-----Original Message-----
From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Powers
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 2:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Regional rinks

Arik Marks wrote:
>
> **OK, let's make it proportional representation - 8/58 is ~14%, so 1
> in 7 regionals can be on a big sheet. But what you leave out is that
> the western cluster of big sheets gives all western teams far more
> experience on those size sheets.  There are what, 2-3 in the east?
> And is there anyone who would argue that it's easier to adjust up
> than adjust down in size of ice?

In Hockey East:
* New Hampshire is full Olympic at 200x100
* UMass is close at 200x95
* BU and Northeastern are upsized at 200x90 but it probably plays closer to
NHL size than Olympic size
* BC has a practically-NHL 200x87

I don't think anyone in the ECACHL or AHA is above 200x85, but I could be
wrong there.
-----------------------------------------------------


When I wrote that, I was using data from Wodon's current USCHO article,
which said in part:

" Almost 50 of the 58 schools playing D-I hockey have NHL-sized ice
surfaces. A couple go to 90 feet wide. It's well known that going down to a
smaller sheet is easier than going up. So if that many teams play on the
small ice, it's clearly a disadvantage. Whereas if it goes the other way,
it's much less of a disadvantage (if at all), and only for eight teams.

I understand why regionals are still held at home locations, but having to
play on the big ice is a double whammy to the opponent."


Here's the raw data, hopefully it shows conclusively that the WCHA benefits
in A BIG WAY from having an Olympic regional:

Summary:
- 10 of 58 rinks are Olympic size, or ~17% (roughly 1 in 6)
- 8 of 10 Olympic rinks are out west, 6 in the WCHA, 2 in HE.
- All WCHA teams will be very used to playing on Olympic ice since 60% of
their league games are played on it (6 of 10 schools).  Contrast this with
~22% of HE games, ~17% of CCHA games and 0% of ECAC, AHA or CHA games.

Again, does anyone really believe it's  easier to get used to bigger ice
than get used to smaller ice?

Refute the numbers boys...just try it.

Arik

Arik Marks
Cornell '91
Michigan '99





Stat details.....


All Rink Sizes:

Clearly NHL     43
-------------
190 x 85        1
200 x 85        40
200 x 87        1
204 x 87        1

Much closer to NHL
-------------
200 x 90        5


Closer to Olympic       2
-------------
200 x 95        1
200 x 97        1


Olympic 8
-------------
200 x 100       8

Grand Total     58


So that's 48 basically NHL size, and 10 basically Olympic size.  (Wodon had
50 and 8)


Size Group by Conference:
                NHL     Olympic
AHA:            9
CCHA:           10        2
CHA:            6
ECAC:           12
HE:             7         2
WCHA:           4         6
----------------------
Grand Total     48       10






Rink Detail......

ECAC:
Vermont 200 x 90
Dartmouth       200 x 90
Harvard 204 x 87
9 others        200 x 85

HE:
UNH             200 x 100
UM-A            200 x 95
BU              200 x 90
NE              200 x 90
BC              200 x 87
Other 4 200 x 85

AHA:
Army            200 x 90
8 others        200 x 85

CHA:
All 6           200 x 85



CCHA:
NMU             200 x 100
UAF             200 x 100
10 others       200 x 85

WCHA:
CC              200 x 100
UMinn           200 x 100
UAA             200 x 100
MN St.  200 x 100
SCSU            200 x 100
Wisc            200 x 97
UMD             190 x 85
3 others        200 x 85