Hot Stamper - myth or reality?

I think Chayro is correct, that the term is used by Tom Port at Better Records to market particular copies that he and his staff have determined, based on listening, sound better than other copies of the same record. Without getting into the subject of copy to copy variability of the same exact pressing, there are huge differences in different pressings, and no general rule of thumb (well, maybe a couple), as to which pressings of a particular album have the 'best' sonics. You can do your due diligence through a number of sources, including Discogs, for listings of various pressings, (which sometimes, but not always,include matrix numbers and other deadwax information); Steve Hoffman forums, where folks will weigh in on the sonic differences between different pressings identified by deadwax info (largely of rock and pop from the 60's and 70's) and a few other fora where people who have listened and compared different pressings have weighed in, based on their listening comparisons. (Mike Fremer does this too, in some of his vinyl reviews).
My own experience has been that getting the 'right' pressing of particular record can make a dramatic difference in sonics. In many cases, these are not 'audiophile' pressings, but early pressings of 'regular' records that benefit from good mastering, an earlier generation of the tape or a confluence of other factors that make the particular pressing 'special' sonically. Unfortunately, for some of the most desirable rock records, this becomes expensive because there is a knowledgeable market for these pressings. But, there are many good 'standard issue' records from the late 60's and early 70's that sound great and don't cost a fortune.
I have, in a number of instances, a half dozen or more different pressings of the same record; even among the more desirable pressings, there are often trade-offs (e.g. an early UK Island Pink Label may sound more immediate but have more surface noise than a later pink rim). And, buying used records, you are always at risk on condition. Not visual, but what's in the grooves. Visual grading is almost useless.

I have certainly heard the term 'hot' applied to a particular mastering, the best example of which is probably the 'RL' cut of LZII. It sounds dramatically different than every other copy of that record I have heard.

I didn't watch the video. Does Michael use the term 'hot stampers' in the context of Tom Port's offerings or generically, to refer to recordings that were mastered 'hot'?

Ebuzz- there is a fair amount of discussion on the web about the 'RL' cut of LZ II. The biggest issue with these is that many are trashed. Check to see if it is inscribed 'RL' on both sides- some copies are not. The preferred copy is apparently one with the RL and 'SS' (Sterling Sound) markings on both sides, and with narrower deadwax on side two. It took me a while to find a quiet, minty copy, but even one that is VG+ will give you a sense of what this record can deliver. It's a good one.

PS There are also RL mastered copies of The Band's self-titled album with the lime green Capitol label - another jewel, musically and sonically.

It was a pretty balanced article, i guess. Tom Port is not without controversy and this didn't really stir up anything new. As to the system, doesn't surprise me- there were a lot of well-known engineers who monitored over pretty middle of the road speakers to make sure what they were hearing reflected the 'average home stereo'; however, I would assume that the folks who are paying for Port's selections have systems that are far more than average; on the other hand, since every system has its own sonic signature, maybe this mid-fi receiver approach really is, if not "neutral" in a musical sense, then truly middle of the road in terms of sonic character (neither warm nor analytical). I don't subscribe to the 'old pressing is always best' but I do find, more often than not, that the right old pressing has a quality that is more 'of a piece' than a lot of remasters, which may sound more "audiophile" and impressive, but less musical. Perhaps just a matter of taste. I've never bought anything from Port and for those who do buy from him, more power to you. I guess I'd rather go to the trouble of sourcing multiple pressings and do my own leg work, at far less cost. (Of course, that means in some cases, that I have many copies of the same record).