Olmypics 2006 Torino Winter Games

[na85]

Don't justify women's hockey because of something thats happened in the past. The games in men's at the beginning didn't have a goal differential of over 100 by the end of the tournie. It's a big embarassement and all it turns out to be is a crowning of Canada year after year.

We can get our 25 medals without women's hockey, don't worry.

Women don't compete in a few events (Nordic Combined is one that comes to mind) because not enough of them participate. This can be applied to hockey as well. Italy only has 200 women that play hockey, and most of them are under 16. How can you put together an olympic level team if everyone that shows up gets a spot?

So what, you're saying that because Italy's team sucks balls we should eliminate women's hockey from the olympics? Makes perfect sense. While we're at it, let's disband men's hockey too, since Kenya's team is so terrible. Heaven forbid they might get schooled by superior players and embarassed.

Canada wins because we have superior female hockey players. You do them an injustice by dismissing their skill and prowess.

[geoffrey]

Don't justify women's hockey because of something thats happened in the past. The games in men's at the beginning didn't have a goal differential of over 100 by the end of the tournie. It's a big embarassement and all it turns out to be is a crowning of Canada year after year.

We can get our 25 medals without women's hockey, don't worry.

Women don't compete in a few events (Nordic Combined is one that comes to mind) because not enough of them participate. This can be applied to hockey as well. Italy only has 200 women that play hockey, and most of them are under 16. How can you put together an olympic level team if everyone that shows up gets a spot?

So what, you're saying that because Italy's team sucks balls we should eliminate women's hockey from the olympics? Makes perfect sense. While we're at it, let's disband men's hockey too, since Kenya's team is so terrible. Heaven forbid they might get schooled by superior players and embarassed.

Canada wins because we have superior female hockey players. You do them an injustice by dismissing their skill and prowess.

No doubt. It's not an international competition with only two real teams though.

[Vancouver King]

Canadian women demolish host Italy 16-0 in hockey! I should have called a bookie ...

Women's hockey shouldn't be an olympic sport. There is only 2 countries in the world that compete at an olympic level, how ridiculous is that for an event.

They had to blow out the score because home advantage against the Americans in the final is decided by goal differential.

It was embarssing to watch, and hopefully the IOC eliminates women's hockey in a hurray, its just beyond ridiculous why they are there.

Where is home ice advantage for the team scoring the most blowouts?

[geoffrey]

Where is home ice advantage for the team scoring the most blowouts?

Home ice advantage in hockey is last to put stick down in faceoff and last line change, both can be a positive effect. Team with biggest goal differential gets these benifets.

Obviously they aren't playing in Canada.

[Slavik44]

Don't justify women's hockey because of something thats happened in the past. The games in men's at the beginning didn't have a goal differential of over 100 by the end of the tournie. It's a big embarassement and all it turns out to be is a crowning of Canada year after year.

We can get our 25 medals without women's hockey, don't worry.

Women don't compete in a few events (Nordic Combined is one that comes to mind) because not enough of them participate. This can be applied to hockey as well. Italy only has 200 women that play hockey, and most of them are under 16. How can you put together an olympic level team if everyone that shows up gets a spot?

So what, you're saying that because Italy's team sucks balls we should eliminate women's hockey from the olympics? Makes perfect sense. While we're at it, let's disband men's hockey too, since Kenya's team is so terrible. Heaven forbid they might get schooled by superior players and embarassed.

Canada wins because we have superior female hockey players. You do them an injustice by dismissing their skill and prowess.

No doubt. It's not an international competition with only two real teams though.

But this is not odd for an olympic sport, especially not a new one. 37-1-3, 403 goals for and 34 against. 1924, 110 goals for only three goals against. Basketball 12 out of 17 gold medals have gone to the U.S. Table Tennis 42 medals of a possible 49 have goen to asain countries almost all to china and South Korea. No woman outside of South Korea or China has ever won a Gold medal in the event, only one male outside of south korea and china has ever won gold in the event. Or even diving where U.S males have won 27 gold medals next closest is China with 5 Gold medals. Or mens swiming U.S males 111 gold medals to second place Austrialias 29. Or womens badmonton where all but two medals have been awarded to China and Korea. In fact Track and field the United States of America 627 medals next closest Great Britain with 149. Or mens double luge only three countries have ever won a medal in that event and it has been in 4 olympics. Or what about Mens single luge otuside of Germany/East Germany only two gold medals have been awarded.

[geoffrey]

You did your research. You've got a point.

So this is what it comes down to though. In single participant events, is it more about the induvidual competition, or the nationalistic competition?

Obviously in hockey its a national team, its not up to any induvidual person, so Canada is winning every year.

Where as in other sports, different induviduals are winning every year?

I don't know, I just don't like a sport where its a round robin of blowouts just to have the US play Canada every year in the final. Hopefully the sport comes along, but why can't we wait until then? It's really just embarassing to the other nations that get skunked. The Italian team had 3 defensement under 16! And their goalie was only 5 feet tall! Good effort, but its far from a professional skill level.

Snowboarding and Short Track are two such sports that had to wait until they were more developed before they have competition.

And what of Nordic combined where women don't compete at all, because of lack of competition?

[Biblio Bibuli]

Snowboarding and Short Track are two such sports that had to wait until they were more developed before they have competition.

Now that short track speed skating came about, regular speed skating had to be renamed ... it's now called "long track speed skating".

You know, thinking about track & field, I never see pygmoid athletes winning any sprints and mid range races there either.

Maybe if they put several sharp turns into the 100, 200, 400, 800 etc. meter races ....... hmm, I think I'll put it into the IOC's suggestion box.

[Spike22]

Let's hope we bag a lot - best of luck to our olympians.

[geoffrey]

Snowboarding and Short Track are two such sports that had to wait until they were more developed before they have competition.

Now that short track speed skating came about, regular speed skating had to be renamed ... it's now called "long track speed skating".

You know, thinking about track & field, I never see pygmoid athletes winning any sprints and mid range races there either.

Maybe if they put several sharp turns into the 100, 200, 400, 800 etc. meter races ....... hmm, I think I'll put it into the IOC's suggestion box.

Pygmoid? Come on, be nice!

There was actually a 'pygmoid' that won a medal in the Mens 500m Long-track today.

I really like short-track, I think its probably one of the most exciting sports to watch at the olympics.

[Slavik44]

With Nordic combined there is no womens organization or events period so if Womens Ice hockey is in the infant/childhood stage Womens nordic combined is in the sperm and egg stage, it is about as developed as ringette for males. Where as Womens Ice hockey has had a world chamionship tournement since 1990. Although it is somewhat dissapointing that Womens hockey is a Canada versus America, Finland versus Sweeden event...I think the development of womens hockey is best served as a part of the olympic games, and certainly it is not an anomaly.

[fellowtraveller]

I'm not so sure that womens hockey is even really an international sport yet.

Russia has 6 womens hockey teams in a country of 300 million. That is a problem for the sport overall.

They could solve the 'running up the score' problem by simply having a coin toss decide home ice advantage. Thats what most sports do, the Super Bowl for example.

How many people partcipate in biathlon in North America? The number is greater than zero, but not many more. Yet they hand out a basket of medals.....

[geoffrey]

I'm not so sure that womens hockey is even really an international sport yet.

Russia has 6 womens hockey teams in a country of 300 million.

How many people partcipate in biathlon in North America? The number is greater than zero, but not many more. Yet they hand out a basket of medals.....

Theres actually probably about a hundred biatheletes at least out here (especially in Canmore). I also think theres a big following in Quebec, correct me if I'm wrong. At least we are competitive in cross-country skiing, as are many nations. We just need to give our skiers guns and we'll be set.

But since we can't even give our border guards guns, that might be a tough sell.

[Canuck E Stan]

When is the Olympics going to become an event that occurs every four years in ONE location?

The cost of rotating the Olympics in different cities becomes more expensive all the time.

Why not make the summer Olympics permanently in Athens, and the winter Olympics in a city that could use the revenue to revieve a failing economy and one that has excellent winter weather conditions?

Somebody is making big bucks with the Olympics(IOC?) all the while, the cities go into the hole building the facilities for years just for a two week run.

[tml12]

When is the Olympics going to become an event that occurs every four years in ONE location?

The cost of rotating the Olympics in different cities becomes more expensive all the time.

Why not make the summer Olympics permanently in Athens, and the winter Olympics in a city that could use the revenue to revieve a failing economy and one that has excellent winter weather conditions?

Somebody is making big bucks with the Olympics(IOC?) all the while, the cities go into the hole building the facilities for years just for a two week run.

What are you talking about Canuck?

The Big O, here in Montreal, was paid for long before the Olympics even took place in 1976! :angry:

[geoffrey]

When is the Olympics going to become an event that occurs every four years in ONE location?

The cost of rotating the Olympics in different cities becomes more expensive all the time.

Why not make the summer Olympics permanently in Athens, and the winter Olympics in a city that could use the revenue to revieve a failing economy and one that has excellent winter weather conditions?

Somebody is making big bucks with the Olympics(IOC?) all the while, the cities go into the hole building the facilities for years just for a two week run.

What are you talking about Canuck?

The Big O, here in Montreal, was paid for long before the Olympics even took place in 1976! :angry:

Stan's got a point there, it does seem rather wasteful.

However, these facilities are used constantly afterwards, its not just a two week game. The olympics are what gave Calgary infrastructure, without them, we would be so screwed right now (worse than our roads and transit already are)!

[tml12]

When is the Olympics going to become an event that occurs every four years in ONE location?

The cost of rotating the Olympics in different cities becomes more expensive all the time.

Why not make the summer Olympics permanently in Athens, and the winter Olympics in a city that could use the revenue to revieve a failing economy and one that has excellent winter weather conditions?

Somebody is making big bucks with the Olympics(IOC?) all the while, the cities go into the hole building the facilities for years just for a two week run.

What are you talking about Canuck?

The Big O, here in Montreal, was paid for long before the Olympics even took place in 1976! :angry:

Stan's got a point there, it does seem rather wasteful.

However, these facilities are used constantly afterwards, its not just a two week game. The olympics are what gave Calgary infrastructure, without them, we would be so screwed right now (worse than our roads and transit already are)!

You thik your roads are bad...

No but I didn;t disagree with him...

My point was that although the Olympics are a great honour they also come at a great price...

[Canuck E Stan]

My point was that although the Olympics are a great honour they also come at a great price...

That's how I view it too.Too much of a price to the city hosting the event.

However, these facilities are used constantly afterwards, its not just a two week game. The olympics are what gave Calgary infrastructure, without them, we would be so screwed right now (worse than our roads and transit already are)!

The problem with a lot of these facilities is that it takes big bucks to keep them in shape.

Once built on a massive scale it also needs lots of upkeep and $$ for international competition standards.

It becomes a money pit in maintenance costs.

The Oval in Calgary needs millions today to put it back to standards, just as the Big "O" in Montreal.

One location for the Olympics would allow expansion to existing at one site without having costly rebuilding everytime a new Olympics comes around.

Where does all the revenue from advertising,media etc. go? and how much is made? Never did see numbers from the IOC.

[geoffrey]

My point was that although the Olympics are a great honour they also come at a great price...

That's how I view it too.Too much of a price to the city hosting the event.

However, these facilities are used constantly afterwards, its not just a two week game. The olympics are what gave Calgary infrastructure, without them, we would be so screwed right now (worse than our roads and transit already are)!

The problem with a lot of these facilities is that it takes big bucks to keep them in shape.

Once built on a massive scale it also needs lots of upkeep and $$ for international competition standards.

It becomes a money pit in maintenance costs.

The Oval in Calgary needs millions today to put it back to standards, just as the Big "O" in Montreal.

One location for the Olympics would allow expansion to existing at one site without having costly rebuilding everytime a new Olympics comes around.

Where does all the revenue from advertising,media etc. go? and how much is made? Never did see numbers from the IOC.

In efficiency your right. In keeping with the concept of the games, your not.

It's not like these cities are having the olympics forced upon them. It's their choice and there is always 4 or 5 contenders. So let cities spend if they want to, its their choice.

[tml12]

My point was that although the Olympics are a great honour they also come at a great price...

That's how I view it too.Too much of a price to the city hosting the event.

However, these facilities are used constantly afterwards, its not just a two week game. The olympics are what gave Calgary infrastructure, without them, we would be so screwed right now (worse than our roads and transit already are)!

The problem with a lot of these facilities is that it takes big bucks to keep them in shape.

Once built on a massive scale it also needs lots of upkeep and $$ for international competition standards.

It becomes a money pit in maintenance costs.

The Oval in Calgary needs millions today to put it back to standards, just as the Big "O" in Montreal.

One location for the Olympics would allow expansion to existing at one site without having costly rebuilding everytime a new Olympics comes around.

Where does all the revenue from advertising,media etc. go? and how much is made? Never did see numbers from the IOC.

In efficiency your right. In keeping with the concept of the games, your not.

It's not like these cities are having the olympics forced upon them. It's their choice and there is always 4 or 5 contenders. So let cities spend if they want to, its their choice.

tacpayers though too...

[Canuck E Stan]

Good enough,but when Vancouver can't pay the bills for 2010, who do you think gets to help out?

Vancouver gets the faclilities but the all the Canadian taxpayers pays for it.

Can you afford to go to Whisler to go skiing?

Vancouverites get the facilities on your dime.

They wanted it,they should take out loans to pay for it.

[geoffrey]

Good enough,but when Vancouver can't pay the bills for 2010, who do you think gets to help out?

Vancouver gets the faclilities but the all the Canadian taxpayers pays for it.

Can you afford to go to Whisler to go skiing?

Vancouverites get the facilities on your dime.

They wanted it,they should take out loans to pay for it.

I do ski at Whistler occasionally. I prefer the backcountry, though Whistler is a great resort.

I agree that they should pay for it, or at least borrow the money to be paid back to the government.

[Biblio Bibuli]

Good enough,but when Vancouver can't pay the bills for 2010, who do you think gets to help out?

Who do you think gets more great advertising out of huge international events like the Olympics ... the immediate place where they are held, the Province, or the whole country?

The whole country, of course.

The place where theese events are held must be attractive, of course, and that is why you'll never see major international events in places like Detroit, Buffalo, Digby, Cornwall (before they dumped the mill), Sudbury, Bellville etc..

[Spike22]

I'm not so sure that womens hockey is even really an international sport yet.

Russia has 6 womens hockey teams in a country of 300 million. That is a problem for the sport overall.

They could solve the 'running up the score' problem by simply having a coin toss decide home ice advantage. Thats what most sports do, the Super Bowl for example.

How many people partcipate in biathlon in North America? The number is greater than zero, but not many more. Yet they hand out a basket of medals.....

The reason there is not more teams in other countries are the women are still subserviant to men and they remain tethered to the home raising kids, taking care of the home etc. There is no time for such frivolous activities. Only those with penises can participate in womens sports - they are called semfems [semi-female]. (Remember the East German womens swim team? - yikes brings back many frightening memories)

The only thing they ever have in their hands is spoons and brooms

[na85]

While you raise a valid point, I very much doubt that gender roles are the leading cause behind the development (or lack thereof) of women's hockey. I would say that the primary hinderance to women's sport is that there just aren't enough viewers, and therefore the major networks are reluctant to carry the broadcasts.

[Biblio Bibuli]

I would say that the primary hinderance to women's sport is that there just aren't enough viewers, and therefore the major networks are reluctant to carry the broadcasts.

Why would I go and pay to see Chris Evert play Martina Navratilova if, with minimal effort, I can always find a local junior or senior men's competition with much more talent ... and it's free.