Was the saddledome ice olympic size?

[DOK]

During the 88 olympics? I know this year they are playing on nhl size ice, but was it olympic size ice in 88?

[CokeMachineGlow]

yes it was

[Jetsfan]

yep

[HOOT]

This is the first time ever in Olympic history I believe.

[Icon]

Olympic facts are fun to check out on Wikipedia...


At the first tournament in 1920, there were many differences from the modern game: games were played outdoors on natural ice, forward passes were not allowed,[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Birth-12) the rink (which had been intended to be used only for figure skating) was 56 m × 18 m (165 ft × 58.5 ft)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Pod1920-4) and two 20-minute periods were played.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Num21-11) Each team had seven players on the ice, the extra position being the rover (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_%28ice_hockey%29).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Timeline-5) Following the tournament, the IIHF held a congress and decided to adopt the Canadian rules—six men per side and three periods of play.[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Birth-12)
The tournaments follow the rules used by the IIHF. At the 1969 IIHF Congress, officials voted to allow body-checking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checking_%28ice_hockey%29) in all three zones in a rink (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink) similar to the NHL. Before that, body-checking was only allowed in the defending zone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink#zones) in international hockey.[139] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Num19-138) Several other rule changes were implemented in the early 1970s: players were required to wear helmets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_helmet) starting in 1970, and goaltender masks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goaltender_mask) became mandatory in 1972.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-Timeline-5) In 1992, the IIHF switched to using a playoff system to determine medalists and decided that tie games in the medal round would be decided in a shootout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shootout).[140] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-139) In 1998, the IIHF passed a rule that allowed two-line passes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pass_%28ice_hockey%29). Before then, the neutral zone trap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_zone_trap) had slowed the game down and reduced scoring.[141] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-140)
The current IIHF rules differ slightly from the rules used in the NHL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Hockey_League_rules).[142] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-141) One difference between NHL and IIHF rules is standard rink dimensions: the NHL rink is narrower, measuring 61 m × 26 m (200 ft × 85 ft), instead of the international size of 61 m × 30 m (200 ft × 98.5 ft)[143] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-142) The larger international size allows for a faster and less physical style of play.[144] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-143)[145] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-144) Another rule difference between the NHL and the IIHF rules concerns how icing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icing_%28ice_hockey%29) is called. In the NHL, a linesman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_%28ice_hockey%29#Linesman) stops play due to icing if a defending player (other than the goaltender) touches the puck before an attacking player is able to,[146] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-icing-145) in contrast to the IIHF rules in which play is stopped the moment the puck crosses the goal line.[146] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-icing-145) The NHL and IIHF also differ in penalty rules. The NHL calls five-minute major penalties for more dangerous infractions of the rules, such as fighting, in addition to the minor and double minor penalties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_%28ice_hockey%29#Types_of_penalties) called in IIHF games.[147] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-major-146) This is in contrast to the IIHF rule, by which players who fight are ejected from the game.[148] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-fighting_iihf-147) Beginning with the 2005–06 season (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005%E2%80%9306_NHL_season), the NHL instituted several new rules. Some were already used by the IIHF, such as the shootout and the two-line pass.[149] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-148) Others were not picked up by the IIHF, such as those requiring smaller goaltender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goaltender) equipment and the addition of the goaltender trapezoid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink#Goaltender_trapezoid) to the rink.[150] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-149) However, the IIHF did agree to follow the NHL's league's zero-tolerance policy on obstruction and required referees to call more hooking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooking_%28ice_hockey%29), holding, and interference penalties.[151] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-150)[152] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_Olympic_Games#cite_note-151)

[Brick]

Yes. The Saddledome ice is expandable at the expense of 5 rows of seats or something like that. This was done during the 1988 Olympics.

[Resolute 14]

Yup. The Saddledome was the first major North American arena designed to support Olympic sized ice surfaces.

They went with NA ice for these games because VANOC didn't want to eat the cost of renovating GM Place.

[HOOT]

They went with NA ice for these games because VANOC didn't want to eat the cost of renovating GM Place.

They lied about one cost, what would be one more? ;)

[Hemi-Cuda]

Yup. The Saddledome was the first major North American arena designed to support Olympic sized ice surfaces.

They went with NA ice for these games because VANOC didn't want to eat the cost of renovating GM Place.

which i'm all for, i hate watching hockey on international sized ice. this will also give Canada zero excuses for not finishing well in this tournament

[redforever]

Yes. The Saddledome ice is expandable at the expense of 5 rows of seats or something like that. This was done during the 1988 Olympics.


right, the bottom tear of metal seats closest to the ice surface in the lower bowl retract to make it Olympic size ice.

[gottabekd]

I thought I heard it mentioned that the Saddledome can no longer roll back the seats to make room for Olympic ice. Something about changing it up during renovations. Can anyone confirm/deny this myth?

[Resolute 14]

They could do it, but would have to physically remove the club seats in order to do so. They don't fold under easily the way the non-club seats do.

[FlamesKickAss]

they roll them back when monster jam comes to town. Or does that not come to town anymore?

[d_phaneuf]

Yup. The Saddledome was the first major North American arena designed to support Olympic sized ice surfaces.

They went with NA ice for these games because VANOC didn't want to eat the cost of renovating GM Place.

I think that was half of it, the other half was that they would be cutting out like 5 rows of seats, which are all going for a few hundred a pop, and close to 1000 for the gold medal game

I don't think its that big of a deal, 90% of the players are used to play on this size ice anyway

[TopChed]

this will also give Canada zero excuses for not finishing well in this tournament

Well, there's always the refereeing.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

I thought I heard it mentioned that the Saddledome can no longer roll back the seats to make room for Olympic ice. Something about changing it up during renovations. Can anyone confirm/deny this myth?

Were the renovations done before or after the 1995 World Juniors? They played the Saddledome games on Olympic ice that year. I think renovations came after that (start of the 95-96 season) but might be mistaken.

[getbak]

Were the renovations done before or after the 1995 World Juniors? They played the Saddledome games on Olympic ice that year. I think renovations came after that (start of the 95-96 season) but might be mistaken.
Yes, the Saddledome was renovated during the summer of 1995.

If you can stomach it, here's the last game played in the "old" Saddledome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWaviZ62DWI

[hwy19man]

Yup. The Saddledome was the first major North American arena designed to support Olympic sized ice surfaces.

They went with NA ice for these games because VANOC didn't want to eat the cost of renovating GM Place.

GM Place was designed to have the international ice surface. It is a sad excuse since other construction has gone over budget. The European countries were not happy with that excuse either. Salt Lake City had the international surface and it is the better size. Bad move by VANOC and it is too bad the IIHF was unable to force them to reverse that decision.

[Hemi-Cuda]

GM Place was designed to have the international ice surface. It is a sad excuse since other construction has gone over budget. The European countries were not happy with that excuse either. Salt Lake City had the international surface and it is the better size. Bad move by VANOC and it is too bad the IIHF was unable to force them to reverse that decision.

big ice is not better ice. international hockey is boring with all the trapping teams can do with that much ice, now we get to see a faster and more entertaining brand of hockey for these olympics and Team Canada doesn't have to many any adjustments whatsoever. good on VANOC for sticking with that decision

[hwy19man]

big ice is not better ice. international hockey is boring with all the trapping teams can do with that much ice, now we get to see a faster and more entertaining brand of hockey for these olympics and Team Canada doesn't have to many any adjustments whatsoever. good on VANOC for sticking with that decision.


I think bigger ice is better. The extra width of 4.1 metres is awesome. Just like I said in another thread on this topic, NHL ice can be boring with trapping teams too. I have seen very fast games on the larger surface. Team Canada had no problems adjusting to the bigger ice in 2002. VANOC, with the NHL size rink, should have asked for the mens hockey to be played with NHL rules and regulations in addition to the NHL size rink.

[d_phaneuf]

I think bigger ice is better. The extra width of 4.1 metres is awesome. Just like I said in another thread on this topic, NHL ice can be boring with trapping teams too. I have seen very fast games on the larger surface. Team Canada had no problems adjusting to the bigger ice in 2002. VANOC, with the NHL size rink, should have asked for the mens hockey to be played with NHL rules and regulations in addition to the NHL size rink.

Vanoc wouldn't want to give up probly 1000 seats at at least a few hundred dollars a seat for the money they can get keeping it to the NHL size

And I haven't seen any of the players really complain about it, they are used to NHL ice anyway

[pope04]

Yes, the Saddledome was renovated during the summer of 1995.

If you can stomach it, here's the last game played in the "old" Saddledome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWaviZ62DWI

I'd forgotten that Makarov set up Whitney's series winner.

I'm going to go stick my head in an oven now.

[pope04]

Yes. The Saddledome ice is expandable at the expense of 5 rows of seats or something like that. This was done during the 1988 Olympics.

I'm pretty sure that this is no longer the case. The '95 reno took care of that.

[valo403]

I think bigger ice is better. The extra width of 4.1 metres is awesome. Just like I said in another thread on this topic, NHL ice can be boring with trapping teams too. I have seen very fast games on the larger surface. Team Canada had no problems adjusting to the bigger ice in 2002. VANOC, with the NHL size rink, should have asked for the mens hockey to be played with NHL rules and regulations in addition to the NHL size rink.

It's not a coincidence that trapping systems were developed on international sized ice. Bigger ice is not better by any stretch of the imagination. It' a myth held onto by people who have only ever watched best on best tournaments on international ice. Of course it's great hockey, it's the best players in the world. Watch a typical European league game, the big ice makes trapping that much easier. Put the best players in the world on ice that forces them to play the game, not hide on the edges, and you'll see a wa better product.

[nfotiu]

It doesn't matter if bigger ice makes for a better game or not. They didn't change the rules to make the ice smaller, they let Vancouver have smaller ice for commercial reasons. It is very lame, and disrectful to the tradition of Olympic hockey. It also gives the perception that the smaller ice was chosen because it would be an advantage to Canada, who doesn't have the experience of playing on large ice compared to the other nations.

[hwy19man]

It's not a coincidence that trapping systems were developed on international sized ice. Bigger ice is not better by any stretch of the imagination. It' a myth held onto by people who have only ever watched best on best tournaments on international ice. Of course it's great hockey, it's the best players in the world. Watch a typical European league game, the big ice makes trapping that much easier. Put the best players in the world on ice that forces them to play the game, not hide on the edges, and you'll see a wa better product. The Devils and the Wild are the classic trap teams on NHL sized ice and those teams were coached by Jacques Lemaire, a canadian. I have been to live European games and North American games that were played on the international surface. It is better and that is not a myth simply because the games I went to were not filled with premiere players. More open ice hits. Bigger is better, plain and simple.

[Resolute 14]

I'm pretty sure that this is no longer the case. The '95 reno took care of that.

Nope, it's still expandable. But they can't fold the club seats down like they can the regular ones. They would have to physically remove them, then push the floor away.

[troutman]

Does it make a difference in figure skating it is is small or large ice?

[valo403]

The Devils and the Wild are the classic trap teams on NHL sized ice and those teams were coached by Jacques Lemaire, a canadian. I have been to live European games and North American games that were played on the international surface. It is better and that is not a myth simply because the games I went to were not filled with premiere players. More open ice hits. Bigger is better, plain and simple.

No it's a myth, you're completely out to lunch. watch the Canada - Germany game from 02, it's a perfect demonstration of how well the big ice can be used to completely suck the life out of the game. In fact, I just watched an interview with Brendan Shanahan where he talked at length about how much easier it is to kill a game on the big ice.

More open ice = more play funneled to the edges and less action in scoring areas, less hitting, a more passive style of play, and worse hockey.

[troutman]

Dave King and George Kingston who have seen a lot of hockey in Europe say the same thing - larger ice means less scoring chances. It is simple geometry - the further you have to travel to the net, the less scoring there will be.

You can try this experiment yourself - play ball hockey on a basketball sized surface, then a hockey sized surface. There will be way more goals in the former case.

[Resolute 14]

Anyone who watched the SEL games Sportsnet broadcast during the lockout would be well aware that larger ice does not automatically mean better game. That was some of the worst hockey I ever saw, and much of it was due to the defensive style. The size of the ice surface won't save a sport that decides to be defence-first.