HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Canada Cup/World Cup

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-14-2013, 10:05 AM
  #1
cam042686
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Canada Cup/World Cup

Canada Cup/World Cup question to all of you.

Why is it that we have never seen this event turn into a “true” World Cup like event such as we see in soccer? By that I mean the Canada Cup started in 1976. Then we saw it again in 1981 (5 years.) Then 1984/87 (3 year intervals.) Then 1991 (4 years) 1996 (5 years) and not again until 2004 (8 years.) It hasn’t been seen since. Why is that?

As well while using the World Cup name we have seen some games in Europe, we never see Canada or the US play games in Europe. Why is that?

As well why hasn’t this become, again like a soccer World Cup? Say in 2004 it was played in Canada. Then in 2008 Berlin? 2012 Moscow and 2016 perhaps Detroit? I realize there are not as many big rinks in Europe but let other countries bid on the event like what is done with the Olympics and it is up to them to ensure they have the proper facilities. So if say Germany wants to host the “World Cup” they have to ensure that they have the proper rinks, hotel accommodations, etc.

The way it is now when this event is played, Canada and the US always have “home ice advantage.” They always play before friendly crowds, they always have the smaller ice, they are always in comfortable cultural surroundings, etc. That isn’t fair. It is almost like our players are scared to play outside of North America and have to ensure that our guys have every possible advantage. Again, that just isn’t fair -why do the Europeans always have to come to us for a “World Cup.” As it is now it isn’t a “World Cup.” It is a “North American Cup.”

Craig Wallace

cam042686 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 10:14 AM
  #2
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 500
The 81 Cup was originally scheduled for 79, but a rift between Hockey Canada and the CAHA and the Soviet/Afghanistan situation caused the delay.

As for the lapse from 91 to 96, not sure. My guess is after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the way the 91 tourney was just dominated by Canada it may not have been much hype. Plus, there was labor issues at the time the tournament would have been played.

It will never be like the World Cup of soccer because there are only 7 teams that would have a legit shot at winning. Granted, most teams in soccer aren't going to win, but the national teams can still compete with other national teams. The US tied England in the last World Cup. Could England's hockey team stay within 10 goals of the US's D team?


Last edited by patnyrnyg: 03-14-2013 at 10:21 AM.
patnyrnyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 11:14 AM
  #3
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,703
vCash: 500
Unfortunately, it's politics between the NHL and the European leagues.

The European leagues already have the World Championships, which are basically catered to their rules and their schedules.

The Europeans see the Canada Cup/World Cup as basically the reverse - an NHL-tournament that is catered to NHL rules an schedules.

I would love to have a World Cup every 4 years, probably in the same year as the Summer Olympics to be offset 2 years with the Winter Olympics. But that requires the NHL and the Euro leagues to actually come to a mutually beneficial agreement, and good luck with that...

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 11:48 AM
  #4
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,118
vCash: 500
Well, in addition to what others have said, it seems that the origin of a sport plays a big role. Sports that originated in North America, and tend to be mostly influenced by a North American perspective, tend not to have a World Cup type event. This is true for hockey, basketball, baseball (don't try to talk about that 'Classic') and football. I think that nationalism is just a bigger part of sport in Europe, which tends to drive those competitions into creation. Hockey also lacks a large number of nations playing the sport at a high level, which makes it more difficult to create a legitimate World Cup type tournament.

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:05 PM
  #5
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,090
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
1996 (5 years) and not again until 2004 (8 years.) It hasn’t been seen since. Why is that?
NHL participation in the Olympics has turned the CC/WC into a second-rate tournament in the eyes of many people. The interest is probably not big enough. What else would keep the NHL from organizing another one?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
As well why hasn’t this become, again like a soccer World Cup?
There already is a regular World Championship (≙ Soccer World Cup) organized by the IIHF (≙ FIFA in Soccer). The overlapping with the NHL schedule is unsatisfactory ("not a best-on-best tournament"), but in Europe it's still a renowned tournament that makes the IIHF and the hosts a lot of money.

Could the CC/WC have superseded the World Championship as the only "best-on-best tournament" before 1998? Maybe, but not without:
1) alternating the hosting between North America and Europe. Why didn't it happen? Ask the NHL. I think the Swedes and Fins had to pressurize them into having a couple of games in Europe in 1996.
2) having a qualifying process. If you want to hand the top nations a secure spot via invitation, that's fine considering the circumstances (no breaks for international qualficiation matches in the NHL schedule), but you cannot exclude the rest of the hockey world altogether. Let the other countries (Norway, Latvia, Belarus, Switzerland etc) play for spots in the World Cup.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:12 PM
  #6
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,340
vCash: 500
Dollars

Sponsorship and advertising dollars plus licensing dollars are not readily available in Europe from most countries - Britain, France, Italy and other borderline hockey Group A,mainly B and C countries will not support the event with dollars or Euros like they do soccer or the Olympics.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:35 PM
  #7
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
**** World Cup of soccer, the Olympic Games is the real arena and they have never been able to accept that.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:51 PM
  #8
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,090
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
**** World Cup of soccer, the Olympic Games is the real arena and they have never been able to accept that.
What are you talking about? The Olympics mean nothing in soccer.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 01:16 PM
  #9
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
NHL participation in the Olympics has turned the CC/WC into a second-rate tournament in the eyes of many people. The interest is probably not big enough. What else would keep the NHL from organizing another one?



There already is a regular World Championship (≙ Soccer World Cup) organized by the IIHF (≙ FIFA in Soccer). The overlapping with the NHL schedule is unsatisfactory ("not a best-on-best tournament"), but in Europe it's still a renowned tournament that makes the IIHF and the hosts a lot of money.

Could the CC/WC have superseded the World Championship as the only "best-on-best tournament" before 1998? Maybe, but not without:
The World Championships are NOT a best-on-best tournament. The appeal of the World Cup to North Americans was the ability to see the best players in the world compete against each other. You're right that it happens at the Olympics now, but that's every 4 years. And I do prefer the World Cup's format of a best 2 out of 3 finals.

Quote:
1) alternating the hosting between North America and Europe. Why didn't it happen? Ask the NHL. I think the Swedes and Fins had to pressurize them into having a couple of games in Europe in 1996.
2) having a qualifying process. If you want to hand the top nations a secure spot via invitation, that's fine considering the circumstances (no breaks for international qualficiation matches in the NHL schedule), but you cannot exclude the rest of the hockey world altogether. Let the other countries (Norway, Latvia, Belarus, Switzerland etc) play for spots in the World Cup.
Yes, these are the things the NHL could do to make the tournament more appealing to Europeans.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 01:55 PM
  #10
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,090
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The World Championships are NOT a best-on-best tournament.
Of course I'm aware of that. Sorry, the sentence should have read: Could the CC/WC as the only "best-on-best tournament" before 1998 have superseded the World Championship? Wrong word order, my bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The appeal of the World Cup to North Americans was the ability to see the best players in the world compete against each other. You're right that it happens at the Olympics now, but that's every 4 years. And I do prefer the World Cup's format of a best 2 out of 3 finals.
Every 4 years. That was also the average intervall between Canada Cups, so I don't see the point. As for the best of 2 finals, I happen to agree. But overall it seems the Olympics are more attractive to a lot of fans and players. The original idea was to have the World Cup in 1996, then the Olympics in 1998 and then continue the 2 year cycle. Instead, the World Cup disappeared. They tried to revive it in 2004, but forgot about it afterwards. Why would they do that if the mass appeal was there?

Edit: I'm not against it, just trying to explain why it didn't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yes, these are the things the NHL could do to make the tournament more appealing to Europeans.
Which is the key to make it a "true" World Cup like the Soccer World Cup. You want the rest of the hockey world to care? Well, Europe pretty much is the rest of the hockey world.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 03:59 PM
  #11
CharlestownChiefsESC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Laurence Harbor NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
Canada Cup/World Cup question to all of you.

Why is it that we have never seen this event turn into a “true” World Cup like event such as we see in soccer? By that I mean the Canada Cup started in 1976. Then we saw it again in 1981 (5 years.) Then 1984/87 (3 year intervals.) Then 1991 (4 years) 1996 (5 years) and not again until 2004 (8 years.) It hasn’t been seen since. Why is that?

As well while using the World Cup name we have seen some games in Europe, we never see Canada or the US play games in Europe. Why is that?

As well why hasn’t this become, again like a soccer World Cup? Say in 2004 it was played in Canada. Then in 2008 Berlin? 2012 Moscow and 2016 perhaps Detroit? I realize there are not as many big rinks in Europe but let other countries bid on the event like what is done with the Olympics and it is up to them to ensure they have the proper facilities. So if say Germany wants to host the “World Cup” they have to ensure that they have the proper rinks, hotel accommodations, etc.

The way it is now when this event is played, Canada and the US always have “home ice advantage.” They always play before friendly crowds, they always have the smaller ice, they are always in comfortable cultural surroundings, etc. That isn’t fair. It is almost like our players are scared to play outside of North America and have to ensure that our guys have every possible advantage. Again, that just isn’t fair -why do the Europeans always have to come to us for a “World Cup.” As it is now it isn’t a “World Cup.” It is a “North American Cup.”

Craig Wallace
In my opinion its because the iihf is not as powerful as the nhl and the nhlpa. In soccer fifa has power over every competition and league unfortunately whjen it comes to the pro game and the top players the nhl and hockey canada overpower the iihf.

CharlestownChiefsESC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 04:06 PM
  #12
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post



Which is the key to make it a "true" World Cup like the Soccer World Cup. You want the rest of the hockey world to care? Well, Europe pretty much is the rest of the hockey world.
Right. And that's the problem. The NHL only cares about marketing the World Cup to North Americans. Just like the IIHF really only cares about marketing the World Championships to Europeans.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 04:16 PM
  #13
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 500
I would much rather see a World Cup over the Olympics. Think it is a waste to have both.

Make it an 8 or 10-team tournament. Figure the big 7 (US, Canada, Russia, Sweden, Finland,Czech Republic, and Slovakia) are in and then 3 more teams based on performances at past events. For arguments sake, Germany gets in as the 8th team.

Play each team once. However, spread it out. So the US and Canada will play 3 teams in Europe and 3 teams at home and play each other in either the US or Canada (can alternate each year). One year start the tournament in North America. US and Canada play each other and 3 other teams. They then all travel to Europe where the European countries play each other and then the US and Canada (teams who didn't play in NA.

So, US plays Czech Republic, Sweden, Finland in the US. Canada plays Russia, Slovakia, Germany in Canada.

Canada then plays in the Czech Republic, in Sweden, in FInland. US plays in Russia, in Slovakia, in Germany.

European teams wind up playing 2 games in NA and 5 in Europe. US and Canada play 4 in NA and 3 in Europe.

Then in this case have the medal round in Europe. Top-4. Semis and then a best of 3 final.

Next time, reverse it. Same format, same idea of hosting, but this time start in Europe, then they all come to N.A. In NA, US can host one semi, Canada the other and they can alternate the finals. In Europe, they can rotate who hosts the medal round.

patnyrnyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 04:17 PM
  #14
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Unfortunately, it's politics between the NHL and the European leagues.

The European leagues already have the World Championships, which are basically catered to their rules and their schedules.

The Europeans see the Canada Cup/World Cup as basically the reverse - an NHL-tournament that is catered to NHL rules an schedules.

I would love to have a World Cup every 4 years, probably in the same year as the Summer Olympics to be offset 2 years with the Winter Olympics. But that requires the NHL and the Euro leagues to actually come to a mutually beneficial agreement, and good luck with that...
It is also the $$$$$. IIHF wants a piece, each country wants a piece, NHL wants most, NHLPA wants it.

patnyrnyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 04:42 PM
  #15
NMF78
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Belgium
Country: Belgium
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
Canada Cup/World Cup question to all of you.

Why is it that we have never seen this event turn into a “true” World Cup like event such as we see in soccer? By that I mean the Canada Cup started in 1976. Then we saw it again in 1981 (5 years.) Then 1984/87 (3 year intervals.) Then 1991 (4 years) 1996 (5 years) and not again until 2004 (8 years.) It hasn’t been seen since. Why is that?

As well while using the World Cup name we have seen some games in Europe, we never see Canada or the US play games in Europe. Why is that?

As well why hasn’t this become, again like a soccer World Cup? Say in 2004 it was played in Canada. Then in 2008 Berlin? 2012 Moscow and 2016 perhaps Detroit? I realize there are not as many big rinks in Europe but let other countries bid on the event like what is done with the Olympics and it is up to them to ensure they have the proper facilities. So if say Germany wants to host the “World Cup” they have to ensure that they have the proper rinks, hotel accommodations, etc.

The way it is now when this event is played, Canada and the US always have “home ice advantage.” They always play before friendly crowds, they always have the smaller ice, they are always in comfortable cultural surroundings, etc. That isn’t fair. It is almost like our players are scared to play outside of North America and have to ensure that our guys have every possible advantage. Again, that just isn’t fair -why do the Europeans always have to come to us for a “World Cup.” As it is now it isn’t a “World Cup.” It is a “North American Cup.”

Craig Wallace

Because its a NA/NHL event not a real World Cup organised by the world governing body of the sport.

NMF78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 03:52 AM
  #16
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,781
vCash: 500
I'm happy just with the Olympics right now, or at least I don't need a best on best tournament that hasn't got any continuity (or at least now it hasn't). And the last World Cup (2004), for example, was a lackluster affair IMO; if Finland hadn't reached the final, I don't think anyone would remember the tournament in Finland at all. There's no doubt that the collapse of Soviet Union took away a lot of the appeal and all tournaments post 1987 are pretty much forgotten here I think. Of course, officially, Canada Cup was not just about Canada and Soviet Union, but in reality, that's how it basically was, whether they faced each other in the final(s) or semi-final or whatnot.

The upside vis-ŕ-vis Winter Olympics might be, though, that the World Cup would be held in a country/countries where there's real interest in hockey; so at least there would be a final with great atmosphere (unlike in the 2006 Olympics in Turin, Italy, for example).


Last edited by VMBM: 03-15-2013 at 05:14 AM.
VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 06:51 AM
  #17
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
I think the real question here is why the IIHF historically was unwilling or unable to host their own best on best tournament. The only reason the Canada Cup was created in the first place was because for decades the IIHF/IOC did everything in their power to keep North America's top players out of their tournaments. In fact it wasn't until most of Europe's top players began playing in North America that the IIHF/IOC started to change their ways.

Here are some of the reasons why a stand alone IIHF Best on Best tournament has yet to happen.

1. The dysfunctional structure of the IIHF

Today roughly 70% of the world's hockey players and fans are from either Canada or the USA. If anything historically I would argue that an even higher percentage were from NA, but these numbers are harder to prove the further back you go, so I'll stick to the 70 / 30 split.
Since the IIHF is structured on the one country, one member, one vote system, as most international organizations are, and because Europe's hockey players are spread across many more countries, the vast majority of the IIHF's power base resides in Europe. This obviously means that Europe's hockey community is greatly over represented in the IIHF and North America's likewise is greatly under represented.
Because of this time and time again through the years the IIHF has put Europe's interests ahead of everyone else's. Some examples would be barring NA's best players from their tournaments, adopting European ice size, rules, style of officiating, etc as the "International" standard, holding the "World" Championships during the NA playoffs and basically only ever having them in Europe. Because of all this I think the IIHF's reputation as a body which equally represents the World's hockey community has been justifiably tarnished in North America.
As to why the IIHF never did more to arrange a tournament where all the best players could attend I can only assume that they didn't feel that the European teams were ready to compete on a level footing. I certainly don't think that is the case now, but there was probably some truth to that notion decades ago.
Thankfully the NBA and the IOC paved the way for the NHL to participate in the Olympics, because I don't think the IIHF would have ever organized something like that on their own.

2. The dysfunction created by having a league (NHL), not the governing body (IIHF) as the most powerful organization in the sport.

While I put most of the blame on the IIHF, the NHL certainly shares some of the responsibility. First of all I have to say that the NHL is a business and it is not it's job to represent the World's hockey community. Some may argue that it is in the NHL's best interest to do so, but ultimately that is for the NHL owners to decide and it is no secret that the vast majority of their revenue comes from North American fans. I think the NHL could have done more to work with the IIHF, but on the flip side they at least made attempts to accommodate fans in Europe by holding some of the first round World Cup games over there.
It is true that the NHL and NHLPA organized cups were almost entirely played over here, but when you consider why the C Cup/ W Cup were created in the first place it is totally unrealistic to expect the NHL and PA to hold them in Europe, away from their main fan base and where their revenue potential is much less.
Having said all of this it does make it more challenging for the IIHF to run tournaments since they obviously have to do so in partnership with the NHL and don't have the dictatorial powers of someone like FIFA.
Having said that I would like the NHL to do more to support international hockey in the future. For example I don't think the all-star games works very well in hockey and I would much rather see them break for international games. I would love to see a CAN-USA 3 game mini series instead of the ASG and mini series with other nations if the interest was there.

3. Moving forward

While I think the NHL should go to Sochi, after that it would be much better if the IIHF organized their own best on best tournament. There are many benefits to having control of the location, timing, format, revenues, etc., that are lost when using the Olympics as the sports showcase tournament. It might take some time to build the prestige of a new tournament, but in the end I think the hockey world would be much better off.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:08 AM
  #18
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
The way it is now when this event is played, Canada and the US always have “home ice advantage.” They always play before friendly crowds, they always have the smaller ice, they are always in comfortable cultural surroundings, etc. That isn’t fair. It is almost like our players are scared to play outside of North America and have to ensure that our guys have every possible advantage. Again, that just isn’t fair -why do the Europeans always have to come to us for a “World Cup.” As it is now it isn’t a “World Cup.” It is a “North American Cup.”

Craig Wallace
Actually if you look at the statistics being the host team at an international hockey tournament is a slight disadvantage. There is a slight advantage in league play where the home team is guaranteed last change, etc., but the home team advantage in terms of international play is one of the biggest misconceptions out there.

I agree though that holding every tournament in only one continent is not right, since the fans from the other side get screwed. I would much rather see a system where the host city alternates between Europe and North America every four years.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:59 AM
  #19
Hubie
Registered User
 
Hubie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Actually if you look at the statistics being the host team at an international hockey tournament is a slight disadvantage. There is a slight advantage in league play where the home team is guaranteed last change, etc., but the home team advantage in terms of international play is one of the biggest misconceptions out there.

I agree though that holding every tournament in only one continent is not right, since the fans from the other side get screwed. I would much rather see a system where the host city alternates between Europe and North America every four years.

With the exception of 1981, every best on best tournament held in North America has been won by Canada/US and every tournament held outside NA has been won by a European team. This seems to indicate an advantage.

Hubie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 08:28 AM
  #20
Yamaguchi
Registered User
 
Yamaguchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hubie View Post
With the exception of 1981, every best on best tournament held in North America has been won by Canada/US and every tournament held outside NA has been won by a European team. This seems to indicate an advantage.

Good point. Therefore, they should hold the best on best tournaments in neutral locations like Nagano.

Yamaguchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 08:55 AM
  #21
Hanji
Registered User
 
Hanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hubie View Post
With the exception of 1981, every best on best tournament held in North America has been won by Canada/US and every tournament held outside NA has been won by a European team. This seems to indicate an advantage.
North Americans have won 53% of world juniors held in North America, 45% when in Europe. It does appear to be at least some advantage.

Hanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 09:18 AM
  #22
Jussi
No strings on me
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 44,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
North Americans have won 53% of world juniors held in North America, 45% when in Europe. It does appear to be at least some advantage.
Let's not bring juniors into a best-on-best debate.

Jussi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 11:11 AM
  #23
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
What are you talking about? The Olympics mean nothing in soccer.
That's what i'm saying buddy. I think it's better to play best on best at the Olympics than in some world cup. Succer obvisously views themselves to be larger than the olympic family.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 04:05 PM
  #24
Inkling
Proud to be a Mammal
 
Inkling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,400
vCash: 500
I'd like to have a true IIHF-sanctioned World Cup best-on-best simply because those tournaments are held where the hockey fans are located and are more accessible to the average fan than the Olympics. It's a very expensive prospect to travel to, and attend an Olympic games and they are often located in countries that are not hockey nations.

If you are content with watching on TV, then I guess it doesn't matter to you, but if you are a fan that likes attending the prospect of attending best-on-best games in person, then a true World Cup works better than an Olympics.

Having both of course is best, the prestige and marketing power of the Olympics and the accessibility of a World Cup.

Inkling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:24 PM
  #25
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hubie View Post
With the exception of 1981, every best on best tournament held in North America has been won by Canada/US and every tournament held outside NA has been won by a European team. This seems to indicate an advantage.
There has only been two held outside of NA so I would say the sample size is far too low to draw any conclusions, and it's not like any one of the contenders could claim a home ice advantage in Nagano. If you look at the World Championships on average teams place higher in the year before and the year after hosting than they do the year they host.

Ice size is a different issue that I haven't calculated the winning percentages on, but it is probably a factor. However in general the top players in Europe have way more experience playing on the small ice than North Americans have on the big ice, so it's not really the same both ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
North Americans have won 53% of world juniors held in North America, 45% when in Europe. It does appear to be at least some advantage.
Here are the percentages of tournaments won at the WJC, when hosting and not.

COUNTRYHOST WINNING %AWAY WINNING %
CAN4041
CZE06
SWE06
FIN203
RUS/USSR2536
USA09

As you can see all but one country has won a higher percentage of tournaments when not hosting as opposed to hosting.

Mr Kanadensisk 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 02:37 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.