Streak Terminology in the NHL - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

stella · 10-25-2005, 10:00 PM

Starting this year, the NHL implemented a shootout rule to settle ties. If no winner is determined in the five minute sudden death overtime, the teams go to a shootout to decide the winner and overtime loser. Therefore, there are no longer ties in the NHL. Losing in overtime or in the shootout awards one point to the losing team. This has created confusion when it comes to streaks. Previously, if a team is going through several games of a certain pattern, then a streak is noted. The terminology used to be:

1. A team that goes through a series of all wins is a winning streak.
2. A team that goes through a combination of wins and ties is an unbeaten streak.
3. A team that goes through a combination of losses and ties is a winless streak.
4. A team that goes through a series of all losses is a losing streak.

But now that there are no longer ties and single points are awarded to overtime losses, then is the terminology to describe streaks still accurate? Of my four terms above, the only one that remains accurate is the winning streak. But since an OT loss still awards one point, should that really be considered a "loss"?

1. If a team goes through wins and OT losses, should that still be considered an unbeaten streak?

2. If a team goes through regulation time losses and OT losses, should that be considered a losing streak or a winless streak?

robyrob · 10-25-2005, 11:58 PM

shootouts are a boring suckfest, they should just give both teams a zero and let the fans go home with their dignity intact.

anyways,
1. If a team goes through wins and OT losses, should that still be considered an unbeaten streak? no, you didn't win or tie - you LOST

2. If a team goes through regulation time losses and OT losses, should that be considered a losing streak or a winless streak? technically, it would be BOTH

my new terminology:

1. A team that goes through a series of all wins is on a winning streak.
2. A team that goes through a combination of wins and OT losses is not on a streak.
3. A team that goes through a combination of losses and OT wins is on a pathetic streak.
4. A team that goes through a series of all losses is a suckfest streak.

stella · 10-26-2005, 10:02 PM

I found out that a streak that consists of wins and overtime losses is called a [B]points[B] streak.

Zebra 3 · 11-14-2005, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robyrob

shootouts are a boring suckfest, they should just give both teams a zero and let the fans go home with their dignity intact.

I totally agree. I saw the NHL's first ever shootout. I found it to be a desperate gimmick and felt slightly nauseated afterwards...one more reason to hate Bettman.

10-25-2005, 10:00 PM	#1
stella Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Sep 24, 2003 Posts: 392	Streak Terminology in the NHL Starting this year, the NHL implemented a shootout rule to settle ties. If no winner is determined in the five minute sudden death overtime, the teams go to a shootout to decide the winner and overtime loser. Therefore, there are no longer ties in the NHL. Losing in overtime or in the shootout awards one point to the losing team. This has created confusion when it comes to streaks. Previously, if a team is going through several games of a certain pattern, then a streak is noted. The terminology used to be: 1. A team that goes through a series of all wins is a winning streak. 2. A team that goes through a combination of wins and ties is an unbeaten streak. 3. A team that goes through a combination of losses and ties is a winless streak. 4. A team that goes through a series of all losses is a losing streak. But now that there are no longer ties and single points are awarded to overtime losses, then is the terminology to describe streaks still accurate? Of my four terms above, the only one that remains accurate is the winning streak. But since an OT loss still awards one point, should that really be considered a "loss"? 1. If a team goes through wins and OT losses, should that still be considered an unbeaten streak? 2. If a team goes through regulation time losses and OT losses, should that be considered a losing streak or a winless streak?

10-25-2005, 11:58 PM	#2
robyrob certified wackball#3 Moderator Forum Icon Join Date: Aug 03, 2003 Location: hiding under the third booth at Arnold's Posts: 58,211	shootouts are a boring suckfest, they should just give both teams a zero and let the fans go home with their dignity intact. anyways, 1. If a team goes through wins and OT losses, should that still be considered an unbeaten streak? no, you didn't win or tie - you LOST 2. If a team goes through regulation time losses and OT losses, should that be considered a losing streak or a winless streak? technically, it would be BOTH my new terminology: 1. A team that goes through a series of all wins is on a winning streak. 2. A team that goes through a combination of wins and OT losses is not on a streak. 3. A team that goes through a combination of losses and OT wins is on a pathetic streak. 4. A team that goes through a series of all losses is a suckfest streak.
	__________________ * firefox * AdAware * HiJackThis * CoolWebShredder * Spybot * SpywareBlaster * Spyware Terminator * * GeeksToGo * AntiVir * Avast antivirus * Housecall Online * Sysinternals Security Utilities * * ZoneAlarm * Agnitum-firewall * Comodo Firewall * AVG Anti-Rootkit * RootkitRevealer * ParasiteCheck * * Annoyances * FreeCodecs * Mikes-Hosts-File * GRC.com * MSAntispyware * DVD's * TradeList * myspace *

10-26-2005, 10:02 PM	#3
stella Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Sep 24, 2003 Posts: 392	I found out that a streak that consists of wins and overtime losses is called a [B]points[B] streak.