Were They Really Upsets?

[Oilslick941611]

Finland is absolutely a power team, please take off your rose-coloured glasses.

They've won two of the last five WJC's, and are looking like a solid bet to at the very least play for a third gold medal since 2014.

Sweden, despite their decade-long run of dominance in the group stage, has one gold medal to show for it. And Russia hasn't won WJC gold since 2011, although that could change this year as well. Perhaps it'll be a Russia-Finland final.

Or Switzerland-USA, who knows. That's the beauty of this tourney, anything can happen.

what rose coloured glasses? I'm not looking through the lens of just this tournament. Im looking at the IIHF as a whole. rose coloured glasses is picking one tournament and judging the whole tier list.

 

[Dr Pepper]

what rose coloured glasses? I'm not looking through the lens of just this tournament. Im looking at the IIHF as a whole. rose coloured glasses is picking one tournament and judging the whole tier list.

If you're gauging all IIHF tournaments, Finland is still a top-tier team. Sure their trophy cabinet isn't as weighed down with gold like Canada's might be, but they're still deserving of being mentioned in that same circle with the others.

 

[JackSlater]

Finland over Canada wasn't an upset, but I can't imagine how Switzerland eliminating Sweden wasn't one.

 

[Urbanskog]

in what way? how is it belittling?

its giving them credit for beating Canada and saying they have been thorns in the side for all the power teams.

Finland isn't a "power" team in the way Canada, Russia, Sweden and the US are. there's no shame in that, when they start winning tournaments at all levels, then we can add them to that tier.

That exactly is belittling. Finland has been more successful than either Russia or Sweden in the past decade and Sweden has only won gold once since 1981 but somehow these are some magical "power teams" and Finland is perceived to be some kind of a more successful Slovakia.

 

[Urbanskog]

What are you basing these numbers on?

Betting odds.

 

[trick9]

Switzerland one, definitely. It's a short tournament, and that happens once in a while.

Finland? Absolutely not. I had them ranked higher than Canada to begin with and i thought they controlled most of the play in that game, just like they did in the pre-tournament game against Canada. Teams struggle in early stages all the time and pick up when everything is on the line.

 

[Scouter]

Switzerland one, definitely. It's a short tournament, and that happens once in a while.

Finland? Absolutely not. I had them ranked higher than Canada to begin with and i thought they controlled most of the play in that game, just like they did in the pre-tournament game against Canada. Teams struggle in early stages all the time and pick up when everything is on the line.

The Finns did not play that well in any game until Canada.

 

[blindpass]

The probability of Canada's win was estimated to be 72.65% - 75.82% while the probability of Sweden's win was estimated to be 81.47% - 86.67% so yes, these certainly were upsets.

Love the precision on those numbers. I mean not just to two decimal places but with a range too, this is fantastic. I guess someone has it all figured out.

 

[AlainC]

in what way? how is it belittling?

its giving them credit for beating Canada and saying they have been thorns in the side for all the power teams.

Finland isn't a "power" team in the way Canada, Russia, Sweden and the US are. there's no shame in that, when they start winning tournaments at all levels, then we can add them to that tier.

They went undefeated in 2006 Olympics until gold medal loss to Sweden. They've won the WJC twice in the last five years. They're producing elite players at all positions now, which wasn't always the case. It's debatable, but I think they've entered that elite tier.

 

[Urbanskog]

Love the precision on those numbers. I mean not just to two decimal places but with a range too, this is fantastic. I guess someone has it all figured out.

Different bookmakers had set different odds for the event. I would have used only Pinnacle's odds but they didn't offer lines for the moneyline.

 

[trick9]

The Finns did not play that well in any game until Canada.

Good teams don't need to. That's why i wish there were more competitive teams, to be honest.

 

[22Brad Park]

But we do not live in paper, do we?

You guys have done wonderful. Really happy for your country .Hope you medal.

 

[blindpass]

Different bookmakers had set different odds for the event. I would have used only Pinnacle's odds but they didn't offer lines for the moneyline.

And bookmakers are tapped into the Universal Truth (tm)? Their odds presumably balance the betting, which may well be biased. Fine to cite them I suppose, but they aren't "the odds".

 

[22Brad Park]

The Finns did not play that well in any game until Canada.

They were playing well vs USA but a couple quick goals by a good USA team got them.States led tourney with over 210 shots in 5 games so far.So your selling them short saying Finns never played a good game b4 Canada.

 

[Urbanskog]

And bookmakers are tapped into the Universal Truth (tm)? Their odds presumably balance the betting, which may well be biased.

That is not how it works. "Sharp" action is what sways the odds.

 

[Snuuzi]

Swiss beating us was not really an upset. They have been very good the last few years producing many good players. And on top of that Sweden brought a bad team with like 5 people getting sick.

Anyway this tournament was doomed to fail the moment the Pejorative Slured organizers set the schedule. I mean whos gonna care about a tournament being played in the middle of the night? Ofcourse the players will feel this when they play for their country... Do it right next time IIHF or GTFO.

 

[Scouter]

Good teams don't need to. That's why i wish there were more competitive teams, to be honest.

This overrating of the Finns is too much.

 

[Saekk]

Swiss beating us was not really an upset. They have been very good the last few years producing many good players. And on top of that Sweden brought a bad team with like 5 people getting sick.

Anyway this tournament was doomed to fail the moment the ******ed organizers set the schedule. I mean whos gonna care about a tournament being played in the middle of the night? Ofcourse the players will feel this when they play for their country... Do it right next time IIHF or GTFO.

I feel like i'm walking straight into a mine here, but have you ever heard of timezones?

 

[blindpass]

That is not how it works. "Sharp" action is what sways the odds.

Sounds consistent with what I said. Maybe you could offer a richer explanation if you disagree?

 

[Jaffray15]

The upset was Team Canada losing to Finland the way they did. One minute to go and a bad bounce, then Tim Hunter's dumb decision to have Comtois take the Penalty Shot and to finish it off Dobson breaks his stick on an open net and then Glass tips it past Dipietro.

All of that was THE UPSET.

 

[trick9]

This overrating of the Finns is too much.

This wasn't about the Finns. Good teams like them, Sweden, Canada, Russia and USA for example can sleepwalk through round robin because they will still destroy teams like Denmark and Kazakshtan in most nights. Then people are shocked when good teams start to play better as the games actually mean something.

 

[blindpass]

The upset was Team Canada losing to Finland the way they did. One minute to go and a bad bounce, then Tim Hunter's dumb decision to have Comtois take the Penalty Shot and to finish it off Dobson breaks his stick on an open net and then Glass tips it past Dipietro.

All of that was THE UPSET.

In the context of the game winding down at 1-0, sure. But the bounces could have played out differently at any point.

If you could replay the game over and over I would expect Canada would win it maybe 60% of the time. To that extent it was a slight upset. The way the game happened matched my prior expectations.

I see Switzerland-Sweden differently. The Swiss were actually the better team on the day. I didn't expect that. Going in I'd have said 85% for Sweden, but based on how they both performed if it was replayed it would be close to 50-50. Perhaps Swedes suffering from the flu was the difference, who knows.

 

[Urbanskog]

Sounds consistent with what I said. Maybe you could offer a richer explanation if you disagree?

Sounds consistent with what I said. Maybe you could offer a richer explanation if you disagree?

That they are not trying to balance it so that an equal amount of money is placed on both sides. As the bookmakers release the early odds, the maximum stake limits are low and keep increasing and the odds sway to the direction the sharp bettors guide them to.

 

[blindpass]

That they are not trying to balance it so that an equal amount of money is placed on both sides. As the bookmakers release the early odds, the maximum stake limits are low and keep increasing and the odds sway to the direction the sharp bettors guide them to.

So yes, "balance" was imprecise. They want to capitalize on the bias of the crowd. People generally tend to over rate the favorite, and bias towards their own team, so in this case Vegas was going to give odds that overrated Canada significantly. So the balancing they are doing isn't to put equal numbers of bettors on each side but to maximize the number of bettors on the wrong side of the actual odds.

 

[Scouter]

This wasn't about the Finns. Good teams like them, Sweden, Canada, Russia and USA for example can sleepwalk through round robin because they will still destroy teams like Denmark and Kazakshtan in most nights. Then people are shocked when good teams start to play better as the games actually mean something.

Ok, 1st sentence you say it's not about them, then right after you say it's about them.