Talk:2010 IIHF World Championship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tie breakers[edit]

Hi! Does anyone know how they decide tie breakers? Is it number of points earned in matches between the teams in question and then goal difference between the teams in question, rather than overall goal difference? If so, I think Czech republic is already qualified for the next round, as even if they lose to Sweden and France loses to Norway, they'll have 3p and +3 goal difference, for sure beating either Norway or France by goal difference.Lejman (talk) 20:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And how can Finland be ahead Denmark? Both have 6 points, Finland LOST the game against Denmark AND their goal difference is worse (0 vs +2).82.141.72.10 (talk) 21:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tie breakers and poor reporting[edit]

The czech republic have clinched a spot in the next round after their second game. The worst they can finish is third in their group, and it sad that the iihf page reported they are danger of the relegation round. If France beats Norway, and the Czechs lose to Sweden, there will be a three way tie for second, and in head to head differential the czechs would be at +3 which would make it impossible to be last. I expect such poor reporting here in Canada where we don't follow the international game so much, but reporter Andrew Podnieks should be ashamed to hold a position of covering the games and not understand the rules.174.90.253.51 (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, that's lame of him :P - Lejman (talk) 21:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Completely wrong. Just because you think a goal differential can't be changed, that doesn't make it so. This is NOT a place for POV. Slaja (talk) 23:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tie breakers if group stage is not completed yet[edit]

Yeah, tie breakers between three teams are: 1)number of points earned in matches between the teams in question. 2) goal difference between the teams in question 3)highest number of goals scored by these teams in their direct games 4) the results between each of the three teams and the closest best-ranked team outside the sub-group 5) the results between each of the three teams and the next highest best-ranked team outside the sub-group 6)2009 IIHF World Ranking Positions.

If only two teams remain tied after some of these steps (e.g. same goal difference in step 1), the game between these two teams will be determining tie-breaker.

BUT!!! I think if group stage is not completed yet, the overall goal difference is tiebreaker between teams. So, Czechs and Belarussians are second in their groups after round 2!!! --CZMajkl (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Oh, excuse me. Here is link for official statistic page. http://stats.iihf.com/Hydra/230/IHM230300_76_9_0.pdf Czechs and Belarussians are third... --CZMajkl (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Republic and Belarus have been qualified into qualification groups[edit]

If France will beat Norway, than: CZE 3 p, goal difference 3, NOR 3 p, 0 and worse; FRA 3p, -3 and better France Norway 1:0 CZE 3, NOR -1, FRA -2 France Norway 2:0 CZE 3, NOR -2, FRA -1

It is simillar in group A. Impossible that CZE and BLR will play in relegation group. So, they must be green-marked.--CZMajkl (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. There is no scenario in which either the Czech Republic and Belarus can finish lower than third in their groups. Please stop making that change. Bds69 (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)bds69[reply]
My error, you are correct. Apologies CZMajkl. Slaja (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Germany second, Denmark third[edit]

http://stats.iihf.com/Hydra/230/IHM230700_76_2_0.pdf

There are four teams with same number of points and direct matches are not completed. Goal difference is decisive tiebreaker. Denmark and Germany have same goal difference +1 but Denmark - Germany 1:3 so Germany second, Denmark third...--CZMajkl (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you find the "not completed" rule? Lejman (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is my poor opinion. It is not important. But official stats are the most important thing :-)... http://stats.iihf.com/Hydra/230/IHM230700_76_2_0.pdf --CZMajkl (talk) 22:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw :P Their source is correct, even if they ignore their own rules ;) Oh well! Lejman (talk) 22:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they ignore own rules :-) but official stats are official stats, so ;-)...--CZMajkl (talk) 22:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They DON'T, and DIDN'T, ingnore threir own rules. Germanany, by the rules, should have been second before the round began. They were in a four way tie, and the teams that they had a head to head history with were Finland and Denmark. The differential in those head to head matches was: Germany +2, Denmark +1, Finland -3. Slovakia could only be judged against them by that rounds GD, so they were. It does appear, however, that playing fewer games "trumps" this while the round is in progress, to which I do not have an explanation.174.90.255.24 (talk) 19:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In stages which haven't started, the direct match rule still applies? Slaja (talk) 01:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
wait wait wait. check this: http://www.iihf.com/channels10/iihf-world-championship-wc10/news/news-singleview-world-championship/article/the-show-goes-on.html?tx_ttnews
Here it says Denamark is second, germany is third. Slaja (talk) 01:07, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They appear to be going by points, least games played, goal difference (in that order) so far. Lejman (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Sweden in Quarterfinal[edit]

Scenario 1: SWE 6, CZE 6, LAT 6, NOR 6:
points between teams in question: SWE 6 p, LAT 6p, NOR 3p, CZE 3p

Scenario 2: SWE 6, CZE 6, NOR 6
SWE +2, CZE 0, NOR -2

Scenario 3: SWE 6, CZE 6, LAT 6
SWE +1, CZE 0 or worse, LAT - 1 and better --CZMajkl (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If CZE loses to CAN and LAT, and NOR defeats SUI, it's
SWE 6, LAT 6, NOR 6
Points between teams in question: SWE 6p, LAT 3p, NOR 0p.
I can't seem to find any scenarios where SWE doesn't qualify. Good job figuring that one out! Lejman (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Denmark[edit]

Don't know if this has any place in a wikipedia article, but I was wondering if there was a place to note that Denmark has assured themselves of the highest placing in their nations hockey history.174.90.254.110 (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They haven't qualified just yet... Four games left. If the following happens:
SVK def FIN, BLR def DEN, GER def SVK in OT, FIN def RUS(*)
The table will look like this:
Rus 12
Fin 9
Svk 7
Ger 6
Den 6
Blr 2
So they could still finish 5th in the group, giving them the place of 9th or 10th.
Which depends on the other group, but the 5th ranked team there could still get 6 points too, so Denmark could theoretically still finish 10th ;)
(*) Actually Finland gaining any points vs Russia is enough, so an OT loss or win is enough too. Lejman (talk) 20:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry, thats true. What exciting group... --CZMajkl (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it is! It's of course very likely they qualify. If they do, I'd think it'd be appropriate to mention in the first section of the page, as well as on Denmark's hockey team's page.Lejman (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
:-) Nice... I remind - if Czechs finish worse than 7th, it would be the worst result in hockey history (since 1920) :-( --CZMajkl (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So long as there is a reference stating both those facts, then it would be a worthy addition to the article. Kaiser matias (talk) 22:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wish them best of luck. Assuming they don't want to try to get points vs Canada, they need to defeat Latvia and have Switzerland gain points vs Norway to reach quarter-finals... today is an important day for Czech republic! (And to finish 7th even if they lose the QF game, they should try to get a decent goal difference so they beat the E4 team :P) Lejman (talk) 08:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Martin Merk cites Denmark's hockey first here:http://www.iihf.com/home-of-hockey/news/news-singleview/article/three-teams-advance.html?tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=955&cHash=cdd2f4489670.28.250.248 (talk) 18:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He also manages to get some facts wrong...
  • Denmark’s six points are enough to advance to the quarterfinals for the first time ever thanks to their head-to-head victories against both Germany and Slovakia. (Germany defeated Denmark...)
  • Sweden reached the quarterfinals and needs a victory against Switzerland to win the group. Otherwise they will finish in second place. (If Sweden loses to Switzerland in regulation and Czech republic defeats both Latvia and Canada, Sweden will actually finish 3rd.)
I sort of like the numbers there though. Czech has a rough mission ahead, trying to get points vs Canada, it'll be interesting games for sure.Lejman (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Norway[edit]

Looks like Norway will make a comeback into the top 8 now, after an undeserved 5–0 loss against Latvia. =)

I predict the Czechs to win against Latvia, but lose against a Canadian team that has to win to avoid meeting Russia in the quarter-final!

If this happens Norway will advance and they will meet Russia instead (only to be slaughtered, but that doesn't matter :p).

Have any team advanced to the quarter-final with worse than a −17 goal-difference before, by the way?

lil2mas (talk) 19:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If Finland wins against Russia they will be E1. This does not change change anything about the loss for Norway if they advance. ;-) Kante4 (talk) 20:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone will defeat Russia this year, they have one hell of a team! But I was hoping Denmark would defeat Belarus, because that was the team I thought Canada would want to face in the quarter-finals. But now that both Russia & Finland could become E1/E2, and that the deciding match is played after their match against the Czechs, I don't think Canada will make an effort to win. They would instead rest players in front of the quarter-finals. Congrats in advance, Czechs... lil2mas (talk) 20:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus[edit]

BLR, GER and SVK can end up in a 3-way tie with 5 Points (SVK beats GER after OT), but Slovakia would wins this Tie-Breaker with 5 Points against the other 2 Teams, so is Belarus not already out of Tournament?

Edit: OK, just saw Slaja changed it back. ;-) Kante4 (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lost me brain for a quick sec there :). Slaja (talk) 20:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, just wanted to make sure everyone realizes it. :) Kante4 (talk) 20:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quarterfinal Match-ups[edit]

If it is of any interest; Switzerlands only quarterfinal victory came in 1992, against Germany (3-1). Canada and Russia have never met in an elimination QF game, nor have Finland and the Czech Repulic. There have been 15 years featuring this round (1997, 1998, 1999 did not), Denmark becomes the 16th country to participate (unless you argue that Czechoslovakia in 1992 makes it 17). Sweden has the most victories with 13, Canada is next with 12. USA has the most losses with 9, Czech, Finland, Germany, Russia, Switzerland all are next with 6.174.90.236.252 (talk) 15:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

main page![edit]

I want to thank everyone for making this years IIHF WC page such a great success, all the hard work by Kante4, Bds69, Hautala, Creet, CZMajkl, Lejman, and everyone else who helped out. We accomplished my main goal to bring the refinement and completion this championship article deserves, and we made it to the main page of the worlds 6th most popular website! Once again this has been fun and congrats to everyone for making it to the main page! I hope everyone comes back to do it again next year! Slaja (talk) 02:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yay~! Gratz everyone :P Some of you guys did crazy amounts of edits here, I'm glad I was able to help some too :) Lejman (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, at times it was busy but fun. Thanks to all. :) Kante4 (talk) 20:05, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2010 IIHF World Championship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:54, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on 2010 IIHF World Championship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IIHF_World_Championship&oldid=1212539474"