Do I need to play pro to prove that the system works?

I don’t think so.

I should have known that any mention of “professional hockey” would bring a response.

It took about a week and a half for this video to gain traction in Instagram:

My claim here is that I could play pro hockey, but I chose not to. That would rather coach 10, 100, 1,000 or more to the highest levels of hockey, making the same transformations I made, is my choice instead.

Obviously, some people didn’t get the point.

“Seems like your head is kinda big here. Be humble.”

“Mason, you can’t actually believe this. That’s delusional.”

“How many pros have you developed?”

“You’re just lying. Stop the false advertising.”

“Skills don’t translate as much as you think.”

“Saying you coulda played pro is absurd.”

“You could play pro hockey but you chose not to?????? Says no one.”

These are not followers, which honestly makes sense. And they’re also miserable couch potato keyboard warriors projecting their shortcomings onto me instead of taking action, testing and falsifying their own claims. So with that in mind, I delete the unproductive comments, which is also a rule I have.

By the way, notice how none of these comments question the actual specific standards on their own. Rather they question my stats from playing 6 years ago, which is useless. Would you really want me to look up something you were bad at 6 years ago?

I’m not ashamed to say that I was bad.

But I also acknowledge and respect my CURRENT abilities.

The reason I say that I can make pro hockey is because of - the Ability Standards in the Hockey Hacks System. I can do 80% of all the “freak” standards in the list.

Some NHLers I’ve observed likely can do 85-90% of the “freak” standards. But there is no one who can do 100% of the standards.

If I were to analyze and test the abilities of many other pro players in lower leagues like the ECHL and AHL or any European Leagues, it is very likely that, regardless of what your Elite Prospects say, they are not even close to 70% of the “Freak” Standards. Otherwise, they would be in the NHL!

The reason I’m so obsessed with standards is that it gives bad players like myself a complete transformation. It is not interesting to see a great player go from #5 to #1 in the world. It IS interesting to see a bad player in the bottom 50th percentile climb up to the top 10th percentile. Why? Because they’re defying the odds, beating their genetics, overcoming what they were “born as”.

This means Connor McDavid is overall less interesting to me vs. someone like a Martin St. Louis. One player was good already. The other was not good, but built himself up from his training.

If you had to honestly and humbly ask yourself what is more interesting to you, would a case study of transforming from a 4th line scratch to an unstoppable superstar interest you? Or would a superstar being a superstar interest you? I know my answer, because I don’t sit on the couch eating potato chips all day responding to a video that “triggers” me just because I didn’t make the NHL when I was 18.

Here is the case study done on myself, where I changed from being bad to being great:

And that means more than your stats from 6 years ago.

If you want help with a transformation, check out all my programs at hackelhockeyhacks.com

And thank you for your continued support in our mission to make the abilities of the best hockey players accessible to everyone.

Yours in Hockey Hacks,

Mason