HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   International Tournaments (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Should the medal round have a different format? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=746196)

Buck Aki Berg 03-04-2010 11:41 AM

Should the medal round have a different format?
 
One thing I've never liked about international hockey tournaments is that you win for gold and bronze, and lose for silver. It's sad to see the silver medalists dejected, and the bronze medalists celebrating (hell, the Finns took a team photo!)

What I propose is that what is currently the bronze medal game be used to determine rankings for two additional games to be added - the silver medal game and the bronze medal game.

The silver medal game would pit the loser of the gold medal game against the winner of what is currently the bronze medal game (for the Olympics, it'd've been USA vs. Finland)

The bronze medal game would pit the loser of the silver medal game against the loser of what is now the bronze medal game (for the Olympics this would have been the loser of USA/Finland vs. Slovakia.

Obviously it would take some re-jigging of the entire tournament to squeeze in these extra games, and I don't particularly like how the fourth-ranked team only plays one extra game while the second- and third-ranked teams play two, but I definitely like the idea of winning for each madal.

Thoughts?

blue425 03-04-2010 11:46 AM

I said the exact same thing after the game, with the exception of the second extra game.

I would make it one extra game.

Loser of gold vs. winner of bronze.

Winner gets silver.

loser gets bronze.

Frank the Tank 03-04-2010 11:55 AM

Logistically how would the organizers squeeze in an extra game(s). Especially when the gold medal game in Men's Ice Hockey is supposedly the premiere event held on the last day of the games. Never mind the fact that numerous Olympic events are held under the same format - loser of the gold medal match receives silver, and the organizers would then have to re-schedule an extra game for all those events.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the current format is fine.

SMoneyMonkey 03-04-2010 12:12 PM

50% of the time (probably not a perfect stat but, you get it) the silver medalist already beat the Bronze medalists the game before. I understand the sentiment but it's better to end a tournament with the Gold/Silver being handed out, not the Silver/Bronze.

Kamal007 03-04-2010 12:46 PM

I was thinking about this the other day, what I was thinking was take the teams that are seeded 1-8 by the IIHF (doesn't need to be the seeding, can be a pre Olympic tournament to get into the Olympics) and do a playoff type format. The difference for the Olympics and the Stanley cup finals would be that in the Olympics, they would play 3 games instead of 7. So a 3 game series. For example:

1. Canada
2. Russia
3. Finland
4. Sweden
5. USA
6. Czech Rep.
7. Slovakia
8. Switzerland

The games:

First round: Canada/Swiss, Russia/Slovakia, Finland/Czech Rep., Sweden/USA
Second Round: Canada/Slovakia, Finland/USA
Bronza Medal Round: Slovakia/Finland
Gold Medal Round: Canada/USA

Gold Medal Winner: Canada
Silver Medal Winner: USA
Bronze Medal Winner: Finland

4 series in the first round, 2 in the second and 2 in the third. Total of 8 series of 3 games each over a 2 week period. The most a team can play is 9 games, the least is two.

Just what I was thinking.:)

y2kcanucks 03-04-2010 12:52 PM

This would be the only sport that does this.

Buck Aki Berg 03-04-2010 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pauser (Post 24294397)
This would be the only sport that does this.

Cool, eh? :D

PlayersCoach 03-04-2010 01:58 PM

The change I would like to see is a change to the group structure.

If they are going to stick with a 12-team format, they should have two Groups of 6, and then each team could play a 5-game round-robin to determine places 1-6 in each group. From there, the top 4 in each pool would move on to the quarterfinals, and play crossover games against the other group (1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3).

That way you wouldn't get that weird qualification round and subsequent goofy bracket.

It would require quite a few more games, though.

Moobles 03-04-2010 02:22 PM

I guess a counter-argument is it's anti-climatic. The gold medal game is the last game of the tournament. With this format, the silver medalists would still have to play a last game after the gold medal is awarded.

Kessel>Seguin + 03-04-2010 02:29 PM

Too many games to add to a short tourny. No point in asking the loser of the gold medal game to possibly play 2 addition games if they lose the "silver medal" game

BlackAces* 03-04-2010 02:34 PM

Such is life. I wouldn't be super psyched to go from losing the gold, to having to win the silver against a team that already lost in the semi-finals.

Seems unfair.

garbageteam 03-04-2010 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackAces (Post 24296336)
Such is life. I wouldn't be super psyched to go from losing the gold, to having to win the silver against a team that already lost in the semi-finals.

Seems unfair.

And then they lose the silver........ to play with the 4th place team for the bronze medal!

and then they lose the bronze medal............ to play with the 5th place team for the copper medal

and so on

CheeseSandwich* 03-04-2010 02:49 PM

Who would buy tickets for the silver and bronze games? After the gold, the tourney is over.

It sucks to have the losers look dejected, but you can't do anything about it other then try to cheer them up.

NeverGoingToWin 03-04-2010 03:18 PM

I hate this idea.

MapleLeafsFan4Ever 03-04-2010 03:43 PM

I hope they never use this idea.

Also let's say they did try this wouldn't they need to do the same thing at the World Hockey Championships and the World Juniors? Those are both IIHF events and it would look stupid having different rules for the Olympics.

Buck Aki Berg 03-04-2010 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garbageteam (Post 24296568)
And then they lose the silver........ to play with the 4th place team for the bronze medal!

and then they lose the bronze medal............ to play with the 5th place team for the copper medal

and so on

You left out playing the sixth-place team for the shale medal, then the seventh-place team for the talc medal :D

Zetsyuk 03-04-2010 04:56 PM

Just because the Americans looked so damn dejected and depressed does not warrant a complete revamp of traditional tournament format. And really, who wants more games after the gold medal faceoff?

chopkins 03-04-2010 06:18 PM

The idea makes sense, but the Gold Medal Game in men's hockey is the main event of the Winter Olympics and should be the last one. It just wouldn't feel right to have 3 more games following it.

NeverGoingToWin 03-04-2010 06:19 PM

How does the idea make any sense? A team's feelings were hurt so they should get a second chance at finishing the tournament with a win? Ridiculously bad idea.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.