JT - The 'Boeing push' perhaps?
No, that technique on the 722 is very obvious .. AN pushed the Boeing push line fairly strongly for new chums. After a period characterised by a singular lack of success with that technique, I tried landing the thing like a C172 and that worked far better ...
The one landing which did work well was a greaser's greaser (ie a fluke) .. but very disconcerting .. no sound or vibration of touchdown and we ALL knew that if it wasn't on the ground then we were all about to find out in a very definite manner. As it turned out the ASI just slowed down and eventually I was game enough to pull the PECL.
Mind you, when the head hostie stuck her head in to enquire as to the author of the landing, I had no trouble accepting credit .. albeit that it had naught to do with my then beginner's skill level on the beast ..
Stan's technique was tied up with the aircraft's being a simple extension of his thought processes .. or so it seemed to me. He was the only chap I can recall flying with who was so reliably consistent with his landings. When I discussed it with him, he dismissed his skill as being largely good luck (which I am sure is the same way that Goren used to characterise his luck at the table ...). I don't think that he ever had worked out just how he landed the aircraft .. he just did it.
Yet the -100 was one of nature's pussycats to land ...