Blackdragon» is a member of the mASF forum. Acronyms used in this article can be looked up on the acronyms page. To get involved in discussions like this, you can join the mASF discussion forum at fastseduction.com/discussion.
Original discussion thread: http://fastseduction.com/discussion/fs?action=9&boardid=2&read=88787&fid=8&FirstTopic=180&LastTopic=209
I’ve tracked the last 51 women I have actually dated in some capacity and have placed the results in a link at the bottom of this post. This list covers approximately a year of activity, minus a few months here and there where I took a break from PU and dating (because I was busy in other areas of my life, or was already getting plenty of sex, or whatever).
In the table below I list the woman’s age, hotness, how far I got, and why it didn’t get to sex (if it didn’t).
Several notes on reading the data:
1. If there’s a question mark by her age, that means it’s possible the woman was lying to me about how old she was. As you’d expect, most of these age-liars are women who were either very young or very old. (FYI, I’m 36).
2. “Hotness” is a 1 to 10 scale based purely on my opinion. FYI, I like women with long hair, big tits (real or not don’t care), nice hips, big shapely booty, but the rest of her very skinny (washboard stomach, skinny legs, etc.). I consider “10’s” to be literally perfect, and thus are very, very rare (and, sadly, tend to be golddiggers). You can tell from the data that I tend to like 9’s to 9.8’s the best, and that I turn down women less than 8 (life’s too short to date 7’s or less).
3. “PU Type” is SS for Social Circle, O for Online, and D for Daygame. I never do club game, night game or hired-gun game. I rarely do long game (don’t see the point).
4. With “Results”, “Full Sex” means actual intercourse. “Heavily Sexual” means sexual stuff way beyond kissing, but not actual vaginal intercourse (it includes all kinds of fun stuff…no I’m not going to lay it out…use your imagination you bastard). I also display the number of meets it took to get sex. My hard and fast rule: I don’t allow women to see me past four meets without sex (and you shouldn’t either, by the way). Yes, four meets sounds like a lot…keep reading and I’ll explain.
5. In the “Why didn’t it go all the way?” column, “SVSRN” is a term I came up with myself a long time ago. It means a woman who needs “Someone Very Serious Right Now”, i.e. chicks who need to get serious really fast. When I get serious, I get serious slow, so I don’t date those. If I say “Unknown”, that means the woman and I got along great, and may have even been sexual, but she moved on suddenly and I never found out exactly why (could be another guy, could be fear, could be she decided I was a prick, who knows). “Still In Progress” means as of this writing I’m still working on this woman and don’t know the final result yet.
I have only included the last 51 women I have actually “dated” or had sex with in this list. I have purposely not included women I have sarged but who I never actually got to timebridge over to somewhere outside of the sarging location (or haven’t yet). Nor does the list include any pre-existing MLTR’s, FB’s, retreads, or “floaters”…I.E. there have been more women in my life in the last year than 51…these are just the newest 51.
Whatever conclusions or observations you have on the data, I ‘d love to hear it. Several conclusions I myself have drawn from this data:
1. I “get sexual”, well beyond making out, with about 29% of the women I get on at least one “date” or timebridged meet. That’s good.
2. Of the women I get to a first date/meet, I fuck about 18%. That’s good, but not good enough. I’d prefer that to be around 25% to 30%. Based on the data, I need escalate even faster than I already do, and screen harder BEFORE the first meet. Hm. Both tough to do (input on this is welcome from guys actually out in the field who are getting laid).
3. I was VERY surprised by this, but it’s clear from the data (some of which I haven’t posted here) that about 86% of my wasted time with little results are from women older than 33. For this reason, I have officially stopped pursuing women 34 and older for the time being. It’s a complicated and interesting topic and I may make a separate post about it. Anyway, It’s sad, because historically I tend to like women my age or older. Not that I’m complaining about those 18 and 19 year olds…
4. Probably not surprisingly, social circle sarging is the easiest to get laid from, by far. For this reason I am working on widening my social circle (which, outside of my work, is not that large) to include more women, and more women of the type I like (I generally don’t “hang out with friends” or go to parties, or crap like that, which is why I’m so reliant on online game» and daygame).
5. Just because you kiss ‘em, doesn’t mean you’ll fuck ‘em. I’ve mentioned this before but I have stopped caring about k-closes a long time ago. I focus on fucking, not kissing.
6. To go for the SNL/day2 lay or not? As you can see, my experience clearly shows there are many women out there who will NOT fuck you on the second meet, but will happily fuck you on the fourth meet. Many on mASF will recommend you next a chick after she doesn’t put out by the day2, and I have disagreed with this. Now I have empirical evidence to back this up (at least in my own game…I know everyone is different). I would say if things are going well, next a chick after the day4, not the day2. As long as you’re NOT spending money on her, going to the day4 is often worth it, as you can see from the data. But remember, as I’ve said, I NEVER go past a day4 without sex, ever. And, as you can see, most women don’t even last that long.
The women displayed here are not listed in an exact chronological order, but close.
Alright, enough horseshit. Without further ado, here’s the data:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p5AP8lhpl8f9VL4wpl10vMw
I’ve gone back and forth about actually posting this for a while now, but I finally decided to since this is the exact kind of data I was desiring when I started researching women and dating quite a while ago.
