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.

The world rankings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-20-2013, 03:19 AM
  #1
Everlasting
Registered User
 
Everlasting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Somwhere in time
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,281
vCash: 807
The world rankings

1. Sweden
2. Finland
3. Russia
4. Czech Republic
5. Canada
6. USA
7. Switzerland
8. Slovakia
9. Norway
10. Germany

I think it is a good ranking that displays the current form and strenght of the teams. Switzerland need to make atleast 1 or 3 more good tournaments before they deserve to be ranked better, but they are getting there. Finland and Russia have been good lately, and have had their sucess, but Russia can do so much better. Maybe switch Czech Republic with Russia? The other rankings are fair too. Canada can do A LOT better, but hockey is not a game of theory. You need consistency and good results, which is something Canada have been struggeling with since the last Olympics, but they can easily bounce back.

http://www.iihf.com/home-of-hockey/c...3-ranking.html

Everlasting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 03:23 AM
  #2
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,335
vCash: 500
Wow, I didn't know/realize the Czechs were that strong internationally. Similarly, good on the Swiss for passing Slovakia and cracking into that top-7. Two nations that fly under the radar a bit I guess, unless I'm just ignorant (likely).

My guess though is that the US is on the verge of solidifying a position in the top-3.

vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 03:35 AM
  #3
Rob
Registered User
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,968
vCash: 500
Even if Canada were to win gold at Sochi they would not make any big gains in the rankings as an Olympics gold medal is worth the same as a World Championship gold medal according to the IIHF.

I do understand that the rankings serve a purpose for seeding the teams at the Olympics. This is why I think the rankings are more important for the lower ranked teams than for the highly ranked ones.

Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 03:49 AM
  #4
Tomas W
Registered User
 
Tomas W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4,693
vCash: 500
Yeah the ranking is more important for lower level teams.

Tomas W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 04:26 AM
  #5
stv11
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Even if Canada were to win gold at Sochi they would not make any big gains in the rankings as an Olympics gold medal is worth the same as a World Championship gold medal according to the IIHF.

I do understand that the rankings serve a purpose for seeding the teams at the Olympics. This is why I think the rankings are more important for the lower ranked teams than for the highly ranked ones.
Yes, the ranking's main purpose being qualification for the Olympics, giving the OG more weight would result in the same teams qualifying over and over again. They work well as a seeding system too, the pools are pretty well balanced and since they are in use, there wasn't any seeding disaster like the 2004 World Championship.

But in the end, there's isn't much difference between being ranked first or sixth.

stv11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 05:28 AM
  #6
roto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Even if Canada were to win gold at Sochi they would not make any big gains in the rankings as an Olympics gold medal is worth the same as a World Championship gold medal according to the IIHF.

I do understand that the rankings serve a purpose for seeding the teams at the Olympics. This is why I think the rankings are more important for the lower ranked teams than for the highly ranked ones.
Still, also olympic tournament is still only one tournament. Yes, top countries have their A-players there, but it doesn't really matter from ranking point of view because the sample quality of that tournament is low: round robin games are almost meaningless (all teams advance to playoffs) and then from one to four single game elimination games.

Anyway, the IIHF ranking is much better than FIFA ranking, for example, which is a joke. FIFA ranking favors teams from continents with weak teams. Even bigger joke is the FIFA World Cup. The best teams are not there but predefined amount of best teams from each region.

If ice hockey World Cup was arranged in same way, it'd be like this: Canada, Russia, Sweden, Czech Rep, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Qatar, South Africa and Egypt.


Last edited by roto: 05-20-2013 at 05:53 AM.
roto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 05:42 AM
  #7
premadonna
Registered User
 
premadonna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,221
vCash: 520
Canada has done nothing on international level since 2010. Their ranking is deserved.

premadonna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:17 AM
  #8
Rob
Registered User
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stv11 View Post
Yes, the ranking's main purpose being qualification for the Olympics, giving the OG more weight would result in the same teams qualifying over and over again. They work well as a seeding system too, the pools are pretty well balanced and since they are in use, there wasn't any seeding disaster like the 2004 World Championship.

But in the end, there's isn't much difference between being ranked first or sixth.
I agree. Despite Canada's low ranking they ended up in the easiest group at Sochi. As long as Canada doesn't drop out of the top eight I'm not too concerned.


I'm sure every nation would rather win at the Olympics than be ranked #1 in the IIHF ranking.

Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:19 AM
  #9
leksig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 171
vCash: 500
The rankings seems accurate to me.

leksig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:20 AM
  #10
Rob
Registered User
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by roto View Post
Anyway, the IIHF ranking is much better than FIFA ranking, for example, which is a joke.
Disagree. FIFA has 'best vs best' games and tournaments every year. IIHF? Once every four years. That is a joke.

Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:26 AM
  #11
True Hockey Fan
Registered User
 
True Hockey Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt Russell Crowe View Post
Canada has done nothing on international level since 2010. Their ranking is deserved.
Well, can't argue about that , but isn't a little bit weird that olympics have the same importance as the whc ?

On the other hand, I really don't care so much about the IIHF rankings. What matters are the results and the score at the end of the game.

Btw, congratulations to Sweden.

True Hockey Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:34 AM
  #12
roto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Disagree. FIFA has 'best vs best' games and tournaments every year. IIHF? Once every four years. That is a joke.
Apparently it's not easy for many to understand why FIFA ranking sucks. Think. It has nothing to do with "best-on-best".

roto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 06:39 AM
  #13
roto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Hockey Fan View Post
Well, can't argue about that , but isn't a little bit weird that olympics have the same importance as the whc ?
Why so? IIHF doesn't even know if NHL is going to release it players because NHL is still afraid that the league goes belly up if there's a two week olympic break every four years. It's weird since other leagues don't have a problem with it.

I bet Canadians wouldn't like to emphasize the olympics in IIHF ranking if NHL players weren't there.

roto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 07:07 AM
  #14
Rob
Registered User
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by roto View Post
Why so? IIHF doesn't even know if NHL is going to release it players because NHL is still afraid that the league goes belly up if there's a two week olympic break every four years. It's weird since other leagues don't have a problem with it.
No, the league is not afraid that it will go bankrupt. There are just a lot of US owners who do not see the positive in closing down the season for two weeks.

Quote:
I bet Canadians wouldn't like to emphasize the olympics in IIHF ranking if NHL players weren't there.
If NHL players aren't playing I wouldn't care about the IIHF ranking at all.

Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 07:13 AM
  #15
True Hockey Fan
Registered User
 
True Hockey Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by roto View Post
Why so? IIHF doesn't even know if NHL is going to release it players because NHL is still afraid that the league goes belly up if there's a two week olympic break every four years. It's weird since other leagues don't have a problem with it.

I bet Canadians wouldn't like to emphasize the olympics in IIHF ranking if NHL players weren't there.
It's not like the IIHF doesn't know. Fasel can influence that. And the last 4 years it were olympics with NHL players. So it's not only about one olympic tournament. You can also change the point system easily. So yes, it's very weird to me that since 1998 olympics, after 16 years, the IIHF has still the same point system for olympic games and the world hockey championships.

But as I said, it doesn't matter to me. If Canada is ranked 7th, but wins the Sochi olympics, I'm completely all right with that. And I think the same thing applies for europeans.

If the United States wins, I don't care they are number 6 right now. The tournament where every nation can make the best team possible is the tournament that matters to me.

// edit: matters MOST to me.


Last edited by True Hockey Fan: 05-20-2013 at 07:23 AM.
True Hockey Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 08:00 AM
  #16
stv11
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,808
vCash: 500
As I said earlier, giving more wait to the Olympics would push the teams taking part up the ranking and thus defeat its main prupose, automatic qualification for the OG. Belarus, who was 9th in Vancouver, could have qualified for Sochi thanks to this result despite Norway performing a lot better than them ever since.

I think that thanks to the IIHF ranking, the right nine teams earned direct qualification for Sochi.

stv11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 11:44 AM
  #17
IHaveNoCreativity
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Somewhere in Quebec.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,165
vCash: 500
The rankings are fair and accurate.

IHaveNoCreativity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 12:24 PM
  #18
True Hockey Fan
Registered User
 
True Hockey Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHaveNoCreativity View Post
The rankings are fair and accurate.
For the World hockey championship, probably yes. But with olympics together ? No way.

True Hockey Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 01:07 PM
  #19
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Hockey Fan View Post
For the World hockey championship, probably yes. But with olympics together ? No way.


The purpose of the rankings is to place a country in the most deserved tournament (olympics, WC div1-4, etc.) based on recent performance. In that sense they are extremely fair and accurate.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 01:36 PM
  #20
True Hockey Fan
Registered User
 
True Hockey Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
The purpose of the rankings is to place a country in the most deserved tournament (olympics, WC div1-4, etc.) based on recent performance. In that sense they are extremely fair and accurate.
Yes, it's as fair as the qualification for teams like Austria, Slovenia, Lativa and Germany when fighting for olympic spot without their best players

True Hockey Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 01:40 PM
  #21
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Hockey Fan View Post
Yes, it's as fair as the qualification for teams like Austria, Slovenia, Lativa and Germany when fighting for olympic spot without their best players
The rankings are fair. While I agree that the Olympics should be worth more than the WHC, like someone else already posted, since Vancouver 2010, Canada has done NOTHING on the international stage, at ANY level, except one U18 gold. Hockey Canada should be embarrassed by their efforts.


Last edited by Chalupa Batman: 05-22-2013 at 03:48 PM. Reason: Flaming
TonsofPuppies* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 01:43 PM
  #22
Zorkan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
The whole "not with their best players" argument is kind of moot IMO. Especially considering that some countries (especially the more hockey developed) intentionally waived to get some of their stars into the tournament. And in the end, if you do not have the depth to compensate for the few players still in the playoffs, I guess your lower ranking is also justified... (and as you can see, this "depth" argument shows just how ridiculous the claim of "not having our best players" really is, I mean, look at Team Canada this year ffs...)

Zorkan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 01:56 PM
  #23
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 68,713
vCash: 50
Surprised to see Great Britain drop to 21. We punched above our weight with the Olympics to get to the final qualification stage but then I guess our poor WJHC cost us.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 02:03 PM
  #24
Frank the Tank
The Oiler Tankers
 
Frank the Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,283
vCash: 500
It is not surprising that the IIHF rankings rely heavily on the WHC championships because it is the organization's crown jewel event. It generates large revenues for the IIHF in terms of viewing rights in European markets. As a result, such rankings have to be taken with the bias the IIHF has as an organization towards Europe. For example, the WHC schedule is based on the finish of the European professional leagues while ignoring the NHL playoffs, the league where the majority of best players in the world play.

Everyone knows to take these ranking with a grain of salt, anyways. Russia was #1 heading into Vancouver 2010 and were eliminated at the QF in a blowout loss. That is not the perception, however, because when I point out (to both NA or European hockey fans) that Canada upset the tournament favorites, the large majority reply that Canada was the actual favorite so it is not an upset.

Frank the Tank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2013, 02:30 PM
  #25
Zorkan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank the Tank View Post
It is not surprising that the IIHF rankings rely heavily on the WHC championships because it is the organization's crown jewel event. It generates large revenues for the IIHF in terms of viewing rights in European markets. As a result, such rankings have to be taken with the bias the IIHF has as an organization towards Europe. For example, the WHC schedule is based on the finish of the European professional leagues while ignoring the NHL playoffs, the league where the majority of best players in the world play.

Everyone knows to take these ranking with a grain of salt, anyways. Russia was #1 heading into Vancouver 2010 and were eliminated at the QF in a blowout loss. That is not the perception, however, because when I point out (to both NA or European hockey fans) that Canada upset the tournament favorites, the large majority reply that Canada was the actual favorite so it is not an upset.
The rankings are based on your previous successes and it's obvious that you can't use it as a prediction for future success, especially with the marginal differences between the top countries.

I don't understand this obsession about who is the "best country" in general as all those tournaments will always just be a snapshot in the first place. So just relax and enjoy the hockey...

Zorkan 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 08:36 AM.

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.