Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
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.
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
-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"
>
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.
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
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.
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
>
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
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
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: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
> 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,
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
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
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.
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
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: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
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
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
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
" 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
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
-TD
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Entire Topic
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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."
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.
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
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
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
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