than 2 people can hear you at a
time.
>Like Juggler, I don't use
>gimmicks. However, having
>seen many people, such
>Toecutter, Mystery, etc, use
>them effectively, my opinion
>is that gimmicks are GOOD.
I think they are fine too, however, I think learning something like magic tricks JUST to PU chicks
is corndick behavior. If you are into something like magic or tarot anyway, I see no problem using
that stuff in seductions but it's hard to learn it FOR THAT PURPOSE without having it come
across that way and it looks really lame when it does.
I don't think Juggler is totally anti-gimmick either. I think he thinks all that stuff is fine as long as
it doesn't become something you RELY ON to PU.
IMO, TD, you do understand a lot of the mechanical aspects of the method but an appreciation for
his overall philosphy and way of thinking about the game I don't quite see from this post. I will get
into that more later.
-PDX

Fuck man, i aint closed minded, but i cant read this much shit. Do a summary man for those of us
who just cant handle more than about 100 words or so. I like juggler method stuff and wanna
learn a little about it, but really man ive got lazy eyes from hell when it comes to reading off the
computer.

"make the ho say no"


hey gunwitch, waddaya want me to do dude? its a long method! :)
I'm on my way out, but I can feedback this last post and then I'll look at it more later tonight or
tommorow.
On 4/14/03 8:21:00 AM, SexPDX wrote:
>What's up, TD.
>
>I HAD to be on the board when
>you posted this, LOL! I'll
yes I know.. the sweet addiction of the ASF.. help!!
>Agreed except I don't think Juggler
>himself has what I would call an "alpha"
>presence and his criticism of me was
>that I was TOO alpha. Then again,
actually that's a good point dude.. I forgot about this from when I met Juggler..
An interesting aspect of his approach is that he looks like a librarian or something.. so I found it
interesting that he actually fucks hotties which was totally counter-intuitive..
BUT... I'm VERY open-minded to this, because I NEVER would have thought that dressing
PEACOCKY would get results either.. until I TRIED it..
Juggler seems to have a quality of being DISARMING, which I assume he must exploit to his
maximum advantage :)
>>Also note, that JUGGLER IS
>>CANNED. He simply uses CANNED
>>stories from HIS LIFE and HIS
>>VIEWS and OPINIONS.
>
>If by "canned" you mean telling a story
>he has told before at some point then
>okay, but he doesn't think of them as
>"routines" that he runs in order to get
>some REACTION.
interesting distinction.. good point.
>I have gotten negs to work only a few
>times EVER, but it hasn't been something
>I have worked on a lot. I like negging
>MYSELF better. Ever try that?
I do that alot also.. admitting insecurities, vulnerabilities.. this makes up a large part of my PU..

the negs are to disarm the bitch shields of HB9+ models, strippers, or general hotties.. they've
worked extremely consistently, but it doesn't mean its the only way.. hence the point of this
thread.
>I think it works because of self-esteem
>issues on the part of the chick. Or
>rather, a sense of self based on how
>they appear to others.
very possibly.. also, alot of girls who diet, and make themselves up excessively have this problem..
of course, these girls are often excessively hot as well.. :)
point is, if you're looking for girlfriends or just hot chicks to get with.
and NO I'm not saying that all hotties have LSE, so let's not take this out of context, huh,
everyone? ;)
>Actually, TD, *I* have never seen ANYONE
>approach a group and address the WHOLE
>GROUP with some scripted opener and end
>up laying a girl in that group. I know
that's what I find so interesting about this.. I have NO DOUBT that Juggler can produce results,
because he runs WORKSHOPS..
same with Mystery..
BOTH these guys produce the GOODS..
so what interests me, is that they both get results using different M.O.s
that's why I'd like to get more insights and explanation into this..
>IMO, TD, you do understand a lot of the
>mechanical aspects of the method but an
>appreciation for his overall philosphy
>and way of thinking about the game I
>don't quite see from this post. I will
>get into that more later.
>
>-PDX
cool.. that's why I posted this.. I *HAVE* read and talked to his students excessively btw.. but I
posted this out of interest to see other's opinions.
-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (8 of 79), Read 2017 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 11:34 AM

On 4/14/03 8:43:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:


>hey gunwitch, waddaya want me
>to do dude? its a long
>method! :)
It's a very simple method. Your over analyzing way of thinking made it long. If you need hundreds
of words to make a simple point, then there may be a need to improve your communication skills,
which is essential for sarging ;)
>I'm on my way out, but I can
>feedback this last post and
>then I'll look at it more
>later tonight or tommorow.
Where do you find all this time to analyze and post these things? Besides work, gym, sarging,
sleeping, and eating lots of food...I hardly even have time to read the board!
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (9 of 79), Read 1884 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:17 PM
On 4/14/03 8:43:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:
>BUT... I'm VERY open-minded to this,
>because I NEVER would have thought that
>dressing PEACOCKY would get results
>either.. until I TRIED it..
I have decided I like peacocking in some situation and Juggler is not into peacocking at all. But he
and I talked about this in Vancouver and it is another example of something that we think can be
okay as long as it doesn't become something you RELY on.
I personally think Juggler himself takes the "rely on yourself" philosophy to a bit of an extreme. If
he says or does something more than a few times he declares it something that is becoming a
"crutch" and he therefore has to get rid of. I am not THAT extreme with this way of thinking
however I do believe in relying on myself.
But you have to realize that we are talking about a guy who will put on a FAT SUIT and make
himself look uglier just so he can challenge himself to rely on his game more.
>Juggler seems to have a quality of being
>DISARMING, which I assume he must
>exploit to his maximum advantage :)
I learned a lot in the workshop about making myself appear less threatening. That is actually a
concern I have with peacocking. Most of the guys I knew growing up and know now who are good
with women have styles that involve a lot of what ASF calls "alphaness". Many of them are black

guys who have habits of aggressive conversational style and body language. Juggler thought I was
WAY too threatening for his style to work for me and it was something I had never really thought
of at the time but he was right. I intimidated people without even trying and now I have toned it
down a lot.
>>I think it works because of self-esteem
>>issues on the part of the chick. Or
>>rather, a sense of self based on how
>>they appear to others.
>
>very possibly.. also, alot of girls who
>diet, and make themselves up excessively
>have this problem.. of course, these
>girls are often excessively hot as
>well.. :)
>
>point is, if you're looking for
>girlfriends or just hot chicks to get
>with.
>
>and NO I'm not saying that all hotties
>have LSE, so let's not take this out of
>context, huh, everyone? ;)
I didn't think you were saying that. And I don't think that all hot girls have LSE either. But I DO
think that many of the traditional MM targets (models, dancers, celebs, etc.) are women who are
particularly preoccupied by how they appear to others because their sense of self is based on that
and I think that MM assumes this so that it can be effective in seducing such women.
I normally don't go for these women myself so we need to remember that for the purposes of this
discussion. Portland however, has more sex-industry women per-capita than any American city so
maybe it would be a good thing for me to think about this kind of skill set a little.
I actually have dated a stripper before. I PU'd her while still very much an AFC in many ways and
I did it at a bar/pizza place outside a highly-charged social situation.
>>Actually, TD, *I* have never seen ANYONE
>>approach a group and address the WHOLE
>>GROUP with some scripted opener and end
>>up laying a girl in that group. I know
>
>that's what I find so interesting about
>this.. I have NO DOUBT that Juggler can
>produce results, because he runs
>WORKSHOPS..
>
>same with Mystery..
>
>BOTH these guys produce the GOODS..
>
>so what interests me, is that they both
>get results using different M.O.s
>
>that's why I'd like to get more insights
>and explanation into this..
I guess for us to have a better discussion about THIS aspect of the topic than we already have, I

would have to take Mystery's workshop (which I have thought about but I don't think he still
offers them) and you would have to take Juggler's.
>cool.. that's why I posted this.. I
>*HAVE* read and talked to his students
>excessively btw.. but I posted this out
>of interest to see other's opinions.
There are some aspects of this that I find it hard to talk about without getting into things that I
normally consider OT on ASF, such as the attitudes and motivations of the PUA and his approach
to life and the foundation of his sense of self. I will give it a shot.
When Juggler sarges, he is not trying to impress anyone. He is not trying to prove anything to
anyone or to himself. I think a lot of guys in this community are after the recognition they get as a
PUA more than they are their own happiness. Or rather, how they appear to their peers plays a
major role in their happiness or fullfillment. If that is the attitude that works for the person doing
it, then there is a lot of methods discussed here that will accomplish all those things for them.
The discussions we tend to get into about what will or will not work with "elite" or "superhot"
women tend to leave me a little perplexed. I've been with some pretty hot girls, Juggler has been
with more than I have I know. But as far as whether or not any of my chicks were "elite", I don't
really know because calling women such a thing as "elite" really isn't in my vocabulary. *I* was
attracted to them, *I* enjoyed having sex with them and spending time with them, that's really all
that I am concerned with. THIS is the attitude about the game I think that you and I, and Mystery
and Juggler are on opposite ends of and it is what I was talking about in my post above.
When I hear talk about "elite" women, I think "girls who EVERYONE ELSE thinks are hot". It
makes sense to want these girls. I am attracted to girls many other guys think are hot too and
because they get the kind of attention they do, some different tactics do apply. But seeking out
these girls BECAUSE everyone else thinks they are hot is what runs counter to the attitude to the
game that I am describing.
I am not saying one attitude is "better" than the other. They are just different. And I think that
you will never REALLY be using Juggler's approach the way it is meant to be used if your desire to
be successful using it comes from this POWERFULLY DRIVE to want to be able to pull chicks
using EVERY method out there. I say know yourself, know what you are trying to accomplish and
do THAT. To me, learning things from people like Mystery or you or Ross for that matter is in the
context of looking for what YOU do that I can use for what I am trying to do and and it's not going
to be everything.
I have more to say but I am pressed for time right now. Maybe TD, you can I can get on the phone
to talk about this and post afterwards. That might save us some time typing back and forth on this
HUGE and DEEP topic.
But my main thought now is that I question the underlying psychology behind your relentless
desire for the ability to want to step into ANY PUA's shoes and take on ANY mentality and being
able to model ANYONE without reservation and DO WHAT THEY DO. It's particularly
interesting since you claim you can effectively do that which you WANT to be able to do in the
game using what techniques you use now. I would rather stay in my own skin and pull chicks
being ME maybe using a little of what others do that I decide fits with what I am trying to
accomplish.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:The Multiple Methods- Swimming Metaphor (10 of 79), Read 1879 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Wall_Street jweide5@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:17 PM
On 4/14/03 8:43:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:
[...]
>that's what I find so interesting about
>this.. I have NO DOUBT that Juggler can
>produce results, because he runs
>WORKSHOPS..
>
>same with Mystery..
>
>BOTH these guys produce the GOODS..
>
>so what interests me, is that they both
>get results using different M.O.s
>
>that's why I'd like to get more insights
>and explanation into this..
I've thought about this a lot too. To 'solve' this dilemma I've come to think of the game like this:
We have all been dropped into the ocean, and we are trying to reach an island. Many of us are
flailing around, totally baffled as to what to do or in what direction to head. Some of us are
dropped very close to an island, and it is a simple matter of doggie-paddling over to the island.
Some others are born with incredibly powerful muscles and terrific eyesight to spot an island and
swim to it. These people are 'naturals' at finding land.
So a couple of guys who are utterly flailing around try some different things and end up inventing
some swimming strokes. After a little practice, they are swimming quickly to an island. After they
climb out of the water, they decide to tell other flailers about the strokes they discovered so that
they may too reach an island and live happily ever after.
So anyways, one of these guys discovers the front crawl; another discovers the breast stroke;
another discovers the back stroke; another, the side stroke; another, the butterfly; etc. etc. etc.
Once mastered, any one of these strokes will bring someone to land quick enough. However, some
people are very comfortable with the front crawl but find the back stroke awkward. Some find the
butterfly flashy and impressive but not as effective as the breast stroke. Do you see where I'm
going with this everyone? It's foolish to scratch one's head and say, "Well jeepers, the front crawl
is super-duper for me, I can't understand why anyone would waste all their time and energy
learning the back stroke!" Different people prefer different swimming styles... they feel more
comfortable and/or get better results. It doesn't matter what stroke they do as long as they get to
land. Us, sitting here discussing the finer points of our 'swimming strokes', have to pick and
choose the techniques that complement our needs and desires the best, as we craft our own
strokes.
Furthermore, pretty much any half-decent swimmer can perform ALL the different strokes. After
all, they are each useful in different situations. You can't win a backstroke race if you only know
breast stroke. Similarly, you might have the greatest game ever in a frat basement on a Friday
night, but that's not going to help you after you've graduated. You need to learn different strokes
for the different situations your life puts you in.

OK well there you have it... I hope I haven't overexplained my point :)


HTH
Wall Street
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: The Multiple Methods- Swimming Metaphor (11 of 79), Read 554 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Wham wham52@shaw.ca
Date:Sunday, April 27, 2003 04:36 AM
Hey man, that's a really cool analogy!! Really very cool
.............................................. for me to POOP ON.
Front crawl rules all!
I kid! I kid! To each his own, I'm 18 year old young hyper guy that runs
around the supermarket like an 8 yr old, so GWM doesn't work too great for
me. Nor does heavy NLP, I think that's mostly for older chicks (I mean 30+).
I like C&F and playful, all that funky TD stuff, and juggler (hey, I need
SOMETHING for rapport and low-key chitchat).
Whammo
http://wallstreet.pua.youaremyfriend.com
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (12 of 79), Read 1973 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 11:59 AM
>By NOT asking questions right
>away, you give the girl no
>reason to walk away, and you
>AVOID generating bad emotional
>states in her such as "why is
>this guy hitting on me?" etc
>etc..
>
>She'll then try to get rapport
>with YOU, and you can get into
>a conversation.
That doesn't always happen. For most girls, you still need to supply most of the conversation in
the beginning to warm her up.
Not asking questions is not a trick to get rapport. It's a way to make the other person feel
comfortable.
You don't do that to seek her approval, you do that to make her feel comfortable.

>I DISAGREE with what Juggler


>says about being genuine, as
>it does not cause problems for
>me - nor do I think that
>anything that I do is not
>genuine.
so what's the problem? if you think you're genuine, then you're on the same page with him.
>-don't use negs
>-don't bust on girls using C&F
>-walk right up to the target,
>don't use group theory
>-don't ever use other people's
>material
It's not about whether to use them or what to use. It's about WHY you use them.
Don't RELY on using them
Don't do them to seek approval
Don't be needy for a response when you use them
Other than that, feel free to use whatever you want to use.
>I've picked up models and
>strippers, and they have
>always gravitated towards me
>the second that I negged them.
when you said 'picked-up', did you actually end up fucking them? If not, there is really no prove
that 'negging' can cause an HB to become 'gravitated' toward you. From my experience, any neg
before rapport, will only fuck up the rest of the sarge.
Sometimes good looking guys think negs works, but the girls are really just putting up with them
'cause they've already decided to fuck them for their looks (or social proof, or money) before the
neg even comes.
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (13 of 79), Read 1915 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:scoob
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 03:46 PM
This is an interesting and insightful dialogue. I agree with all of your points excepting:
On 4/14/03 7:02:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:
>APPROACH THE TARGET DIRECTLY:
>
>Juggler argues that the target

>will lose interest if you


>focus on her group, and
>actively ignore her. Perhaps
>she'll think that you hadn't
>the courage to approach her.
My experience is that I get much less shit-testing and much quicker rapport if I approach the
target directly and then proceed to disarm her cockblocks after the opener. I will proceed to
basically ignore the target during this time. This could be called reverse group theory. I have now
impressed upon the target that I am confident enough to approach her directly with a statement
or opinion, which 95% of the guys that approach her don't do. Then, I shift my attention
TOTALLY away from her and onto her group, usually another girl who isn't as hot but seems to
have some position of power within the group (alphaness, dominance). Now the HB target is both
impressed and confused...leading to an inexplicable feeling of attraction in many cases.
I have to be careful in timing this. I've got to shift focus from the target to the cockblocks within
60-90 seconds and then BACK to the target within another 5 minutes to proceed with the usual
sarge structure. Generally I don't have to use negs because my approaching her directly and then
ignoring her as if I were using her as a stepping stone to gain entry into her group is neg enough.
It's hard to articulate why this works for me consistently but I believe that is the gist of it. I give
off a vibe of confident indifference while still conveying personality and value.
>
>Instead, he suggests simply
>walking up to the target, and
>approaching her directly.
>
>If you are GOOD, and can run
>an intriguing conversation,
>she will be interested, and
>her friends will see this.
>They will not cockblock.
>
This is true. However, I've had too many good direct approaches get stonewalled at isolation to
NOT try to disarm the cockblocks...UNLESS the cockblock(s) are actively in a "hookup" and likely
to isolate themselves.
>I disagree with this, and
>although I would LIKE to
>believe it, I have tried it
>many times, and it has not
>worked.
>
It could be that you are projecting an aura of overconfidence. Coupled with the badboy image and
the peacocking (both of which I also use) the other group members may see you as a threat. This
is a pitfall of having a larger-than-life persona and why guys with MAD game like Mystery preach
group theory. I'm not at that level and perhaps that is why it works for me but not for you.
>I also would figure that I can
>run a Juggler style pickup as
>effectively as many of his
>students, because I play the
>game EVERYDAY, and I LIVE this
>stuff... I really like
>Juggler's posts, so I've

>worked hard on developing the


>skillsets that he's
>recommended.
>
I have no doubt that you can.
>So if I can't do it, after
>field testing this M.O.
>EXTENSIVELY, from where I'm
>sitting its just hard for me
>to get how anyone else could.
>Still, maybe some guys CAN
>attract an HB9 or 10 from a
>club, by approaching her
>directly, on a CONSISTENT
>basis. But I have never met
>anyone who could.. (I often
>still go at the target, but
>the friends must be addressed
>at some point)
>
Ah, now of course I do agree with this point. The friends can never be completely excluded in my
experience. Still, I stand by my assertion that running my reverse group theory mindfuck
attraction tactic after directly approaching the target works far better for me than using TRUE
group theory according to MM. It surprises me that you've never met anyone who did this. Maybe
Southern U.S. women are a different breed.
>It just doesn't seem to work
>like that.
>
>Still, I appreciate that this
>can be a FRUITLESS debate,
>because Juggler will say "well
>dude, I can, so that's your
>problem", and I'll just say
>"ummm dude, that's nuts"
>
>So I'm not really sure how to
>resolve this one over the
>internet. Maybe in Boston.
>
>YES, in Boston, I would really
>like to see this, and I'll
>GLADLY eat my words if I could
>see this, because it would be
>amazing and I'd learn alot
>from it.. I'm still new to the
>game, and I never hesistate to
>admit when I'm wrong because
>to me that's a sign of
>PROGRESS in my game. So if
>any students will be there,
>please let me know if you see
>me there and show me what you
>learned from Juggler.

>
I've been considering a Juggler workshop because I feel that his would be most beneficial to my
overall game at this point. Plus I respect him for not resorting to blatant spamming. I may or may
not take a class prior to Boston but I will be up there for the 4th of July meeting. It's just damned
hard to schedule for a workshop with the type of business I am in and the hours I keep. Hopefully
past students will be in attendance. It would be good to compare notes with guys that have taken
various workshops. Maybe we'll even have a guru or two show up!
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (14 of 79), Read 1357 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:$20 dallar GI? suckysucky@asia.com
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 04:15 AM
On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:46:00 -0400, scoob wrote:
>Plus I respect him for not resorting to blatant spamming.
Come now. You people love spamming, remember?
That's why Jay has set up a site for you that has that huge list of
advertised sites readily available and gunwitch has some modest site
out there in internet land that Jay obviously doesn't want a good
person like me to ever know about.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (15 of 79), Read 1343 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:$20 dallar GI? suckysucky@asia.com
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 05:02 AM
>Still, maybe some
>guys CAN attract an HB9 or 10 from a club, by approaching her directly, on a
>CONSISTENT basis. But I have never met anyone who could..
i found it...
"Take a guy who is a 1- in looks (perhaps fat, short, hideous face,
balding, old, smelly, poorly dressed, etc.), but a -10- in effort.
This guy will STILL land women who are -5.5s- once in while, and 3sfrequently."
http://gunwitch.fastseduction.com/
Effort = you can't instantly hook them with 'good looks'.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (16 of 79), Read 2082 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:19 AM

Some other good counter-points from SEXPDX, that I'll throw into this discussion because I think
that they are beneficial up in this thread:
SEXPDX SAYS:
I don't believe conveying higher value is in conflict with building rapport. Making nothing but
statements early in the interaction, providing the majority of the value to the interaction in the
beginning and speaking from the heart while you are doing it DOES convey value and DOES build
rapport at the same time. I don't share your apparent belief in a distinct separation between what
is RAPPORT and what is VALUE.
I guess I wouldn't go so far as to say it is absolutely NOT Juggler method but it bear in mind the
ultimate goal of Juggler method is to rid yourself of all ATTATCHMENTS (ie. routines, canned
material) and to rely more and more on yourself until you rely COMPLETELY on yourself. Try
sharing your life experiences and observations of the world without having to make "routines" up
about it and you will be closer to what Juggler method is.
As I have discussed with you before, my view of canned material and these "routines" is different
than yours. Making up routines, openers or things to say and trying them out is fun and in my
experience it was good for starting out but I just don't see it as something to be WALLOWED IN, I
see it as something to move beyond.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (17 of 79), Read 2070 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:59 AM
>SEXPDX SAYS:
>
>
>I don't believe conveying
>higher value is in conflict
>with building rapport. Making
yes, I agree that this can work.
by approaching, and with bodylanguage/tonality, you can convey a higher value in that you are a
good conversationalist.
for me, with my looks not really being there, I find that I still have difficulties PULLING with this,
on HB9+.. I can do it on HB8.5- with no problems though.
Most HB9+ girls that I meet in public gatherings have attitudes. However, LONE GIRLS or for
DAYTIME, I have pulled HB9+ with zero C&F or negs.
Still, for me at this point, I prefer just being the cocky badboy type, and then giving them rapport
after they've crawled all over me.
However, just because I do it ONE WAY doesn't mean that another way doesn't work. So I
acknowledge the virtue in what you're saying.
>nothing but statements early

>in the interaction, providing


>the majority of the value to
>the interaction in the
>beginning and speaking from
>the heart while you are doing
>it DOES convey value and DOES
>build rapport at the same
>time.
the statements aren't what convey the value, IMO.
it's the way that you deliver them.. still, this is probably what you meant.
I don't share your
>apparent belief in a distinct
>separation between what is
>RAPPORT and what is VALUE.
2 M.O.'s here are possible, in my opinion.
1) get rapport through statements, which conveys higher value by being a good conversationalist
and through the good things that will be conveyed throughout the conversation.. also the feeling
of trust that you will generate is something that girls can value.
2) As Rick H would say "break rapport".. do it in a way that evokes strong emotional reactions
until the girls freak and try to get rapport with you.. then get rapport (or SKIP it for PARTY
CHICKS who only want to FUCK)
>I guess I wouldn't go so far
>as to say it is absolutely NOT
>Juggler method but it bear in
>mind the ultimate goal of
>Juggler method is to rid
>yourself of all ATTATCHMENTS
>(ie. routines, canned
>material) and to rely more and
yeah I remember when we talked about this on the phone..
I really like this idea, because as you said it doesn't focus on DEPENDING on an OUTCOME..
for example, in the past, I'd run all my A-Crowd bit, or something like that.. Now 90% of the time
I'd get a great reaction..
but the other 10%, it would fall flat.. and this would throw me..
After talking to you, I realized that not being attached to OUTCOME of a
statement/routine/whatever is important to being FLUID.. I've posted alot to Wham about this in
his field reports, and its helped my game since we chatted..
now I don't think about it, and just move onto something else..
>more on yourself until you
>rely COMPLETELY on yourself.

this I kinda perceive as Mystery's "fool's mate" thing, where even though what he's saying is
TRUE, he's kind of spinning it in a way that he wants..
like, Mystery is RIGHT that its getting check-mate in ONE MOVE, so you can't really say that he's
being manipulative..
Juggler is RIGHT that you rely on YOURSELF..
But I think that both of them (both guys that I LIKE, btw) have spun statements that kinda try to
push you in a certain direction..
so "rely on yourself" is something that nobody would disagree with.. "don't use fool's mate" is
something that nobody would disagree with.. but IMO, they are taken OUT OF CONTEXT, in the
sense that while they are RIGHT, they are slogans that don't necessarily address the TOTALITY of
the debate.
using C&F, for example, IS relying on yourself.. going for a lone chick might be checking her in
one move, but you're no fool to do so.. etc etc..
I'm SURE that I probably do this as well, so its not a criticism so much as just an analysis..
As for the "relying on yourself", I don't see any difference between being COCKY to rely on
yourself, and just talking about things from your life.. I enjoy teasing girls.
To me, I ENJOY being cocky and getting the girls to crawl all over me, so for me I project a more
GENUINE image when I actually use negs and C&F..
>Try sharing your life
>experiences and observations
>of the world without having to
>make "routines" up about it
>and you will be closer to what
>Juggler method is.
From the first post in this thread, I understand Juggler-Method as developing a sort of charisma,
where you WILL direct the conversation in a particular way.
The DISTINCTION is that you don't use OTHER PEOPLE's material, and you use your own.
That's how I read the post, anyway, but it may have since changed. I've asked Papa, and he says
that I understand correctly, which is as of his workshop which was in October this year.
Hence the GF-Test, "life as a movie rating", and self-palm reading routines.
>Making up routines, openers or
>things to say and trying them
>out is fun and in my
>experience it was good for
>starting out but I just don't
>see it as something to be
>WALLOWED IN, I see it as
>something to move beyond.
>
I know that alot of guys talk about routines as something to "move past" or as a "crutch"..

to me, this seems to come from the fact that as you learn PU, you are first nervous, and thus rely
on canned material as a way to conduct a conversation while pushing through your nerves..
this makes sense to me, but I also point out an alternate view on this..
at this point, I have no nerves during pickup except maybe at the start of the day (when I'm tired
and not in state yet)
but routines are still great, because I can TIGHTEN them and IMPROVE them.. so I don't use
them as a CRUTCH, but as a METHOD.
REMEMBER though, that routines are PRIMARILY designed for GROUPS..
So because Juggler doesn't USE 'group theory', and prefers to approach the target, alot of this
doesn't even apply..
PERHAPS THEN the REAL divergence between MM and Juggler method is that Mystery engages
the group, while Juggler approaches the target directly..
Because for me, once I have a girl isolated (or just a lonewolf), I don't even need to talk almost AT
ALL..
I don't even need ANY of this stuff! :)
I can literally just walk up to girls and tease them for 1 minutes, grab them, kiss them, and say
"you're my new girlfriend" and then drag them off..
Again, this is because of the cocky-badboy thing, so girls will accept it.. all this other stuff is
UNNECESSARY for me..
BUT, if Juggler seriously CAN consistently walk directly up to a HB9+ girl in a club, and game her
effectively (so its not just a friendship but there is some sexual interest) then clearly Juggler he
has the SUPERIOR SKILLSET, because he has a skillset that allows him to BYPASS the stuff that
I have to do in order to pull from groups in public gatherings.

-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (18 of 79), Read 2054 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 08:34 AM
On 4/14/03 7:59:00 AM, TylerDurden wrote:
>I don't even need ANY of this
>stuff! :)
Well, nobody is trying to convince you that you DO need it that I can see. And even if they are (not
sure what prompted all this discussion exactly), you certainly don't have to INSIST to us that you
don't need it. I believe you! Do what you like that works for you!

>I can literally just walk up


>to girls and tease them for 1
>minutes, grab them, kiss them,
>and say "you're my new
>girlfriend" and then drag them
>off..
>
>Again, this is because of the
>cocky-badboy thing, so girls
>will accept it.. all this
>other stuff is UNNECESSARY for
>me..
OKAY!
>BUT, if Juggler seriously CAN
>consistently walk directly up
>to a HB9+ girl in a club, and
>game her effectively (so its
>not just a friendship but
>there is some sexual interest)
>then clearly Juggler he has
>the SUPERIOR SKILLSET
Okay, take what you THINK is good and multiply it by 500 million! JUGGLER IS THAT GOOD!
And he DELIVERS the goods!
Hahaha! Sorry, couldn't resist :-)
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (19 of 79), Read 2059 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 08:48 AM
On 4/14/03 8:34:00 AM, SexPDX wrote:
>On 4/14/03 7:59:00 AM, TylerDurden
>wrote:
>
>>I don't even need ANY of this
>>stuff! :)
>
>Well, nobody is trying to convince you
>that you DO need it that I can see. And
>even if they are (not sure what prompted
>all this discussion exactly), you
>certainly don't have to INSIST to us
>that you don't need it. I believe you!
>Do what you like that works for you!
yeah it must kinda seem weird how much I go into this shit..

its all just hobby-based.


I could PU chicks for a long time now, but I'm looking to improve my skillset as a hobby, so I'm
interested in all perspectives.. that's why I've brought this up.. no other reason than that.
btw my comments were in the context of GROUP THEORY.. have another look ;)
ack I really have to go eat breakfast now.. I've been on ASF for 2 hours..
-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (20 of 79), Read 1790 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 12:58 AM
>Okay, take what you THINK is good and
>multiply it by 500 million! JUGGLER IS
>THAT GOOD! And he DELIVERS the goods!
I probably wouldn't go that far. This may creat a false image of an unrealistic hero for the newbies
here...something we already have way to much on this board.
Just like everyone of us, Juggler has his off moments, he crashes and burns, there's times he's not
able to follow up after opening, he ejects when the interaction becomes hopeless.
He has great ideas, he is a great mentor, he is laid back, down to earth, and can easily initiate
conversation with all types of people.
But I wouldn't try to portrait him as some kind of seduction God, I don't think he sees himself that
way neither. Though he has some good stuffs to share, there's plenty for him to learn and improve
just like you and I ;)
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (21 of 79), Read 1758 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:37 AM

<ZenDragon> wrote in message


news:74660.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> >Okay, take what you THINK is good and
> >multiply it by 500 million! JUGGLER IS
> >THAT GOOD! And he DELIVERS the goods!
>

> I probably wouldn't go that far. This may creat a false image of an
> unrealistic hero for the newbies here...something we already have way to
much
> on this board.
I agree we do, that's what I was making fun of. Sorry if you didn't think
it was appropriate to joke about.
> Just like everyone of us, Juggler has his off moments, he crashes and
burns,
> there's times he's not able to follow up after opening, he ejects when the
> interaction becomes hopeless.
Good point, this is actually something else that Juggler has helped me to
become better at. Staying in until I KNOW the girl won't open. I used to
go in with an opener and not know what to do if my opener didn't get the
REACTION that I was looking for. When you are not attatched to a reaction,
you can just make a statement about something that you observe that might
just be something that you would think to yourself except you are expressing
it to her instead. Any reaction you get (or lack of a reaction) is fine.
You can do this again and again and again. And each time, whatever happens
is fine. Sometimes she opens after the first statement, sometimes after the
second or third, sometimes not at all. But either way is fine because it's
something you observed/thought/shared that you would have said to anyone and
you are happy to have expressed it. You don't think about what else you
could have said to have gotten a "reaction" because you are not attatched to
the reaction.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (22 of 79), Read 1346 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:$20 dallar GI? suckysucky@asia.com
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 04:14 AM
On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 07:19:00 -0400, TylerDurden wrote:
>Juggler method is to rid yourself of all
>ATTATCHMENTS (ie. routines, canned material) and to rely more and more on
>yourself until you rely COMPLETELY on yourself
Yeah, like, if you see Juggler on your path, kill him.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (23 of 79), Read 2046 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:37 AM
TylerDurden wrote:
> This may be counter-intuitive to you, but you want the conversation about
> YOU.

This is one aspect of what Juggler does, but his entire method, at least as
far as I have been able to determine from his archive, consists of several
aspects. There are a lot subjects he covered, but many of his posts focus
primarily on conversational skills. Juggler, to me, seems to be a very witty
and manipulative conversationalist. Now, I have casually used the word
"manipulation" in reference to his tactics before, but I don't consider that
to be a negative thing. It simply seems to me that he is very good at
controlling or manipulating the conversation to get what he wants, and,
quite frankly, this is a good skill to have in PU and in interpersonal
communication in general.
Juggler seems to have a very engaging style where he can create interesting
conversation out of thin air. And while he tells other people that they
should do the same, I think his style really reflects his particular skills
and is not something that everyone should try to imitate. Juggler uses his
ability to be interesting in a totally unique and disarming way to quickly
demonstrate value in a conversational setting. But since few people
could keep up their end of an even conversation with Juggler, he will
frequently gain a "conversational advantage" which he can then use to
quickly guide the conversation where he wants it to go.
Juggler has several tools or patterns that he uses to do this. A few of them
are making statements, hooks, the exchange frame, reverse EV, and forcing
IOIs. Making statements is probably his most discussed and well-known
tactic, and it is the one on which you reposted some material in this
thread. Juggler probably has at least a half-dozen posts of similar detail
and quality all on the subject of making statements. It's a decent idea, but
I think it needs to be seen in the context of his overall style. I don't
think that it is the core dynamic that constitutes his method.
As for the other tactics, here is a brief overview. A hook is a tactic
wherein he says something in order to elicit a certain response that will
allow him to talk about what he wants to discuss while making it look like
it was the other person's idea. The exchange frame is a way of establishing
that he expects people to give him something in order to get something in
return. He specifically does this with very minor things in order to make
the point that this is something that is very important to him. Reverse EV,
or getting her to elicit his values, is similar to the exchange frame in
that it constitutes a give-and-take wherein he requires her to adapt to his
values as he builds rapport. Forcing IOIs is also similar to the other
techniques in that it is a way of getting a chick to do what he wants her to
do, in this case giving him IOIs which will form the basis for an
extraction.
In addition to these conversational tactics, Juggler has also posted several
other strategic PU ideas, perhaps the most significant of which is the SOI.
While I haven't studied this group of strategies in as much detail as the
conversational tactics, I think many of them work around the principle of
using a bold move that comes right out and lets her know his intentions in a
very smooth and non-threatening way. Thus the SOI seems to be sort of the
model for this group.
The fundamental principle of SOI is to let the chick know what you want to
do in a way that forces her imagine it happening in her head and then decide
whether to accept or reject it. The possibility for rejection must be
there, and Juggler seems to prefer to quickly bring the issue to a head,

probably because he is adept at easily putting aside any objections.


Perhaps the key to his whole method is that he puts forward his
agenda in a way that makes other people not feel good about rejecting it.
I think it is good that Juggler's stuff is becoming more well-known on this
NG. His approach to PU seems to me to be less formal and more flexible than
some of the previous well-documented methods on ASF. Because of this, I
think his ideas have potential to help a lot of people learn many of the
basic skills of PU without having to memorize clumsy, contrived scripts like
our forefathers (of a couple of years ago, that is) had to do. Essentially,
I believe that Juggler's posts contain the seeds for many new insights into
the underlying structure of PU which could dramatically change the way we
approach the art on this NG. The difficult part, at this point, is to dig
through them and develop these ideas in a more structured and organized way.
This is, of course, an ongoing process that continues as more people study
and understand Juggler's material, and perhaps this thread will be a useful
step in that process.
By the way, I have a hand-selected group of several dozen posts that
constitute the meat of Juggler's archive loosely arranged by category. If
other people are seriously interested in looking at these in the context of
this thread or for other reasons, then some sort of general distribution
method might be arranged. Perhaps formhandle would even set something up on
the main server.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (24 of 79), Read 2037 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Proto protogoth@subgenius.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 07:54 AM
All in favour for a neat section of Juggler's post. I didnt know about the hook and the SOI, most of
time giving Neo-Rio praise for those. Maybe I am wrong.
One thing I forgot to add in my previous post:
About C&F. A lot of attention goes to C&F. For me C&F seems more of a condition sine qua none.
If you are not cocky, do you have HSE? Without HSE hard to PUA. If you are not funny, do you
have a sense of humour? Without a sense of humour hard to PUA. Basically C&F is the basic
stance which most often than not is good enough to get you laid as most guys are LSE and dont
have a sense of humour. The real question is given that you are/do C&F what else can you do to
enhance your game. So basic stance: C&F, then game plan (GWM, Juggler, MM, SS). I don't know
Juggler but I doubt he is not C&F.
Proto
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (25 of 79), Read 2035 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 08:10 AM

Softcontrol,
thanks for adding to the thread dude.. I see no reason not to add a Juggler thread above this one if
Formhandle doesn't object.. I'm also going to email Juggler to ask him to review this thread if he
has time, because its something that interests me.

-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (26 of 79), Read 2097 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 08:03 AM
adding more posts to my own thread, before I look at the feedback:
CRAIG'S TAKE ON ROUTINES:
Craig, the eliminidate guy, suggested this when we met.
FIRST: Routines HELP you, because you have no ability to conduct a conversation because of
your nerves. So with routines, at least you can say SOMETHING.
SECOND: Routines HURT you, because you've now learned to control your state, and you have
the ability to conduct a conversation. So the routines will hold back the good convo that you were
putting out there.
LAST: Routines go back to HELPING you, because you have now developed a strong
conversational skill, and you can ADD them to ENHANCE your conversational abilities.

I like his analysis of it. People may recall that I did PURE natural conversation and bodylanguage
for 8 straight months before ever using a routine.
So for me, perhaps I'm coming from a frame where conversational skills are ASSUMED.

-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (27 of 79), Read 1986 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 02:35 PM
Alright, I never took the Juggler workshop but the type of method is what I use.
Firstly, drop the whole seduction thing for a few weeks and just go around and SOCIALIZE with

people, everyone everywhere, become a genuine EXTROVERT. Ditch all the lines to open. When
people take notice of you in "their environment" for a split second that is when you should get
used to just talking to them. Talk about something, talk about NOTHING, just talk and talk, and
get relating to things with them. And try to use statements as best you can.
Get used to saying what comes off the top of your head to people. Care about your opener and
QUESTION it to yourself, she will question it too. BAD. Practice seeing things in the environment
and being able to improvise conversation off of them. Objects, colors, fabrics, anything. Become a
good conversationalist, it takes practice, but get to the point where you can relate anything to
anything.
Forget negs, they can easily go into a negative frame, stay positive, and if the other person wants
to talk about something negative, redirect the conversation to something positive or neutral even.
Try talking to her after a few minutes of chat like she's your MAMA, or your favorite cousin. Get
them on the same level as you going THAT route.
Also be as non threatening as possible on approaches, body language is key here. But also is
attitude. Ever wonder why some girls love to go to gay bars. It's because gay guys are SO non
threatening to them! Simple!
Once you start to get all this stuff down and practice it everywhere as much as you can. Then you
can focus on the game of it. And here's how you do that, whenever conversations reach a high
point you SOI! Wowwww, that's so complex. :D
But really if you're both talking and she says something funny which gets you both laughing, you
say something like, "you're funny, you make me laugh." "I like you." "You have such and
interesting sense of humor."
It's that simple. And after you get to a few high points with her, and want to close, say "this was a
great conversation, we should hang out sometime, I'd like that." Or something along those lines
and then close.
Once you get the opening and conversationalist part going effortlessly, the rest is making moves
on high points. And that's it. Get that down and it's all effortless. Then it's all become being social,
fun, GENUINE and putting your best foot forward. The people you interact with will see all these
qualities in you by simply reading in between the lines.
Hope that helps.
mmasters
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (28 of 79), Read 1857 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 09:54 PM
mmasters wrote:
> Alright, I never took the Juggler workshop but the type of method is what
>I use.
I'm not sure what this post has to with the thread in general, but I thought
it was a good post, so here are my comments.
> Firstly, drop the whole seduction thing for a few weeks and just go around
> and SOCIALIZE with people, everyone everywhere, become a genuine
> EXTROVERT. Ditch all the lines to open. When people take notice of you in

> "their environment" for a split second that is when you should get used to
> just talking to them. Talk about something, talk about NOTHING, just talk and
> talk, and get relating to things with them. And try to use statements as best
> you can.
I agree with this for guys who have no idea how to approach chicks. In fact,
I think this is far better for them than learning some routines and
approaching girls to specifically "sarge" them and run their routines. Guys
like that aren't going to be PUing these chicks anyway, except by sheer
luck, so they might as well be learning something they can use, like how to
just socialize and talk to people. This is the building-block skill of all
PU.
> Forget negs, they can easily go into a negative frame, stay positive, and
> if the other person wants to talk about something negative, redirect the
> conversation to something positive or neutral even.
IMO, negs are an advanced technique. Beginners don't even know what they
are, much less how and when to do them. You should only be using a neg if
you really know what you doing.
> Also be as non threatening as possible on approaches, body language is key
> here. But also is attitude. Ever wonder why some girls love to go to gay
> bars. It's because gay guys are SO non threatening to them! Simple!
Non-threatening is good, but there is a fine line between non-threatening
and passive or beta. You don't want to be an AFC pussy. You still want to be
bold and aggressive, but you want to do so in a non-threatening way.
It's not such an easy concept to explain.
> Once you start to get all this stuff down and practice it everywhere as
> much as you can. Then you can focus on the game of it. And here's how you do that,
> whenever conversations reach a high point you SOI! Wowwww, that's so
> complex. But really if you're both talking and she says something funny
> which gets you both laughing, you say something like, "you're
> funny, you make me laugh." "I like you." "You have such and interesting
> sense of humor." It's that simple. And after you get to a few high points
> with her, and want to close, say "this was a great conversation, we
> should hang out sometime, I'd like that." Or something along those lines
> and then close.
Those are pretty weak SOIs.
> Once you get the opening and conversationalist part going effortlessly,
> the rest is making moves on high points. And that's it. Get that down and it's
> all effortless. Then it's all become being social, fun, GENUINE and putting
> your best foot forward.
This is not exactly all there is to it. Your method is sort of like the
beginnings of a Juggler-style method, but his method goes far beyond what you
posted. Yes, he does go out and talk to people in a social, fun, and genuine
way, but he also does this while employing several conversational techniques
that allow him to direct and manipulate people into doing exactly what
he wants without appearing to be putting any effort into it. It doesn't look
like he is doing anything special beyond just being genuine, but in fact, he
is. The tactics are there, but most people can't see them.

TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit


Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (29 of 79), Read 1821 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 10:17 PM
softcontrol wrote:
>mmasters wrote:
>> Also be as non threatening as possible on approaches, body language is key
>> here. But also is attitude. Ever wonder why some girls love to go to gay
>> bars. It's because gay guys are SO non threatening to them! Simple!
>
>Non-threatening is good, but
>there is a fine line between
>non-threatening
>and passive or beta. You don't
>want to be an AFC pussy. You
>still want to be
>bold and aggressive, but you
>want to do so in a
>non-threatening way.
>It's not such an easy concept
>to explain.
Yes, your body language, voice tone and overall confidence is important here too.
>> Once you start to get all this stuff down and practice it everywhere as
>> much as you can. Then you can focus on the game of it. And here's how you do that,
>> whenever conversations reach a high point you SOI! Wowwww, that's so
>> complex. But really if you're both talking and she says something funny
>> which gets you both laughing, you say something like, "you're
>> funny, you make me laugh." "I like you." "You have such and interesting
>> sense of humor." It's that simple. And after you get to a few high points
>> with her, and want to close, say "this was a great conversation, we
>> should hang out sometime, I'd like that." Or something along those lines
>> and then close.
>
>Those are pretty weak SOIs.
Yes they are, but after having met somebody for 5-10 minutes do you really want to be sending
out strong SOIs yet?
>> Once you get the opening and conversationalist part going effortlessly,
>> the rest is making moves on high points. And that's it. Get that down and it's
>> all effortless. Then it's all become being social, fun, GENUINE and putting
>> your best foot forward.
>
>This is not exactly all there
>is to it. Your method is sort
>of like the
>beginnings of a Juggler-style
>method, but his method goes
>far beyond what you
>posted. Yes, he does go out

>and talk to people in a


>social, fun, and genuine
>way, but he also does this
>while employing several
>conversational techniques
>that allow him to direct and
>manipulate people into doing
>exactly what
>he wants without appearing to
>be putting any effort into it.
>It doesn't look
>like he is doing anything
>special beyond just being
>genuine, but in fact, he
>is. The tactics are there, but
>most people can't see them.
There's more than that of course, but I believe that's the bottom line of it.
mmasters
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:SOIs: Juggler reposts (30 of 79), Read 1813 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 11:34 PM
mmasters wrote:
>>Those are pretty weak SOIs.
>
> Yes they are, but after having met somebody for 5-10 minutes do you really
want
> to be sending out strong SOIs yet?
Since it will take some time to get all of my Juggler stuff up somewhere
publically, I will repost his two most important SOI posts below. You should
find your answers there.
Post #1
The great thing about SOIs is that they can put you in a frame where the
girl
and you are talking about the two of you having sex. She can not do this
without imagining having sex with you.
A good SOI is really a sensually painted picture of the two of you doing
pleasurable physical things to each other. Work on making the picture
enticing.
Even if she turns the SOI down, she will still have to vision what you are
talking about. That in and of itself is a good thing.
An SOI does show value. It says you can talk about sex candidly. Thus you
must
be a man who seduces many women. Ironically, showing an ability to candidly
and

smoothly SOI can make a girl more likely to chase you.


You can SOI without chasing her. The first SOI I usually use is very light
and
is half SOI and half hoop for her to jump through. For instance, "If I were
to
kiss you, on a scale from 1-10 how would I rate your kiss?"
SOIs can be very valuable in getting her to bed quickly. Figure out how to
incorporate SOI into your game and you will notice a huge improvement in
getting girls into bed fast.
Also, keep in mind an SOI should only be used after you have attracted the
girl. So in a sense, she is SOIing you already.
You can also reverse SOI: "I am not the kind of guy who would just take a
woman
home the first night I met her and give her a night of pleasure and
continuous
orgasms. I'm not that easy. Well, at least you have to buy me a couple of
drinks first."
The best way to SOI is just get into talking about kissing and then turn up
the
heat from there.
Many girls will reject an SOI. They have to because they do not want to come
across as sluts. The key here is to never give them the chance to do that
and/or not take their rejection seriously. If you have any hint that she may
reject you can just keep going right past the SOI: "I have a bottle of
whipped
creame in the frig. You should come home with me and help me finish it off.
Hey
doesn't that girl over there look like Julia Roberts?"
Or you can do a take away: "Let's go back to my place and massage lotion
into
each other's skin." (This is where you watch her reaction. If she is going
to
reject the SOI you do a take away.) "No wait. You are pretty tall. Forget
it. I
don't have enough for you."
So you see, she has to picture the SOI in her mind, even though you pulled
it
away.
And if you give her the chance to reject an SOI, and she does, then just
laugh.
This is good because it shows that you will not take her rejection of your
advances seriously. This works because she knows she has to shoot down the
SOI
so she doesn't look like a slut. But she really wants to go home with you or
may later after you make her really horny with more SOIs. She just needs to
get
her protest on the record but does not want you to actually stop under this
'technical rejection'. When you laugh, it is like a wink - shows that you

understand her rejection has to be there for the record. Make sense?
Many guys seem to have trouble using SOIs because they feel incongruent with
themselves. Using an SOI seems like introducing a huge state change. But
when a
guy is unwilling to do this the interaction is probably messed up already.
He
was probably not bold at the approach. To really make an impact on a girl
and
get her wanting you deeply that night you have to demonstrate that you are a
man who will bodly make state changes. This is real confidence. You need to
show from beginning to end that you have what it takes to introduce state
changes. And show that once you move her to a new state, you can keep her
there
and make it enjoyable. Thus she understands that you can get her into bed (a
state change) resolutely and smoothly and it will be a pleasurable
experience you have established a good track record.
Guys get repore with a girl and use good material and then they wonder why
they
can't close the deal and get the girl into bed. This is usually because they
have been unwilling from the very start to make dramatic state changes. That
is
why you should never look for ways to ease into an approach with a girl. A
gimmick or trick to get a girl talking with you may indeed start a long
conversation but it will hurt you when trying to close the deal. You need to
be
bold from beginning to end and make many dramatic state changes throughout.
You
sort of have to be congruently incongruent. Then the SOI is in character.
Then
the SOI will be eventually accepted.
That brings me to another point. All it takes for a girl to accept an SOI is
not to reject it. She is very unlikely to say, "Yes, let's go do that". That
is
one reason why SOIs should rarely be phrased as questions. If you do this
you
are pretty much negating any chance for her to accept the SOI. Instead make
statements: "We should go back to my house and watch the cat do backflips
while
you give me a massage." That's it. If she says nothing then you are in. You
should presume she is coming home with you.
If she doesn't accept an SOI you should return to chatting about whatever,
then
after a minute SOI again. Keep this pattern up and if you make your SOIs
creatively seductive enough and make it clear you are want to give her
pleasure
then she will get real horny and eventually accept one.
One other thing, after she accepts the SOI and you take her home you may
have
to repeatedly SOI until you are actually having sex with her.
Also, you may find it helpful to agree when she tells you that she is not

the
type of girl to sleep with someone the night she met him. Keep nodding on
this
account. This is another 'on record rejection' which saves her face while
you
are seducing body 'off record'. Never fight her rejections of an SOI. Just
consider them for book keeping sake only.
Post #2
At some point you are going to have to SOI. If you try to take her clothes
off,
that is an SOI. You may be trying to avoid all risk until the last moment.
I'm
sure you have had success with setting the mood, kinoing the girls and then
building it up into sex. That can work. But your life will get much easier
if
you can figure out how to incorporate SOI into your game.
Remember that SOIs are delivered ONLY after she is demonstrating that she is
interested. Or, if you were using my system, after you had forced IOIs.
The difference between an SOI and a close is that the SOI talks about what
you
are going to do with her. The close is simply the accounting details of
making
it happen - numbers or driving situations, etc. The close should be almost
an
after thought.
For a better understanding of an SOI let's look at the approach. You can
call
the approach a type of SOI. The mere fact that you are coming to talk to her
is
letting her know you are interested. That is why you can not sneak in. Guys
continually come up with gimmicks to try to get in risk-free. Problem is, a
hot
girl has been hit on since she was thirteen. She can see this coming a mile
away. She may or may not shoot such a guy down, she may even talk with him
for
awhile but she will not respond to him like she does a confident guy who
comes
in unafraid of a risk. Girls don't understand a lot about what really works
on
them but they are right when they say they want a bold confident man.
Demonstrate this to her. And ironically, if you come in arrogantly exposed
to
fire you will be less likely to be shot.
Well an SOI works similarly. You demonstrate you are unafraid to tell her
straight out what you can do for her sexually. Most guys don't do that. They
are timid. They try to sneak her into bed. They hope that repore or kino
will
be enough. Well some times it is, but many times it is not - you have to put
the picture in her mind.
You have to get over the avoidance of risk. Instead court risk. She needs to
see that you can work around her anti-slut protocol. She WANTS to have sex

with
you.
You feel that her saying NO is a bad precedent. I understand where you are
coming from. But remember that the mind can not hold a negative thought. If
I
tell you to not imagine a Volkswagon beetle, you can not help but imagine a
funny bug looking car. As far as her imagination, her NO is not anywhere
near
as powerful as your suggestive SOI.
Also, you are presuming that you are creating a NO. The fact is that the NO
is
there right from the beginning. You just can't see it. That is where many
guys
get in trouble. They have done a good job of attracting her. Now they hope
the
work is over and try to extract her. But they never did what was neccesary
to
find out if they had attracted her enough.
But if you are still wanting to avoid NOs then do the other things I
suggested
and don't give her the chance by either doing a take away or talking past
the
objection
A proper SOI does three things:
1. It gets her thinking about sex with you.
2. It let's her see that you are bold and candid enough to take her all the
way.
3. It tells you if you have done a good enough job in the attraction phase
of
your seduction.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:SOIs: Juggler reposts (31 of 79), Read 1806 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 12:30 AM
Softcontrol:
As BL suggested a light SOI with sexual state is pretty damn powerful. I think new guys would be
better to go out and do light SOIs on conversational highs and get used to doing them at the right
time, then once they master that they will have a feel for using the strong SOIs better later on.
Also, shit you could use both, get her agreeing on the light ones then go for the heavy ones later getting a yes pattern formation underlying your SOIing of her.
mmasters
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (32 of 79), Read 1821 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:BLscorpZ kebnab@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 11:17 PM
> > whenever conversations reach a high point you SOI! Wowwww, that's so
> > complex. But really if you're both talking and she says something funny
> > which gets you both laughing, you say something like, "you're
> > funny, you make me laugh." "I like you." "You have such and interesting
> > sense of humor." It's that simple. And after you get to a few high
points
> > with her, and want to close, say "this was a great conversation, we
> > should hang out sometime, I'd like that." Or something along those lines
> > and then close.
>
> Those are pretty weak SOIs.
not the "I like you" SOI. combine this with sexual state, its more powerful
than a nuclear bomb.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (33 of 79), Read 1794 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 01:17 AM
I agree with BL that softcontrol is wrong that "I like you" is a weak SOI. It's very powerful and it
has helped to get me laid several times now.
It depends on your delivery. You have to do it at a HIGH-POINT in the interaction. For example,
laughter or enthusiastically agreeing on some point that was made or agreement about liking
something or another kind of demonstration of similarity in expression. Something that you
GENUINELY like. This way it becomes real to say it.
The truth is that not many guys are confident enough to comfortably tell a woman they like her in
a way that is appropriate.
If you say "I like you" at some lull in the conversation, then yes it is weak and even comes across
creepy depending on the situation.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (34 of 79), Read 1791 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 01:32 AM
<SexPDX> wrote in message news:74663.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> I agree with BL that softcontrol is wrong that "I like you" is a weak SOI.
> It's very powerful and it has helped to get me laid several times now.

Well, you might want to ask Juggler about it then. According to what he has
posted here, I think he would agree with me.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (35 of 79), Read 1781 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 02:33 AM

<softcontrol> wrote in message


news:74666.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> <SexPDX> wrote in message news:74663.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> > I agree with BL that softcontrol is wrong that "I like you" is a weak
SOI.
> > It's very powerful and it has helped to get me laid several times now.
>
> Well, you might want to ask Juggler about it then. According to what he
has
> posted here, I think he would agree with me.
I tend to doubt he would agree with you based on the fact that he met the
girl I PU'd at the airport and !closed who I used the "I like you" SOI on
right after I used it and he told me it was good that I did that because it
let her feel comfortable in believing I really did like her and that I
wasn't going to shoot her down if she made advances or reciprocated advances
of mine.
In any case, I am sure he will show up in this thread at some point and he
will be able to correct me if I have mischaracterized something.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (36 of 79), Read 1781 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 02:48 AM
<SexPDX> wrote in message news:74685.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> I tend to doubt he would agree with you based on the fact that he met the
> girl I PU'd at the airport and !closed who I used the "I like you" SOI on
> right after I used it and he told me it was good that I did that because
it
> let her feel comfortable in believing I really did like her and that I
> wasn't going to shoot her down if she made advances or reciprocated
advances
> of mine.
So he said it was good. That still doesn't make it an SOI. A SOI, according
to Juggler, does three things:
1. It gets her thinking about sex with you.
2. It let's her see that you are bold and candid enough to take her all the

way.
3. It tells you if you have done a good enough job in the attraction phase
of your seduction.
This is from one of the articles I reposted. "I like you" certainly does not
do either of the first two and probably doesn't do the third either.
Whatever it is, it is not an SOI.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (37 of 79), Read 1781 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:09 AM

<softcontrol> wrote in message


news:74687.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> <SexPDX> wrote in message news:74685.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> > I tend to doubt he would agree with you based on the fact that he met
the
> > girl I PU'd at the airport and !closed who I used the "I like you" SOI
on
> > right after I used it and he told me it was good that I did that because
> it
> > let her feel comfortable in believing I really did like her and that I
> > wasn't going to shoot her down if she made advances or reciprocated
> advances
> > of mine.
>
> So he said it was good. That still doesn't make it an SOI.
He called it that in the workshop which is why I am calling it that here.
> A SOI, according
> to Juggler, does three things:
>
> 1. It gets her thinking about sex with you.
I have known all the girls were into me who I have used this on at the time
I delivered it. If she IS into you and you tell her YOU like HER then she
WILL be thinking of sex with you because it becomes a much more real
possibility to her once she knows you like her.
> 2. It let's her see that you are bold and candid enough to take her all
the
> way.
Like I said, most guys are not comfortable telling a girl they like her and
deliver it well and with confidence and sincerity. It is a bold move the
way I see it.
> 3. It tells you if you have done a good enough job in the attraction phase
> of your seduction.
In my experience so far with this particular SOI (if we are going to call it

that), I was pretty sure I was doing a good job before I used it. So I will
leave this one to Juggler to explain.
> Whatever it is, it is not an SOI.
I don't see the need for the rigid semantics regarding what is or is not an
SOI. I think it's close enough and apparently so does Juggler since he does
call it that. Beyond that, I know it works.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (38 of 79), Read 1781 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:35 AM
<SexPDX> wrote in message news:74690.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> He called it that in the workshop which is why I am calling it that here.
OK, maybe I am wrong. While your point-by-point explanation made some sense,
it still didn't really convince me that this line is a strong SOI according
the standards he set forth. If Juggler considers it be one, I hope that he
will explain why in more detail.
> I don't see the need for the rigid semantics regarding what is or is not
an
> SOI. I think it's close enough and apparently so does Juggler since he
does
> call it that. Beyond that, I know it works.
As I implied in my first post in this thread, I am still investigating this
aspect of Juggler's method, so I find it useful to know exactly how he
defines the terms he is using. Once I have broken it down and I understand
how and why it works, terminology obviously won't matter so much.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (39 of 79), Read 1783 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:45 AM

<softcontrol> wrote in message


news:74697.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> <SexPDX> wrote in message news:74690.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> > He called it that in the workshop which is why I am calling it that
here.
>
> OK, maybe I am wrong. While your point-by-point explanation made some
sense,
> it still didn't really convince me that this line is a strong SOI
according
> the standards he set forth.

Actually, I had another thought about this and that may be that I was
confusing what you called a "weak SOI" with what Juggler refers to as "weak"
with regards to other things. He tends to call something "weak" or say it
"weakens" if it is asking for or seeking the other person's approval and
doesn't PROVIDE value but ASKS for it. This is why the method stresses
making statements. Statements PROVIDE value (strengthen), questions ASK for
it (weaken). So even if it turns out it's not an "SOI" exactly, saying "I
like you" (if delivered with good timing) is not something Juggler would
call "weak".
This further demonstrates that our quibble here is mostly about semantics.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (40 of 79), Read 1741 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 07:08 AM
SexPDX wrote:
> Actually, I had another thought about this and that may be that I was
> confusing what you called a "weak SOI" with what Juggler refers to as
"weak"
...
> So even if it turns out it's not an "SOI" exactly, saying "I
> like you" (if delivered with good timing) is not something Juggler would
> call "weak".
OK, that's fair. I didn't mean to say that the statement itself was weak or
ineffective, just that it is not a very good example of an SOI. I think it's
useful to be clear about what an SOI is and is not just as it is important to be
clear about what a neg is an is not. It helps everyone for people to
accurately describe what technique they are using, otherwise we end
up with several posts back and forth to clear up the confusion. :)
I don't really know how to classify the "I like you" line. While it's not
an SOI, I am not sure what it is exactly.
As to SOIs, one of my personal favorites is one that Tunnces once posted. He
would casually mention to chicks at a certain point in the PU that they are
going to have sex. That's an SOI. The archive link is:
http://www.fastseduction.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?
action=retrieve&grp=4&mn=103960101748828
That post also talks about how to calibrate the chick's reaction to the SOI,
which is important. I think David X uses essentially the same line, but you
will have to look that one up yourself. Juggler's posted examples of SOIs
are somewhat less blunt and more expressive, but they are no less explicit.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (41 of 79), Read 1437 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com

Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 08:09 PM


I wrote:
> I think David X also uses
> essentially the same line, but you will have to look that one up yourself.
Actually, I just stumbled onto it, so here it is. This is from formhandle's
post on Cliff's list, http://www.fastseduction.com/cliff/2001-06-02a.shtml
"- If a chick resists your come-ons or innuendo, you don't want to spend any
more effort on her because she's not going to fuck you without a lot of
work.
For example, if she asks "Where are we going tonight?", David says "To bed,
but I'm kind of hungry right now so we're going to get a bite to eat first."
If she gets offended, drop her before taking her to eat because it's clear
she isn't thinking about fucking you."
OK, so it's not exactly the same line that Tunnces uses, but is a clear SOI
nonetheless. The principle is the same.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (42 of 79), Read 1835 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 10:04 PM
I forgot to address a few points in my former post.
1) Cocky / funny
2) Groups
1) I believe that cocky funny can and should be used if it's something you're good with or
something that comes natural for you. I naturally do it a little bit but not a lot, it's not the most
natural for me, perhaps it has to do with the fact I'm an only child.
In this part of my post:
>>> Try talking to her after a few minutes of chat like she's your MAMA, or your favorite cousin.
[Use that to] Get them on the same level as you <<<
The door is open for cocky funny if that's something you naturally do with the people you're close
with. So I'm not sure what Juggler's take is on that, but that is my take.
2) Concerning groups, Juggler has his own group theory of sorts. It's not what mystery does.
Juggler puts his attention on specific people rather than the whole group. (tell me if I'm wrong
here Juggler, but this is my understanding) And he engages a person drifting on the outside of the
group, then moves to other people in the group if he desires to. That's the basic idea of what he's
doing off the top of my head but I'm sure I'm missing some of his thoughts.
mmasters
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (43 of 79), Read 1811 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:dvs
Date:Monday, April 14, 2003 11:15 PM
Regarding juggler and groups. I recall him saying on the topic of groups that often a girl's real
group and perceived group is different. Only by directly engaging the target initially, will you
discover who the real potential obstacles are. That guy you thought was part of her group, is often
just some AFC who is trying to leech off her for social proof and will eject when a real alpha male
engages her.
I've being surpised when I have approached the target directly and other people in her group have
ejected themselves (guys and girls). If you start off by approaching the group as a whole, you
might be keeping obstacles there who would've otherwised ejected to allow their friend to meet
the outgoing confident looking guy who approached her.
Hopefully juggler will jump in this thread and straighten shit out.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (44 of 79), Read 1775 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 02:08 AM
This is great. Thanks TD for the material.
IMO Juggler method seems to be the most natural method to those PUAs who already have highly
developed conversational skills. Having read the posts above I've realised I probably engage in a
game that is pretty close to Jugglers (happy to accept a correction from any of the PUAs who have
seen Juggler and myself) in that I usually steer the convo to myself/mutual interests (in a nonAFC way) pretty quickly.
I also find myself increasingly going for a relatively unambiguous SOI early in the sarge.
Yourno1admirer and I were working a mixed 5 set recently with an HB8.5 target and I G-closed
the target by making an SOI within about two minutes of the opener, based on noticing her
appeal. This approach I am finding increasingly effective as my number of successful approaches
increases, so I figure it is the conversational confidence, or ability to manipulate and hook
conversational partners into your own communicative direction, that forms the basis of the
success of this approach.
Now, I come from a background of commencing my PU study with basic knowledge of SS,
followed up with the NG. I would be interested in knowing what developmental pathways other
PUAs who profess the juggler method have followed.
Peace,
HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (45 of 79), Read 1774 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:afcpua johnlamont@tennis.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:09 AM

juggler doesnt like c&f?


most of what juggler method stands for seems good. one thing i disagree COMPLETELY with is a
few months ago he told us to delete ALL materials we have on ALPHA. that was BS. knowledge
about being alpha is mandatory to PUA lifestyle.
can someone use DYD AND Juggler Method? because MM doesnt seem congruent with me & SS
sucks shit for me because i believe it is BETA. the NEW GWM method has some good insights,
but it has limited application. i also find MM is limited to clubs or 3 sets+ in daytime PU (which
are rare.)
so Mrsex4uNYC could only get away with extensive EVing because he was a NATURAL? anyway, i
think he's good more for his attitudes than for his actual "techniques & methods"

" the game don't wait but im so tight i can wait for the game. "
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (46 of 79), Read 1778 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 03:28 AM

afcpua wrote:
> juggler doesnt like c&f?
He thinks it's fine as long as the girl is playing along. Personally, I
hardly use it at all.
> most of what juggler method stands for seems good. one thing i disagree
> COMPLETELY with is a few months ago he told us to delete ALL materials we
have
> on ALPHA. that was BS. knowledge about being alpha is mandatory to PUA
> lifestyle.
afcpua, you SO crack me up with his whole "mandatory to PUA lifestlye" bit.
Haha!
Most ASF people are way too into the whole "alpha" thing. IMO, it's a
useful frame for some styles and for some sitautions but it's not absolutely
necessary. I no longer think about what is or is not "alpha".
I was too for a long time mostly because ASF strongly encouraged it so I got
used to it while I was a beginner. Also, I have natural friends who are
very alpha in their PU styles and social behavior so I picked up a lot of
speaking and body language habits from them without even trying to. All of
which are habits I have dropped since my workshop with Juggler and I find it
a lot better because people are a lot less threatened by me.
> can someone use DYD AND Juggler Method? because MM doesnt seem congruent
with

> me & SS sucks shit for me because i believe it is BETA. the NEW GWM method
has
> some good insights, but it has limited application. i also find MM is
limited
> to clubs or 3 sets+ in daytime PU (which are rare.)
I think it's less important what METHOD you are using and more that you just
get out there and do SOMETHING. All the methods you mention above will give
you at least SOME results if you really commit yourself to it and don't talk
yourself out of it through analysis.
> so Mrsex4uNYC could only get away with extensive EVing because he was a
> NATURAL? anyway, i think he's good more for his attitudes than for his
actual
> "techniques & methods"
That's the case with most naturals. I know them IRL and they TALK like
MrSex4uNYC sounds in his posts. It's actually kind of funny.
afcpua, I think you should try to make some friends who are natural PUA's.
I think that would be great for your game and it would help you be less
analytical about this subject.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (47 of 79), Read 1657 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 10:06 AM
SexPDX You're turning into Juggler's official spokes person...lol He still hasn't posted the
structure of conversation thing he promised all of us workshop guys, can you go bug him about
it ;)
man I don't care how lazy he is, it's no excuse, a promise is a promise!
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (48 of 79), Read 1462 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Hive a255970@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 06:16 PM
ZD,
Lighten up capitol G.
Hive

On 4/15/03 10:06:00 AM, ZenDragon wrote:


>...
>man I don't care how lazy he
>is, it's no excuse, a promise
>is a promise!
>
>ZD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (49 of 79), Read 1782 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:gunwitch gunwitch187@charter.net
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 05:06 AM
On 4/15/03 3:09:00 AM, afcpua wrote:
The NEW
>GWM method has some good
>insights, but it has limited
>application.
If it aint something i posted or the gunwitch method formhandle hosts i didnt write it, the one a
auseduction is legitimate as well. Several guys here have invite only groups that have it up and
may have altered it.
If you are referring to my recent verbal methods, its just a small piece of what i do, and isnt really
a NEW gunwitch method. There is no NEW gunwitch method.

"make the ho say no"


TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (50 of 79), Read 1395 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Cassius cassiusforever@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 08:01 PM
Just an observation
> Craig, the eliminidate guy, suggested this when we met.
>
> FIRST: Routines HELP you, ...
1
>
> SECOND: Routines HURT you, ...
0
> LAST: Routines go back to HELPING you, ...

1
Funny how this structure gets into everything, and when used is a
powerful way of making people see things your way
Cassius
"learn something new every day"
>
>
> I like his analysis of it. People may recall that I did PURE natural
> conversation and bodylanguage for 8 straight months before ever using a
> routine.
>
> So for me, perhaps I'm coming from a frame where conversational skills are
> ASSUMED.
>
>
>
> -TD
>
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (51 of 79), Read 1446 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:TylerDurden tylerdurden9982@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 07:32 PM
wowzerzzzz... nice thread.. I'll check it over later.

-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (52 of 79), Read 1425 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:Manifestis3 bjmin3@yahoo.com
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2003 08:59 PM
i've READ a lot of juggler method but haven't SEEN it in action...there are so many but what is the
ESSENCE of Juggler Method? I've heard that it is generating rapport...but how could u get lays
with rapport? Does he phase shift into sexual phase or anything like that? or is it just talking and
chatting...
i understand cocky/funny...ss, gunwitch, etc...but what makes Juggler's method work? What's it
power? I know he's coming out with a book...anyone know when Juggler is going to come out with
his new book?
manifestis3

"live your reality..."


TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (53 of 79), Read 1405 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:InnerCalm
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 01:00 AM
On 4/15/03 8:59:00 PM, Manifestis3 wrote:
>i've READ a lot of juggler
>method but haven't SEEN it in
>action...there are so many but
>what is the ESSENCE of Juggler
>Method? I've heard that it is
>generating rapport...but how
>could u get lays with rapport?
>Does he phase shift into
>sexual phase or anything like
>that? or is it just talking
>and chatting...
>
>i understand cocky/funny...ss,
>gunwitch, etc...but what makes
>Juggler's method work? What's
>it power? I know he's coming
>out with a book...anyone know
>when Juggler is going to come
>out with his new book?
>
>
>manifestis3
>
>"live your reality..."
I'm sure we'll be the first to know.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Discussion topic: Juggler method (54 of 79), Read 1395 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 02:52 AM
I just wanted to be the 50th post. yay!
Now where's Juggler at. :)
mmasters
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Juggler Method Group Theory (55 of 79), Read 1388 times

Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 05:10 AM
Date Posted: 2001/12/06 01:56:00 AM EST
Author: juggler <unknown email address>
Subject: Group
To understand the group approach you need to first understand something
about
regular, blind, never spoke to her, she has not winked at you approaches.
Then
you can scale up from there.
Many guys make the consistent mistake of believing an approach should allow
the
beggining of a fifty-fifty conversation.
But most girls, experiencing a stranger, are not going to provide anywhere
near
50%. More like 10%. She'll answer questions with lines like "fine" or "It's
a
girl's night out" - useless comments like that.
You have to get her warmed up before she will give back more substance. She
has
to get used to the idea of you. This period can take a few minutes.
Meanwhile,
you have to keep things going. Most guys stall. They are just plain, not
used
to doing this type of work. It's akin to being a on stage by yourself. it
may
look like you are with someone but you are in fact all alone. Most guys get
freaked, don't have material, lack confidence or whatever - they can not do
it.
it is not something that happens in their daily life.
Develop material which can stand alone or develop some routines which have
the
illusion of needing support but in fact stand alone - very powerful. I'll
explain more detail on that later.
To return to the subject of groups. You have all of these challenges only
magnified. Suddenly you have 2 or 5 or 10 people from which you have to keep
attention. And the percentage dynamic is still in effect. So if
you work a set of three the ratio is now 270%-30%. Seems impossible to
provide
270%
You are just one man. Work it. Get as close as possible.
Be big.
Commit all the way. Anything less than 100% will get you killed.
Okay, not really killed. Just humiliated in front of a group, which for some
people is worse than death.

Use sweeping gestures.


Slow down.
Use routines which allow illusionary input.
Do not expect help from the group or a wing. You are surrounded by people,
but
you effectively are all alone.
But you will win them over with your humor and charm. Be prepared to make
many
new friends. Buy a bigger calender. Be ready to one on one the group's
beautiful women. You will succeed.
Once you are in with the group you will be returned to the 90-10% scenario
again when you one-one the groups cute girl. Sheeesh...more work... but you
are
in - in baby!
After you turn around a few skepticle groups into liking you it will give
you
great confidence and understanding. You may arrive at a new level of
consciousness.
Of course there is much more to working groups than this. If this topic
continues I will post more.
-Juggler
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Juggler Method Group Theory (56 of 79), Read 1322 times


Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:16 PM
SexPDX, what you posted was Juggler's group theory. It's an interesting theory, but what does it
have to do with the topic of this thread?
I think the bros wants to know how one can go from an approach to a fuck just by simply having
interesting conversations without any planned routines nor transitions. Maybe it's best to let
Juggler explain this himself. You've already said too much in his behave. If he doesn't care to
defend his own method. There is no use for any of us to do it for him.
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (57 of 79), Read 1296 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Thursday, April 17, 2003 02:18 AM

ZenDragon wrote:
> I think the bros wants to know how one can go from an approach to a fuck
> just by simply having interesting conversations without any planned
> routines nor transitions. Maybe it's best to let Juggler explain
> this himself. You've already said too much in his behave. If he
> doesn't care to defend his own method. There is no use for any of us to
> do it for him.
ZD, I don't think it's a question of Juggler defending his method since
nobody is attacking it. TD wanted to discuss it, presumably, to learn more
about it, and I think that is an admirable goal since Juggler's method is
still not that well understood on this NG. Sure, it would be nice if Juggler
himself would join in and help us out, but the archive is there. I think
that, particularly in lieu of this book he keeps promising, it is our
responsibility to investigate and study his method for ourselves, and I
think that's what several of us are doing.
As to the question of how to go from an approach to a lay with just
interesting conversation, I sometimes forget that a lot of guys here are not
and have never personally known an interesting conversationalist. These guys
probably have little idea just how controlling someone like that can be. If
you can be interesting, people will let you be in control, and this is your
fundamental goal in PU. Ultimately, you don't want to control the conversation
as much as the woman's behavior, but many of the ASF methods start with
control of the conversation as a way of getting to this goal.
Routines, in fact, attempt to do this in a similar way to how Juggler
does it, by making you appear to be interesting. The problem, however,
is that a routine will only work if the chick (or group of chicks) actually
finds your particular delivery of the routine to be interesting. If not,
they will not give you control of the conversation unless they are desperate
or you have something else up your sleeve which is very strong. While, for
some guys in some situations with some chicks, routines will work, IME, for
the best quality chicks, unless someone has the delivery, social proof, and
other toolkit of a guy like Mystery, routines alone are not going to cut it.
Juggler's method includes several tactics designed to maintain control of
the conversation in a much more flexible and spontaneous way. His
conversational toolkit consists of primarily two types of things. The first
are ways of being interesting and the second are ways of controlling the
conversation in a way that specifically will lead it to culminate in sex.
Both of these things together, IMO, constitute his method. And typically, he
will try to combine both aspects in a single technique. This is what makes
his style so expressive. But other than style, I don't think that most of
the actual methods Juggler uses are that different from the ones other
people on ASF use.
Things like push-pull (a.k.a. 101), kino, SOI, rapport, and others
keep popping up everywhere. Personally, I think that if people
understand these kinds of things and know the underlying structure of
seduction, then style doesn't matter. That's also why I believe that people
should, at some point as they are learning this stuff, start developing
their own personal style rather than always copying someone else's. I still
think it is important to study and understand other people's methods since
one can gain insights about the structure of seduction by doing so, but
ultimately, I think, the end goal is for everyone to be able to express
his own personal style in his PUs.

TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit


Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (58 of 79), Read 1286 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:SexPDX alphasmilodon@hotmail.com
Date:Thursday, April 17, 2003 04:59 AM
<ZenDragon> wrote in message
news:75038.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com...
> SexPDX, what you posted was Juggler's group theory. It's an interesting
> theory, but what does it have to do with the topic of this thread?
Re-read the subject line of the thread: JUGGLER METHOD.
Also, note that many of the replies to the thread mention the topic of
groups.
> I think the bros wants to know how one can go from an approach to a fuck
just
> by simply having interesting conversations without any planned routines
nor
> transitions.
I think it's been expressed very well in recent posts by myself and others.
In THIS thread we have talked about SOI's. In my workshop post I included a
lot of information about the conversational structure (statements,
threading, high-points, timing, etc), SOI's, body language. The only things
I think of right now that I DON'T think have been discussed enough are
disclosure of relationships (which BL covered in his post I believe) and
amplification (which I personally find hard to explain in text). What would
you like to talk about that you feel has not been covered adequately?
> Maybe it's best to let Juggler explain this himself. You've
> already said too much in his behave.
I can understand that it might seem that way to you but I am not just
parroting Juggler here (other than my repost of the groups material which I
thought was relevant to the discussion). The method is getting me closes,
and I am therefore perfectly confident in expressing my views on it EVEN IF
Juggler doesn't do it himself in this particular thread (which he is free to
do or not do as he pleases). As far as I am concerned, anything that gets
me laid I have carte blanche to post about on ASF if I so choose.
-PDX
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (59 of 79), Read 1275 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Thursday, April 17, 2003 09:53 AM
>What would
>you like to talk about that you feel has
>not been covered adequately?

All the methods you mentioned are great for midgame. I've done them, and they work.
With street approaches, if you open with just a random opener, and try to initiate a conversation
with statements, in my experience, the HB will not even give you a chance to continue. For
example, in the context of sarging at a women's clothing store, or girls walking by at the mall, the
HB will maybe give you a one quick response then walk away from you. I've done hundreds of
sarging doing this since the workshop at all types of contexts. With stationary targets, it a good
way to get in and stay in if you're smooth enough. With moving targets, it almost never works.
And it's not just me, I've seen it happen to Juggler as well with my own 2 eyes.
>As far as
>I am concerned, anything that gets
>me laid I have carte blanche to post
>about on ASF if I so choose.
I'm not knocking on your post. I know you have game.
It just your posts aren't context specific. And it paints a rosy picture which isn't true, "as long as
you you do statements, SOIs, amplification, ...blah, blah, blah...everything will work itself out"
Which is the case with most bros who post here. You may have gotten laid with what you learned
from Juggler with a women waiting for a ride outside an airport, or a girl sitting by the bar looking
to talk to interesting guys. But there are all types of sarging situations out there, and until you get
out there on the field to do them, you won't realize where the sticking points are with this method.
I've done hundreds of approaches with PURE Juggler Method in just about every context you can
think of, and I know where the problems are. And it always either in the beginning where you just
can't get the HB want to stay to continue interacting with you, or you find it difficualt to transition
to sexual closes. In midgame it works great, but it's no use if you can't even get to the midgame, or
you can't transition from there to a full close.
We can talk about this more on IM or on the phone. I'm not debating with you dude. I'm
interested in working with you to find a way to make this method more workable in more types of
situations, as I'm already doing with BL. And we can only do that after we are willing to be honest
with our field experiences, and face the fact that what we have so far is not enough.
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (60 of 79), Read 1144 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Saturday, April 19, 2003 02:32 AM
SexPDX, thanks for your reposts of Juggler method, I've found then really useful. TD and many
others from the "Mystery School" advocate stringing routines together as a way of overcoming
Juggler's properly identified 90/10 problem....now I've field tested routines extensively and have
come up with three conclusions:
1. Routines are a LOT BETTER than stalling, so for RAFCs they should be considered a CORE
TOOL;

2. For routines to be REALLY EFFECTIVE in creating the A of FMAC they have to be practised A
LOT;
3. For myself and I suspect a lot of other advanced conversationalists the effort of practising the
delivery of killer routines is not worth the results, in other words I get better results delivering
animated free form conversation and mirroring the ongoing reality.
On the other hand, I find the various paradigms of MM, namely FMAC, neg theory, group theory,
cat theory etc. fucking gold during almost all sarges. They sit there like a master program keeping
me alert to the unfolding social dynamic and permitting me to keep the social hierarchy of groups
favourable to the sarge.
If I had the time and passion of a TD I would study routines for the heck of it and maybe end up
with a better game, I don't know. For now, I think Juggler is great with his SOI-based approach
and simple openers/conversational gambits. My comment is that PUA is not about saying one
style is better than the other but rather knowing many styles so that you're versatile.
And I still can't see how I can successfully sarge 9s and 10s in a socially-proofed club without MM.
:) If Juggler can jump in now and TELL ME HOW HE DOES I would be, well, overjoyed!!!!
Peace,
HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (+ yet another repost) (61 of 79), Read 1157 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Saturday, April 19, 2003 04:31 AM
HunterS wrote:
> 1. Routines are a LOT BETTER than stalling, so for RAFCs they should be
> considered a CORE TOOL;
> 2. For routines to be REALLY EFFECTIVE in creating the A of FMAC they have
to
> be practised A LOT;
> 3. For myself and I suspect a lot of other advanced conversationalists the
> effort of practising the delivery of killer routines is not worth the
results,
> in other words I get better results delivering animated free form
conversation
> and mirroring the ongoing reality.
I agree with almost all of this except for your conclusion in statement 1
that routines should be a core tool. You admit in statement 2 that routines
won't be really effective unless you practice them a lot, and I would
suggest that this practice time would be better spent learning to actually
become a decent conversationalist. The problem with skipping this step and
spending all your time learning routines is that you cannot script an entire
PU. As soon as you get in a situation for which you don't have a routine,
you are going to be at a strong disadvantage and probably blow the PU.
I look at routines from the exact opposite direction. IMO, routines should
only be something that people develop in the field as they find out what
works for them. Even Juggler seems to use "routines" in the sense that there
are lines, stories, and techniques that he uses over and over again in

similar situations. But he didn't find these things on the Internet, he


found them in the field by improvising and seeing what worked for him and
what didn't. I believe that this is how people should be thinking about
routines.
> And I still can't see how I can successfully sarge 9s and 10s in a
> socially-proofed club without MM. :) If Juggler can jump in now and TELL
ME
> HOW HE DOES I would be, well, overjoyed!!!!
MM's group theory is not a method, it is a theory, and a lot what it says
are just observations about people that happen to usually be true. Just
because Juggler didn't learn these things from Mystery doesn't mean that he
doesn't know them. In fact, I think that both of them understand groups
quite well, they just happen to use different methods to take advantage of
this knowledge. Take a look at Juggler's post on social proof, reposted
below for your reading pleasure.
---In general the more beautiful the girl the better. But Specialist makes a
good
point here which is often ignored. It is not just being seen with a girl
which
demonstrates social proof. It is your ability to get her laughing and
obviously
enjoying your presence.
It is best not to think about social proof too much. You will be further
ahead
in the long run developing your abilities to approach and make a woman happy
you are there. Then social proof will just happen and not be something you
have
to actively pursue.
Also, you may find that bringing a girl with you for social proof will not
work
as well as meeting girls there. A new girl will be much more interested and
captivated by you.
Here is an example. I am talking with two very attractive girls. I take a
break
from them to turn around and speak with two other girls... maybe 5's. I do
this
all the time. Not part of a scheme. Just being outgoing with everybody.
Well,
these two non-attractive girls were pretty fun and I liked them immediately
(not in a sexual way of course). Anyway, we are talking and my interrupts
and
tells me the two hot girls want to know something. I just put my finger up
to
tell him just a minute I am in a conversation here.
So eventually I turn back around and the first thing out of the hot girls on
the left's mouth was to ask me if I am seeing anybody. Very bold sign of
interest. So of course I gave her the girlfriend test.

Thought about it later, there was probably a lot going on in her mind. I was
sort of demonstrating social proof with the unattractive girls while at the
same time doing a neg hit on the hot girl and a take -away.....all that
stuff
that many guys here like to break down. But the point is, you do not have to
figure it all out and force it to work for you. Just be outgoing and chat it
up
with many people and it will work for you unconsciously. This will leave you
to
concentrate on the important part of your game... being seductive.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory (+ yet another repost) (62 of 79), Read 1111 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:57 AM
Yeah, juggler is basically saying be outgoing and conversational and the SP will come of its own
volition...the breaking down that Mys teaches however - for this little PUA at least - has helped
speed up the process of internalising socially proofed bahaviours A LOT. Just being
conversational doesn't cut it, unless you are socially proofed by looks/status etc. in the first place.
I mean, the juggler repost you justed added demonstrated a pure MM style club
behaviour....without knowing the break-down how will a student/aspiring PUA "get it"?
IMO juggler method is an ADVANCED concept of PU that is best suited to those with strong
conversation skills and a mastery of group dynamics. Its easy to forget the level most RAFCs are
at when you haven't been there yourself for a few years....anyway, its all valuable and I think this
thread has teased out some great stuff.
Peace,
HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another repost) (63 of 79), Read 1119 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Sunday, April 20, 2003 01:22 AM
HunterS wrote:
> Yeah, juggler is basically saying be outgoing and conversational and the
> SP will come of its own volition...the breaking down that Mys teaches
> however - for this little PUA at least - has helped speed up the
> process of internalising socially proofed bahaviours A LOT.
Agreed. I think knowing the theory behind the practice helps a lot.
> Just being conversational doesn't cut it,
> unless you are socially proofed by looks/status etc. in the first place.
I think Juggler would disagree since most people say he is a generally
nondescript-looking fellow. But then again, I think his skills are way beyond
those of most guys on this board, and, in any case, he probably doesn't PU

in ultra-trendy nightclubs. I doubt they have many of those in Ann Arbor


anyway. IMO, there's no reason not to use every tool that you can find and
with which you feel comfortable.
> IMO juggler method is an ADVANCED concept of PU that is best suited to
> those with strong conversation skills and a mastery of group dynamics.
That's an interesting statement because I have always said that MM is an
advanced PU method that is best suited for guys who already have strong
1-on-1 seduction skills. While I would agree that many of Juggler's
conversational tactics could be considered advanced, I think that at
least a decent understanding of 1-on-1 convo skills is required in
order to effectively work groups. I also believe that Juggler has a
lot of information that will help guys at all levels improve both
their convo skills and their PUs in general.
Most of the posted stuff about MM leaves out 1-on-1 convo, and, I think
because of this, a lot of inexperienced guys used to try to jump right into
stock routines without yet having a clue how to PU. Maybe if Mystery himself
is by your side teaching you this will work, but for guys on the Internet
who are all alone, I don't think it will get them very far.
> Its easy to
> forget the level most RAFCs are at when you haven't been there yourself
> for a few years.
It's not that easy to forget! I still vividly remember my first cold PU
almost 7 years ago and my strategy at that time was basically talk about
common interests to create rapport. Granted, I had spent a lot of time
hanging out with some relatively skilled PUAs and I already had pretty a
decent knowledge of interpersonal psychology, but I had no real method other
than approach, gain rapport, close. While it is true that a lot of guys don't
even have this part down yet, I certainly don't think those guys should be
trying to work groups with routines, negs, social proof and other tactics.
Much better to learn to have a decent conversation first.
> ...anyway, its all valuable and I think this thread has teased out
> some great stuff.
Absolutely. This has been a great thread.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (64 of 79), Read 1090 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:XANEUS xaneus@yahoo.com
Date:Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:00 PM
Having read this thread, I have three questions for
anyone extensively familiar with Juggler method.
1. Does he suggest approaching the target directly, or
does he suggest starting with one of the less
conversationally involved members of the group and
working your way to the target. Both have been
suggested, but there was no clarification. Also

incidentally, does whether there are guys in the group


make any difference?
2. What are some of the specific techniques Juggler
uses to seamlessly control/manipulate conversation?
Would it be possible to incorporate such techniques
into other frameworks as well? Will they effectively
merge with MM, SS, Gunwitch, C&F etc...? Why or why
not?
3. What have your experiences been with incorporating
parts from other methods (C&F, SS, Gunwitch, MM
etc...) into Juggler method? What works universally,
what doesn't?
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (65 of 79), Read 1079 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:afcpua johnlamont@tennis.com
Date:Sunday, April 20, 2003 03:43 PM
7 years for softcontrol. do you consider yourself PUA softcontrol? i hope there is NOBODY out
there that plays the game for 7 years and is still GPUA. that would discourage me greatly.
" the game don't wait but im so tight i can wait for the game. "
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (66 of 79), Read 1055 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:softcontrol sftcntrl@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 21, 2003 02:38 AM
afcpua wrote:
> 7 years for softcontrol. do you consider yourself PUA softcontrol?
OK, let me give you four possible answers:
1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes, but I suck at PU
4. It depends, sometimes yes, and sometimes no
Which of these is correct? Well, I would say that it is equally true to say
that all of them are correct as it is to say that none of them are correct.
And I am not trying to say that I mean that number #4 is correct; I mean
that statement literally.
The reality is that most guys who other people would consider to be PUAs
don't really consider themselves as such. At least, that has been my
experience, and I think you would find the same results yourself if you read
through the archives. A lot of guys who clearly know what they are doing
flat out deny that they are PUAs, and I haven't seen one example of a guy
who has been around for a while calling himself one.

When you understand the game, you understand that there is no such thing as
a "PUA." It's an ideal figure that roughly describes a phenomenon, but not a
real person. There are only guys with more skills and guys with less skills.
Skills are relative, to many things, but actions are concrete.
You will also understand that PU is incredibly difficult and ridiculously
easy at the same time. That's the paradox of it, and I think that's one
reason why guys don't like to tout themselves as "PUAs" around here.
As to your question about how long I have doing this, I first became aware
of the game about 8 years ago. But it has been a slow process for me. The
pull back towards AFC life has been, at times, much stronger than the pull
towards PUA life. I spent some of those years almost completely out of the
game. There's a lot of reasons for this which I think will make my experience
atypical for guys currently on this NG. Still, I don't think you can go
from knowing nothing at all about the game to a full-fledged PUA in
less that a few years. I have another post wherein I break down the stages
through which I have been, and I'll post it once the LR restriction passes.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (67 of 79), Read 1045 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 21, 2003 04:21 AM
The full move to PUA (as defined by form in PAIR) takes about one year IME working your game
at least once a week (I'm talking 4-5 approaches a night). So we're talking 250 ASF-aware
approaches + reading online and occassionally meeting other ASFers IRL. Plus after I considered
myself PUA I did the MM workshop, which showed me how much further the game could
progress....
I fully believe though that a dedicated student could master the game in a few months if they
made it their life's work...that seems to have been TD's approach. It's the old rule, it's not the time
but the concentration of activity within that time that counts.
Peace,
HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (68 of 79), Read 1001 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Monday, April 21, 2003 02:06 PM
>1. Does he suggest
>approaching the target
>directly, or
>does he suggest starting with
>one of the less
>conversationally involved
>members of the group and

>working your way to the


>target. Both have been
>suggested, but there was no
>clarification. Also
>incidentally, does whether
>there are guys in the group
>make any difference?
You're analyzing too much here, what you need to do is just go out and try it both ways. From my
experience of sarging with Juggler, he does not have any set way of doing things. It's easy to
structure things out on the board so people know what you're talking about. But when you're in
the field, what you do is totally dependant on the situation at hand. Approach a lot of groups and
pratice establishing rapport with everyone in the group to develop a natural instict on group
dynamic. Only through doing that you will be able to answer your own quesiton.
>2. What are some of the
>specific techniques Juggler
>uses to seamlessly
>control/manipulate
>conversation?
He makes spontaneous statements to carry on the conversation. Then he builds the rest of the
conversation base on the other person's reponse. He relates and amplifies them. The downside of
doing this is when she doesn't repond well initially there's not much you can do about it, since
you're looking to build a conversation off her response, and there's no response to be built on.
From my experience with him, when this happens, he simply ejects.
>Would it be possible to
>incorporate such techniques
>into other frameworks as well?
>Will they effectively
>merge with MM, SS, Gunwitch,
>C&F etc...? Why or why
>not?
Don't worry about 'techniques' or 'merginG methods'. These things are just packaged products
people made up to make money. If you ever want to get good at your game, what you really need
is:
1) knowing yourself, your own strengths and weaknesses, and you won't really know that until you
have a lot of field experience
2) Seek ways to improve your sticking points. You can seek inspiration from reading the board,
sarge with another PUA and obvserve what he does, or just simply allow your unconsious to give
you new ideas on what to do. The most important thing is once you get an idea you go out and try
it!
3) Practice EVERYWHERE with EVERYONE. Not just with girls, not just when you're sarging.
You should become the kinda of guy who is able to chat up any stranger you meet, or open any
type groups at any situation.
What you want to become is a NATRUAL PUA. Not a person who's constantly struggling with
'techniques' and 'methods'

>3. What have your experiences


>been with incorporating
>parts from other methods (C&F,
>SS, Gunwitch, MM
>etc...) into Juggler method?
>What works universally,
>what doesn't?
I find using spontaneous trance patterns while relating/amplifying the other person's
conversation (Juggler Style) a VERY powerful combination. You get both WIDE & DEEP rapport.
My advice to you is this is not about mixing what methods with what method. It's very limiting to
think in terms of 'methods'. Focus on gaining field experience and discover your own sticking
points and what may or may not work for you. I know some bros here want to make sure they
know EVERYTHING before they go out and try them. That is just not gonna happen. Your game
does not get better from reading other people's stuff. You game only gets better when you put
yourself out there in the unknown to explore new possibilities for yourself. It takes courage and
dedication, but the NATURAL PUA you will become is worth every second of your effort.
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Juggler Method Group Theory ( yet another rep (69 of 79), Read 1005 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Cloud9 cloud9virtual@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 21, 2003 02:44 PM
ZenDragon wrote:
> 3) Practice EVERYWHERE with EVERYONE. Not just with girls, not just when
> you're sarging. You should become the kinda of guy who is able to chat up any
> stranger you meet, or open any type groups at any situation.
>
> What you want to become is a natural PUA. Not a person who's constantly
> struggling with 'techniques' and 'methods'
>
ZD, that is unconscious competence. You must know of the four stages of
learning:
I - unconscious incompetence
II - conscious incompetence
III- conscious competence
IV - inconscious competence
You guys keep pushing Juggler and dissing MM or other tactics, but in
fact you advocate stage IV without providing a roadmap to get there.
Unless you're natural (but you're not, because you wouldn't be on the
board), you have to fuckin LEARN. Look up the stages of learning in any
context, not just sarging, they're alway the same.
So, when I see you dissing MM group merging (which is stage III) and
advocate "open any type groups at any situation" (stage IV), BUT THE
SAME THING ALTOGETHER, I really beging to wonder if your judgement is
not clouded at least to the amount you paid Juggler for his workshop.

Juggler is either natural or on stage IV, but it doesn't seem like he


has any method to get a guy from stage II and morph him into stage IV.
Which means what? - that he's not the greatest teacher, his approach
lacks the methodology of learning.
I will drive this point home some more, you know about Zen ZenDragon so
this should make sense to you.
We have a guy and a group of five HBs, with various b.shields.
Guy is stage I:
- he walks into the set, and his enthusiasm, innocence, "beginner's
mind" takes him a fair way into chatting the set. But he lacks
understanding of what he's doing, so except for "getting lucky", he's
bound to fail.
Guy is stage II:
- he goes, "oh man, that set is too hard for me to crack, I need wings
and I'm generally not in that league yet. I'll let this one pass."
Guy in stage III:
- "gotta merge some shit here". He goes and grabs two social proof
babes, forms a group and then merges with the five targets. Or highjacks
another group and merges that with the 5-set.
Guy in stage IV:
- I am Zen. I am Yin and Yang. Nothing phases me. Poor little five HBs,
here I come to give you good feelings.
>
> I find using spontanrous trance patterns while relating/amplifying the other
> person's conversation (Juggler Style) a VERY powerful combination. You get
> both WIDE & DEEP rapport.
>
as I was saying...I am Zen...I've come to give you good feelings (stage IV).
Cloud9
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (70 of 79), Read 1010 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Style cpowles100@hotmail.com
Date:Monday, April 21, 2003 02:38 PM
Just spent a few days with Juggler, who crashed at my house. Got to
understand a lot of things about his method, why it works, and how it
works for me. And also why he is one of my favorite guys I have ever
met in this community.
In my mind, Juggler's style is GOLD for daytime walkups,and for
building rapport. It's very casual and under the radar and genuine.
On the other hand, though Juggler has a system for closing, I haven't
seen him or anyone else demonstrate or teach it, so in my mind, the
flaw with straight Juggler style, is that you can not choose ANY

target and give yourself a GOOD guarantee of a close by going "pure


Juggler." Especially if you are going after super-hot women who have
lots of options.
In my experience, if I don't pull out my value-demonstrating routines,
I am not going to stand out in her mind and guarantee a strong,
no-flaking close. I wish this wasn't true, but IME, it is.
That said, I have not yet done all the steps of Juggler method. Here,
in my interpretation, are the steps, from watching him and talking
with him.
I. Open by telling a story or making a situational comment. Exchange
situational stories. Ask ONE very open-ended question to get more
information if necessary. Assume comfortable rapport, and get a nice
exchange of stories going.
II. Get deep. Ask an open-ended question that can get personal, like,
"So what's your story?"
III. Find out their relationship situation (even if it means asking
directly if they have a boyfriend), discuss your relationship
situation, and discuss relationships in general.
IV. Make an SOI
V. Arrange a meeting
CPowles
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (71 of 79), Read 900 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2003 08:14 AM

>In my experience, if I don't


>pull out my
>value-demonstrating routines,
>I am not going to stand out in
>her mind and guarantee a
>strong,
>no-flaking close. I wish this
>wasn't true, but IME, it is.
I think your post is on the money CP, in that Juggler method is best suited to sarging HBs outside
of the highly socially-proofed environments of clubs/events...I disagree that you need to pull out
routines to guarantee strong closes in normal IRL situations like beaches, cafes etc...sometimes
the risk of seeming contrived can outweigh the benefits in these environments...having seen you
do your shit in clubs though I agree with you in the context of "charged" environments and as I've
said before nothing compares with MM/routine based sarging in effectiveness within highly
socially-proofed environments.
Peace,

HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (72 of 79), Read 893 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2003 09:54 AM
>Juggler
>method is best suited to
>sarging HBs outside of the
>highly socially-proofed
>environments of clubs/events
I have to agree with this. I have not yet been able to get IN with Juggler style statement/question
openings and follow ups at the type of environments you described. Which is understandable, I
don't think Juggler even go to those places ;)
Having that said, this type of approach style does work with HBs who are just hanging out at
clubs. They go there 'cause their friends are there. It does not work with the snubby high bitch
shield HBs and the high energy wild & crazy ones, the reason is simple, they're not there to have
conversations with people. And most of them aren't good at holding conversations, that's why
they go to clubs, they don't need to talk to anyone.
>clubs/events...I disagree that
>you need to pull out routines
>to guarantee strong closes in
>normal IRL situations like
>beaches, cafes etc...sometimes
>the risk of seeming contrived
>can outweigh the benefits in
>these environments.
Tru dat
>I've said
>before nothing compares with
>MM/routine based sarging in
>effectiveness within highly
>socially-proofed environments.
For me, after getting so used to Juggler style approaching, trying to pull out routines feels so
weird and incongruent. I went to a club on sunday and didn't have much success with JM, then I
tried to switch back to my old C&F & routines stuff...and it completely totally & absolutely killed
my states! Incongruency big time!!!
JM & MM is like water and oil. I've yet found a way to blend the 2. Juggler doesn't believe it can
be done. It's almost like a choice between the force and the darkside (hehe). Anyone out there
who have success with it please share ;)
ZD
"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."

TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit


Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (73 of 79), Read 933 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:juggler juggler@seductionarts.com
Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2003 12:20 PM
On 4/21/03 2:38:22 PM, Style wrote:
>Just spent a few days with
>Juggler, who crashed at my
>house. Got to
>understand a lot of things
>about his method, why it
>works, and how it
>works for me. And also why he
>is one of my favorite guys I
>have ever
>met in this community.
Thanks. You know I feel the same way.
I wish we had discussed my methods more. But it's hard when we hang out not to spend all our
time just having fun.
>I. Open by telling a story or
>making a situational comment.
>Exchange
>situational stories. Ask ONE
>very open-ended question to
>get more
>information if necessary.
>Assume comfortable rapport,
>and get a nice
>exchange of stories going.
No. This is not the method. You saw me do some of that find of stuff. but the method is to open
with anything. It can be an opinion or a situation or introducing yourself or even bleeding on
people. In dynamic situations (stores and moving people) a situational opener tends to work well.
But in clubs or static situations I like to just introduce myself.
The key is not the opener. The opener does not matter much. The key is how you handle the
response. The method is amplifying and using responses. You want to gain the skill to read and
use a wide range of responses - that's fun, flexible and makes real connections. Using routines as
openers or anywhere does not give you much opportunity to use a wide range of responses. The
very point of a routine is to ellicit a specific 'good' response - that's boring and weak.
>II. Get deep. Ask an
>open-ended question that can
>get personal, like,
>"So what's your story?"
That's a good thing to do but it is not technically part of the method. The method is not to worry
so much about getting deep but to get wide rapport (a feeling like you can talk about anything).
Again the key is including and amplifying a girl's response, no matter the response.

>III. Find out their


>relationship situation (even
>if it means asking
>directly if they have a
>boyfriend), discuss your
>relationship
>situation, and discuss
>relationships in general.
Talking about relationships are great. But keep in mind you must talk about your relationship
experience or this comes across as you are just hitting on her.
>IV. Make an SOI
At all her high points. This rewards her for trying and sarging you back.
>V. Arrange a meeting
No. This is not the method. You do not arrange a meeting. You either instant date or both of you
admit you are really into each other. Then if you want to get together later it is a matter of just
taking care of the details. The real business is in her agreeing that she is into you.
But really this is not a method. There are no stages or steps. There is no transition. It should not
be thought of as a tool to achieve a result. It is a way. It is a place you should achieve and stay in
and bring others into. The things like SOI at her high points or gaining the skill to use any of her
reactions or any of the other parts of the way are not tools to manipulate a result. They are ways to
help her fulfill her natural human want to be in that place.
Here is the Juggler way:
Think about what you would want an interaction with a girl to be like if there was no need to get
sex. Let's say that sex was a given. You did not need to do anything tricky or run 'game' to score.
How would you like that interaction to be? Myself I want it to be fun, exciting, relaxed, playful and
sharing with each other willingly. Now think about how you can make that happen. Would you
use tricks or be sneaky to get a girl to be that with you? No, that would be counter productive
and/or unneccesary work. You would instead lead her by being fun, relaxed, sharing, or whatever
you want the interaction to be like yourself and learn to allow and encourage her to be that as
well.
It is just that most people have no idea how to allow and help someone achieve this place. Now
the big mental step. Sexuality is not that big of a deal. Sure it has more important implications as
far as chance of pregnancy, disease and emotional connotations. But from a 'who has the power'
point of view it should be regarded the same way as having fun or any of the things you want an
interaction to be - it should have nothing to do with power.
Style you are a great person. You have many of the skills for doing this method. You are an
amazing and cool person. Much of what you do with women is so unnecessary. If you would just
take the chance of directly being the great you that you are then you would not need so much of
this extra stuff. I think you are afraid of your own greatness and maybe dealing with some of the
reactions you would get that comes with letting that person out. Sometimes you seem so close to
making this shift. Ah, but anyway you are a good friend so I have time to convince you.
What I am talking about is amazing. It can make a very intimate real connection very quickly with super hot babes or anyone else for that matter. It has been shown to me to be very powerful
in many, many contexts. It is based on universal truths. And as you know, I can not demonstrate
the more intimate aspects to anyone's satisfaction because of the LTR I am in. But don't confuse

the message with the messenger. I usually get out of interactions after hooking a girl because I
know the danger and power of the way and to keep my promise to my lovely girlfriend. That is the
weakness in my workshops but not in the way. Sex and intimacy flow very easily out of this place.
But I will have to think, maybe there is a way to demonstrate this.
Anyway, it amazes me how good of friends we are and yet I still haven't cleared all this up with
you. I do actually think it is a tribute to how much fun we have together that we never get around
to talking much 'shop'. It's either that or my inability to articulate it all. However, it should all be
clear once I finish my book.
Talk to you soon,
Juggler
www.seductionarts.com
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (74 of 79), Read 915 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:Style cpowles100@hotmail.com
Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2003 01:57 PM
This explains so much, man. Thanks. Funny how we hardly even talked
about all this, or any PU really. I am going to print it out and read
it when I work out today, and comment more in depth if necessary.
Also, here's an update on some of the girls from the weekend, for fun:
#1 The cute big-teeth girl that had Japanese food with us. The one
that you kept inviting out with us when I had a date with HBRed, LOL!
Anyway, saw her tonight, and spent the night at her place. Finally. I
really like her for some crazy reason. Also solved whatever went wrong
last time.
Style: Let me ask you something. When you left my house in the
morning last time, did you get all weird afterwards because you
thought I was a player or because you thought I liked you too much.
HB: Both, I guess.
Style: Well, they're both true (rolling over on top of her, and
tickling her and kissing her).
#2 The short hottie I met at the Easter party, and invited myself to
her house that same night when we were in the car. Ah, the memories.
Anyway, you'll never believe this, but nothing happened. She would NOT
get within proximity of me at all for the entire night. It was
bizarre. It was so on before. This time, she just talked my ear off
throughout the entire movie, but the sexual green lights were all
gone. Bizarre. Just when I was about to think I was a super-stud, I
come crashing to earth.
#3 The Asian chick who I got hot and heavy with in the bathroom of the
dive bar.
I may actually see her again, believe it or not.
Anyway, good times. Will respond in detail later, but I generally

agree with what you wrote. Great post and explanation and
clarification.
CPowles

TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit


Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (75 of 79), Read 916 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:ZenDragon
Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2003 03:37 PM
>Talking about relationships are great.
>But keep in mind you must talk about
>your relationship experience or this
>comes across as you are just hitting on
>her.
It sounds like we're making an effort to hide our real intentions. Maybe that could come across as
not genuine? Because you are seeking her approval when you don't want her to think your're
hitting on her...you care about how she thinks of you...and she's someone you just met.
>What I am talking about is amazing. It
>can make a very intimate real connection
>very quickly - with super hot babes or
>anyone else for that matter.
This is indeed an amazing way of comnunicating and interacting with others. After your workshop
my relationship with everyone around me has improved 5000%!
But in the context of sarging 'super hot babes', I'm really not sure this style would work. From my
field experience, when the 'super hot babe' doesn't initially screen you as her TYPE, you will get
almost zero response from her, and if you're working off her response...there is nothing there to
work on. Even if you do get a few words out of her, she is not interested in listening to what you
have to say, so your relating & amplifying are just slipping over the top of her head while she's
thinking about how to eject.
I really believe with 'super hot babes', not just in club situations, but in all sorts of contexts, you
need something powerful to get her initial attention. Routines & gimmicks may be weak from
your point of view, but they do promise initial attention and you at least have a chance to
continue!
Juggler I think you're a great person and very cool to be around with. But I've been sarging with
your method VERY extensively since the workshop and I just want to be honest about what works
and what doesn't. Maybe there are aspects of your method that you have not shown us (maybe
they'll be in your book?), but from my field experience so far it's helping me to make good friends
with everyone, but not getting laid with 'super hot babes'.
With 'super hot babes', the ones that I get a 'you're not my type' vibe from, I'm currently working
on opening with a powerful presentation, once their attention is in place, quickly shift to rapport
mode (Juggler Style). Any bro who has successful experience with this please feel free to share ;)
ZD

"I've cum to liberate all who have not been liberated."


TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (76 of 79), Read 777 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:mmasters antifluxx@aol.com
Date:Wednesday, April 23, 2003 06:01 PM
On 4/22/03 3:37:00 PM, ZenDragon wrote:
>But in the context of sarging
>'super hot babes', I'm really
>not sure this style would
>work. From my field
>experience, when the 'super
>hot babe' doesn't initially
>screen you as her TYPE, you
>will get almost zero response
>from her, and if you're
>working off her
>response...there is nothing
>there to work on. Even if you
>do get a few words out of her,
>she is not interested in
>listening to what you have to
>say, so your relating &
>amplifying are just slipping
>over the top of her head while
>she's thinking about how to
>eject.
>
>I really believe with 'super
>hot babes', not just in club
>situations, but in all sorts
>of contexts, you need
>something powerful to get her
>initial attention. Routines &
>gimmicks may be weak from your
>point of view, but they do
>promise initial attention and
>you at least have a chance to
>continue!
ZD, I see this barrier you're talking about with the highly attractive girls. They've had a lot of
experience with men and usually have a good idea of what they want. As well, they have a lot of
options. A great way I've found to help break through this barrier is by incorporating gunwitch's
ideas with Juggler's. Particularly sexual state, for it is in using THAT that you get beyond what she
wants and you display to her what she needs.
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (77 of 79), Read 760 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com

Date:Wednesday, April 23, 2003 09:29 PM


Hey, all this "just communicate" stuff is great Juggler, and I agree with practically ALL of what
you say, its just that:
a. SHBs (that's SUPER hot babes) are NOT everywhere...they usually are found in
CONCENTRATION AREAs such as EVENTS, VERY COOL CLUBS, FUCK-HOT VACATION
SPOTs etc. etc. and are often, through not fault of their own, very, very heavily into qualifying
men....hey, if you had been modelling since 14, on the party scene at 15 and driven around in
nothing but limos and fuck-hot sports cars by guys oozing alpha YOU WOULD TOO.
b. Often, half the secret of sarging these Gs is just getting PEER GROUP ACCEPTED...ie. PAST
THE FUCKING MINDERs, whether those minders be actual security or just the AFCs/next-inline-with-money-to-lay-a-model guys who crowd these girl's lives....
c. I don't see how your method gets a PUA anywhere with SHBs IN THESE SORTS OF SCENES.
I come up with three possibilities:
1. Seek to sarge SHBs outside of heavily socially-proofed environments (difficult because of my
comment (a) above);
2. Quit sarging "scene" SHBs who are often pretty warped because of the lifestyle alluded to in (a)
(reasonable enough solution if you're actually looking for a GF, there's lots of really cute Gs out
there who are NOT in the modelling/club scene);
3. Get a box of tricks to help you achieve massive social proof and overcome (b) RAPIDLY...eg.
MM.
Just where I am right now, the ability to sarge ANY G, ANYWHERE is how I define my game. In
terms of what matters in LIFE/interpersonal relations with Gs (and probably GAME as well once
I'm tired of the superficial shit people are saying juggler method is unsuited to) I'll drop even
practising the "tricks".
Peace,
HunterS
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (78 of 79), Read 763 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:zyxwxy
Date:Wednesday, April 23, 2003 10:01 PM
In article <76137.11532@discussion.fastseduction.com>, HunterS
wrote:
> a. SHBs (that's SUPER hot babes) are NOT everywhere...they
> usually are found in CONCENTRATION AREAs such as EVENTS, VERY
> COOL CLUBS, FUCK-HOT VACATION SPOTs etc. etc.
This is just simply not true. Period.
You don't see a high concentration of SHBs at the Barnes & Noble,
but I'd bet you 50 bucks that I can find at least two or three, any

day of the week, any time of day. Or within five minutes of hitting
the street downtown.
Of course, at the bookstore they're not wearing their wonderbras and
thick makeup (usually), but since the goal is to get 'em naked that
shouldn't matter anyway.
zyxwxy
Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic

Topic:Re: Discussion topic: Juggler method (79 of 79), Read 761 times
Conf:>> Advanced
From:HunterS thirdmarshall@hotmail.com
Date:Thursday, April 24, 2003 06:18 AM
Point conceded that there may be SHBs (though I doubt 3 or more) in any large communal space
in a large metropolis IN THE BETTER AREAS of that metropolis. That's just a reflection of
Mystery's observation on 1 in a number as a rating system - ie. an SHB is 1 in a thousand....get
1000 people in a mall and chances are one will be an SHB.
What I am saying is, you want to be able to PU from the fucking runway events in you need to...
Peace,
HunterS

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi