Updated Cumulative Best on Best Score: Canada 6 - Rest of the World 4

[fronkjonk*]

Originally Posted by Fataldogg

I get what people are saying. I know it is important to win the "Gold" game, obviously. That is what every team goes to the Olympics for. I just don't think a single game is vindictive of a team being better than another. If that was the case, why do we have best-of-seven game series in the NHL? We can always change it to a single game formula and if the BEST team ALWAYS WINS the game when IT MATTERS than we would have a 100% accurate representation of what team deserved the Stanley Cup? I don't think that would be the case and I doubt few of you would too.

Every game in the SCF last year mattered. Detroit won the first game and if it was based on one game elimination Detroit would have won. Based on one game Detroit was better? No.

And I agree, Canada probably would win a series against USA in 6 or 7 games. I think it would be closer than some would indicate but I don't think the best teams ALWAYS win the game when it matters. Otherwise an UPSET wouldn't exist. The game was a 3 - 2 victory for Canada in OT. That hardly represents that Canada would have won 10 times out of 10 because it was the Gold Medal Game and it "mattered." If USA got a lucky bounce and won the game 3 - 2 it doesn't mean they would have won it 10 times out of 10 when it mattered. I don't see it so cut and dry.

You can try and argue that Canada did not clearly have the better team for 4 years if you want, but in the end it is for naught because they won Gold and you did not. If you are the one who gets to write the history books you can write "Canada and the USA were so similar that the series was 1-1" if you want, but that doesn't matter. Canada won, the best team wins these things, and Canada is implied to be the best team. Case closed until 2014.

[Eukaryote]

Originally Posted by NMF78

Wow, making an assumption and then calling your speculation a 'fact' seems quite far fetched to say the least. And if you count the results of the Unified Team, the Soviet Union also has 8 Olympic Golds (in 10 Olympic Games, 15 if counting the Russian results).

You're right it was overstated. But the point remains: Because Canada was not allowed to use it's best, but all the other communist countries could use professionals their gold medal victories are tainted or are at the very least suspect. Those tournaments were missing the very best players of a major Hockey nation.

Hence the comment about the consecutive Russian golds is bogus.
QED

[Alberta tough]

Funny how other countries can have a thread showing appreciation to thier country for what they have accomplishied it is ok. If Canadians start a similiar thread they are being cocky *****.

[Eukaryote]

Originally Posted by YMB29

This is just a lot of popular claims by you. Learn some history...
If you are talking about cheating and biased officiating just look at the 87 Canada Cup, where every team other than Canada was at a disadvantage.

Unfortunately it seems your "history" is missing or is buried. There's lots of other proven misinformation from the Soviet Totalitarian regimes. In the case of the Summit Series, there's video evidence of USSR misconduct as well as the testimony of Canada's players and staff. But I guess you need to believe it was fabricated, including the films that were broadcast LIVE. But then if it was why would it be? We are the ones who won decisively in the Soviet Union.

Originally Posted by YMB29

And again how much medals in the modern era, when other countries actually played hockey?

How many? Canada has won 2 of the 4. Russia has won ZERO hockey gold medals since the tournament first became best on best in 1998.

Originally Posted by YMB29

Canada was allowed to send all the NHL players it wanted since 77 in the WCs, but the results did not change.

LOL. The WCs are always held during the early rounds of the Stanley Cup playoffs or while the NHL regular season was still happening. I wonder why the Europeans, especially the USSR wanted it that way? Hmmm.

I hope you're not trying to say those WCs were actually best on best ones, no one who knows anything would believe that nonsense.

Originally Posted by YMB29

Dominating a home tournament is not exactly proof of dominance.
Now Canada is just more consistent than others, which is much easier now since the USSR and CSSR are no more.

We have dominated Russia/USSR on best on best and took them out in their home rinks in 1972 despite all the cheating against us and harassment we experienced. And we're still beating them now.

[Dave Karp]

Originally Posted by McGuillicuddy

When you lose, say little. When you win, say less.

Yep. When my team wins at beer pong, we say nothing. Act like you've won before.

[YMB29]

Originally Posted by Eukaryote

Unfortunately it seems your "history" is missing or is buried. There's lots of other proven misinformation from the Soviet Totalitarian regimes. In the case of the Summit Series, there's video evidence of USSR misconduct as well as the testimony of Canada's players and staff. But I guess you need to believe it was fabricated, including the films that were broadcast LIVE. But then if it was why would it be? We are the ones who won decisively in the Soviet Union.

Won decisively??
What are you talking about exactly? What was fabricated and buried by the "evil totalitarian regime"?

How many? Canada has won 2 of the 4. Russia has won ZERO hockey gold medals since the tournament first became best on best in 1998.

So two gold medals in the modern era, not eight...
And it is not like Russia was doing the winning before 98; it was the USSR... There is a difference you know...

LOL. The WCs are always held during the early rounds of the Stanley Cup playoffs or while the NHL regular season was still happening. I wonder why the Europeans, especially the USSR wanted it that way? Hmmm.

They did not want it that way. That is the way it was. The IIHF was not going to change everything to suit the NHL.

I hope you're not trying to say those WCs were actually best on best ones, no one who knows anything would believe that nonsense.

My point is that when Canada was allowed to use NHLers, and would sometimes send very strong teams, the Soviets were still winning like before.
But if you are going to say that some of the Canada Cups were best on best (76, 91) then some WCs should be considered so also (82, 89).

We have dominated Russia/USSR on best on best and took them out in their home rinks in 1972 despite all the cheating against us and harassment we experienced. And we're still beating them now.

No, if you look at the record of games, depending on what you consider best on best, it is about even with the USSR. However if you consider that most games were played in Canada or in the US, the officiating and other advantages for Canada, plus goals scored, the Soviets were more dominant.
As for Russia, even though the team is no where near the level of the USSR, the Olympic record vs Canada is even. There was also that Canadian win in the 96 World Cup, but that was after two Russian goals were disallowed, one was because they changed the rules just for the game and went to video review to call a penalty...

[guapo23]

Maybe a little off topic but as a Canadian I was really ashamed of the Closing Ceremonies.

It felt like one long masturbatory ****-fest promoting Canada.
There was very little content that reflected the spirit of the Olympics :
to bring together atheletes from the whole planet to compete with honour.

As the host country, I think it is the Host Countries duty to have the closing ceremonies reflect the Olympics, not just the Host Nation.
It felt like propaganda.

For the Opening Ceremony, it makes sense for the Host Country to prepare a show that reflect the national Character of the Host.
But for the Closing Ceremony I thought the constant self-congratulatory speeches were tacky & classless.