Was the saddledome ice olympic size?

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by hwy19man

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]

Originally Posted by getbak

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

[valo403]

Originally Posted by hwy19man

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]

Originally Posted by valo403

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]

Originally Posted by pope04

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]

Originally Posted by hwy19man

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.