Kids up to about Atoms should be playing on reduced size surfaces (ie half-ice, or side-to-side instead of end-to-end).
Not even a question in my mind, and in countries like Sweden and Denmark (who IMO have the top youth development programs in the world) it's taken for granted that kids who can barely skate are just wasting their time chugging up and down a 200ft surface. Little kids are going to miss a 50ft cross-ice pass to a moving target about 90% of the time, and then waste more time chasing the errant puck down the ice. And if you're going to tell them not to make those long passes, or not to chase the puck 200ft, then you've just validated the whole point of using a smaller surface.
The kids get more puck time, and their skating improves faster with constant stopping and starting than it does by skating end to end and back.
Tighter spaces also levels the playing field, so the kids who are good can't just skate the puck wide and around everyone, and the kids who suck can at least challenge for the puck by virtue of being able to get within reach of the puck carrier.
I've also taught a lot of adults who were new to hockey how to play, and have definitely seen better results teaching them the basics on a 3vs3 sized surface.
Edited to add:
Quote:
Originally Posted by greentree
Practices yes, games no. Let 'em skate.
Yeah, that's fine too. Makes the games seem like more of a big deal to the kids.
__________________
I am a lunatic whose world revolves around hockey and Oilers hate.
Last edited by BACKCHECK!!!; 02-27-2014 at 09:27 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BACKCHECK!!! For This Useful Post:
If by "retrofit", you mean move the nets to the half boards and play cross-ice, then yes.
I know it requires the substantial investment of about 15 seconds, but that's the sacrifice us "sensitive" types make.
It has nothing to do with being sensitive. The kids enjoy it more, and they improve faster.
Silly all around, don't fix what isn't broken. Maybe this cross-ice play would work well for the Tier 10 teams, anything other than that is funny.. How is this going to improve their games? The game has been played this way world wide forever, why change it now?
skating is the biggest attribute that kids need to learn. the more free ice the better in my opinion. I have reffed hockey for many years with novice kids and they have no problems really getting up and down the ice.
Not to mention, would we not start having to build all new 'kid level' arenas
The Following User Says Thank You to DropIt For This Useful Post:
You don't build specialty ice rinks for kids, you just don't USE the whole surface until they're past novice.
You put the nets along the side boards, and you play EAST-WEST instead of NORTH-SOUTH.
It also gives you more options for the number of kids playing. With 2 coaches you can have a 4-on-4 session going at each end of the ice, and 16 kids skating at a time instead of 10.
__________________
I am a lunatic whose world revolves around hockey and Oilers hate.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BACKCHECK!!! For This Useful Post:
You don't build specialty ice rinks for kids, you just don't USE the whole surface until they're past novice.
You put the nets along the side boards, and you play EAST-WEST instead of NORTH-SOUTH.
It also gives you more options for the number of kids playing. With 2 coaches you can have a 4-on-4 session going at each end of the ice, and 16 kids skating at a time instead of 10.
What will be used as boards, those silly foam dividers? With such a small area, theres going to be a bunch of standing around. Normal surface teachers kids how to skate, pivot and stop. I've watched those little kids play during the intermission of Flames games and they go end to end all the time, no issues..
Our arena has an NHL size ice, as well as a "kids ice" (dimensions unknown) and I have played hundreds of times on both. The regular ice was way, way better. I think the kids ice was only better for Timbits, Pups, or Jr Novice.
__________________
Disregard any and all THANKS I give. I'm a dirty, dirty thanks-whore.
The Following User Says Thank You to Trailer Fire For This Useful Post:
What will be used as boards, those silly foam dividers? With such a small area, theres going to be a bunch of standing around. Normal surface teachers kids how to skate, pivot and stop. I've watched those little kids play during the intermission of Flames games and they go end to end all the time, no issues..
Generally, you have the end boards on one side, and the coach follows the play along the blue line, and effectively acts as the other set of boards by keeping the puck in play when he has to.
I'm not saying you can't learn to play hockey on full ice, pretty much all of us did. And im not saying there arent advantages and disadvantages.
I'm just saying I've coached on big ice, and on small ice, and ive had better results on small ice. And the most organized and with-it youth development programs I've seen do it that way too. Your mileage may vary, but I'm convinced.
__________________
I am a lunatic whose world revolves around hockey and Oilers hate.
The Following User Says Thank You to BACKCHECK!!! For This Useful Post:
First off thanks for posting this, I think it is a topic that is worth discussing.
To those that are talking about retro fitting arenas, or building smaller arenas, you are missing the point.
Going to 3 on 3 is a topic in town currently.
Here are my thoughts:
Dynamite (or Timbit) I am all for 3 on 3 cross ice.
Novice, I think you need to start the introduction of full ice. There is talk in Sylvan that there will be a split of some 3 on 3 and full ice. A full season of only 3 on 3 I think would be not be the best, and hope to see a blend of 3 on 3 and 5 on 5.
I think the positives for these young players far out weigh the negatives. One positive is more puck touches. Playing only 3 on 3 in a smaller space allows for more puck touches which increases kids enjoyment, and also increases their stick skills. This increases confidence, which is huge in any sport.
As for the skating, I would suggest the skating skills needed for cross ice 3 on 3 are greater than full ice 5 on 5. There is much more front to back/back to front transitions, and much more stoping/starting in 3 on 3 than in full ice. Most young skaters can skate 200 ft, but they struggle stopping starting and transitioning front to back/back to front.
Another positive is the kids learn to think the game quicker. I see player hold the puck for far too long on full ice, and by that i mean you will see players stand with the puck for 3,4,5-10 secs. This is because it can take that long for the opposition to get to them. In 3 on 3, the distance that a defender has to go to close down the puck carrier is reduced. Players will learn to think the game faster sooner. Also, they will build confidence handling/playing in a crowd, there just isn't the huge expanse of ice to go and hide on.
There is also less space on the ice for the stronger staking player to just lug the puck up the ice. It forces them to see the ice more and pass more. This is a huge positive.
The 3 on 3 game is faster, no face offs, more time is spend actually playing.
My son loves 3 on 3 as a goalie. He has tonnes of work to do and spends very little time watching the play from 200 ft. He is forced to stay focused on the game/puck.
There is the draw back of no off sides, and less positional play. But positional play is easily taught in atom (and during some 5 on 5 novice games) once you have confident players you can teach them pretty quickly. My son complains that he does not have a crease, but this is minor and is out weighed by the positives.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
When I was a kid, we played half ice in Medicine Hat for Novice. The rinks had some wooden sectional quarter (about 2 feet high) boards that they used to put across center ice. The leagues would schedule all the novice games in roughly the same time blocks so the temp boards wouldn't have to be taken in and out constantly. This way, they were also able to have 4 teams play per hour rather than 2.
What will be used as boards, those silly foam dividers? With such a small area, theres going to be a bunch of standing around.
Actually, you are wrong. Cross ice 3 on 3 demands more skating of the kids.
Quote:
Normal surface teachers kids how to skate, pivot and stop. .
Full surface teaches kids how to skate 200 ft in a straight line on wide open ice. Smaller surface 3 on 3 teaches kids to skate in tight areas, pivot and stop.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Last edited by undercoverbrother; 02-28-2014 at 09:51 AM.
Reason: poor multi tasking skills.
The Following User Says Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
we practice half ice usually (Novice) and I agree that skating in tighter spaces is a better skill to learn than skating full ice. Full ice is easy, moving in small quarters is much better.
I think we're all forgetting the whole point of this.
Forget all of this "training for big ice surface"...I thought putting Kids into hockey was to let them half fun playing the game. We arent breeding all of our Kids to be in NHL
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Barbecue For This Useful Post:
Do we need smaller ice surfaces for kids?
