Anyone feels like 80/20 rule is becoming slowly outdated and going further into 99/1?

Reddit View
Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Copy link
PDF EPUB TXT PNG
acroma414
August 24, 2019
171 upvotes
askTRP

Women are getting pickier since more and more of them awaken to the reality that adultery is not punished and they can do whatever they want, and all of them obviously want creme de la creme if possible. Not to mention dating apps becoming more and more popular too, media portraying being a slut as a good thing that leads to freedom etc. Chads don't mind giving their time on less attractive women because they just want to conquer all there is. I am not saying 99/1 is a today's reality but at some point it might as well become true seeing the direction of dating trends.

I mean I can improve only so much, I won't waste all of my resources just to be somewhat noticeable in the sea of overblown standards.


Post Information
Title Anyone feels like 80/20 rule is becoming slowly outdated and going further into 99/1?
Author acroma414
Upvotes 171
Comments 135
Date 24 August 2019 04:45 AM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit askTRP
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/250387
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/asktrp/comments/cup37n/anyone_feels_like_8020_rule_is_becoming_slowly/
Similar Posts
Monk Mode - Be Your Own Abbot Edition

Introduction: A simple guide to DIY monk mode. Skip to "Be Your Own Abbot"

A Guide to Understanding Women

I Just wanted to share my research, I might create a blog but I am

The Politics of Life: 25 Rules for Survival in a Brutal and Manipulative World

Book The Politics of Life: 25 Rules for Survival in a Brutal and Manipulative World

12 Laws For Life by Jordan Peterso

I recently read Jordan's 12 Laws. Frankly it’s the first thing I have read

The Golden Rule is stupid and following it will make the people around you miserable. It's especially bad for relationships.

The Golden Rule: "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."


Red Pill terms found in post:
standards
Comments

[–]plxxx140 points141 points  (23 children) | Copy

Be it as it may, even if it turns out to be 99.9/0.1 thats no reason to stop working on yourself. Your mentality is all wrong

[–]shneakypete23 points24 points  (2 children) | Copy

This. You're not improving for them. You're improvement is for you.

[–]flipdoggers2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well it depends how. E.g. I lift only because it improves my SMV; if I didn't care about that, I'd stick only to cardio and calisthenics which I prefer, but don't get me as jacked.

[–]TheRedPillRipper1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I can only improve so much

Really? Prove it.

[–]dani0987 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

I improve your self for yourself. Live your own best quality of life

[–]eboyster-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I know plenty of ugly dudes with decent looking girlfriends.

[–]bare_et_spoergsmaal 1 points [recovered]  (23 children) | Copy

Nah, women still want LTR and the vast majority can't keep a 1% man for more than one night. In fact, most can't get him for one night even.

Anyways, I don't think you even know what a 1% man is. I don't believe they sleep around with anyone. They're very selective and don't deal with bullshit. Because that's what it takes to become a 1% man.

[–]ValorElite27 points28 points  (9 children) | Copy

What even is a 1% man? Depends on what you are trying to do.

[–]TooManyThots49 points50 points  (8 children) | Copy

a 1% man is objectively the best man in a room of 100 men.

[–]bare_et_spoergsmaal 1 points [recovered]  (7 children) | Copy

Exactly. So a 1% man isn't a lowlife fuckboy, because as soon as a jacked, tall, famous actor walks in, the fuckboy fades in comparison. Even though this actor may be married to a single woman all his life.

[–]TheGillos36 points37 points  (6 children) | Copy

A famous actor (who is also good looking, lol) would be top 0.0001% (if not more).

[–]bare_et_spoergsmaal 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy

My example was extreme, but I meant that it's easier to have a higher SMV that a lowlife fuckboy.

[–]Vikingcel5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Then provide what would be an accurate example in your opinion.

[–]celincelin1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Because it’s pretty easy to be a famous actor.

This sub is pure autism, without reasoning abilities autists sometimes still have.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

so like Brad Pitt who is still gonna get divorce raped.

[–]TheGillos0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Well... He was with a total psycho...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

guess his vetting was below par

[–]TooManyThots11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy

lol, wrong. They'll settle for a sub-10 man.

Look at the rise of popularity of "casual" sex. All the women I know say they don't do relationships, just hookups.

[–]ForrestAlpha8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yh women have become more open and brazen with their dualistic mating strategy these days. A lot of girls will have a BB bf, whilst still fucking Chad behind his back.

What "top 20% of men are getting 80% of women" means is that if those men so choose they can get regular sex from 80% of women...well 100% of women really.

The fact that Tinder and other dating apps have exacerbated the issue of a smaller percentage of men monopolizing all the women, has just also exacerbated the need for women to employ AF/BB

[–]acroma414[S] 6 points7 points  (9 children) | Copy

By 1% I mean a percentage of Chads that are open to anyone without the need for a longer relationship.

[–]bare_et_spoergsmaal 1 points [recovered]  (8 children) | Copy

Well those aren't the 1% men. They're lowlife fuckboys with no meaningful purpose in their life. That's nothing to be jealous of.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is why the red pill advocates

focusing on your mission

.

My mission is nutting in dimes.

[–]Vikingcel3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is some serious feelgood bullshit.

[–]acroma414[S] 6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy

Let's assume that all women suddenly desire lowlife fuckboys because they feel like that's what they want now due to social conditioning and other factors. Obivously not 100% of women will ever go for that, but more and more of them do go. What now?

[–]bare_et_spoergsmaal 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy

Dude nothing changes. Focus on yourself and have a higher purpose. Lift and be healthy. Read, work on your career. Socialize. Learn how game women and dress/groom good. Etc. Read the sidebar.

Do you seriously think that being a lowlife fuckboy who have nothing going on in his life than women is a life well lived? I'd probably kill myself if that's all what I've done with my life once I reach old life.

[–]Atheist_Utopia5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Don't moralize on this sub, even though I agree with you. What you and I define as a life well lived is different for everyone.

[–]ogkushinjapan3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Exactly. Besides Prince Williams and Harry, most 1% men are self made. Guys who won the looks genetic lottery are not top 1% unless they work super hard and get lucky in their career.

[–]dani0980 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Your logic is sound

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

I mean yes the top 1 percent of men (the Leo DiCaprios etc.) are what all women are after. But the reality is that the top 1% of men are really picky and they won't go for any slut on the streets.

These women don't have a choice but to pick from the bottom 99% of men when they realize that the top 1% of men don't want them anyways.

Improve yourself to be as close to the top 1% as possible. The top 1% not only has good looks but also earns good money and has status. I'm talking attractive doctors, lawyers, CEOs, actors etc.

[–]CopeTiliRope36 points37 points  (32 children) | Copy

In reality it’s more like 99.999/0.001

Because girls constantly want the best, and won’t ever want to settle unless it’s with a literal top-tier man. So if you took any girl and lined up every man on Earth for a game of Tinder IRL, the girl would only swipe right on Hollywood stars and male models. Because she believes she can have them.

But, however, girls cannot have the top-tier guys. In reality, it would be impossible for all the girls to share the top 1% of the top 1% (won’t stop them from trying, but eventually the guy will pick the best of the litter and leave the rest in the dust. Eventually) So therefore the girls have to drop their standards and get only extremely handsome guys. But then the extremely handsome guys settle with their best option, and the girls have to settle with only very attractive guys. And so on and so forth. And girls will keep lowering their standards until they get a guy they can actually land. And because of the Pareto principle and the laws of statistics, this lands at about 80/20.

Girls are always super picky. They always want the literal best. But they can’t get the best so they’ll get the best they can get. As a guy, you don’t have to be the best. Who cares about 80/20 or 99/1? As a guy, you just have to be the best she can get. Whether that’s the best in a small social circle or the best in a 100 mile radius, if you’re the best looking option, girls want you.

The reason everyone cites Tinder as showing how picky girls are is because of the sheer selection of men it gives them. If you had 1000 amazing restaurants to choose from, of course you’d only pick Michelin star ones. In order to keep up on Tinder, you’d have to be better than the million other guys on the app, rather than the thousand in her area. It’s for this reason I believe no one should ever use Tinder. Approach girls in the real world. Your odds are 1000x better.

[–]rubenbrasil14 points15 points  (2 children) | Copy

"wont ever want to settle unless theyre top tier"

not true lol. bitches settle for betas all the time. its literally a huge fundamental of AF/BB.

[–]CopeTiliRope14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

“Won’t ever want to settle”

No girl wants the Beta Buxx. That’s the other fundamental part of AF/BB. They want to have kids with the top guy. They have to settle for Beta Buxx

[–]Senior Endorsedmax_peenor1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

bitches settle for betas all the time. its literally a huge fundamental of AF/BB.

It's a feature, being that is means BETA bucks.

[–]tony88325 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

I heard some young women talking at work. One said to the other. “Do you get approached? She said no. Mostly DM’s on social mediA and text. “ So if you want to be part of the 99% - don’t approach.

[–]BetaCuckSimp4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

As a guy, you just have to be the best she can get. Whether that’s the best in a small social circle or the best in a 100 mile radius

Or just the best that night. Eventually you'll end up being the best at a particular bar or club or pub, etc and then it's your turn.

[–]acroma414[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

It’s for this reason I believe no one should ever use Tinder. Approach girls in the real world. Your odds are 1000x better.

I never could land anything, not even a date with IRL women. I am quite literally invisible to them and all of my dates were only through Tinder. So maybe the odds are greater for everyone but me, dunno.

[–]CopeTiliRope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I would hazard a guess that the girls you’ve met on Tinder aren’t high tier though, or at least high enough tier as you can get. Think about if you could land a 4/10 on Tinder, you could land a 5-6/10 IRL with the same effort

And I would also guess you aren’t approaching nearly as many girls as you’re swiping right on Tinder. Just like girls are presented many options for men, your options for girls are much higher on Tinder too. So approaching 100 girls you might get 30, but swiping right on 10,000 girls you might get 50. Your odds are significantly worse, but through sheer numbers you see better results

[–]acroma414[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Tinder is good for setting up dates with people. I have nowhere to go IRL if I wanted to invite someone out. It takes much more effort to talk to random people, get them to know and then ask them out. My hobbies and work related things are solitary in nature so I don't hang out with people on a daily basis and I don't want to go into this dancing class shit, I just don't want to. Not everybody has to go there, I'll be one of those people. Also want to avoid clubs, I am not attractive for people who go there.

To be honest I can't think of one place where I can actually meet people with the purpose of asking them out lol. Without Tinder there's nothing.

[–]H0tTamal32 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

You have a defeatist attitude. If you aren't willing to better yourself and let go of the story about yourself that you've made in your head, then there is nothing anyone can do for you. The OP seems to be an attempt at laying the blame for your failures at the feet of our culture. This TRP stuff doesn't work unless you take action.

[–]H0tTamal3-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

This comment says it all. You are trying to do all of your approaching through the highly competitive and shallow world of tinder. You certainly do need to be at least top 20% but probably more like top 10% to get any kind of steady success on tinder, unless you are ok with HB5 and lower.

If you are invisible to women IRL, you are doing it wrong. You need to be a presence. You need to get their attention with well crafted game.

I know it is hard to approach. That is where you will get the biggest return on investment of your time. If you aren't having success with it, then that just means you need to keep working on it. Make field reports of your failures, ask for guidance. You could be swimming in pussy if you focus your efforts in the right direction, instead of trying to find a reason why you will never succeed so why even try.

When you approach in person, looks are not as important as they are online. Sure, make some effort by lifting and dressing well, but approach game is not about being the best looking guy. If you have strong approach game that you develop through trial and error, you will be able to pull pussy consistently.

[–]SpinPlates1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

This right here.

Also, strong usernamer.

[–]jm512 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

As a guy, you just have to be the best she can get.

A friend bought a hobby farm in Normandy, I've stayed there a few times. It's so rural that the neighbouring farmer has never left his small village, no need.

The one and only shop/gas station was run by an older couple. When they got married, she was a widow and he was a widower. Him 6'3" and her 5'1".

He was the only middle aged widower and she was the only middle aged widow, it was taken for granted that they would get hitched.

[–]Senior Endorsedmax_peenor0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

What do you think 80/20 means?

[–]CopeTiliRope0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

80/20 is traditionally that 20% of the men get 80% of the women. a.k.a the Pareto principle (which applies to everything in the universe as far as we can tell. My favorite being that 80% of language spoken is composed of 20% of written words)

My point is that the Pareto principle only applies across large sample sizes, as it is a statistical principle, after all. In extremely large samples like Tinder, the top 20% is a very high standard that most men can’t reach. So if this is the case, you need to reduce the sample size a women has to choose from (going from millions on Tinder to maybe the dozens that actually approach her) in order to increase your odds of being in that top 20%.

My points on women wanting the absolute best (99.999/0.001) was an argument on the reason behind the Pareto principle working in a dating environment. Women want the best and naturally seek the top just the same as any force of nature wants the best option, due to evolution and the way the universe works, so therefore by them seeking an equilibrium between the best they can get and someone who will actually have them, we land at 80/20. With unrestricted access to men, women would all share the top 0.001% if they could manage it. And with the rise of feminism and casual sex culture, they are getting more access and it is slowly shifting from 80/20 to 99/1 (Just look at recent studies on the percentage of men that get matches on Tinder).

[–]Senior Endorsedmax_peenor-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

80/20 is traditionally that 20% of the men get 80% of the women

No, that's not it. It's 20% of the men get 80% of the sex. No one is saying 80% of men are incels. We acknowledge there is a sexual strategy for the 80% that can secure them some sex, particularly through provider behaviors. It's also a strategy that will secure far less total sex than the 20% can secure.

[–]dadfrombrad0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy

Looks to guys is money to girls

Obviously looks are a factor, but nothing on the planet raises your SMV more effectively than a Rolex.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy

Looks to guys is money to girls

Obviously looks are a factor, but nothing on the planet raises your SMV more effectively than a Rolex.

Millions of thirsty beta-providers disagree with you.

I've seen your theory in action. My friend's (female) cousin is a hot little hoe. She ended up getting wifed up by a rich guy. He was making tons of money in his job so he wifed up a dime. Lucky rich guy right?

She made him buy a huge mansion, new cars, a yatch, and basically blew as much money as she possibly could, all while treating him like absolute SHIT.

Everything eventually came to a head when the guy's company ran into some financial trouble and he got canned. They lost everything, she ended up leaving his ass, but not after being along for the ride and getting fucked on the side by other men the whole time.

The idea that having money and being a beta provider is the pinnacle of success with females is completely wrong.

When talking to mediocre guys, I've heard them say "you can't get a girl like that without lots of money." The reason why they say that, is because THEY can't get a girl like that. I tell them, "I'lll be right back."

[–]CopeTiliRope6 points7 points  (12 children) | Copy

Blatantly false. Any girl would pick the handsome hobo over the ugly millionaire. Sure girls settle for rich guys, but they never want to fuck them. Unless you’ve got Dan Bilzerian “fuck you” money and can buy models to hang out with you, money doesn’t mean shit.

[–]6times6661 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy

Money matters a lot. Obviously not 100k a year rich. More like 500k a year and over rich.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy

Money matters a lot. Obviously not 100k a year rich. More like 500k a year and over rich.

Girls don't care about this as much as they used to. In western countries, even welfare hoes have their housing, food, and medication paid for. They want some good dick.. Young women make their own money now, they are out-earning men in most big cities.

This shit about "have money, get women" is outdated A/F. In the 1950s, beta provider game was tha real shit. Not anymore.

[–]6times6662 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

I disagree. I think women care a lot about income. It’s just most men on this sub wont ever reach that level of income so they’re hamstering.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I disagree. I think women care a lot about income. It’s just most men on this sub wont ever reach that level of income so they’re hamstering.

Income is a last resort for unattractive men to try and get women.

That's a pretty low quality relationship though.

[–]CopeTiliRope1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy

Even 500k isn’t enough to make up for an ugly guy. You’d need at least millions, and most people will never get there. Looks are way more important to people who aren’t CEOs

[–]6times6660 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

I mean there’s more to life than attracting women anyway right? Just splash money on a gold digger and breed with her and have attractive kids. That’s what my uncle did.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

I like something that your uncle did, find someone attractive and breed. Mix your genes with top notch, attractive girls.

[–]6times6660 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Yeap but then again he has no time too look for love. His purpose is his work.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Which highlights one of the downsides of "beta provider game" and working your life away for money.

[–]6times6660 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

He has his own business, it’s a passion of his. He has no time for love or to pursue a relationship with a woman. At the end of the day do what makes you happy. If it’s earning lots of money or living for the weekend, you do you. More to life than attracting women.

[–]conk200011 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy

Based on swiping app data, the ratio is currently 94.5/5.5.

80/20 is for any average IRL situation.

95/5 is runaway open hypergamy.

[–]clausternn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Source?

[–]spider_13378 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

I suppose for one night stands yes, but then again wouldn't you want to have a onennight stand with an hb10? Modern women suck at being women ironically and that in itself is a turn off not just for chad but men in general. The women of today sleep around for validation since most cant even keep the commitment of a true HVM.

[–]TooManyThots6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yea this is pretty much fact at this point thanks to the Pareto Distribution:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Probability_density_function_of_Pareto_distribution.svg/552px-Probability_density_function_of_Pareto_distribution.svg.png

which pretty much perfectly matches the tinder preference distribution:

https://miro.medium.com/max/1200/1*iC0UjKDxFViE3XZuk6MMUw.jpeg

and tinder is becoming the most common way women meet men:

https://scontent-frt3-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e15/67315537_763004594118241_6856839656517309395_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frt3-1.cdninstagram.com&oh=965eabdcb454f594fdc37335402d790f&oe=5DDCECE1&ig_cache_key=MjA4OTU0MDQ0MzI0NzYyMzg5NA%3D%3D.2

It's not quite 99:1 now, but probably close to 95:5

[–]lonelythrowaway012 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy

As a 5’0 balding Indian guy, I just gotta say looks it’s the majority that matters, if you don’t even have a good foundation to build off of, it’s pretty much useless doing anything. It’s over for you fam

[–]volvostupidshit1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Thank god you won't have a chance to procreate. Just think of what your children would be like if they get your genes and your personality. They will have no chance to survive. If you want anything in this world, you need to adapt. That's what our ancestors had been doing to survive. You're fucked in the face? Then go do something else that would compensate for it. Get a good job that may afford you some surgery and raise your status for one.

​

It was never simple for us ordinary men and yet there are so many ordinary men who continued their bloodlines. Use your intellect and survive this harsh world. Or better yet, just lay down and cry. The world does not need a person with defeatist attitude anyway.

[–]lonelythrowaway012 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy

Being muscular isn’t going to compensate for an ugly face, being short and of an unattractive race.

I’m not even being a defeatist I’m being a realist, women don’t chase after 5’0 bald Indian guys no matter how confident they are or how much game the use

[–]volvostupidshit0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Then you are right.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Life is too short to live in this mindset. Why do you base your self worth on female attention.

[–]Filmguy0004 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Like many on here have said, the 99/1 rule pretty much applies to the quick on the spot-fuck. I think its fair to say that there is a below 5% of men who most women would fuck within a short period of time upon meeting them (within hours or even minutes). But the vast majority of men won't fit that bill (even most red pill dudes).

But most women do want some sort of commitment at various stages of their lives and the 99/1 rule isn't practical or realistic in that sense.

[–]AceMav214 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

I feel like reddit would be different if we all had profile pictures

[–]ThreeEyez22 points23 points  (2 children) | Copy

While you’re fixated on trivial shit, we’ll be out enjoying all the women and our lives.

[–]acroma414[S] -2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

What's trivial about this exactly? Noticing a trend which says a lot about overblown standards is not trivial, because it hits everyone that isn't at the peak. Unless you are, then good for you.

[–]superjerk992 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I don't know how relevant this is, but there was just a study done recently that found young adults between 18-35 are the least promiscuous of the last 2 prior generations. I'm sure a quick Google search could pull up the actual study but I don't care that much.

Either way, who cares? You can't fault wemon for how the world works these days. Evolve and learn to use it to your advantage or just stay miserable.

Edit: some words

[–]ProFriendZoner4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

The Rules of Hypergamy never change.

[–]donkeydodo4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

When you stop caring, is when you have the chance to become top percentile.

[–]iCeeYouP3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Lmao poor OP these redpill guys gaslighting the fuck outta him.”wuts dat, you say genetics are the main factor and looks matter??? Found the inkwell!!” Lmao op don’t worry you’re not going crazy these guys are just boarder line bluepilled guys with puffed up chests

[–]nogatcord10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy

"I won't waste all of my resources just to be somewhat noticeable in the sea of overblown standards."

Then don't. It seems you've made up your mind anyway.

"media portraying being a slut as a good thing"

Sounds good to me. Im failing to see the problem here.

[–]IOwnMyShit9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy

What kind of incel shit is this?

Not sure if you’re trolling or not, but if you’re not, look up Owen Cook and tell me how he has fucked hundreds of 9’s and 10’s given his looks and height?

Look at how confident he is, stribe to be that.

Don’t sit in your boy room and bitch and cry because you’re not Chad Thundercock.

Or be an angry virgin, I don’t give a fuck, I’m happy either way.

[–]acroma414[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

ook up Owen Cook and tell me how he has fucked hundreds of 9’s and 10’s given his looks and height?

Do you know that for sure? I don't know the guy but if the only source of that are his words, then I can't really trust such claims.

[–]vondoom9002 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

You're actually right it's 86% 14% ATM based on dating statistics. Well observed.

[–]Crixusgannicus2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The wise man seeks to get the most bang for the least bucks.

"Bang" in every sense of the word and in every context, not just related to women.

[–]GiftedUnlimtedRU2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

All these guys giving you shit meanwhile they’re sat getting worked up on Reddit. Every transaction has a price and if the price isn’t worth paying, don’t pay it. That being said women aren’t that picky, maybe in their ideals but not in reality.

[–]mrrooftops1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

When 5s think they are 9s and society has promised them 9s, they only want that.

[–]ogkushinjapan2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

I’d consider Prince Harry a 1% man. Royalty, immense wealth, 6ft3. Yet see who he married?

Elon musk is another, yet how many times he has married?

Shows that men under 1% who are redpilled still have some great advantages over these 1%ers

[–]TooManyThots6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

Prince Harry is a 0.01% man

[–]sebastianconcept1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Way less than that. How many princes in Earth divided by 7 billion

[–]CainPrice2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Nope. If anything, as casual sex became more prevalent and accepted and mainstream, the 80-20 rule became more like the 70-30 rule.

Today, more than ever, a slightly more average-ish, less chad-ish guy with good social skills can catch women between boyfriends when they're in a casual phase and get laid.

Guys who insist on stupid shit like all women sharing some miniscule 1 percent of men are typically internet warriors. The - extremely- ugly and socially stunted. It doesn't matter if it's 80-20, 99-1, 70-30, or 50-50. If you're in the bottom third of men, you lose no matter how big or small your category of men is.

[–]SpinPlates2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I actually agree with OP on this and the top comment is naive as fuck.

Just because women want an LTR with a top 20% man doesn't mean they won't cheat on him with a top 1% man. (We're talking about 1% attractiveness)

Just today on r-dataisbeautiful a Scandinavian women had a .9% swipe right rate. Over 12,000 swipes and 99.1% were left swipes. She even said she mostly goes after extremely handsome men....oh with interesting bios Teehee &virtuesignal&virtuesignal&virtuesignal&virtuesignal

[–]ghjklzxcv123 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy

Make a big 7 figure wealth and move to asia or some shitty slavic country. You can basically own everyone with your money, now you are a god when it compared to lowlife chad.

[–]6times6661 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Having a 7 figure wealth will do you well in a 1st world country also.

[–]Lambdal71 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Nah, if you’re a top 20% male, you can get almost any women by just building a real connection with her and doing some mild game.

[–]RandomWordsssss1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

What kind of incel bullshit is this

[–]Hedser910 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I know for a fact that guys who are average or maybe even slightly below average get laid too every now and then. Handsome guys have it more easy though. Always had my doubts about that 80/20 rule, its also used in business with any argumentation missing.

[–]xx-Rain_Maker-xx0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

As other people here have stated. It's more like 95/5 instead of 80/20. Being a 20% guy is not enough to be successful in Tinder.

[–]deathhandmachiavelli0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think its still 80/20.

[–]five_eight0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is sort of the equivalent of a mid-life crisis (which is in most of our futures): this is the hill I'm climbing---is it the right hill?; do I even want to climb it?; is the juice worth the squeeze/is it realistic? I think OP deserves some credit and realistic feedback.

[–]benedictineasu0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

No. However, I do think a lot more younger men are just giving up. Phone apps can either bring a guys ego way up or down. However, both men would be better fit to hitting on woman at social spots in person. You gotta be able to do this.

If you have to depend on phone apps for dates you’re doing yourself a huge disservice. You gotta be able to hit on girls in social spots. Men need to hunt. 80/20 is still good, but sadly a larger percentage of men have completely gave up trying. Think of it like how we report job numbers. If you’re not searching for a job after a while you don’t effect the unemployment number.

[–]LeEbinConchShell0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

yep, i just fuck hookers in SEA now. way more economical

[–]red_matrix0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

As social media ramps up this will become a game of looks and looks alone.

Girls want AF/BB.

It’s nature.

[–]latinasonly0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

average guys get laid all the time. lots of loserly guys date hot girls. being in the top 5% is not hard at all.

[–]frankgold0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think 80/20 rule also applies in exponential. Meaning you can pareto square, and say out of the 80 woman attracted to the top 20, 64 would be attracted to top 4, and out of them, 51 would be attracted to top %0.8 percent if you cube the pareto rule.

[–]brinkleybuzz0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Would my girl prefer to be banging Dwayne Johnson? Sure, but that MFer isn't walking through our door anytime soon, so it's my cock she's sucking.

Top 20%, top 1%, doesn't matter. What matters is you're the best option when she wants some dick.

[–]zboo1h0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Maybe, just maybe, JUST MAYBE, there may be more important things in life besides the pursuit of slime.

[–]RelucBeam0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Incel tier post.

Relax, calm down and focus on yourself rather than on what women are doing.

[–]VinterBot0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

If it was all about looks there wouldn't be ugly people around.

[–]_quote0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I’m not being weird and racist, just truthful here. The 99/1 thing is true for white girls. Their standards are absolutely insane. Black and Hispanic girls are way more normal with dating white guys. And Asian girls (especially Chinese and southeast Asian) have like no standards and date loser white guys all the time.

[–]Nighthawkdragon80 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think it’s 97 3 rule

[–]ComfyBiscotti0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

its about 95/5 now. blackcels, currycels, asiancels, uglycels, arabcels and even whitecels are now out of luck.

​

chad or nothing is the norm

​

or else be a beta cuck bux

[–]grunge0220 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Thanks to social media it looks like it's heading there. If so that means you have to work even harder than. Times are going to get tougher and it's your decision if you're going to keep fighting and give it your all or give up completely like all those lame mgtows.

[–]TheWalkingNightmare0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Should've posted this to incels.

[–]volvostupidshit-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

As I've always said, incels probably should not try to spread their seed. They will just produce lazy, depressed children anyway if they ever accidentally spread one which will just a burden to society. So I always support their mantra of "just lay down and rot."

[–]magx01-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

The thing they never tell you about 80/20 is the 80 is not static. It becomes the 80 of the 80 and then the 80 of that 80 and so on.



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter