HFBoards

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

Should the World Juniors move to a larger format?

View Poll Results: Should they increase the number of teams in the WJHC?
No, they should not (Keep it at 10 teams) 42 58.33%
Yes, they should (Raise to 12 teams) 24 33.33%
Yes, they should (Raise to 16 teams) 5 6.94%
Other/Not sure 1 1.39%
Voters: 72. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2012, 01:31 PM
  #1
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Should the World Juniors move to a larger format?

When I mean larger format I mean more teams. Right now there's only 10 teams, and teams that are perenials in the WC's are often WJC tweeners, up and down every year.

There's definitely some good things about it, but there's also some bad things about it.

On the good side, more teams mean teams like Denmark, Germany and Latvia aren't going up and down every year. Give these teams players more exposure, which is always a good thing.

On the down side, the bottom teams in this tournement aren't exactly close to the top teams, unlike the World Championships where it's not that surprising to see Denmark knock off the USA.

Long story short, should the IIHF increase the number of teams?

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:38 PM
  #2
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
If they switch to 8 QF teams then yes, the group stage almost becomes meaningless to the top teams then, as of now you can lose a tournament with a bad group stage like the US did last year, with 8 Quarterfinalists 1 win gets you in the QF which is dumb.

If they go to 8 Quarterfinalists they need to go to 12 teams total

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:43 PM
  #3
topched
Registered User
 
topched's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
When I mean larger format I mean more teams. Right now there's only 10 teams, and teams that are perenials in the WC's are often WJC tweeners, up and down every year.

There's definitely some good things about it, but there's also some bad things about it.

On the good side, more teams mean teams like Denmark, Germany and Latvia aren't going up and down every year. Give these teams players more exposure, which is always a good thing.

On the down side, the bottom teams in this tournement aren't exactly close to the top teams, unlike the World Championships where it's not that surprising to see Denmark knock off the USA.

Long story short, should the IIHF increase the number of teams?
My God. If anything they should lower it to 8 and have one team up and down each year.

Every tourney there are 2 teams that go winless in round robin play and get thorougly wiped.

I think the 8-0 or 10-1 type losses hurt those countries far more than it helps them.

If you're adding teams like Kazhakstan, Denmark, Norway etc. You're going to have even more of those scores, and potentially some worse ones. If a team is getting beat by double digits more than once, that shows that the playing field is nowhere near level.

topched is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:45 PM
  #4
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
only 1 team goes down per year

Kazakhstan is not one of those teams now, they're not even in D1A

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:47 PM
  #5
topched
Registered User
 
topched's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canada4Gold View Post
only 1 team goes down per year

Kazakhstan is not one of those teams now, they're not even in D1A
Was just thinking back to 09 when they were part of the tournament. That game was embarassing to watch. You feel bad for those kids.

Another issue with the current relegation system is that this tournament changes so much year to year. A good team one year doesn't neccessarily mean a good one the next. This can't really be changed, but still.

topched is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:49 PM
  #6
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Denmark wasn't smacked around last year, in the group stage sure, but they had 2 OT games in the relegation pool which is where their real competition is. Them beating up on teams in D1 isn't helping.

The games tnhat help are the ones against those teams just above them, Switzerland, Slovakia, Germany, etc. They get those up here not down in division 1, they learn from the beatdowns they take in the group stage and use those lessons in the relegation stage, teams like Latvia, Denmark, Norway, Belarus would learn more by getting in competitive games against teams in the 7-9 range than beating up on France and Austria

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:51 PM
  #7
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 72,477
vCash: 50
It wouldn't be possible to increase it at the moment as it would dilute the competition in lower levels which they spent a while thinking about changing to improve it. You'd need new nations to come in as well.

Shrimper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 02:16 PM
  #8
Qurpiz
Unregistered Abuser
 
Qurpiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,715
vCash: 500
What really needs to happen IMO is Quebec getting its independence, therefore leveling out the field a little (=maybe Canada wouldn't be so ******* dominant) and having one more elite team in the tourney.

After that happens, sure, go for 12 teams, maybe even 14 or 16

And let it be clear, I don't want to start that whole conversation in this thread

Qurpiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 02:45 PM
  #9
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
It wouldn't be possible to increase it at the moment as it would dilute the competition in lower levels which they spent a while thinking about changing to improve it. You'd need new nations to come in as well.
Agreed. The improvements to the elite division due to a change in format, if any, would be greatly outweighed by the damages caused predominantly to the competition in Div IA, but by extension also to the lower ones.

Ryker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 05:02 PM
  #10
kaiser matias
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canada4Gold View Post
Denmark wasn't smacked around last year, in the group stage sure, but they had 2 OT games in the relegation pool which is where their real competition is. Them beating up on teams in D1 isn't helping.

The games tnhat help are the ones against those teams just above them, Switzerland, Slovakia, Germany, etc. They get those up here not down in division 1, they learn from the beatdowns they take in the group stage and use those lessons in the relegation stage, teams like Latvia, Denmark, Norway, Belarus would learn more by getting in competitive games against teams in the 7-9 range than beating up on France and Austria
That didn't happen this year in Division IA. If you look at the results, you will see that up until the last day it was a toss-up between Norway, Denmark or Belarus for promotion. Those teams were all relatively equal in skill, and are probably of similar calibre to Germany and Latvia. While they didn't have much trouble with Austria or France, the scores of those games are probably a lot closer than they would have been if it was Denmark playing Canada again. Their games against each other are far more competitive. And with only one team getting promoted and relegated each year, it means a team like Latvia can stay in the top division for a couple years and experience playing Canada a couple times, gaining said experience, rather than losing 10-0 once and going back down for a year or two.

The current system works well. You can't add anymore teams to the top level because these teams would get blown out each time. And it would totally destroy the lower levels, which the IIHF has finally fixed with their new system of promotion and relegation.

kaiser matias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 05:13 PM
  #11
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
There is too much of a gap between the top teams like Canada, US, Russia, Sweden and the teams like Germany, Latvia, Norway etc. The Czechs, Slovaks and Finns, being small countries have good and bad years as is too be expected, but teams like Germany, Latvia etc rarely ever compete with anybody in these tournaments. I'm not sure it really benefits anybody to have more of these completely overmatched teams in the tournament. The big teams don't gain much from winning 7-0. The small teams don't gain much from being smashed 7-0.

The only realistic way that I could see the tournament expanding would be to have a preliminary round like they used to do in the Olympics. That way teams like Germany, Denmark, Latvia, Norway etc would have a chance to play against each other. As it is now those teams basically get crushed and their entire tournament comes down to a one game play off in the relegation round against the other crappy team. The preliminary round of course creates a whole bunch of other challenges regarding players release, scheduling conflicts etc. For that reason I don't see the benefits. It's better to just let the smaller countries play on a more competitive playing field in the next division.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 05:25 PM
  #12
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,710
vCash: 500
I'd much rather see the number of teams reduced to 7, then have a round robin where each team plays each other once, then top 4 into the SF. All the teams would be competitive, all the games would be important, I bet it would be an incredibly entertaining tournament.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 05:28 PM
  #13
Rob
Registered User
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,110
vCash: 500
Hockey Canada has been against it. They don't want the tournament to go longer nor have more games in a shorter time frame.

As a fan I am against it as it would bring the quality of the tournament down.

Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 07:25 PM
  #14
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser matias View Post
That didn't happen this year in Division IA. If you look at the results, you will see that up until the last day it was a toss-up between Norway, Denmark or Belarus for promotion. Those teams were all relatively equal in skill, and are probably of similar calibre to Germany and Latvia. While they didn't have much trouble with Austria or France, the scores of those games are probably a lot closer than they would have been if it was Denmark playing Canada again. Their games against each other are far more competitive. And with only one team getting promoted and relegated each year, it means a team like Latvia can stay in the top division for a couple years and experience playing Canada a couple times, gaining said experience, rather than losing 10-0 once and going back down for a year or two.

The current system works well. You can't add anymore teams to the top level because these teams would get blown out each time. And it would totally destroy the lower levels, which the IIHF has finally fixed with their new system of promotion and relegation.
My point was these teams aren't improving beating teams they always beat.

I don't care if they keep it at 10 but if 8 teams make the playoffs is almost renders the group stage pointless for the top teams. My point was they should raise it to 12 if they raise the playoffs teams to 8. I'd prefer if they kept it at 6 and 10

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 07:30 PM
  #15
ricky0034
Registered User
 
ricky0034's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,568
vCash: 500
i'd rather it be decreased than increased

ricky0034 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 09:00 PM
  #16
Royal Canuck
Go Jumbo Joe!
 
Royal Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 814
Im okay with expanding to 12 teams just for the fact that we could have 4 divisions of 3 teams and the knockout format would be much easier, (Top 2 through round robin advance from their division, then the 4 division teams are seeded and play a 1 game knockout) then a semi-final to play for gold and the loser plays for bronze, each against the winners/losers of the other 2 divisions).

__________________

Twitter |HFBoards Contact | Blog
PSN - TBennz
"You're never a loser until you quit trying. " - Mike Ditka
Royal Canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 09:07 PM
  #17
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,911
vCash: 500
I don't care how many in the opening round, but...

Reduce it to eight teams in the medal round (have two divisions of four teams each play each other once before the playoff games).

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 09:08 PM
  #18
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
I don't care how many in the opening round, but...

Reduce it to eight teams in the medal round.
reduce to 8 in the medal round? You nrealize the current medal round consists of 6 teams. Not sure how you reduce from 6 to 8

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 09:19 PM
  #19
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
No need to see players further pad their point totals against weak teams.

Also, was anybody else confused by Canada4Gold and topched having the same avatar?

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 10:20 PM
  #20
Canada4Gold
Registered User
 
Canada4Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topched View Post
Was just thinking back to 09 when they were part of the tournament. That game was embarassing to watch. You feel bad for those kids.

Another issue with the current relegation system is that this tournament changes so much year to year. A good team one year doesn't neccessarily mean a good one the next. This can't really be changed, but still.
It'd be nice if a team that gets promoted from division 1 plays in the elite that same year. That way those who have good teams and get promoted, don't lose all the players that promote them.

That would lead to teams getting relegated 1 year, play D1, get promoted, and play elite, get relegated, repeat. Fringe countries would often play twice in 1 year many times

Canada4Gold is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 04:00 AM
  #21
stv11
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,844
vCash: 500
I would like to have a 12 teams tournament with 8 teams making it to the medal round, I've never been a fan of the 6 teams playoffs.

Regarding the blowouts issue, Denmark, Norway and Belarus are not worse than Germany and Latvia, it's not like an expansion would add a much weaker team to the tournament. The lower divisions would be fine too, last week division IA tournament would have featured Denmark, Slovenia, Austria, France, Poland and Kazakhstan, not a unbalanced list of teams.

stv11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 04:18 AM
  #22
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stv11 View Post
I would like to have a 12 teams tournament with 8 teams making it to the medal round, I've never been a fan of the 6 teams playoffs.

Regarding the blowouts issue, Denmark, Norway and Belarus are not worse than Germany and Latvia, it's not like an expansion would add a much weaker team to the tournament. The lower divisions would be fine too, last week division IA tournament would have featured Denmark, Slovenia, Austria, France, Poland and Kazakhstan, not a unbalanced list of teams.
It wouldn't add a much weaker team, but it would add more weaker teams. I don't see the benefit for anybody when big guys run over these guys.

The only reasonable way would be an eight team bye to the round robin. Then have the extra six or whatever countries play a preliminary round to see the top two advance.

In that case you'd have....


USA
Canada
Russia
Slovakia
X


Czechs
Sweden
Finland
Switzerland
X


Prelim round

Germany
Latvia
Denmark
Norway
Belarus
Slovenia


Of course the question is, can you get all those players released for extra games? I don't know. But I don't see the reason to have Canada play Germany and Denmark or Russia play Latvia and Norway. Those games are wasted.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 04:52 AM
  #23
Sanderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
There is too much of a gap between the top teams like Canada, US, Russia, Sweden and the teams like Germany, Latvia, Norway etc. The Czechs, Slovaks and Finns, being small countries have good and bad years as is too be expected, but teams like Germany, Latvia etc rarely ever compete with anybody in these tournaments. I'm not sure it really benefits anybody to have more of these completely overmatched teams in the tournament.
Is that so?
I do remember quite a few of those smaller teams being competitive, Germany beating USA and Slovakia and then getting relegated because of losses against Belarus and Switzerland, Russia barely beating Kazakhstan, Switzerland taking the eventual gold-medal winner Sweden to a shootout. It happens, just like blowout losses happen. Now, blowouts were a bit more extreme lately then in the years prior to that, but there is a reason for that as well.

The problem is, the smaller nations are much more dependent on the skill of their oldest age-class. There have been quite a few times where teams got up to the WJC on the strength of their best class in years, only to lose most of them for the next tournament and get blown to bits because the next class was weak. Just like teams got relegated to a lower level even though they were probably much stronger than the team that got up. That's why having only one team go down makes sense.

Then you get to the point of different strategies. Some smaller nations try to compete with the best, and then lack the energy to beat those who are about their level, as those teams didn't waste any energy on the big nations, letting themselves get steamrolled, to save anything they have for the games they can win.

They just changed the system so maybe they should wait for some years and see how it goes.

Sanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 05:38 AM
  #24
stv11
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanderson View Post
Is that so?
I do remember quite a few of those smaller teams being competitive, Germany beating USA and Slovakia and then getting relegated because of losses against Belarus and Switzerland, Russia barely beating Kazakhstan, Switzerland taking the eventual gold-medal winner Sweden to a shootout. It happens, just like blowout losses happen. Now, blowouts were a bit more extreme lately then in the years prior to that, but there is a reason for that as well.

The problem is, the smaller nations are much more dependent on the skill of their oldest age-class. There have been quite a few times where teams got up to the WJC on the strength of their best class in years, only to lose most of them for the next tournament and get blown to bits because the next class was weak. Just like teams got relegated to a lower level even though they were probably much stronger than the team that got up. That's why having only one team go down makes sense.

Then you get to the point of different strategies. Some smaller nations try to compete with the best, and then lack the energy to beat those who are about their level, as those teams didn't waste any energy on the big nations, letting themselves get steamrolled, to save anything they have for the games they can win.

They just changed the system so maybe they should wait for some years and see how it goes.
Some good points here. A possible solution to avoid teams being promoted thanks to a good class and not being competitive the following season would be to play a tournament with the bottom two teams and the top two teams of division IA to decide who plays in the top division. With such a system, teams would earn their place in the WJC on the strength of the players who will actually take part in the tournament. It could also help in solving the last problem you mention: with no threat of direct relegation, no need to save energy for the key games.

stv11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 09:47 AM
  #25
tony d
Honey Nut Cheerios
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,079
vCash: 500
No, I think it's perfectly fine at 10 teams as it is now.

__________________
tony d 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 05:13 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.