Holeček should receive more credit than implications he was propped up the Czechoslovak defensive system. What more was left for him to do? Like what is he missing in his career?
When European hockey finally got on the same foot as the North American around 1970, no goalie has received more best goalie awards, more all-star votes than Holeček.
All-stars were voted by writers, best goaltender awards were decided by the IIHF directoriate. Different group of voters, yet both were repeatedly selecting Holeček. No goalie has even won internationally more of these than Holeček before or since. Including a goalie, who's already on the list, and was in better position to earn more all-stars / goalie awards since he played internationally considerably longer.
"Who cares about awards? They're binary. You either win it or don't. Don't tell us full picture. And voters make mistakes."
If you're suspect about voters being wrong, we will surely find a basis for it in stats...
No, we won't. Holeček recorded the SV% the same way as awards. Goaltending statistics are available here: Goaltenders Internationally in 1964-1990 (stats and awards)
It would be easy to reject Holeček if the stats invalidate the awards but the opposite is true.
Defensive system and good coaches didn't really help the Czechoslovak team in 1970 and 1979, did they? I'd be curious how could anyone explain away Holeček's stats in contrast with the Czechoslovak goalies' SV% immediately before and after Holeček.
Thirdly, I hoped game reports goalies mentions, that I posted yesterday, would convey clearly that Holeček was consistently one of the best players of his team. If you don't believe in hundreds of voters' competency in declaring who the best goalie each championship was (even though those writers mostly see 90%+ of games and all goalies in action so they knew who they're voting for).. Okay..
If you deny the validity of Holeček's superior statistics in his prime being affected by the system he played in (even though the Czechoslovaks' SV% dropped like a rock right before and after Holeček for multiple tournaments in a row).. Okay..
But I don't see how you can't deny how reports acclaimed Holeček, game after game, tournament after tournament. I've covered only WHC 1971, OG 1972, WHC 1972 and WHC 1973. But I can assure you the papers are singing praises for Holeček the same way in other championship except for 1977.
So back to my original question - what Holeček himself should have done more? Awards - check, stats - check, admiration expressed in contemporary reports - check.
Holeček will not be 1st nor 2nd in my ballot. But he also won't be last.
I personally don't see how anyone, who claims how he values consistency in goalies ranking, would then vote Parent ahead of Holeček. Take 1974 & 1975 out, does Parent appear in the project at all? Take the same two seasons out of Holeček, he just comes to discussion 3 weeks later.
When European hockey finally got on the same foot as the North American around 1970, no goalie has received more best goalie awards, more all-star votes than Holeček.
All-stars were voted by writers, best goaltender awards were decided by the IIHF directoriate. Different group of voters, yet both were repeatedly selecting Holeček. No goalie has even won internationally more of these than Holeček before or since. Including a goalie, who's already on the list, and was in better position to earn more all-stars / goalie awards since he played internationally considerably longer.
"Who cares about awards? They're binary. You either win it or don't. Don't tell us full picture. And voters make mistakes."
If you're suspect about voters being wrong, we will surely find a basis for it in stats...
No, we won't. Holeček recorded the SV% the same way as awards. Goaltending statistics are available here: Goaltenders Internationally in 1964-1990 (stats and awards)
It would be easy to reject Holeček if the stats invalidate the awards but the opposite is true.
Defensive system and good coaches didn't really help the Czechoslovak team in 1970 and 1979, did they? I'd be curious how could anyone explain away Holeček's stats in contrast with the Czechoslovak goalies' SV% immediately before and after Holeček.
Thirdly, I hoped game reports goalies mentions, that I posted yesterday, would convey clearly that Holeček was consistently one of the best players of his team. If you don't believe in hundreds of voters' competency in declaring who the best goalie each championship was (even though those writers mostly see 90%+ of games and all goalies in action so they knew who they're voting for).. Okay..
If you deny the validity of Holeček's superior statistics in his prime being affected by the system he played in (even though the Czechoslovaks' SV% dropped like a rock right before and after Holeček for multiple tournaments in a row).. Okay..
But I don't see how you can't deny how reports acclaimed Holeček, game after game, tournament after tournament. I've covered only WHC 1971, OG 1972, WHC 1972 and WHC 1973. But I can assure you the papers are singing praises for Holeček the same way in other championship except for 1977.
So back to my original question - what Holeček himself should have done more? Awards - check, stats - check, admiration expressed in contemporary reports - check.
Holeček will not be 1st nor 2nd in my ballot. But he also won't be last.
I personally don't see how anyone, who claims how he values consistency in goalies ranking, would then vote Parent ahead of Holeček. Take 1974 & 1975 out, does Parent appear in the project at all? Take the same two seasons out of Holeček, he just comes to discussion 3 weeks later.
Last edited:
