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.

How much more dominant Soviets would have been

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2014, 09:15 PM
  #1
Juubito
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Helsinki
Country: Finland
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
How much more dominant Soviets would have been

If they had the MASSIVE referee advantage like Canada did in Canada Cups, had not been disturbed in their hotels and had not played a socialistic game where everyone played as much no matter if it was PP or SH?

Juubito is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:23 PM
  #2
Lars65
Registered User
 
Lars65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 121
vCash: 884
Well they could have hosted a 'Commie Cup' if they wanted, I guess. don't know if everybody would've shown up though. All the teams knew the referees and rules involved, and they still showed up, didn't they? I guess they thought they were so good they could overcome the 'Massive' advantage.

Lars65 is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:24 PM
  #3
An Argument For
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juubito View Post
If they had the MASSIVE referee advantage like Canada did in Canada Cups, had not been disturbed in their hotels and had not played a socialistic game where everyone played as much no matter if it was PP or SH?
They weren't dominant period.

The country failed. The hockey system failed. This thread appears to be garbage but to everyone's surprise I will give it a bronze.

An Argument For is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:37 PM
  #4
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
The Soviets were never truly "dominant". Sending their pros to beat down on everyone's amateurs for decades is far from an impressive feat.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:50 PM
  #5
Acallabeth
Play fair, post fair
 
Acallabeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kemerovo, Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 4,345
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Acallabeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonsofPuppies View Post
The Soviets were never truly "dominant". Sending their pros to beat down on everyone's amateurs for decades is far from an impressive feat.
Only "amateurs" were the Canadian and Americans. And to say that the team that won all but 2 Olympics it participated in, medaled in every IIHF tournament they participated in, wasn't dominant is just laughable.

On topic, I don't think it would make a massive difference. Though the 1987 Canada Cup would be Soviet for sure...

Acallabeth is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:53 PM
  #6
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acallabeth View Post
Only "amateurs" were the Canadian and Americans. And to say that the team that won all but 2 Olympics it participated in, medaled in every IIHF tournament they participated in, wasn't dominant is just laughable.

On topic, I don't think it would make a massive difference. Though the 1987 Canada Cup would be Soviet for sure...
You mean the only country that had the depth and talent to compete on the same level, and could offer a consistent worthy challenge wasn't allowed to actually fairly compete? Yeah, the Soviets should be really proud of their "accomplishments".

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 09:54 PM
  #7
An Argument For
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acallabeth View Post
Only "amateurs" were the Canadian and Americans. And to say that the team that won all but 2 Olympics it participated in, medaled in every IIHF tournament they participated in, wasn't dominant is just laughable.

On topic, I don't think it would make a massive difference. Though the 1987 Canada Cup would be Soviet for sure...
Of course they won the Olympics, they used professional athletes while NHL players weren't allowed to until the 90s. Canada didn't even send hockey teams in the 70s because it was so lopsided.

Good luck with your Russian quarter final goals of the future.

An Argument For is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:03 PM
  #8
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
How much more dominant would Canada have been if their national team played and practiced together as much as the Soviets?

Mr Kanadensisk is online now  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:04 PM
  #9
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
How much more dominant would Canada have been if their national team played and practiced together as much as the Soviets?
I think you mean if they were actually able to ice a national team.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:12 PM
  #10
Pilky01
@JamesD_TO
 
Pilky01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
I dont think alot of Canadians, particularly those under 30, view any Canada Cup victories as anything more than just hockey exhibitions put on by Hockey Canada.

By the same token, I don't think any Canadians view the pre-NHL Olympic tournaments as meaning anything because the best hockey nation in the world, the nation that is the economic engine of the world's most successful pro hockey league, the nation that has won gold in 3/5 NHL Olympics, was sending a team of amateurs.

As for the USSR's "socialist" game plan, that was their prerogative. If they want to play a stupid game that isn't Canada's fault.

Pilky01 is online now  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:26 PM
  #11
Stonewall
Registered User
 
Stonewall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,589
vCash: 500
They were dominant in 1980 except for the game against the US. Look at them scores.

16 - 0 against Japan
17 - 4 against the Netherlands
8 - 1 against Poland
4 - 2 against Finland
6 - 4 against Canada
9 - 2 against Sweden

They would have won gold too if the US lost against Finland.

CSKA Moscow was also dominant in the Super Series

Stonewall is online now  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:31 PM
  #12
Pilky01
@JamesD_TO
 
Pilky01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonewall View Post
They were dominant in 1980 except for the game against the US. Look at them scores.

16 - 0 against Japan
17 - 4 against the Netherlands
8 - 1 against Poland
4 - 2 against Finland
6 - 4 against Canada
9 - 2 against Sweden

They would have won gold too if the US lost against Finland.

CSKA Moscow was also dominant in the Super Series
Is 41-5 against hockey nobodies Japan/Netherlands/Poland supposed to mean something?

Those scores tell me they blew out Sweden and played tight games against the Fins and Canadians before losing the US. How is that "dominant"?

Pilky01 is online now  
Old
02-28-2014, 10:47 PM
  #13
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilky01 View Post
Is 41-5 against hockey nobodies Japan/Netherlands/Poland supposed to mean something?

Those scores tell me they blew out Sweden and played tight games against the Fins and Canadians before losing the US. How is that "dominant"?
The Russians have a funny definition of the word.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
02-28-2014, 11:24 PM
  #14
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonewall View Post
4 - 2 against Finland
6 - 4 against Canada
They trailed in both games, they were down 3-1 to a bunch of Canadian college kids early in the 2nd period being outshot by a wide margin (the game's on youtube)

Uncle Rotter is online now  
Old
03-01-2014, 12:01 AM
  #15
Fantomas
Registered User
 
Fantomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Canadians are so insecure. Someone posts that the Soviets were dominant and they have to barge in and say "nooooooooo."

Fantomas is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 12:09 AM
  #16
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,839
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
Canadians are so insecure. Someone posts that the Soviets were dominant and they have to barge in and say "nooooooooo."
I think it is safe to say they where not dominant, no?

Darth Yoda is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 12:15 AM
  #17
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomas View Post
Canadians are so insecure. Someone posts that the Soviets were dominant and they have to barge in and say "nooooooooo."
Lol, we've won 3 or the last 4 olympic golds. Believe me, we're very happy with where we are. How are those back to back QF exits sitting with you guys? The Soviets were an embarrassment to the sport by proclaiming themselves to be some sort of hockey gods, knowing full well that they were facing nothing but inferior competition by cheating the system. And the current Russian national team is carrying on that embarrassment to this day with their pathetic showings at best-on-best competitions. 1981 and counting. Not dominant. Not even close.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 12:52 AM
  #18
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonsofPuppies View Post
The Soviets were never truly "dominant". Sending their pros to beat down on everyone's amateurs for decades is far from an impressive feat.
Actually, they were pretty darn dominant, show a little respect. So much that Canada had to make up a little exhibition tournament called the "Canada Cup" as a way to counteract that.

If you want proof of how good the Soviet system was, see the Russian invasion of the NHL in the 1990s when the iron curtain fell. It was only once far enough removed from that Soviet system that Russia really declined as a hockey power.

Note that this isn't some way of proclaiming that Canada wasn't also awesome. So don't get all insecure Canadians. Canada #1!!! We get it..

The fact that Russia was competitive with Canada in the "Canada Cup" speaks volumes about how strong the Soviet system was.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 01:28 AM
  #19
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
Actually, they were pretty darn dominant, show a little respect. So much that Canada had to make up a little exhibition tournament called the "Canada Cup" as a way to counteract that.

If you want proof of how good the Soviet system was, see the Russian invasion of the NHL in the 1990s when the iron curtain fell. It was only once far enough removed from that Soviet system that Russia really declined as a hockey power.

Note that this isn't some way of proclaiming that Canada wasn't also awesome. So don't get all insecure Canadians. Canada #1!!! We get it..

The fact that Russia was competitive with Canada in the "Canada Cup" speaks volumes about how strong the Soviet system was.
If you're trying to come up with tournaments as a gauge for Soviet dominance, how about you don't choose the one where they lost 4 out 5? A winning percentage of .200 is far from dominant. In 5 Canada Cups, the Soviets have a record of 18-10-4, while the Canadians have a record of 28-5-6.

As for respect, I'll never respect the Soviets because almost all of their wins are tainted by the fact that they faced next to zero legitimate competition by masquerading their pros as amateurs.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 01:38 AM
  #20
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonsofPuppies View Post
If you're trying to come up with tournaments as a gauge for Soviet dominance, how about you don't choose the one where they lost 4 out 5? A winning percentage of .200 is far from dominant. In 5 Canada Cups, the Soviets have a record of 18-10-4, while the Canadians have a record of 28-5-6.

As for respect, I'll never respect the Soviets because almost all of their wins are tainted by the fact that they faced next to zero legitimate competition by masquerading their pros as amateurs.
I guess you never saw the games. Like the '72 Summit Series where the Canadians expected to win 8-0 with 5+ goal margins of victories and ended up realizing the Soviets were the equals. Or the various Challenge Cups where the Soviets spanked top NHL teams. Or the 81 Canada Cup where the final was heavily lopsided in favor of the Russians. Or the 87 Canada Cup where the greatest Canadians of all times (Gretzky and Lemieux in their primes) needed awful officiating just to barely beat their Soviet counterparts.

If all you gather out of all that is CANADA #1! RUSSIA SUXORZ! you need to grow up and learn how to respect your opposition.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 01:43 AM
  #21
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
I guess you never saw the games. Like the '72 Summit Series where the Canadians expected to win 8-0 with 5+ goal margins of victories and ended up realizing the Soviets were the equals. Or the various Challenge Cups where the Soviets spanked top NHL teams. Or the 81 Canada Cup where the final was heavily lopsided in favor of the Russians. Or the 87 Canada Cup where the greatest Canadians of all times (Gretzky and Lemieux in their primes) needed awful officiating just to barely beat their Soviet counterparts.

If all you gather out of all that is CANADA #1! RUSSIA SUXORZ! you need to grow up and learn how to respect your opposition.
So.. you're using the '72 Summit Series, which was won by Canada and lost by the Soviets, and the Canada Cup tournaments, 4 of which were won by Canada and 1 of which was won by the Soviets as proof of Soviet dominance? Before you embarrass yourself further, perhaps you should Google the definition of "dominant". I never once said the Soviets weren't good hockey players. I said they can't be called dominant when they never faced real competition (and when they did, they usually lost).

If Canada took all of their best players out of the NHL and had them practice and play games together year round, then put them up against hockey powerhouses like Kazakhstan, Poland, the Ukraine and the Russian and American WJC teams and decimated them, would that suffice for dominance?


Last edited by TonsofPuppies*: 03-01-2014 at 01:52 AM.
TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 02:00 AM
  #22
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonsofPuppies View Post
So.. you're using the '72 Summit Series, which was won by Canada and lost by the Soviets, and the Canada Cup tournaments, 4 of which were won by Canada and 1 of which was won by the Soviets as proof of Soviet dominance? Before you embarrass yourself further, perhaps you should Google the definition of "dominant". I never once said the Soviets weren't good hockey players. I said they can't be called dominant when they never faced real competition (and when they did, they usually lost).

If Canada took all of their best players out of the NHL and had them practice and play games together year round, then put them up against hockey powerhouses like Kazakhstan, Poland, the Ukraine and the Russian and American WJC teams and decimated them, would that suffice for dominance?
They "dominated" the tournaments they cared about most. That's pretty indisputable. I get your shtick. Canada is awesome. Cool. Good for them. I'm just saying show a little bit of respect. This whole "LOL AMATEUERZZZZZ" is a sad display of class from some posters. It's too bad Hasek took the gold medal game in Nagano '98 (not a true "best on best" as you all like to say as Russia was missing some notable players)... if that's what it would take to validate how strong the Soviet hockey program was.

FYI: just because a team LOSES doesn't mean they didn't play admirably and put on an excellent display of hockey ability. If all you take away from the '72 Summit Series is CANADA RULEZ USSR DROOLZ then you weren't paying enough attention.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 02:06 AM
  #23
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
They "dominated" the tournaments they cared about most. That's pretty indisputable. I get your shtick. Canada is awesome. Cool. Good for them. I'm just saying show a little bit of respect. This whole "LOL AMATEUERZZZZZ" is a sad display of class from some posters. It's too bad Hasek took the gold medal game in Nagano '98 (not a true "best on best" as you all like to say as Russia was missing some notable players)... if that's what it would take to validate how strong the Soviet hockey program was.

FYI: just because a team LOSES doesn't mean they didn't play admirably and put on an excellent display of hockey ability. If all you take away from the '72 Summit Series is CANADA RULEZ USSR DROOLZ then you weren't paying enough attention.
I don't think you're paying attention. It's impossible to lose and be dominant. They are opposites. If you lose a tournament, you didn't dominate said tournament. Likewise, even if you win a tournament, you may not have dominated it. For instance, the '72 Summit Series was a win for Canada, but hardly a dominant one. The only tournaments that the Soviets "dominated" were ones where the only team capable of giving them an actual challenge was put at an insurmountable disadvantage. This really isn't hard to understand. Again, if I were you, I'd start here.

TonsofPuppies* is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 02:07 AM
  #24
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonsofPuppies View Post
I don't think you're paying attention. It's impossible to lose and be dominant. They are opposites. If you lose a tournament, you didn't dominate it. The only tournaments that the Soviets "dominated" were ones where the only team capable of giving them an actual challenge was out at an insurmountable disadvantage. This really isn't hard to understand. Again, if I were you, I'd start here.
They were dominant in the tournament they cared about and competitive in the obviously biased exhibitions Canada put on to display their awesomeness. Get it?

You started this all with your whole "The Soviets were an embarrassment to the sport by proclaiming themselves to be some sort of hockey gods, knowing full well that they were facing nothing but inferior competition by cheating the system. And the current Russian national team is carrying on that embarrassment to this day with their pathetic showings at best-on-best competitions. 1981 and counting." flame. I mean, an embarrassment, really? You should learn how to show some respect, kid.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
03-01-2014, 02:09 AM
  #25
TonsofPuppies*
#ThePriceIsRight
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
They were dominant in the tournament they cared about and competitive in the obviously biased exhibitions Canada put on to display their awesomeness. Get it?
Which tournament are you referring to?

TonsofPuppies* 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 02:10 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.