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.

Top countries in Olympic tournaments (since 1998)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-19-2012, 05:42 PM
  #26
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiLe View Post
Huaaahaaahhhaaaahahahah.... stop, please!


hahahahahahahahah


Aw, man.


*gasp, pant*



Really... that was a good one.














Wait... you did not seriously mean that, did you?
Why are you hating on Slovakia? They won the game against Sweden fair and square. They also beat Russia at that Olympics (and Latvia, which is expected, but they beat them by as wide a margin as Russia, and a wider margin then the Czechs, and came close to beating the Czechs (preliminary round) Canadians, and Finns (medal round). They were also likely in the hardest group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Average placed finishes of the countries who have played in every olympics

3.25 Canada
3.5 Finland
3.75 Russians
4 Sweden
4.5 Czechs
4.5 US
8 Slovakia
9.5 Germany


6.67 Belarus*
8.33 Switzerland*


* Indicates a team has missed an Olympic tournament and their average is simply based on the 3 tournaments they appeared in.


I believe this is a better way to measure the Olympics performance, taking in final positioning and not just medals. Using this measurement the US falls below all but Slovakia of the major powers, because despite their two 2nd place finishes, their dismal showings of 6th and 8th are taken into account. At the top of the table Finland is given better recognition for their consistent success (only one stain in a 6th place finish) despite never actually winning. The small sample size means that the 2010 standings alone moved Canada from 4th place to 1st and Russia from 1st to 3rd.
If you only count the tournaments where they were allowed to use their NHLers (or nobody was) then the Slovaks averaged 5

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 05:58 PM
  #27
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
If you only count the tournaments where they were allowed to use their NHLers (or nobody was) then the Slovaks averaged 5
They actually average 4.5

There's also very little reason to only count the 3 Olympics that Belarus and Switzerland were able to qualify for. Surely their failure to qualify for the other one should be held against them.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:08 PM
  #28
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
They actually average 4.5

There's also very little reason to only count the 3 Olympics that Belarus and Switzerland were able to qualify for. Surely their failure to qualify for the other one should be held against them.
Maybe that is why they aren't in the table?

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:09 PM
  #29
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Why are you hating on Slovakia? They won the game against Sweden fair and square. They also beat Russia at that Olympics (and Latvia, which is expected, but they beat them by as wide a margin as Russia, and a wider margin then the Czechs, and came close to beating the Czechs (preliminary round) Canadians, and Finns (medal round). They were also likely in the hardest group.



If you only count the tournaments where they were allowed to use their NHLers (or nobody was) then the Slovaks averaged 5
I don't understand the bolded part.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:10 PM
  #30
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Maybe that is why they aren't in the table?
They should be.

It's not like they did not get an official ranking.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:13 PM
  #31
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
They should be.

It's not like they did not get an official ranking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
They actually average 4.5

There's also very little reason to only count the 3 Olympics that Belarus and Switzerland were able to qualify for. Surely their failure to qualify for the other one should be held against them.

How would you quantify did not qualify?

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:21 PM
  #32
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
They actually average 4.5

There's also very little reason to only count the 3 Olympics that Belarus and Switzerland were able to qualify for. Surely their failure to qualify for the other one should be held against them.
I counted 94 for the Slovaks (6th place) because as far as I am aware there was a level playing field.

But in 02 and 98 Olympics the IIHF only allowed NHLers after the preliminary round. The top 6 seeds got a bye through the preliminary round. And the rest of the teams had to compete for 2 spots without using NHLers. The IIHF didn't have rankings at the time, and determined the top 6 by the 99 and 95 World Championships. Very strange considering they did a tournament from 3 years before instead of 1, but anyways Slovakia finished 7th in the 99 tournament, and for 95 finished first in Div 1, they were in Div 1 because the IIHF gave all the credit for Czechoslovakia to the Czech Republic (even though quotas required national teams to be at least one third Czech and at least one third Slovak) and Slovakia had to start at the lowest division. They made it to the top division as quickly as possible, but 95 was one year to close to the breaking up of Czechoslovakia to make it.

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:22 PM
  #33
FiLe
Mr. Know-It-Nothing
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Why are you hating on Slovakia? They won the game against Sweden fair and square. They also beat Russia at that Olympics (and Latvia, which is expected, but they beat them by as wide a margin as Russia, and a wider margin then the Czechs, and came close to beating the Czechs (preliminary round) Canadians, and Finns (medal round). They were also likely in the hardest group.
Oh, now I see. I'm not hating on Slovakia, but I was talking about the 2006 tournament - as should have been evident by the way I cut my quote in the original response, like this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Slovakia got screwed by the IOC and IIHF in 98 and 02, but in 06 they went undefeated in the first round
I never referred to 2010. There the Slovaks had a hard, solid, battle in the QF against Sweden and kicked their hides deservedly, lost to Canada in SF, then lost the bronze game after Finland rallied in the third despite being down by two.

In 2006, however, Slovakia won their group because Sweden lost the final game of the preliminary group on purpose to face Switzerland in the QF.

FiLe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:26 PM
  #34
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
How would you quantify did not qualify?
The IIHF did rank every country that did not qualify, for the purpose of the IIHF ranking.

If you're unable to find who placed where, you could simply regard all the non qualifyers as having finished 13th or 15th (depending on the number of teams that did qualify).

This way Switzerland would not look like they did better than Germany or about as good Slovakia, which they certainly didn't.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:33 PM
  #35
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
The IIHF did rank every country that did not qualify, for the purpose of the IIHF ranking.

If you're unable to find who placed where, you could simply regard all the non qualifyers as having finished 13th or 15th (depending on the number of teams that did qualify).

This way Switzerland would not look like they did better than Germany or about as good Slovakia, which they certainly didn't.
Frankly I think if you could not qualify for all Olympics, then you don't deserve to be ranked, but if you give Switzerland and Belarus 15th place finishes in the games they missed:

3.25 Canada
3.5 Finland
3.75 Russians
4 Sweden
4.5 Czechs
4.5 US
8 Slovakia
8.75 Belarus
9.5 Germany
10 Switzerland

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:37 PM
  #36
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiLe View Post
Oh, now I see. I'm not hating on Slovakia, but I was talking about the 2006 tournament - as should have been evident by the way I cut my quote in the original response, like this:



I never referred to 2010. There the Slovaks had a hard, solid, battle in the QF against Sweden and kicked their hides deservedly, lost to Canada in SF, then lost the bronze game after Finland rallied in the third despite being already up by two.

In 2006, however, Slovakia won their group because Sweden lost the final game of the preliminary group on purpose to face Switzerland in the QF.
Okay, fair enough. Although we will never know for sure, it certainly does look like Sweden threw that game. Regardless they also beat the US and Russia in the preliminary round, and lost a close QF so still a good tournament.

It just goes to show how hard it is to judge in these tournaments where one win or loss (at the right or wrong time) can be the difference between playing for a medal or not. Slovakia had a great 06 preliminary, but lost a QF so no chance at a medal. Then in 10 they had a decent (but obviously worse then 06) preliminary, almost lost to Norway, but then win a QF and get two chances at a medal. Same thing happened to Sweden in 02. Undefeated preliminary, but just bad timing to lose in the QF (although Belarus is not a big 7 team, it is certainly close enough that upsets are plausible) takes away any chance at a medal.

What would be a better way to rank (for this thread) would be to look at the total records of all tournaments combined

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:40 PM
  #37
Dynamo81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Moscow,Russia
Posts: 1,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Why are you hating on Slovakia? They won the game against Sweden fair and square.
He is discussing the 2006 olympics where Sweden tanked against Slovakia so they could play Switzerland in the QF. Russia was ridiculously stupid for arriving in Turin the day before the tournament. Still fourth place and beating Sweden 5-0, the U.S and Canada was a good tournament. Had a lot more players from the Russian league in turin than they did in Vancouver.

Dynamo81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:41 PM
  #38
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo81 View Post
He is discussing the 2006 olympics where Sweden tanked against Slovakia so they could play Switzerland in the QF.
Yeah, I understand that now (see my post above)

Just a misunderstanding

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:42 PM
  #39
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Okay, fair enough. Although we will never know for sure, it certainly does look like Sweden threw that game. Regardless they also beat the US and Russia in the preliminary round, and lost a close QF so still a good tournament.

It just goes to show how hard it is to judge in these tournaments where one win or loss (at the right or wrong time) can be the difference between playing for a medal or not. Slovakia had a great 06 preliminary, but lost a QF so no chance at a medal. Then in 10 they had a decent (but obviously worse then 06) preliminary, almost lost to Norway, but then win a QF and get two chances at a medal. Same thing happened to Sweden in 02. Undefeated preliminary, but just bad timing to lose in the QF (although Belarus is not a big 7 team, it is certainly close enough that upsets are plausible) takes away any chance at a medal.

What would be a better way to rank (for this thread) would be to look at the total records of all tournaments combined
There is a clear dividing line between the 1998 Olympics and everything before.

I don't know how one can really compare the teams the US and Canada used to send to the Olympics vs essentially professionals from the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia to recent tournaments.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:43 PM
  #40
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure View Post
LOL , wow that was funny
Belarus was already booked on a flight out of SLC the next day.


It's fun to blame Salo, but Sweden should not have been tied with 2 minutes to go.

craigcaulks* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:45 PM
  #41
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
There is a clear dividing line between the 1998 Olympics and everything before.

I don't know how one can really compare the teams the US and Canada used to send to the Olympics vs essentially professionals from the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia to recent tournaments.
TBF, we did have Petr Nedved is 94!

craigcaulks* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:46 PM
  #42
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
I counted 94 for the Slovaks (6th place) because as far as I am aware there was a level playing field.
I see. Thread title says "since 1998" though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
But in 02 and 98 Olympics the IIHF only allowed NHLers after the preliminary round.
Actually they were allowed in the first round and some did compete but most were still busy with their NHL team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
The IIHF didn't have rankings at the time, and determined the top 6 by the 99 and 95 World Championships. Very strange considering they did a tournament from 3 years before instead of 1,
Taking the results of the previous championship is not feasible, that would leave just a couple of months to complete the qualifying tournaments. The automatic qualifiers for the 2014 Sochi games have already been determined at the 2012 WCh. The 1998 qualifiers took much longer than they do now: it took the Swiss only 3 games to qualify for Turin, while they played 12 games to (fail to) qualify for Nagano.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:48 PM
  #43
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Frankly I think if you could not qualify for all Olympics, then you don't deserve to be ranked,
If you're not ranked, then your average ranking benefits from your failure to qualify.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 06:57 PM
  #44
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
If you're not ranked, then your average ranking benefits from your failure to qualify.
If you are ranked, then your ranking does not benefit because you aren't ranked.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:03 PM
  #45
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
If you are ranked, then your ranking does not benefit because you aren't ranked.
Let's rephrase it: if you don't get a ranking when you fail to qualify, then your average ranking benefits from your failure.

You did give an average ranking to Switzerland and Belarus.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:04 PM
  #46
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
I see. Thread title says "since 1998" though.
Didn't see that, my bad


Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
Actually they were allowed in the first round and some did compete but most were still busy with their NHL team.
Exactly, that's not fair. If the Slovaks got an automatic qualifier to the Olympics, then why do other teams with an automatic qualifier get to skip a round, and play all, not just some games (if you win enough), with their NHLers.

That system was terrible, and it was not a representation of best on best.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
Taking the results of the previous championship is not feasible, that would leave just a couple of months to complete the qualifying tournaments. The automatic qualifiers for the 2014 Sochi games have already been determined at the 2012 WCh. The 1998 qualifiers took much longer than they do now: it took the Swiss only 3 games to qualify for Turin, while they played 12 games to (fail to) qualify for Nagano.
But the Slovaks didn't have to play in the qualifying tournament. They had to play in the preliminary round, while the other big seven teams got a bye, just because of a QF 3 years ago. To determine the 6 byes, why not use 2000 where the Slovaks won a silver, or 2001 where even though the Slovaks finished 7th again, at least it was the most recent.

This was one of the worst systems ever in international hockey, if a team can have a 4 year period where they finish 7th, then 2nd, hen 7th, then 1st in the WC it shows that there is some fluctuation between the top teams, and that picking out 6 from one year was not a fair way to judge. If they were going to stick with the 6 byes, a better way to determine them would have been to average teams finish in the last 2 or 3 WCs.

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:29 PM
  #47
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
That system was terrible, and it was not a representation of best on best.
And that system was put in place to accomodate the NHL. To think that many in NA believe the IIHF is anti-NHL!

Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
But the Slovaks didn't have to play in the qualifying tournament.
Yes they did in 1998.

Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
To determine the 6 byes, why not use 2000 where the Slovaks won a silver, or 2001 where even though the Slovaks finished 7th again, at least it was the most recent.
I think I just explained why they couldn't use 2001, probably they could have used 2000 instead, but you make it sound like they should have decided that after the qualifiers had started which does not make a lot of sense.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:47 PM
  #48
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Frankly I think if you could not qualify for all Olympics, then you don't deserve to be ranked, but if you give Switzerland and Belarus 15th place finishes in the games they missed:

3.25 Canada
3.5 Finland
3.75 Russians
4 Sweden
4.5 Czechs
4.5 US
8 Slovakia
8.75 Belarus
9.5 Germany
10 Switzerland
The problem with this method is that it puts too much weight on the preliminary round standings since they determine the 5-8 placements. One unfortunate thing with the Olympic formats that have been used is that the preliminary round games (for the contending teams) are basically glorified exhibition games. In 98, 02, and 10 no teams were eliminated in the "preliminary round" and in 06 anyone with a pulse made it through.
The number of championships and final appearences tells a much better story than this method.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:54 PM
  #49
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
Let's rephrase it: if you don't get a ranking when you fail to qualify, then your average ranking benefits from your failure.

You did give an average ranking to Switzerland and Belarus.
I listed their numbers and specifically excluded them from the list.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:56 PM
  #50
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The problem with this method is that it puts too much weight on the preliminary round standings since they determine the 5-8 placements. One unfortunate thing with the Olympic formats that have been used is that the preliminary round games (for the contending teams) are basically glorified exhibition games. In 98, 02, and 10 no teams were eliminated in the "preliminary round" and in 06 anyone with a pulse made it through.
The number of championships and final appearences tells a much better story than this method.
The preliminary round existed as part of the tournament structure. It was impossible for a team like Slovakia to get to the medal round if they were unable to survive the preliminary round.

Xokkeu 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 03:57 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.