Should you double text/re-initiate dead daygame leads?

In 2018, I wrote a post: A data-driven analysis: should you “double text/respawn/reinitiate” dead app leads? I concluded that it was not worth it.

At that time, I was only using apps, and now I’m only doing cold approach, so I decided to run a similar analysis for re-initiating dead daygame leads.

Daygamers might hypothesize that this would work better with daygame leads than app leads, given that daygame leads are more invested due to the in-person interaction.

I found that this was not the case. Re-initating dead daygame leads was as equally useless as re-initiating dead app leads:

My test involved double-texting 50 dead daygame leads from both Miami and New York City over the period of December 2021 to August 2022.

I texted only girls that had at least responded to the initial feeler text, thus all 50 leads died out somewhere between responding to the feeler and setting a first date.

All of the double texts were an open loop, a technique proven to get the highest response rate. (I had also re-initiated at least 50 other leads with other strategies previously and gotten nothing).

From here, I would estimate about a third of the girls responded to the open loop.

Of those third, all conversations died except for one that led to a planned date, which the girl flaked on.

Per my analysis, I concluded that I will not be wasting any more time double texting or re-initiating dead daygame leads.

If you get different results, I would love to hear them, and I would love for other guys to do their own analyses. As we know, every situation is radically different based on archetype, location, and a myriad of other factors.

8 thoughts on “Should you double text/re-initiate dead daygame leads?

  1. Anonymous

    I work in SaaS Sales, doesn’t hurt to re-engage dead leads.

    Might be different when it comes to girls though, I don’t really want to text back girls who I or they ghosted.

    Ever think of hopping into the tech Sales space?

    Like

  2. > Should you double text/re-initiate dead daygame leads?

    Fresh leads are the best leads, that is true.

    But…

    This research doesn’t mean anything to me… because… YOU are one of the “most different” guys in Game. If YOU are different, and your approaches are colored by your unique qualities, then EVERYTHING AFTER THAT… is also colored by your initial contact.

    Pancake stats don’t apply to most other guys. They don’t.

    Over and over, you start with YOU, and then tried to generalize… and while in some cases you will go way out of your way to call yourself unique/outlier, when it comes to “general Game stats,” you always report: This is how it is. When… this is how it is for you.

    Until you are able to “date” more [Pancake has had a LOT of success with girls, lots of closes, but rarely ever sees a girl 2X – that is part of Pancake’s context. That is UNUSUAL.] , until you are able date in the normal range (not every girl, but “many girls you close will date you”), you exist in your own world. That is neither good nor bad, it’s just “Pancake World.” And Pancake’s stats are all colored by Pancake… so they are not “interesting” in a “science-y” way (which is mostly a dead way to see Game, anyway).

    I want to be clear. I am NOT saying you have “bad Game.” I am saying you are SO DIFFERENT, that guys should read nothing into your stats. Nothing. You have some of the most unusual stats I have ever seen.

    —————

    With that said:

    — I “double texted” a dead lead in Nov/Dec 2020, she responded, came out again. And again. Closed her… she and I went on an overnight trip this last weekend, we are still seeing each other (2 yrs later). I have fucked her 100s of times. One of the best rels of my life.

    Is that normal? No. But the return here is so high, it’s worth mentioning. If the alt is “don’ bother,” I would say CONTEXT TOTALLY MATTERS. And in many context, yeah… follow up. Show some fucking effort.

    > I work in SaaS Sales, doesn’t hurt to re-engage dead leads.
    — Anon (from comments above)

    I agree here. I will hit a girl three times, even if it’s dead/dead/dead. That is just being thorough. AND… I will hit her again, if I have a good, “organic” (natural) reason to hit her again. If I feel like msging a girl… I do. I do what I want. I don’t care about “science” in mating/dating. “Science” is not sexy. Not at all.

    — In Dec 2021, I closed this girl on the first date. We sent a couple messages after that, and then she went quiet. I was surprised. I hit her again, a week later. Dead, no response. I hit her again a week later. Dead. I was doing this, in part, so she felt good about the sex (I am happy to let a girl feel desired or cared for, that is real for me AND “good Game” as I see it). I think I did once more, and I assumed that would be it (there is limit to my efforts). She responds… enthusiastically. I suggest a date. She’s in. We meet for coffee (I was curious WHY she wanted to see me again). She was into it. I took her home, fucked her. I never liked that girl that much, but the sex was phenomenal. She was super sensitive, came easily, emotional in bed… fantastic.
    Fucked her over and over and over for weeks, until I broke it off.

    I asked her WHY she responded, and she said “because you kept trying.” Again, is that “normal?” No. But fuck normal. This is seduction. There is nothing “normal” about good Game.

    It’s not really about “how much effort” a guy puts in. It’s not. Effort isn’t sexy. But if you’re a sex/smooth guy, EFFORT is still a required ingredient, a LOT of the time.

    And guys that won’t try, for “science” reasons or pride… miss 100s of opportunities. This science/ego stuff is anti-Game.

    Context, context, context.

    And show some effort… and do it WHEN IT FEELS GOOD TO YOU (always, everything should be done when it feels good to you as a man, that is WHY you do everything, it’s not about “science,” it’s not about what the girls think, it’s about what you want as a man… that’s Top Shelf Game.).

    I double text I triple text. Context, context, context. I often get results from that effort.

    Viva Daygame.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You are right that I am different.

      Perhaps it’s my different-ness that enables me to be literally the only person in the community that keeps and publishes detailed stats like this, but I doubt it.

      Everyone else is more than capable.

      If guys disagree or have different results, they need to track the stats and share.

      It starts with one, and we grow to many. That’s how we make this a science, and that’s how we grow together.

      Like

  3. fr4nko

    can you please right an article on archetypes for men ? how to build them , where to look up to etc .
    it’s easy to say stuff like “some girls may like criminal men” “some girls are interested in super tall men” but i think most of us can build those archetypes & benefit from them . so it’d be good to see an article from you on the subject.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s