Cortina d'Ampezzo-Milan Winter Olympics

[jono]

McDavid clearly wanted to be the OT hero. Two attempted 1-on-3 solo rushes in 2 OT shifts, both obviously failed, puck was in the back of the Canadian net 5 seconds after the second one.

Goalies aside Canada was the better team, but they will still rue many of their player selections, choosing grit and experience over speed and scoring which were both lacking in all three knockout round games.

 

[jmdirt]

GOLD!

The first period was skated so fast!

Great winning shot! Great Goaltender!

Johnny Gaudreau's kids being in the photo drained my eyes!

 

[Salvarani]

USA wins, they were the most effective team in this game, Canada lost too many goal chances especially Celebrini and McDavid.

Wasnt it McKinnon who damn near missed an open goal in the 3rd period?

 

[jono]

Wasnt it McKinnon who damn near missed an open goal in the 3rd period?

Mackinnon's miss was the worst by far. Toews also had a 2 foot tap-in saved. Great save but he should have done much better there.

 

[nightowl]

Of all the times for Hellebuyck to stop choking in important games

 

[Sciatic]

Boldy gets the first goal for the US but Canada has more shots on goal... seeing as our our Canadian friends are probably at the bars already do they take a shot each time Canada has a shot on goal, I wonder.

And while this live game is on NBC keeps on replaying Miracle on Ice, somehow I don't think the US beating Canada today would carry the same weight as beating the USSR back in 1980.

That's been a ridiculous comparison they've been making to the 1980 games. In fact, you can't even use the Lake Placid U.S. win in any discussion of the "best gold medal games"--the game against Russia was the semifinal.

 

[Sciatic]

The race took place in the shadow of the spotlight on the hockey final, but the women's 50K cross-country race provided nice bit of excitement in the battle for bronze. I happened to be watching the Swiss broadcast and their call of the Swiss skier grabbing 3rd was the most excited the announcers have sounded this entire Olympics. The event also produced unexpected drama when they changed to new skis, most of the leaders stumbled right after they got the new skis on, including a fall by the eventual winner Anderson. I'm very familiar with the experience when I've stopped (the many times) for a short rest at the top of a hill, I stumble in the first few strides starting again because of snow began sticking the skis were stationary. But I wouldn't expect that in the best skiers at the Olympics because their ski prep is so good, and because I would have expected the coaches to warn their skiers after the first stumble (Diggins I think, happened)?
I'm guessing that over in the Nordic Skiing-Biathlon thread (as well as in Sweden) there's discussion of whether Karlsson would still have won if she didn't drop out beforehand.

 

[KZD]

Yes, Klaebo!

While it can be tiresome to see one person win so much I think it's also nice to see a man in his prime perform to his best potential. Four years from now who knows, Klaebo will be 33 and the Klaebo era may come to an end.

The hardest thing might actually be able to find the motivation to keep competing. Last year Klæbo won 6 golds in 6 in the World Championships at his home town while this year he did the same in the Olympics and broke the Winter Olympics gold medal record so there aren't many more records left to chase, maybe the Winter Olympics medal record where he still trails his compatriot Marit Bjørgen by 2 medals.

Speaking of that record, I would like to give a shoutout to Arianna Fontana. While she competes in a sport that I don't enjoy (short track speed skating) she finishes these Olympics with 14 medals after getting 3 more medals (1 gold and 2 silver).

 

[jmdirt]

That's been a ridiculous comparison they've been making to the 1980 games. In fact, you can't even use the Lake Placid U.S. win in any discussion of the "best gold medal games"--the game against Russia was the semifinal.

MANY people don't know that the USA defeated Finland for the gold that year, also an impressive win!

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

That's been a ridiculous comparison they've been making to the 1980 games. In fact, you can't even use the Lake Placid U.S. win in any discussion of the "best gold medal games"--the game against Russia was the semifinal.

Im not a hockey fan, but I have read the Wikipedia Article about the 1980 tournament, and you are both right and wrong. Right in that the game against Russia (Soviet) was not the gold medal game and that it therefore is a bad comparison, but also wrong when claiming the game was the semifinal.

The 1980 tournament had two groups in the group stage, where the best two went on to the medal round. USA and Sweden from one group and Soviet and Finland from the second group. The games played in the group stage counted twice, meaning that USA played against Soviet and Finland in the medal round and carried their draw against Sweden with them.

That meant then going into the first game, Soviet was on 2 points, USA and Sweden on 1 point and Finland on 0 point. After this round USA was sitting on 3 points, Soviet and Sweden on 2 and Finland on 1 point. When the game between USA and Finland started USA would win gold by winning this match, but Finland would not win gold if they won the match as either Sweden or Soviet would likely gain 4 points by winning their game and if it was a drawn Soviet should win the gold because they beat Finland in the group stage. So the USA-Finland game wasnt even a theoretical "final" in the sense that the gold medal would be decided in that match as only 1 out of 3 possible outcomes would secure gold for one of the two teams involved.

I like the modern concept with knockout games more than a Round Robin medal round.

 

[Sciatic]

Im not a hockey fan, but I have read the Wikipedia Article about the 1980 tournament, and you are both right and wrong. Right in that the game against Russia (Soviet) was not the gold medal game and that it therefore is a bad comparison, but also wrong when claiming the game was the semifinal.

The 1980 tournament had two groups in the group stage, where the best two went on to the medal round. USA and Sweden from one group and Soviet and Finland from the second group. The games played in the group stage counted twice, meaning that USA played against Soviet and Finland in the medal round and carried their draw against Sweden with them.

That meant then going into the first game, Soviet was on 2 points, USA and Sweden on 1 point and Finland on 0 point. After this round USA was sitting on 3 points, Soviet and Sweden on 2 and Finland on 1 point. When the game between USA and Finland started USA would win gold by winning this match, but Finland would not win gold if they won the match as either Sweden or Soviet would likely gain 4 points by winning their game and if it was a drawn Soviet should win the gold because they beat Finland in the group stage. So the USA-Finland game wasnt even a theoretical "final" in the sense that the gold medal would be decided in that match as only 1 out of 3 possible outcomes would secure gold for one of the two teams involved.

I like the modern concept with knockout games more than a Round Robin medal round.

Good explanation didn’t remember that; didn’t remember that. Saying “semifinal” wasn’t correct but the point was it wasn’t a winner take all final like Sunday was.