HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

Has Russia overtaken the #1 spot in World Hockey?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 02:02 PM
  #626
Fulcrum
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,605
vCash: 500
I just think if we look historically, Canada has 'owned' hockey. They created it and they developed it. That's the history.

But then came the Soviet Union that was very advanced in Olympic sports and took it very very seriously, Canada wasn't anywhere near developed at most sports at the time. Soviet Union applied it's science of training, vast knowledge of preparation, brought it up to a higher standard and instantly raised the plank for professionalism. Tarasov and co. also applied a wealth of soccer and bandy knowledge to the game and that is where a lot of combination game came from.

Without NHL and in VERY short time they were able to produce world class players that could rival NHL players, who had a very long history. The Soviet combination hockey was vastly revolutionary for it's time and you can remember Esposito saying "these guys are better than us and lets face facts". He also commented how they couldn't get the puck from them with all the passing and had to play dirty to keep up.

The Soviets had to learn a lot too, when it came to more physical aspects of the game, and playing with more emotion. And with years the countries learnt from each other.

And like I said before, Canada is the premium nation at producting talent right now, but it wasn't Always like that and there is certainly no guarantee it will remain that way. Now there are more countries investing in the sport and challenging Canada, and there could be many changes in the future on who hold the #1 spot.

That is why historically these 2 nations are extremely different in their Hockey roots, but both have put in tremendous amount of resources into the sport.

Fulcrum is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:08 PM
  #627
od71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
The difference is that Canada won the tournament every time except for twice - once in 1981, and once in 1996.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=0zE16aiY6pk

od71 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:21 PM
  #628
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Wow, one play.

That's some pretty stellar sleuthing there Inspector Gadget.

I guess the other 180 minutes + OT of the series don't mean anything.

I'm sure that Canada has never experienced poor refereeing decisions throughout their international hockey history.


Last edited by NyQuil: 12-11-2012 at 02:31 PM.
NyQuil is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:30 PM
  #629
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fulcrum View Post
I just think if we look historically, Canada has 'owned' hockey. They created it and they developed it. That's the history.

But then came the Soviet Union that was very advanced in Olympic sports and took it very very seriously, Canada wasn't anywhere near developed at most sports at the time. Soviet Union applied it's science of training, vast knowledge of preparation, brought it up to a higher standard and instantly raised the plank for professionalism. Tarasov and co. also applied a wealth of soccer and bandy knowledge to the game and that is where a lot of combination game came from.

Without NHL and in VERY short time they were able to produce world class players that could rival NHL players, who had a very long history. The Soviet combination hockey was vastly revolutionary for it's time and you can remember Esposito saying "these guys are better than us and lets face facts". He also commented how they couldn't get the puck from them with all the passing and had to play dirty to keep up.

The Soviets had to learn a lot too, when it came to more physical aspects of the game, and playing with more emotion. And with years the countries learnt from each other.

And like I said before, Canada is the premium nation at producting talent right now, but it wasn't Always like that and there is certainly no guarantee it will remain that way. Now there are more countries investing in the sport and challenging Canada, and there could be many changes in the future on who hold the #1 spot.

That is why historically these 2 nations are extremely different in their Hockey roots, but both have put in tremendous amount of resources into the sport.
There's nothing really to disagree with here, except for a bit of clarity around "#1" and what it means.

The issue in this thread is that everyone is arguing something different.

1. Does #1 mean "The country that can put together the best single squad of players at any given time?"

In which case, in terms of on-ice comparisons, this can be measured through tournament play, head to head match-ups, what have you. On paper, you can try to evaluate the relative skill level and strengths of the players but I always find that to be a wasted exercise because hockey isn't as easily statistically assessed on an individual basis in the the way a sport like baseball is. It's a team game.

Personally, I feel like the Olympics are the only way to measure this to some degree of conclusiveness, given the options available.

2. Does #1 mean "The country that produces the best players in the world?"

This is a different question, because now you're looking at quantity as well as quality. How many players? Does depth count? Or just high-end talent?

Now you've got tournaments like the WJC coming into play, because you're looking at player development. A team like the Czechs who have been playing many of the same guys for over a decade now doesn't necessarily show up particularly well here lately, even if they are still competitive at the senor level. On paper, people use "NHL draft picks" but this is a terrible measure in my mind, especially since the KHL emerged and factors beyond player skill are evaluated in terms of what an NHL team is drafting for.

I'm not really sure how to measure this, although the WJC is a proxy of sorts in that you can see which teams are competitive over time. However, a team like Sweden with one really talented group in one or two tournaments can have a large impact on the generation as a whole, while a team like Canada which is routinely competitive and seems to spit out a handful of elite players every year while the others either become journeymen or fail to make the NHL on a regular basis. It also benefits the "larger" hockey nations which mitigate peaks and valleys in talent with sheer numbers.

Things get confused around here when people start throwing in all kinds of criteria into what "#1" means. You've got chest-thumpers around here who talk about "It's our game" or "It's our history" but they aren't really adding much of value to the discussion, in that it's not something that can be objectively measured.

The only way being #1 means anything is if it can be taken away from you.

I think some Canadians in this thread don't really understand that concept.

I will say again: IMO, whoever wins the Olympics is #1. If the Russians win in 2016, good for them. Be gracious losers, Canada. We won on our home turf, let's see if they can do the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus
Oh and if Sweden, USA, Finland, whatever wins in 2014, they will obviously also be number 1 for 4 years.
Agreed. Sweden had their run, and it was well-deserved. I don't think anyone can begrudge that line-up being the best in the world at that time.


Last edited by NyQuil: 12-11-2012 at 02:36 PM.
NyQuil is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:35 PM
  #630
od71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
Wow, one play.

That's some pretty stellar sleuthing there Inspector Gadget.

I guess the other 180 minutes + OT of the series don't mean anything.
refs shouldn't help team to win games. Certainly such kind of victories doesn't add pride to the winner. I still remember my frustration. There was a draw. Your words reminded me about it again.

od71 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:38 PM
  #631
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by od71 View Post
refs shouldn't help team to win games. Certainly such kind of victories doesn't add pride to the winner. I still remember my frustration. There was a draw. Your words reminded me about it again.
I don't think there's a hockey fan alive who hasn't been frustrated at some point.

NyQuil is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:42 PM
  #632
od71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
I don't think there's a hockey fan alive who hasn't been frustrated at some point.
thanks for consolation

od71 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:20 PM
  #633
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
So assuming WHC's and World Cup results don't count, what other metrics do you suggest to determine the number 1 spot?
I didn't say they don't count, I said you can't go by them alone. You have to take into consideration all of the factors and performances.

Ryker is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:36 PM
  #634
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
The difference is that Canada won the tournament every time except for twice - once in 1981, and once in 1996.

I'll give you credit for valuing the Canada Cup/World Cup far more than most Europeans, who only see it as a rigged tournament, much as how most North Americans have viewed the WCs for decades.

The Canada Cup/World Cup existed because the Olympics didn't fulfill that role.

I tend to agree that the Olympics as they are now pretty much eliminates the purpose of that tournament because we have a true best-on-best tournament now and it's redundant.

I wouldn't mind a sort of World Championships-World Cup-World Championships-Olympics cycle but I can't see the IIHF ever agreeing to it, and as I said before, it's not really necessary.

However, it would be nice to have some primetime senior-level hockey broadcasted in Canada on occasion to drive interest in it.
The Canada/World Cup existed to put money in the coffers of the NHLPA, period. The fans wanted to see more NHL-Soviet matchups, at least in the '70's and 80's, and they could easily sell tickets and land TV contracts to televise the matches. NHL management disliked the concept from the outset.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:39 PM
  #635
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
The Canada/World Cup existed to put money in the coffers of the NHLPA, period. The fans wanted to see more NHL-Soviet matchups, at least in the '70's and 80's, and they could easily sell tickets and land TV contracts to televise the matches. NHL management disliked the concept from the outset.
They dislike anything that interferes with the NHL and its profits in any way, shape or form.

In any event, it filled a void that existed back then which is no longer as applicable.

NyQuil is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 04:02 PM
  #636
jigsaw99
Registered User
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,101
vCash: 500
number 1? With Bryzgalov in net?? LOL

jigsaw99 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 04:17 PM
  #637
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
number 1? With Bryzgalov in net?? LOL
He wouldn't even be among the top three chosen, so I don't see why you threw that straw-man into the discussion.

Ryker is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 04:18 PM
  #638
canuck2010
Registered User
 
canuck2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
The Canada/World Cup existed to put money in the coffers of the NHLPA, period. The fans wanted to see more NHL-Soviet matchups, at least in the '70's and 80's, and they could easily sell tickets and land TV contracts to televise the matches. NHL management disliked the concept from the outset.
Not unlike the IIHF. Of course it's about money.

canuck2010 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:16 PM
  #639
Dasachtach
Bluenoser
 
Dasachtach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Birthplace of Hockey
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
Absolutely not. They could, potentially, after Sochi.

Dasachtach is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:21 PM
  #640
Garl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
He wouldn't even be among the top three chosen, so I don't see why you threw that straw-man into the discussion.
In Sochi? Seriously?

Garl is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:24 PM
  #641
Fulcrum
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garl View Post
In Sochi? Seriously?
Not the way he is playing/not playing right now.

Fulcrum is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:48 PM
  #642
Oyabun
Registered User
 
Oyabun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
It is important to note that the Russians haven't won a best on best tournament since 1981. Since then Canada has won 6. USA has won once. Czech once and Sweden once. Granted they have been close (1984, 1987, 1998) but it has been over 30 years since the Russians were deemed the best in the world. That is an awfully long time for a country to go without winning a top level tournament and try to make a claim that they are #1. You have to have results.
What qualifies as a "best on best" tournament according to you ?. Canada 6, Sweden 1 ?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense since Sweden has 2 olympic golds within the timespan you have given and how can Canada have 6 ?. How often are the olympics held again ?

Oyabun is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:53 PM
  #643
Oyabun
Registered User
 
Oyabun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanDream View Post
Canada #1
USA #2

both countries are far superior in numbers of players, Canada still has the most highend skilled players with the US not having many top 10 players, but easily outproducing Russia from 20-50 range...

/end thread
Your username sure is fitting. USA at No.2 will however forever be nothing but an AmericanDream

Oyabun is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 08:00 PM
  #644
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oyabun View Post
What qualifies as a "best on best" tournament according to you ?. Canada 6, Sweden 1 ?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense since Sweden has 2 olympic golds within the timespan you have given and how can Canada have 6 ?. How often are the olympics held again ?
It doesn't take rocket science to figure it out.

Canada Cup / World Cup alllowed access to any and all NHL players.

So has the Olympics 1998 onwards.

Those are the tournaments that concern Canadians the most.

NyQuil is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 08:11 PM
  #645
Oyabun
Registered User
 
Oyabun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
I'm sure that Argentina and Brazil agree.

I watch the Euro tournaments religiously but as far as world ranking goes, it's like the World Championships of hockey.

It's a tournament with restrictions that impact on any kind of conclusions that can be drawn about world ranking.

Like the World Juniors in hockey, it's also hard to generate conclusions based on Olympic soccer because of similar restrictions on access to players.
Argentina....the most overrated country in the history of football. Why do they get so much respect in North America. Maradona retired a long time ago. Go and check Argentinas actual World Cup record. They haven't accomplished much lately.

The only reason people mention Argentina is because they are the only of 2 nations that has a shot at taking a shot at the European nations. Brazil is a contender. They used be more than a contender, they were the team to beat but has declined greatly in recent years. As the great fenomeno Ronaldo said... the Brazilian NT is "at their worst moment in history"

2006 all semi-finalists were European teams

2010 3 out of 4 teams were European. Uruguay finished in 4th place.

Oyabun is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 08:21 PM
  #646
Oyabun
Registered User
 
Oyabun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
It doesn't take rocket science to figure it out.

Canada Cup / World Cup alllowed access to any and all NHL players.

So has the Olympics 1998 onwards.

Those are the tournaments that concern Canadians the most.
Yes maybe it doesn't take a rocket scientist but it takes a Canadian to figure it out.
Obscure tournaments that has your nation in its name are the tournaments that matter.

One hand on the heart and the other on the bible. There was no irony or sarcasm in my wonder of how Canada could have won 6 of these important tournaments. I didn't know people gave a crap about Canada cup (outside of Canada of course). I haven't got a clue about the record of this tournament and I didn't think it would qualify as a serious best on best tournament but I guess that goes to show what a minor sport hockey is.

A powerhouse creates a tournament and regards it highly. Brazil or Germany/Spain cup...haha. I can't see that catching on at a greater scale

Oyabun is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 11:01 PM
  #647
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 19,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oyabun View Post
Your username sure is fitting. USA at No.2 will however forever be nothing but an AmericanDream
...and yet dreams can come true....

Rabid Ranger is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 11:06 PM
  #648
Ewan McGregor
Registered User
 
Ewan McGregor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
number 1? With Bryzgalov in net?? LOL
I would pay money to see Bryz play for Russia if they make it to the gold match

Ewan McGregor is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:24 AM
  #649
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oyabun View Post
Yes maybe it doesn't take a rocket scientist but it takes a Canadian to figure it out.
Obscure tournaments that has your nation in its name are the tournaments that matter.

One hand on the heart and the other on the bible. There was no irony or sarcasm in my wonder of how Canada could have won 6 of these important tournaments. I didn't know people gave a crap about Canada cup (outside of Canada of course). I haven't got a clue about the record of this tournament and I didn't think it would qualify as a serious best on best tournament but I guess that goes to show what a minor sport hockey is.

A powerhouse creates a tournament and regards it highly. Brazil or Germany/Spain cup...haha. I can't see that catching on at a greater scale
In raw numbers, more hockey fans don't give a crap about the WHC's or pre-1998 Olympic hockey results as a measurement of a country's strength. That plus the fact that the Canada/World Cup had many more of the top players in the world than the WHC's usually do or pre-1998 Olympics make it more relevant.

daver is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 08:38 AM
  #650
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NyLand
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oyabun
I didn't know people gave a crap about Canada cup (outside of Canada of course).
Of course they don't.

I've said as much all over this thread, including in the very post you are quoting:

"Those are the tournaments that concern Canadians the most."

Reading comprehension certainly isn't your strong suit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oyabun
Argentina....the most overrated country in the history of football. Why do they get so much respect in North America. Maradona retired a long time ago. Go and check Argentinas actual World Cup record. They haven't accomplished much lately.
Russia hadn't accomplished much for about the same span of time in hockey.

Does that mean that they could be excluded from major tournaments?

I despise Argentina, but they still make the quarter finals regularly, and they still produce players like Messi and Tevez, so I think it's a bit arrogant to write them off completely.


Last edited by NyQuil: 12-12-2012 at 08:45 AM.
NyQuil is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:28 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.