Day Bang is a dating and seduction book for men that focuses on meeting women during the daytime.
“Day Bang” is mostly based on the idea that you have to avoid scaring women away. And to avoid scaring women, Roosh V embraces indirect game, which he rebranded as “elderly opener”.
Day Bang Summary
About the Author: For good or for bad, Roosh V is a big name in the manosphere world. His blogs, mixing politics with seduction, have been some of the most popular
Roosh V didn’t seem to do much to avoid drama, and at times he seemed to relish “stirring the pot” with the media. He claimed to be the father of the Red Pill community, and to have coined the community’s popular terms “beta male” and “alpha male“, a claim that has been debunked.
But that’s all in the past. Today, Roosh converted to Christianity, says he’s ashamed of his previous work, and condemns pre-marital sex.
Don’t Worry Too Much About the People Around
Roosh V says that most people fear day game because they fear being rejected and being made a fool for the people around to see.
But he says that if you think your rejection will even matter to anyone, you are delusional as to how much you truly matter.
He says:
In a random stranger’s world, your mistake may get a chuckle, but five minutes later you will essentially be erased from their memory.
To get over your fear of approaching and your fear of being a fool to nearby people, Roosh V has a very different solution.
He encourages readers to think about the truly worst that can happen.
People will laugh at you, then update their social media with the story of your foolishness, and then laugh at you even more.
Once you are OK with that outcome, you can come back to present. And know that the worse will never materialize.
Now you can re-imagine the story while you are still looking like a fool, but instead of crowing and whimpering, you look at the people around and smile confidently.
Once you own the worst-case scenario, you can also start considering that it’s so unlikely it will never truly happen.
Approach Indirectly: The Elderly Opener
Roosh V says that any direct approach will scare women.
Instead, you must approach them like you would approach a cat. By showing you’re harmless.
How to do it?
If she has a big suitcase, you will ask not about her trip -too personal!- but about the quality of the suitcase.
If she is writing something, you will not ask what she’s writing about, but about the pen.
And he adds:
To show that you’re sincere in learning about the pen, you’ll share short anecdotes about your own good or bad experiences with pens.
If you don’t remember, you will make up some experiences.
Says Roosh:
Telling little lies while seeking information we don’t really need is necessary to start a conversation in a way that keeps a girl relaxed.
Necessary?
My Note: I disagree
Frankly, I was almost hoping he’d come out at a certain point and say “I was joking”.
Roosh recommends talking 2 or 3 minutes about mundane stuff you couldn’t care less about. And since most likely the woman also doesn’t care about it… Why on earth would you talk about it?
Here is an example from Roosh V:
Let’s say you opened a girl in a bookstore café about the quality of her laptop (…) You even played a little dumb, asking if her laptop had “the Internet access” and USB ports, questions I’ve actually asked before.
I think the girl would be sitting there thinking “what a terrible approach”. Roosh also shows little emotional intelligence here, asking a woman about tech stuff about USB ports?
Most women have no idea.
Also read:
Don’t Smile on The Approach
Roosh V recommends not to smile on your initial approach.
He says:
Smiling will kill your approach before it even gets started because it reliably scares the cat.
And this is another piece of advice I disagree with.
If you come across as unpolished, that’s OK because it shows that you are being natural and didn’t rehearse anything.
Says Roosh:
Now I’m not saying you should purposely pause and throw out “um’s,” but you get no bonus points for being smooth and polished.
Again, I disagree.
Being smooth and polished can powerfully increase attraction. It’s an indicator of confidence, social power, past successes and, as well, intelligence.
Roosh doesn’t see it that way though, as he says:
In my sock example, I played up that I was a style retard, incapable of buying a five-dollar pair of socks, when in reality I’m totally capable of making that decision.
How could purposefully look like a childish retard help one score?
Sure, it can work… Sometimes, with some girls.
Anything might work, if you do it just enough times. But then again, like Krauser says, you can also eat soup with a fork.
And playing up your retardation while you chat about boring topics you care nothing about does not strike me as the most effective and efficient style of game.
Also read:
Bait, Don’t Tell
Roosh stresses the importance of baiting, such as removing enough details from your answers that women will naturally you ask about them.
Having women ask instead of you telling them is far more powerful.
Quotes
On being cool with women’s rejections:
It’s true that a rejection means a girl doesn’t want you in her life. You’re so worthless to her that she doesn’t even want to get to know you. My response to that is… so what?
On the importance of being a high quality man and a high sexual market value guy:
Unfortunately, game isn’t a miracle drug. It doesn’t create value where there is none—it merely brings out the value that you already have. You’ll still need to offer something in exchange for vaginal entry.
CONS
Overall, I disagree with an approach model based on being “as indirect as possible”.
Especially if it’s presented as the only possible way.
Indirect game promoted as the only way of meeting women
It would be OK if Roosh V had said “there are many ways of starting a conversation and meeting women, and I will introduce here the indirect game”.
Instead, he talks it up as if it were the only effective method.
That’s patently not true.
Not just from a theoretical method, but I say that from plenty of experience.
Kether, a successful day gamer, also goes mostly indirect.
As a matter of fact, I learned from him how to make indirect work best.
And it’s not about asking random questions about the laptop she is using and how much RAM it has.
It’s indirect in the sense that you don’t start with “how hot she is”. But it still starts with something about her -or what’s in common between you and her, or what you’re both doing-.
Plus, it progresses talking about you and the woman, not about random stuff that neither of you cares about.
Complex system for something that should be natural
I agree with Aaron Sleazy here, author of “Minimal Game“.
Meeting the opposite sex is something natural, not something unnatural like Roosh V says.
Yes, even in the day, you can make it seem very natural.
Instead, Roosh V introduces this extra complex system made of stages and acronyms.
It’s reminiscent of “The Mystery Method“, of which I was never a fan of.
Number-centric, discourages going for more
Writes Roosh V:
Related to the previous point, at night you can sleep with her after only a couple of hours. During the day you won’t get much more than a number.
Most of the times you will get a number.
But starting with the mindset that “you won’t get much more than a number” is a poor mindset.
And you can sleep with her after only a couple of hours in the daytime, too.
No real connections, just game
“Day Bang” seems to be heavily centered around “getting the number”.
It almost feels like Barnie Stinson from “How I Met Your Mother”, a character that seemed to conflate “getting her number” with “having seduced”.
Hints of mysoginy
Roosh says he only sees women as lubricated holes for his own pleasure.
As shocking as that might sound, that’s OK.
I have a different view, but I don’t see anything wrong with seeing women as sexual objects.
Seeing women as sexual objects is not the same as hating women. And it’s not the same as being bitter. It only means that you see a woman you like, and you want to have sex with her, and not become friends or talk.
That’s OK.
What’s not OK, is when you resent women and wish them harm.
And sometimes I got that feeling from Roosh.
Limiting beliefs
Says Roosh:
At night you can sleep with her after only a couple of hours. During the day you won’t get much more than a number.
I don’t know what he’s talking about.
And I’m far from attractive.
Trick-based, weak-ass approach -“Getting” a kiss?
Says Roosh V:
Your main goal during the day is to get a girl into a night venue, preferably one that serves alcohol (…) Western dating norms dictate that the easiest way to get a kiss starts in a nighttime environment like a bar or lounge.
So here is this guy, talking up “alpha game“, trashing out Western women as undeserving… And then he talks about the “easiest way to get a kiss?”.
I hope you see what’s wrong with that…
PROS
- Provides realistic numbers and expectations
Roosh says that even if you get truly good, you will still be rejected most of the times.
So don’t worry if you’ll end up playing the numbers game.
- Novel advice on overcoming approach anxiety
Roosh was the first one I’ve read to recommend beginners to visualize not just negative outcomes, but the worst possible ones.
I think that might be a better approach for some to overcome approach anxiety.
- Good advice on baiting
The section on baiting was good.
And I even modified my Tinder description to put a bait in there.
- Great wake up call on working from coffee shops
I always thought it was ridiculous to rent a desk or to gulp down sugary latte just so you could work outside of home.
But Roosh V opened my eyes:
I see no reason why you should read or work from home where the chance of meeting a girl is 0%. Haul ass to a coffee shop instead.
Thank you Roosh!
I wasn’t a fan of your book, but this little gem might be a game-changer.
Roosh V Review
I have only reached half of Roosh’s book when I started writing this review.
Frankly, I didn’t see much good up until then, and I disagree with the whole approach Roosh takes to seduction.
He talks up indirect game –very indirect- as if it was not just the most efficient way of picking up women, but as if it were the only possible one.
That’s patently not true, and I can say so not only from theory, but from first-hand experience.
Frankly, I wasn’t sure whether to give it 1 or 2 stars.
Roosh seems to be a bit like RSD Tyler, learning techniques without a solid base of social and emotional intelligence.
There is a place for indirect game.
And somehow “Day Bang” could be useful to a few guys. Some people go in way too overpowering and don’t realize they are scaring girls.
I once saw a guy with a gym bag and gym attire stand in front of a woman, chin up, with the attitude of “wanna fight about it?”.
And I had a black friend who once approached a girl at night, with his hoodie on.
These guys could gain from reading “Day Bang” because it might make them realize that “not scaring the cat” is also important.
But apart from that, I don’t like Roosh’s day game approach in “Day Bang”.
I don’t think it’s very effective and efficient, and sometimes it can come across as outright weird.
Check the:
