Basic Speed Seduction Home Study Course    Compare

The SS Basic Home Study Course was recorded approximately between 1998-2000. The Basic Home Study Course would most likely be considered SS 2.0. This course incorporated the refinements of Major Mark Cunningham utilizing concepts such as hypnotic conditioning and attributes of the Romantic Hero.

The course was CD based when I purchased it from Straightforward. Yates Canipe establishes a framework for the listener giving examples of SS used by newbie students etc.
Some of the major conceptual ideas from this early course for me (and it’s over 10 years since I last reviewed the program) would be as follows:

• Dating is for women I am already sleeping with
• The Attributes of the Romantic Hero
• An SS student being a GIFT for women
• Structuring opportunities and offering challenges
• Leading her imagination
• Tools that can be used for rapport building, qualification, and screening such as palmistry, hand writing analysis, etc
• Introduction to Pattern language
• Using Pattern Language as a sexual accelerator to speed up the time for intimacy
• Themes, Trance Words, Weasel Phrases
• The Structure of Creating your own patterns
• Mani the Martian activity to reduce shame
• Various different approaches such as the famous “Stunning opener”

Not bad for not looking at the course in over 10 years. Keep in mind I had listened to the course 16 times in about a year and half span and spent a lot of time incorporating the exercises in the field and even participating on the SS list.

Would I recommend this product to a complete newbie or my own relative…probably not. There are simpler approachs especially listed on the Top 13 product list by Dating Skills Review. But, this product for me is nostalgia.

You can hear early teachings of Mark Cunningham, Ben Orion, Brother Kamal etc. I think even Kim of Essential Skills can be heard in the background. Also, references to Rick H and even Eben are made also.

I had a interest in NLP and Hypnosis for persuasion …so I was a huge SS fan.
My biggest issues back then was a proper learning strategy was not incorporated through RJ’s teachings at the time. This became resolved with refinements through Riker’s Tech Manual and even RJ’s current catalog.

Other’s having addressed this issue as well such as Brad P through his Forbidden Truth reports, and even Julian Blanc lately through Shift. A plan towards SS skill development was not given back then.

It was a pioneer product for its time, and I sometimes return to Ross for refinements as I find he has insights that the major players in the dating and seduction industry have not addressed, but this was not an easy product for me.

It looks like it is not sold anymore. The current Speed Seduction catalog funneled through RJ’s latest teachings is more user friendly.

Most of the reviews I write on here (DSR)
are right after reading the book or watching the DVD.
This one's unique because I have field-tested SS a ton.
I've learned a lot from Ross Jeffries.
In fact, he relieved me of my virginity (by using his patterns...this girl who was, admittedly, already into me and horny...a librarian, Valerie, she was 18, she passed me her number, we met outside her dorm and she took me up there. I kept talking and talking, trying hard to get every word right.
Now, over ten years later, I realize that I could've just slammed the door, pushed her against the door, and made out with her. Then fucked her. But still, were it not for my SS (magic feather), I wouldn't known how to take the next step.


THE BAD

I feel conflicted about SS, because on the one hand,
I've had some remarkable results with it,
but on the other hand,

1. I've really humiliated myself
by laying it on way too thick...because of my immature understanding
of it. For example, I've fallen for several of my professors,
and I tried to seduce them in my papers by using SS languaging.
I cringe now, thinking about it.
Long story short, I think I was way too obvious...and it was in writing.

2. And another misgiving I have is that Ross Jeffries is a master bullshitter; so you can never trust what he says. It seems like he's quick to justify something. Like if a student says, "Seems to me that it's really obvious the way you're embedding those commands-" Ross will jump in and say, "I'm exagerating for teaching purposes." But I really don't think he was exaggerating. I've never heard RJ actually deliver a pattern in a subtle manner--oh wait...except on that TV interview when he ran the Discovery Channel pattern.

3. His audio sucks in most of his programs. You can hear coughing and clapping and laughing of the audience way too loud. It drowns out what he's saying.

4. I do SS way better than Ross Jeffries himself. I think to run patterns, or even Mystery Method routines, you must be a great actor. IMO, those who try a "pickup line," or a routine, or an SS pattern, and complain that it didn't "work," are probably bad actors. It's probably obvious that they're spouting rehearsed lines.

5. In the shower today, I was thinking about RJ's girlfriend (not in that way). It occurred to me that they'd probably make a good match even if he never used his SS on her. I don't know whether he claims he got her with SS or not, but RJ is now a very successful, tall, deep-voiced man. He does have his ugly days, but that doesn't matter as much to women. I can imagine RJ would make a MUCH better boyfriend than Mystery. I don't think I've ever heard Mystery sound sincere; but RJ sometimes sounds sincere (when he's not.... trying to .... (gasp) sound hypnotic).

6. Most SS students think the patterns are magical spells. But in RJ's first book, or one of his first books, he talked about inducing trance. The girl must be very focused on what you're saying. And it helps if she's in a light trance first.

7. Ross delivers patterns poorly. I've heard a handful of other pua's deliver patterns, and I think they all are better than Ross at delivery. This is only when he's delivering a pattern. Kind of tragic since Ross was born with a golden voice. I could give him some free coaching right here: He gasps a little before each clause. His gestures and facial expressions are too conspicuous (though I haven't experienced from the woman's point of view. I know as a magician, many tricks work only on the one spectator you're addressing, and the rest of the audience thinks it's just silly and obvious).

8. This is in regards to others who have tried to make their own NLP patterns. Fuentes (Sexual Key) is good, but dense. Jason Capital is not good. In 77 Ways to Make Women..., in the 2nd way, Capital makes a brief pattern and then draws the reader's attention to the "embedded commands." The commands were phrased poorly. Very difficult for the subconscious to internalize them. For example, “filled up completely” and “be taken by this experience,” are supposed to be commands, according to Capital.

9. There's not much teaching on Leading. RJ several times does say, "If she's ready to blow you, that's not the time to run a pattern." But I know, in retrospect, I did just that. I'd spend hours running patterns, DDB (doggy dinner bowl look), and I could've seized the girl 20 minutes in.

10. I think I've seen Ross have a girl on stage, and while he's running her finger up her thigh, or from her wrist to her shoulder...she pulls back suddenly with a big smile. Then Ross smiles big, looks to the audience, as if to say, "See! This stuff works." Ross says to her, "What did you feel?" And she says, "It tickled." That's the sort of vibe I get from most of his demonstrations on live girls. It's a mixture of her being on stage, and who knows what post-hypnotic anchors he gave before, and her reporting ONLY the good stuff. She's not going to ruin his seminar when she's in the spotlight. She's his friend...or a girlfriend of his friend. So she's either going to react neutrally or positively.
As a matter of fact, there are studies which show a girl will more likely give her number to a guy, or kiss him, if she (very) recently walked over a rickety bridge. It's called Misattribution of Arousal. The fear, the anxiety she feels, is like feeling sexual arousal. When she's feeling anxious, then she sees a man, then she attributes that arousal feeling to the man. So just having a girl on stage, who gets stagefright, is a recipe for her feeling horny for Ross.

11. In some ways, RJ is a great teacher. But his insistence on teaching in a "non-linear" fashion is just laziness, IMO. I listened to RJ for hours and hours, and it was fascinating and entertaining, but it would've been much more helpful if he taught in a step-by-step fashion. He has a lot of brilliant ideas...in fact many of the ideas in the seduction community originate with Ross Jeffries (but are mistakenly credited to Mystery or Style or unknown)....but it just feels like he's Doc Brown in Back to The Future, just all over the place like he just woke up with this new brilliant idea. But how does it fit into the rubric of SS? And how best to learn it?


The Good

Using SS, I put a girl under a trance for 4 months.
This was way back in the year 2001.

I've seduced many girls with only SS as my tactic,
but Marla stands out because years after we broke up,
we reunited and I asked her about our 4 month long relationship.
She described it this way: "I felt like I was on dope for those 4 months. Everything in my life was no longer important and you were the only thing that was important to me. But I felt hooked on you, trapped in a way...even though you would talk and talk and it was so boring."
Then I explained to her that I was experimenting with hypnosis, and I covertly hypnotized her. She then seemed to have a cathartic moment when I explained those 4 months in that way. Like everything suddenly made sense.

By the way, I'm not sure whether this was just Marla's personality, but when she grabbed my cock, it was like, she wanted to rip it off and keep it. It hurt, because she was pulling it and desired it so much. Also, when I was sleeping on the carpet of my apartment, before we had had sex, I awoke with her on top of me trying to fuck me. Then I reached for a condom under the couch, and she pushed it away and made me do it raw. Again, she said it was important to feel skin to skin, so maybe that's just her personality. I don't recall my intending those outcomes in patterns.

Maybe I should also mention that she was an experiment (I know, I wasn't the greatest guy back then). I was experimenting with being an asshole as well. At the time I think I was listening to Shark's How to Be The Jerk Women Love (which I think I got from RJ's site). All Marla's friends urged her to drop me, but she couldn't.

I should also mention that I believe in her case, she was attracted to me before I got the chance to use SS. So attraction was there to begin with. That still doesn't quite explain all the above. Also, when I firmly rubbed, over clothing, her pussy, she seemed to be orgasming. This was when I was still inexperienced.

I remember one time I was in her bed (before we had sex), and I stopped talking. She just said, "Keep talking." Lol.
Isn't that noteworthy? I've had girls just listen to me, fascinated, even when not using SS. But never has a girl said simply, "Keep talking," like that. Like I was a narcotic.

So that was Marla.


Another girl...who was a real head-turner. I couldn't go to the grocery store with her without a guy hitting on her, and without heads turning. She was super hot. She said, over and over, that she did NOT find me physically attractive. Until. That one night. I told her a bedtime story. It wasn't a pre-memorized pattern. I had just read the romance novel, Falling Angel, by Anne Stuart. I basically told her that story, as best I could remember it, and exchanged the main character's name with my name and her name. As the story progressed, and she was drowsy now, I layed on thick the suggestive language. It was freaking juicy. She said after that night, she was horny for me. Probably a few days later, I was massaging her hand while we were in her bed, watching Friends. She later told me that the massage was turning her on. I said, "You want me to rape you?" (disclaimer: we had already discussed the "rape fantasy" abstractly..that it's the most common fantasy women have--doesn't mean they really want to be raped in real life, it's just a fantasy). She said, "Yes." After that, we lived together for 2 years. She was a wonderful person. I saw her give a 20 to a homeless guy, and I scolded her for it. When I broke up with her...and I can't say this was due to SS...but after I broke up with her, she hanged herself.
Since then, I haven't used it. I don't want a girl to get attached to me.
And if you think words don't have much effect on people, then just consider your reaction to the above story (true story, though, for what it's worth).

Did I mention I don't believe in "NLP?"
It's been studied for decades and found to be ineffective.
But I do believe in 'priming.'
This has been studied in psychology.
There was a study done that goes like this:
Group A, Group B.
Group A is told to memorize this list of 10 words.
Group B is told to memorize this OTHER list of 10 words.

Group A's words all suggest "slow." E.g., cane, walker, gray hair, brittle bones, molasses, snail, etc.

Group B's words are neutral.

Each group is timed (unknown to the groups) as they exit the building.
The people in Group A take much longer to walk to the exit.
They were exposed to those words, and tried to memorize them (focused on them), and the words influenced their behavior unconsciously.

Other similar studies prove priming works.
So it probably doesn't need to take the form of a command, "feel a connection... with me, it happens right here."
It's possible SS is just as effective, perhaps more so (because the language won't get as clunky and stilted), if you simply sprinkle positive words throughout your stories: open, relax, let go, warmth, connection, desire, focus, lock in, surrender, drowsy, adventure, ready, hungry, alive, compelling, vivid, real. Most of those weren't verbs, they weren't commands, strictly speaking. But it was priming.

This is why saying, "Wouldn't it be crazy if two strangers who just met on the street..kissed," is effective for a quick make-out. When the word "crazy" is said, it's said in a clearly positive tone. It's priming her to feel like doing something "crazy." This way, she doesn't fill in her own descriptive word, like, "inappropriate," or "slutty," or "sleazy," or "tacky." No, it's just a little crazy.


It's possible that we can be blatant with this. Act like you don't realize you're speaking sensually, or sexually, and let her feel like she's hearing things.

It's actually been years since I've used any SS.
Either way though, it works well, especially if you're already in a good rapport. Just don't giggle like a schoolgirl when you talk sexually.
I think part of this is just that women love a man who can talk dirty.
Even if you just learn to talk dirty, at length, this is a valuable skill.
I really wish more girls would talk dirty, at length, to me. Right now I've got a girl who will say ANYTHING I tell her to say...which is amazing. But that's rare.

If you've read this far, then I should be writing a book and charging for it.

I've always wondered what routines like LoveSystems routines would be like if you kept the same routines but laced them with SS. I'm quite sure SS works...I'm also quite sure I don't understand how it works or in what way it works. But it's a thing of terrifying beauty.
Obviously it doesn't work on every girl. But if you lace your LS routines with SS, then the 1 in 5 girls who are susceptible (probably not the choicest word to use here) to SS will go wild for you.
You'll tick all those boxes, and at the same time, she'll be salivating just hearing you talk.

SS is complete BS. It does make women horny when you learn it, but it makes you become a manipulative bastard. I tried it a couple times and I really didn't like the way it worked. The stories about RJ masturbating DDA's GF under hypnosis are really symbolic of the whole thing: you don't relate to, connect with women, you just try to use them.