whats your opinion on the rumors that are circulating on having 3 point games for a win in hockey?

Question

i heard that the commissioner is considering this proposal more and more teams are playing for the tie instead of going for a win and the game loses its intensity during the last 5 minutes of the game??

Answer 1

I'd be against a format which allows 3 points for a win. I still think they should just have 2 pts for a win and 1 for a tie. No overtime and no tie breaking needed in the regular season. Save that all for the playoffs where it's all sudden death and the games must have a winner each game. In the regular season all the teams are doing is getting points over an 82 game schedule to see who makes the playoffs. It isn't necessary to have a winner each game.. ties are perfectly acceptable.

I think all the shootout and overtime formats in the regular season are just making a lot of trouble for nothing which is why you are now seeing these problems with teams playing for ties and shootouts

1-on-1 shootouts may be "exciting" for casual fans but they really are a silly way to decide a game. If a game is tied after 60 minutes... then both teams obviously are equally matched on the night... leave it at that and move on. There is no need for some trivial and arbitrary method of trying to determine that one team is superior by having "skill testing" 1-on-1 sessions like they do now.

You may as well have the best two fighters square off at center ice... that would certainly make for some real excitement as well.

Have the best skaters from each team take 2 laps around the rink... fastest wins... makes as much sense as the shootouts now.

How about if the game is tied after regulation... have designated fans for each team alternate shots to try to score from center ice through a six inch slot in a board placed in front of each opposing net... the winning fan can win the game for their team as well as a year's worth of Burger King vouchers who could sponsor the event called something like... "The Overtime Burger Bonanzathon".

If it's all about excitement and marketing I'm sure a lot of fun ideas can be thought up... play 5 minutes of overtime in complete darkness with a glow-in-the-dark puck.

How about blindfold the goalies, stand them backwards in their nets and tie each leg to a goalpost if the game is still tied after regulation.

Have the players play by holding their stickblades and shooting with the handles in overtime.

All players could wear one skate and one ski in overtime.. that ought to be fun to watch.

I'm sure we all can come up with many creative and fun ways to make tie games fun for everyone from ages 3 to 103.

Answer 2

I like nexttothemoon's answer. I would add that since a shootout is not a hockey game, so it makes no sense to settle a hockey game with a shootout.

People have studied the standings results since third point was added for the loss. The difference in the standings for the season were nearly unaffected. It might affect a single game, but the season long difference was negligible.

THe same would likely be true if the 3 point win were introduced.

What is clear is that all this tinkering with the standings points and overtime rules is confusing to the casual fan, who must be brought along if the sport is to thrive outside of its traditional strong areas. The NHL should do away with shootouts all together, and do away with overtime in the regular season. 2 points for a win, 1 point each for a tie. And then overtime as long as it takes in the playoffs.

They do need to make sure not to back off on enforcing the rules. That is, the clutch and grab, hooking, interference that used to be tolerated must not be allowed back in. It is a much better game without that, but the teams will play to win based on how the rules are enforced.

Answer 3

You're probably in the same vessel as the great majority of activities gamblers up and down the nation who are dropping a lot more than they ever win. It's likely you have the occasional win that maintains you coming back for more, but the majority of the time your choices lose. And that fees you actually more money! If you wish to set the end at this issue then you must look here https://tr.im/qfvDo .
With Zcodes you will get the equipment guidelines so you may win the bets and more.
Zcodes System also includes a really productive community that also weighs in and offers there two cents about each game. Perhaps there is a key injury Zcodes does not know about. Number concerns, the forum people allow you to know before you set your investment down.

Answer 4

Something needs to change because the current point allocation structure doesn't allow for enough separation in the standings for wins and losses. The downside to a 3 point win is that 2 points go up for grabs after regulation. OT and SO's should not be worth more than the 60 minutes leading up to extra sessions.

A sliding scale of 3 pts for regulation win, 2 pts for OT/SO win and 1 pt for OT/SO loss would put more emphasis on regulation play, but would not address the OT quagmire.

It'll be interesting to see what they come up with to resolve this situation. I'm not holding my breath since bigger nets are the only modifications the league seems to be fixated on.

Answer 5

I say that there shouldn't be a rule like that. Sometimes teams are just evenly matched or have a bad night. As annoying as 0-1 games are, they can get pretty intense if the right spirit is there.

Answer 6

Many sports bettors eliminate a lot more than they win. But you can income from Zcodes System from here https://tr.im/WOzOb . It could only change your daily life in a really good way permanently!
Zcodes System is virtually “systems within the system

Answer 7

hey rob will u email me at [e-mail] its about runescape

Answer 8

it shoul stay the way it is now,,,