The past year I’ve become interested in the mathematics of game. In Bang Colombia I introduced the Approach Index:
[The Approach Index] states how many girls an average looking guy with decent game has to approach before he’s likely to bang a cute girl. If you’re conversational in Spanish, that number in Colombia is 60. If not, you’ll need to approach about 120 girls. (If you’re a very ugly guy or have zero game, increase these numbers accordingly. If you’re a very ugly guy and have zero game, then increase them further.) The Approach Index doesn’t count internet attempts, only face-to-face approaches.
I made the Approach Index to help guys know how much work they’ll have to do to get laid in foreign countries. Men are too dissimilar for the 60 or 120 values to be accurate, but guys can compare them to other countries to see which is easier to get laid in.
Taking this a step further, I want to introduce the Fuck Number, the number of girls a specific man has to make before he gets laid. Here’s how to calculate your Fuck Number:
Fuck Number = (Number of girls you’ve approached in the past two years) ÷ (Number of girls you’ve fucked)
You may be wondering why I selected two years instead of, say, a lifetime. The reason is that a man’s Fuck Number is constantly changing (improving in his 20s, 30s, and possibly 40s, until finally plateauing around 50 years of age). We need a number that is based on a good amount of data to have actual meaning, but also strongly correlated to current game. Two years is a reasonable compromise. Therefore you must recalculate your Fuck Number regularly, but truth is I don’t know any man who counts his approaches. Therefore the Fuck Number is a theoretical concept.
In the past I’ve guessed that my fuck number was around 30, but after accounting for all the bullshit approaches I do for laughs, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was half that. Let’s pick 20 for the sake of example. That means I have to do 20 real approaches to get a new notch. Because the number is an average, it falls on a bell curve.
It’s possible that during the last two years I got laid only 5 approaches after the previous one, or as much as 80 after. This is the nature of the beast, and perfectly explains both the hot and cold streak. In fact, since the data is normally distributed, it should never happen that I get laid at exactly every 20 approaches like this:
Instead it looks random and noisy, like this:
The second chart is what I see in real life. In a recent month I slept with three new girls, and then the following month got absolutely nothing, not even a kiss. The month after that I started heating up again. There is no such thing as a perfectly neutral streak—you’re either leaning hot or leaning cold. If you’ve been leaning hot for over six months, that means you’ve jumped a level of game.
Many guys say they “got lucky” after getting laid, but really they came close to their Fuck Number. Thinking about this concept makes me realize there is no luck to getting laid at all—it’s just statistics (romantic, I know), and all based on your existing game.
Every non-virgin man has a Fuck Number (the mean), and for him to get laid he has to do two standard deviations in approaches from the mean to pretty much guarantee getting laid. Let’s say a man’s fuck number is 317 with a standard deviation of 100. Using the principles of normal distribution, this man has a 0.4% chance of a new notch after only 17 approaches, and a 99.6% chance of getting laid after 617 approaches. That means he could have a cold streak of years, but within those 617 approaches he’s going to get laid.
I’ve already shared my thoughts about how continuous approaching is the key to banging (Just Keep Going, The Secret To Getting Laid), but the concept of the Fuck Number provides rudimentary mathematical support that sex can be had with only attempts instead of any game at all. While I don’t want to be the man who has to do 617 approaches to get laid, the most important factor in getting laid is how many approaches you do.
I hate to take the fun out of game, but it’s just a form of technology that allows you to screw more girls with less effort, like how the assembly line allowed Ford to make more cars at a cheaper price. To get laid all you need is will and energy. Add game to improve your efficiency, but it’s not required.Tweet Follow @rooshv
Related Posts You May Like:
Game Tips Newsletter:
getting laid is all about work. and lots of it. wages paid on commission.
The Rookie’s last blog post: BCN: The Barista pt. 2.
If one has any standards, I doubt that the fuck number will increase over time. Just from your posts we see that as your game skills increase you don’t approach girls of lesser quality anymore, but tailor your approaches to suit your higher quality skill set.
The fuck number should be the ratio, integrated over the 1-10 scale of hotness of the girls in question, of those approached and those actually fucked. This is more computationally intensive, but doubtless yields a more informative result.
help me out here for a moment,
I have a mate who hasn’t been laid in ages (like, 4 years roughly) , thought I tried to turn him on game an the pua stuff in general, I’d say he probably only approached two or three girls in the last two years.
Divided by the mumber of girls he fucked ( is that the total number or just the last 2 years as well? ) , two in his life (this guy is 27 , sad, really) his fuck number would be 1.5 .
DId i do something worng?
> To get laid all you need is will and energy.
> Add game to improve your efficiency, but it’s not required.
Obviously if game would be required for getting laid, our species would go extinct long time ago. BTW, everybody gets laid if you haven’t noticed. I have a friend who looks really bad, wears clothes his mum bought him while he was in highschool, and has zero game. He gets laid sometimes.
I believe game is required to give you more choices and to raise your value in the dating market, but definitely you can get laid without any game at all.
Yea, it’s pretty much straight forward when you put it like this.
I’ve been doing some lurking on “love-shy” and incel forums and if there is one thing that stands out is the simple fact that these guys just don’t approach, at all, yet seem to blame much of their lack of success with women on mostly external factors rather than their inability to put in the approach numbers.
Matt Savage’s last blog post: 5 Things That Make You “Beta” in a Relationship.
Without a doubt the key factor in success number of approaches. As Tyler has stated, almost all Sticking Points are self-correcting if you keep approaching. Which leads to an important point in racking up high numbers: momentum. If you are going to post a lot of approaches, and thus bangs, its important to keep a strong momentum of approaching to increase your numbers and to compound the hard-won lessons in field. Taking time off between approaches and losing momentum causes your skills to weaken dramatically, and makes it much tougher to get back in field.
Paul Janka said something similar:
“A difficult women usually remains difficult.” people don’t change easily, so instead men have to learn to cut their losses and just approach a different prospect. Some men get so obsessed about getting a lay from a particular women that they end up wasting so many other opportunities and only realise their loss in time and energy when it’s too late.
The takeaway here is that streaks are a function of approaches, not time. You can virtually gaurentee you’ll get laid within a month if you practice approaching every day, but if you limit yourself to a couple per month you’ll likely go for years.
Why is it that Krauser is juggling a handful of hot girls at once, and perfecting his harem game, and meanwhile Roosh is talking about having to approach hundreds of girls in order to get five lays? Just thinking out loud here, people.
Rivelino’s last blog post: I didn’t know I would like anal, that I would like to be choked out, that I would like when a guy slaps my face..
Because my average reader hasn’t done a single approach in their life. Writing about “harem game” would appeal to 100 or so guys, not the 3-4k that read my blog daily. For more advanced techniques you can check out my newsletter or book. I bid you adieu if the topic matter of my writing no longer appeals to you.
I recently touched on the similarities between poker and game (the necessity of giving yourself permission to have confidence)… I think in this respect, I also look at game through the lens of “Expected Value.”
I’m a card counter, and that is even more applicable than poker. When I play blackjack, there is a small advantage that I have (my expected value), that is often times invisible. The reason is because the variance in blackjack is extremely high, compared to the EV. So although my results can go drastically either way in the short term, the fact that I know I’m playing the game correctly will show dividends in the long run.
Dagonet’s last blog post: Rational Self-Confidence.
“Because my average reader hasn’t done a single approach in their life.”
Hey, that’s a pretty good reply. 4,000 readers per day is a healthy number too. Roosh, I have a question, though. Does your revised version of Bang specifically talk about false disqualifiers? I feel like a reporter here, but I was just wondering if you exclude them for a reason, or because you just have never actively tried them.
Also, does your reply insinuate that you in fact have a harem? If so, why don’t you ever write about it.
I don’t mean to give you a hard time. You were and still are one of my early heroes of game. Some of your posts are absolute classics. And, like I’ve said before, your criticism of American society deserves a nationwide audience.
Rivelino’s last blog post: Is swallowing kinky, romantic, or just par for the course?.
“Because my average reader hasn’t done a single approach in their life. Writing about “harem game” would appeal to 100 or so guys, not the 3-4k that read my blog daily. For more advanced techniques you can check out my newsletter or book. I bid you adieu if the topic matter of my writing no longer appeals to you.”
Roosh wins by bitch slap.
I hate it when guys complain about Roosh going over the basics.
The basics are what is needed by most guys (90%+).
It can be discouraging to a guy new to game (like myself) to not have the basics explained to him.
The fact that you need to do TONS OF APPROACHES needs to be drilled into the head of every newbie out there.
Don’t think that you can just read the “Mystery Method” or “Bang” or some other game book and immediately begin banging hot girls left and right.
This kind of thinking is dangerous because it sets up a unrealistic goal.
A better goal would be to look at this post, try to figure out how many approaches you need to do to get a bang (it can just be a rough estimate)…and just start approaching like crazy.
These days, the worst (usually) that will happen when you approach a girl and she is not feeling you is she will ignore your approach and whip out her phone and pretending to text someone something.
Sucks to get dissed, but just move on.
Better luck next time.
That third to last sentence should read:
These days, the worst (usually) that will happen when you approach a girl and she is not feeling you is she will ignore your approach and whip out her phone and pretend to text someone something.
Cool breakdown. I think this is one of the most important things to realize in game. Working sales jobs in the past forced me to become indifferent to rejections and understand the math behind success. But with a lot of my friends and I’m sure a lot of guys, they don’t understand that they need to make a lot of attempts to get laid.
Neo’s last blog post: RooshV Workshop.
Are you fucking kidding me with this shit? Why are you making it so fucking complicated with mathematical formulas and charts? You are over analyzing the shit out of something that should be fun, not a fucking college research project. Fucking ridiculous.
“Are you fucking kidding me with this shit? Why are you making it so fucking complicated with mathematical formulas and charts? You are over analyzing the shit out of something that should be fun, not a fucking college research project. Fucking ridiculous.”
I will admit that this post probably analyzed the topic a bit too much…but it still is something to think about.
The take away message is do lots of approaches b/c lays come in “waves”, not constant, perfectly timed intervals.
Also, there ain’t nothing “fun” about doing approaches when you are a newb since you will have to endure a lot of rejections.
I don’t know about you, but rejections from cute girls sting like a motherfucker (at least for a little while), especially if you get rejected in front of an “audience” (her friends).
Actually, those two charts with the 1 bang every 20 and then the second one with the bangs clustered together and the dry spell– you want to look at a poisson distribution actually.
i think a normal distribution is actually not relevant here, at all, even if you look at the distribution of fuck numbers among guys vs the distribution of how many approaches you have to do for the next bang. it is probably both highly skewed and has very fat tails.
roosh is a microbiologist.
so basically he runs “scientist game”.. moves backed up by field tests, and double blind studies
a post like this might be over the top, but it pays off for his readers
“And, like I’ve said before, your criticism of American society deserves a nationwide audience.”
Roosh actually thinks about America like most people in Europe and elsewhere do. He is definitely not your typical American. And that’s a good thing.
Just a comment on Newbs getting rejected:
With the right outlook when approaching girls, getting rejected does not sting at all. The approach should evolve into something fun, whether its successful or not. Even a harsh rejection like “Sorry, it’s Shark Week” ala Roissy’s recent post should bring about a laugh and a hat tip rather than any sort of self abuse.
An approach and the girl should just be instantly deleted in one’s mind if the approach goes south. With enough constant approaches, you won’t even have to give it a second thought…. Thats when you can sit back and truly have fun with it.
Notice that Roosh had to adjust his numbers for approaches that are for pure self amusement.
- don’t fuck
Rofl @ #11 Roosh
imagine the public service you are doing if 3000 of those 4000 readers get even 1 lay from reading this
ptk’s last blog post: Disqualification!.
“Obviously if game would be required for getting laid, our species would go extinct long time ago.”
The average man will sleep with around 7 women during his life. Most of these were probably through social connections, not cold approaches.
The math approach is interesting. What would also make for an interesting breakdown is a pyramid chart. At the top of the pyramid would be girls you’ve laid, at the bottom, would be girls you approached but blew you off. In between were girls that you may have met up with but flaked out somewhere in the process. A perfect PUA(not that any such thing exist) would have a cylinder rather than a pyramid which means a perfect approach-to-bang conversion rate. A short and wide pyramid would mean a very low conversion rate.
This all makes perfect sense, but I’m curious as to how many approaches one would have to do to generate a relationship?
I’m assuming that each notch is likely not relationship material… is that the case?
(My objectives aren’t entirely just to accumulate notches anymore, but rather get quality bangs from girls I’d like to date long term. Getting laid has gotten easier, but I haven’t found one I actually like)
Joe: Assuming you have average game…
How many notches does it take build a relationship in today’s culture? I’d guess at least 4.
How many numbers do you have to get to get 4 notches? At least 50.
How many girls do you have to approach to get 50 numbers? At least 250.
Commit to approaching 10 girls a week and that means in 6 months you’ll get into something semi-serious. Of course there are a ton of variables I’m not accounting for, but 6 months of work with average game to get a relationship sounds about right to me.
I think fans of Roosh will appreciate this post… especially my photoshop job at the end…
Dagonet’s last blog post: A Shockingly Beta Film.
I know that’s a ludicrous number, and even if you use the infamous Apocalypse Opener you’d probably have more success than that. But if I ever got over 600 cold approaches without getting anything, I’d probably hire a prostitute.
@Whatever: right on the money. Most of my rejections (at least the most salient ones) come from approaching 2sets or 3sets and watching them turn inwards to each other after the declined opener. It’s not the huge scene that beginners make it out to be, and sure it hurts (because we’re wired to feel pain from rejection) but it’s not the end of the world.
@Roosh: there are indeed many other variables to account for. Aka: if you did 100 approaches with Carmen Electra on your arm to DHV you through the roof, it isn’t representative of your average game.
[...] be today or tomorrow, or even this month, but success is inevitable. As Roosh pointed out in this post, sex is can be broken down to [...]
[...] Roosh – “Sex is Mathematics” [...]
So you are saying that to get a notch you have to on average approach 20 girls? That # seems way low for anyone.
10 girls can be approached in a day easily, so then a man could easily lay over over 180 girls a year.
I think that an average guy doing day game, and I have been studying Krauser’s stuff for some time, needs to do about 100 real approaches to get a real lay. It seems like Krauser gets a new notch about every month, & I think he has usually done slightly over 1,000 approaches a year. I would say that looks wise, is is about average to maybe slightly above average.