In a message dated 96-12-31 06:23:53 EST, John writes: > Perhaps it was just an attempt to get the thing over with quickly. I'm > going to assume that the first OT was played without resurfacing. If the > game had ended within the first 5 minutes then the OT would only have > added 5-10 minutes to the game, and not delayed the next game (if this > was the first game). Once you flood the ice, you're adding 15 minutes to > the game time, and definitely delaying the second game. > He's right- they have a 5 min OT period without resurfacing the ice to keep the game moving. The three(5?) minutes in between periods is basically just a chance for people to rehydrate(especially the goalies). They can't play much longer than 5 minutes(I believe HE talked about having a 10 min OT period during the time they tried the shootouts) because the ice gets really bad. The ice tends to deteriorate at the end of a game anyway(depending on where you are)- 5 min is about all it can take without resurfacing. Sometimes even that is a lot. It also keeps the momentum going for both teams and helps prevent cramping(not to mention giving statisticians a break from running down into the locker room). Rob Grover Umaine 1996 Go Bears!!!!! HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.