why hockey is dumb
 

couldn't the two teams just do nothing for 3 periods then guarentee themselves at least 1 point. seems dumb that teams are wasting all their energy to go for 2 or 0 points alot of the time when they can have 2 or 1.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
couldn't the two teams just do nothing for 3 periods then guarentee themselves at least 1 point. seems dumb that teams are wasting all their energy to go for 2 or 0 points alot of the time when they can have 2 or 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Team 1 does nothing, then Team 2 can score and guarantee 2 points instead of 1 point.

Also, 82 points won't get you in the playoffs.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
couldn't the two teams just do nothing for 3 periods then guarentee themselves at least 1 point. seems dumb that teams are wasting all their energy to go for 2 or 0 points alot of the time when they can have 2 or 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, this isn't a half bad idea. Why take a two point lead in the standings when you can go up by one?

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

It's kinda a funny point.. in every non conference play its obviously very +ev to both agree to not do anything for the regulation period.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

I think what he means is that two teams could agree to play their games to a tie in regulation and then have the game always decided by sudden death. This would be +EV to both teams in terms of points. And also, a team that actually made its opponents agree to this strategy of guarenteeing 1 point for both sides for every game of the season would probably not end up with 82 points. They'd have to lose every game in overtime.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

... both teams mutally agree to stay on inside their own blue line and have the puck at centre ice and not touch it. then in overtime, they both try. the teams should average 1.5 points a game, instead of the average now like 1.2 or whatever.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

there are a decent number of teams that basically play for overtime in a tie game. it was worse before the new rules but it still happens.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

How does a hypothetical situation that will never ever come to fruition and really isn't all that viable anyway make an entire sport dumb?

OP loses.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

ok sorry i guess the coaches are just dumb.

is there anything in the rules that disallows this? like unsportmanlike conduct or something?

hockey is also dumb for other reasons.

ill let other elaborate

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

3 pt games are silly right now, but your strategy wouldn't do anything.

If EVERY team just waited until OT, then the race would be close and there'd be more incentive for teams to break the agreement if they fell behind by a point or two. Since the other team might break the agreement, then you have to play for the 2 points as well.

Every game should give out 3 points. 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT/SO win, 1 for OT/SO loss.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

the rule that disallows it is the fact that by the time you were two minutes into the period people would be throwing things on the ice and trying to kill the players and stuff.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
ok sorry i guess the coaches are just dumb.

is there anything in the rules that disallows this? like unsportmanlike conduct or something?

hockey is also dumb for other reasons.

ill let other elaborate

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you explain the other reasons since you failed at your first attempt to kill hockey?

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

I think OT points are dumb anyways.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

Just get rid of overtime. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss. It would be much better that way.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

Any of the following systems would be fine.
3 for reg win 2 for ot/so win 1 for ot/so loss 0 for reg loss
2 for a win 1 for a tie. No OT
Just keep tracks of wins and losses.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
ok sorry i guess the coaches are just dumb.

is there anything in the rules that disallows this? like unsportmanlike conduct or something?

hockey is also dumb for other reasons.

ill let other elaborate

[/ QUOTE ]

Collusion rules would not allow it.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any of the following systems would be fine.
3 for reg win 2 for ot/so win 1 for ot/so loss 0 for reg loss
2 for a win 1 for a tie. No OT
Just keep tracks of wins and losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree pudge, but on the 3-2-1 scenerio I'd rather see 2-2-0. 2 for reg win, 2 for OT win, 0 for any loss. I don't like that a loss is rewarded with anything.

All things considered, though, I'd like to see OT scrapped and tied games stay tied. I'm old school on this.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

what about just play it like playoffs and play as many OT's as necessary?

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
what about just play it like playoffs and play as many OT's as necessary?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they were to substantially shorten the regular season (a good idea that will never happen), this may be just too much. Who wants to see a regular season game go six or seven periods?

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

this is why the nhl sucks, not hockey

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

1). The fans would storm the ice.
2).The owners would be enraged. Noone wants to pay money to see people stand in place. Noone would come to games. The league would cease to exist.
3). Professional athletes have what is called a "competitive instinct", and would never allow anything remotely like this to happen.
4).Were you high when you came to this conclusion that hockey sucks?
5). This hypothetical sucks.
6). OP sucks.
7). I suck.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what about just play it like playoffs and play as many OT's as necessary?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they were to substantially shorten the regular season (a good idea that will never happen), this may be just too much. Who wants to see a regular season game go six or seven periods?

[/ QUOTE ]

Semtex is a good name. I was at a playoff game that went into the 7th period!

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

sorry when i said hockey i meant NHL in my head.

also 7 period games are exciting alot

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

regular season sudden death overtime is silly

they should go to a 3-2-1-0 point structure like pudge is saying, but they won't because it will ruin the record books, not like it hasn't already the way they're doing it.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

cliff notes:

OP sucks

Hockey rules

The NHL rules a little less

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
regular season sudden death overtime is silly

they should go to a 3-2-1-0 point structure like pudge is saying, but they won't because it will ruin the record books, not like it hasn't already the way they're doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was brought up in a BOG meeting.... so it has a chance in the future. NHL is obviously not afraid of change since the lockout.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
cliff notes:

OP sucks

Hockey rules

The NHL rules a little less than NFL, MLB, NBA, and possibly MLS

[/ QUOTE ]

if it's just a 2 point for win, 0 point for loss, 0 point for OT loss system, why not just make it 1 point for a win, 0 for loss, or better yet just be normal like all the other sports and go by record.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

Or don't watch if you don't like the sport and stfu.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
cliff notes:

OP sucks

Hockey rules

The NHL rules a little less than NFL, MLB, NBA, and possibly MLS

[/ QUOTE ]

if it's just a 2 point for win, 0 point for loss, 0 point for OT loss system, why not just make it 1 point for a win, 0 for loss, or better yet just be normal like all the other sports and go by record.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't all sports just use a round ball and a net?

Seriously stop posting if this is the best you can do.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

When I opened this thread, I expected a completely retarded premise supported by a bunch of drivel.

LOL This thread certainly did not disappoint.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

WTF? How does this question need serious responses? This is the worst reason I have ever heard to hate hockey because it comes under some ridiculous premise that the players and coaches are morons for actually wanting to play the game and entertain the fans.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
ok sorry i guess the coaches are just dumb.

is there anything in the rules that disallows this? like unsportmanlike conduct or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

This rule seems to allow quite a bit of judgement on behalf of the officials:

http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule83.html

I love the fines - $200 to $500 dollars. That's less than the price of tickets in Toronto.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ok sorry i guess the coaches are just dumb.

is there anything in the rules that disallows this? like unsportmanlike conduct or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

This rule seems to allow quite a bit of judgement on behalf of the officials:

http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule83.html

I love the fines - $200 to $500 dollars. That's less than the price of tickets in Toronto.

[/ QUOTE ]

That rule probably hasn't been updated since like 1900, the last time someone actually thought this retarded idea was genius.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any of the following systems would be fine.
3 for reg win 2 for ot/so win 1 for ot/so loss 0 for reg loss
2 for a win 1 for a tie. No OT
Just keep tracks of wins and losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree pudge, but on the 3-2-1 scenerio I'd rather see 2-2-0. 2 for reg win, 2 for OT win, 0 for any loss. I don't like that a loss is rewarded with anything.

All things considered, though, I'd like to see OT scrapped and tied games stay tied. I'm old school on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Under your system(the way it used to be) the last few minutes of regulation and all of OT would be boring as hell as no team wants to risk losing their one point...having a guaranteed point means that they have nothing to lose and will take many more chances...makes the game 10x better for the fans.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any of the following systems would be fine.
3 for reg win 2 for ot/so win 1 for ot/so loss 0 for reg loss
2 for a win 1 for a tie. No OT
Just keep tracks of wins and losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree pudge, but on the 3-2-1 scenerio I'd rather see 2-2-0. 2 for reg win, 2 for OT win, 0 for any loss. I don't like that a loss is rewarded with anything.

All things considered, though, I'd like to see OT scrapped and tied games stay tied. I'm old school on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Under your system(the way it used to be) the last few minutes of regulation and all of OT would be boring as hell as no team wants to risk losing their one point...having a guaranteed point means that they have nothing to lose and will take many more chances...makes the game 10x better for the fans.

[/ QUOTE ]

+1

the old OT was terrible. it was like that simpsons bit on soccer - 'center, back to halfback, passes to center, back to wing, back to center'.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

There are obviously numerous -EV reasons why OP's idea doesn't work. First off it's a disadvantage to the better team. Second it obviously makes no sense in divisional games (and there are 32 of those). Lastly giving that free point to the other guy can come back to haunt you later in the year, when home ice for the cup is still decided by overall points. Bottom line it'll never make sense to do this, UNLESS both teams need exactly one point to make the playoffs in the final game, and happen to be in opposite conferences. But those games are never scheduled for the end, so it wouldn't make sense.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

thought experiment time!

implications of: No OT, 1 (or 2 or 100) point for a win, no points for a loss OR tie.

stupid? really stupid? really really stupid?

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

I don't follow the NHL at all but I don't get the hate for the OP if that's actually how it works. It makes sense to play for the tie unless you have a certain % chance of beating the opponent in regulation. Collusion wouldn't really be necessary cause you could just play a defensive game and never try to score.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow the NHL at all but I don't get the hate for the OP if that's actually how it works. It makes sense to play for the tie unless you have a certain % chance of beating the opponent in regulation. Collusion wouldn't really be necessary cause you could just play a defensive game and never try to score.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is just a modified prisoners dilemma problem and it's pretty easy to see why it's best to choose to defect.

Re: why hockey is dumb
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow the NHL at all but I don't get the hate for the OP if that's actually how it works. It makes sense to play for the tie unless you have a certain % chance of beating the opponent in regulation. Collusion wouldn't really be necessary cause you could just play a defensive game and never try to score.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main point is that professional sports are played first and foremost for entertainment of their fans. You bore them to death, you have no fans, and your sport doesn't exist. If hockey was 0-0 for 60 minutes every night with no offensive action, absolutely no one would watch.