HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Hockey Talk by Country > Russia
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

1972 Nationals ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-29-2012, 05:48 AM
  #26
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,455
vCash: 500
Bingo!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I see it more as communism vs capitalism. Only the Soviet and Czech governments had the kind of absolute power over their citizens that made a full time national team possible.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-29-2012, 01:45 PM
  #27
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I see it more as communism vs capitalism. Only the Soviet and Czech governments had the kind of absolute power over their citizens that made a full time national team possible.
Are you saying that communist societies have certain advantages over capitalist societies?

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-29-2012, 11:52 PM
  #28
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Are you saying that communist societies have certain advantages over capitalist societies?
that depends on your values and perspective

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 01:42 PM
  #29
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
that depends on your values and perspective
Except for China and North Korea, there are very few Communists anywhere anymore, so the argument is largely ancient and irrelevant. Its really more about the fact that training regimens that are scientific, thoroughly planned and executed, and specific, the kind of regimens that are typical of Olympic-oriented training, probably surpass the kind of training and conditioning typical of NA pro sports leagues. While paltry by NHL standards, Soviet star Olympic athletes were compensated 3 or 4 times better than the average Soviet citizen, so its not as if anybody had to put a gun to their heads. The bigger threat was that they might be dropped by the program and lose all of their perks.

It boggles my mind that NHL players who make 5 or 6 million dollars a year consider themselves abused because they have to play a seven month season, and then, if they make the playoffs, they might have to actually play a full eight months over the course of a year. The Soviets proved that players are capable of training all-out for eleven months a year - of course they are going to outlast players who have major gaps in their training over the course of a year.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 02:13 PM
  #30
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I see it more as communism vs capitalism. Only the Soviet and Czech governments had the kind of absolute power over their citizens that made a full time national team possible.
What do you mean by full time national team? As far as I know it wasn't much more full time than non-communist national teams from Europe. Even Canada had a full-time national team 1964-1969. Absolute power of the Canadian government?

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 09:45 AM
  #31
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Except for China and North Korea, there are very few Communists anywhere anymore, so the argument is largely ancient and irrelevant. Its really more about the fact that training regimens that are scientific, thoroughly planned and executed, and specific, the kind of regimens that are typical of Olympic-oriented training, probably surpass the kind of training and conditioning typical of NA pro sports leagues. While paltry by NHL standards, Soviet star Olympic athletes were compensated 3 or 4 times better than the average Soviet citizen, so its not as if anybody had to put a gun to their heads. The bigger threat was that they might be dropped by the program and lose all of their perks.

It boggles my mind that NHL players who make 5 or 6 million dollars a year consider themselves abused because they have to play a seven month season, and then, if they make the playoffs, they might have to actually play a full eight months over the course of a year. The Soviets proved that players are capable of training all-out for eleven months a year - of course they are going to outlast players who have major gaps in their training over the course of a year.
The only area where eastern block athletes had a scientific advantage over most others was in regards to performance enhancing drugs. I'm sorry but the rest of what you have written is a load of bunk.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 10:06 AM
  #32
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The only area where eastern block athletes had a scientific advantage over most others was in regards to performance enhancing drugs. I'm sorry but the rest of what you have written is a load of bunk.
You seem obsessed with this subject. It seems as though you are searching for a plausible excuse for how quickly the Soviets went from a non-hockey playing country (1946) to a country who could field teams that on some nights undressed the so-called Canadian "pros" of the NHL.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 10:28 AM
  #33
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
What do you mean by full time national team? As far as I know it wasn't much more full time than non-communist national teams from Europe. Even Canada had a full-time national team 1964-1969. Absolute power of the Canadian government?
I'm refering to a full time program for the top players. I realize that Canada has had full time amatuer or semi-pro teams at times, but that is obviously not what I am talking about.

Here is what I mean by a full time team:

If you are building a full time program you have to first realize that there are not enough international tournaments to have the team play and practice together year round. Obviously you have them play together as much as possible, at every tournament, etc, but you still need a league for them to play in competitive games in the time between tournaments. The first thing you do is figure out what line combinations you want, then spread those players out over a handful of club teams and have them compete against each other in a league. Furthermore you use club teams that all play in the same city so that you can easily have your national team get together for practices, etc.

To do this the national team management (ie government) must have control over the league which is not possible in a free market system. Also you must have full control over the individual players and be able to dictate to them where they play, again not possible in a free society.

The only significant hockey countries in Europe at that time were the USSR, Czechsvk, Finland and Sweden. Sweden and Finland were free countries and their top players were already coming to the NHL in the 1970's and 1980's, so for that reason alone a similar full time program was not possible for them during this era. I should also point out that most of the top Canadian players also played for clubs in the USA at the time.

Don't get me wrong, the communist system allowed for the Czech and Soviet national teams to get the most out of what was a very thin pool of players to choose from. All I was pointing out was that having this level of control gave the communist teams an enormous advantage that made the quality of their individual players look better than they actually were.


Last edited by Mr Kanadensisk: 10-01-2012 at 10:35 AM.
Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 10:30 AM
  #34
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
You seem obsessed with this subject. It seems as though you are searching for a plausible excuse for how quickly the Soviets went from a non-hockey playing country (1946) to a country who could field teams that on some nights undressed the so-called Canadian "pros" of the NHL.
it wasn't that tough to figure out

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 11:46 AM
  #35
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
it wasn't that tough to figure out
What you have to understand is that the quality of NHL hockey has always been vastly overblown. Before the '72 Series, the Toronto Globe and Mail's featured columnist, Dick Beddoes, pledged that if Team Canada didn't win all of 8 games by at least 10 goals, that he would eat his column in a bowl of borscht. Mr. Beddoes' digestive system was the first to come to grips with the fact that the NHL was never what its publicists made it out to be.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 02:46 PM
  #36
Fantomas
Registered User
 
Fantomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Although it is hypothetical I think you would agree that Canada's mens team could have been MUCH MUCH better if they had a similar amount of preparation time and experience playing together as a team.
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Yes, the Soviets had all that preparation. But that came with a price.

They had no freedom, no privacy. In some ways it was as much a detriment as it was a benefit.

Fantomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 02:51 PM
  #37
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
What you have to understand is that the quality of NHL hockey has always been vastly overblown. Before the '72 Series, the Toronto Globe and Mail's featured columnist, Dick Beddoes, pledged that if Team Canada didn't win all of 8 games by at least 10 goals, that he would eat his column in a bowl of borscht. Mr. Beddoes' digestive system was the first to come to grips with the fact that the NHL was never what its publicists made it out to be.
Lots of people underestimated the Soviets before the '72 series, but I'm not sure how that is relevant in this discussion. We now have 40 years worth of knowledge about the topic that Mr Beddoes and others didn't have at the time. Even within the microcosm of the '72 series it is pretty obvious that Canada vastly improved as the series went on, which certainly supports my argument.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 03:00 PM
  #38
Fantomas
Registered User
 
Fantomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The only area where eastern block athletes had a scientific advantage over most others was in regards to performance enhancing drugs. I'm sorry but the rest of what you have written is a load of bunk.
Seriously? Stop being so bitter.

Fantomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 03:08 PM
  #39
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Yes, the Soviets had all that preparation. But that came with a price.

They had no freedom, no privacy. In some ways it was as much a detriment as it was a benefit.
The IIHF does an annual Survey of Players which tracks the number of hockey players and hockey arenas in each country. From that you will see that the number of elite (professional) players that each country produces is directly related to the number of players and arenas the country has. It is pretty obvious why the two are related.

This is the reason why Canada has produced so many more great players and why we have won so many more best on best tournaments than anyone else. It really just comes down to having a hockey infrastructure and getting kids on the ice.

It would probably be unbearable for you or I to go back and live in the oppressive society of the 1970's Soviet Union but that was the only life those players knew so I'm not sure how much of a factor it was on their performance.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 03:10 PM
  #40
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
Seriously? Stop being so bitter.
It's true, what am I being bitter about?

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 03:14 PM
  #41
Fantomas
Registered User
 
Fantomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
It's true, what am I being bitter about?
It's not true. Simply stating something as fact doesn't make it fact. It makes you look foolish.

I know some of the posters on this board are big-time homers, but you are just being a contrarian.

Fantomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 03:15 PM
  #42
Fantomas
Registered User
 
Fantomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
It would probably be unbearable for you or I to go back and live in the oppressive society of the 1970's Soviet Union but that was the only life those players knew so I'm not sure how much of a factor it was on their performance.
Then next time just say "I'm not sure."

Fantomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 05:57 PM
  #43
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Lots of people underestimated the Soviets before the '72 series, but I'm not sure how that is relevant in this discussion. We now have 40 years worth of knowledge about the topic that Mr Beddoes and others didn't have at the time. Even within the microcosm of the '72 series it is pretty obvious that Canada vastly improved as the series went on, which certainly supports my argument.
Not sure of the relevance of the '72 series. Isn't the topic of the thread "the 1972 nationals?" Yes, the Canadians got better when their conditioning improved a little bit (they came into the series arrogant and woefully out of shape). I believe the Soviets should have won the series, but they got cocky after building a commanding lead after Game 5, and stopped working hard enough to win it.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 06:20 PM
  #44
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
It's not true. Simply stating something as fact doesn't make it fact. It makes you look foolish.

I know some of the posters on this board are big-time homers, but you are just being a contrarian.
It is true. There have been a number of people come forward to talk about state sponsored doping in the former communist bloc.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 06:21 PM
  #45
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
Then next time just say "I'm not sure."
sorry should have been more clear, that is actually a way of saying I don't think it had much of an impact

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2012, 06:34 PM
  #46
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Not sure of the relevance of the '72 series. Isn't the topic of the thread "the 1972 nationals?"
never mind, I think you missed my point

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Yes, the Canadians got better when their conditioning improved a little bit (they came into the series arrogant and woefully out of shape). I believe the Soviets should have won the series, but they got cocky after building a commanding lead after Game 5, and stopped working hard enough to win it.
In hockey playing an effective system and having team chemistry are critical and these take a long time to perfect. Just look at how long it can take a new player to fit into a new team. You can dream up whatever excuses you like but if you don't understand the basics there is not much I can do for you.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 07:04 AM
  #47
Sergei DRW
Registered User
 
Sergei DRW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ukraine
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canada180 View Post
Was the 1972 Russian national team the best Russian squad ever?

I think so. Especially with a healthy Kharlamov and Firsov.
Soviet teams of 1978-1983 and 1986-1989 were deeper.
All four lines could score on any given night and situation.


Last edited by Sergei DRW: 10-02-2012 at 07:15 AM.
Sergei DRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 07:13 AM
  #48
Sergei DRW
Registered User
 
Sergei DRW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ukraine
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
Sure you meant Kamensky.

In the 1978-79 team(s), the 2nd line of Kapustin, Zhluktov and Balderis was not too shabby either. Not to mention that the 3rd and 4th lines were much stronger than the ones around 1987... I mean, even the young Sergei Makarov was only a 3rd line player in 1979! (played with the Golikov brothers from Dynamo Moscow). And then there was a certain Vladislav Tretiak.

In 1981-82, the 2nd line of Kapustin, Shepelev and Shalimov played brilliantly; in fact, it could be argued that they were the best Soviet line in the 1981 Canada Cup and 1982 World Championships. And again, the 3rd and 4th lines were stronger than around 1987... plus Tretiak.

Stronger 3rd and 4th?

Soviet team of 87-88' had a great 3rd line from the Dynamo Moscow Lomakin-Semak and Nemchinov
someone named Yuri Khmylev from the Soviet Wings club became a notable center for the Buffalo Sabres along Dale Hawerchuk and Alexander Mogilny.
Sergei Svetlov and Anatoly Semenov weren't too shabby either, all of them scored goals and weren't just "travelers" on that team.

Sergei DRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 11:01 AM
  #49
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei DRW View Post
Soviet teams of 1978-1983 and 1986-1989 were deeper.
All four lines could score on any given night and situation.
I agree. Those two groups were the deepest and strongest, IMO.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 07:59 PM
  #50
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei DRW View Post
Stronger 3rd and 4th?

Soviet team of 87-88' had a great 3rd line from the Dynamo Moscow Lomakin-Semak and Nemchinov
someone named Yuri Khmylev from the Soviet Wings club became a notable center for the Buffalo Sabres along Dale Hawerchuk and Alexander Mogilny.
Sergei Svetlov and Anatoly Semenov weren't too shabby either, all of them scored goals and weren't just "travelers" on that team.
When were they a line for the NT? Regular 3rd line was Sergei Yashin-Anatoli Semeov-Sergei Svetlov. 4th line was generally a mix of whoever was playing best (Chernykh, Semak, Priakhin, Lomakin, Khmylev)

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.