Seannie34 Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 When I watch the home games on tv it looks like the rink at the HSBC arena is alot smaller than the other rinks. Montreal seems to have an especially large size rink. Is it the camera angles or are they really that different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 there's no difference. i think the dimensions are 200'x85'. The old rinks, like the aud and MLG had smaller rinks, but now they're all the same size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 When I watch the home games on tv it looks like the rink at the HSBC arena is alot smaller than the other rinks. Montreal seems to have an especially large size rink. Is it the camera angles or are they really that different? And the players are so little too !!! :P :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mphs mike Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 I think it looks a little smaller after spending 10 days watching Olympic hockey. I still say the greatest rule change the nhl could make is to go to the international size rink. All it would take is to take out the first row of seats around the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 there's no difference. i think the dimensions are 200'x85'. The old rinks, like the aud and MLG had smaller rinks, but now they're all the same size. The Aud - 196' x 85' Boston Garden - 191' x 83' Chicago Stadium - 188' x 85' Olympia - 200' x 83' All others - 200' x 85' I think it looks a little smaller after spending 10 days watching Olympic hockey. I still say the greatest rule change the nhl could make is to go to the international size rink. All it would take is to take out the first row of seats around the ice. Unfortunately it would take more than 1 row of seats to get the rinks 15' wider. It would probably take removing 3 - 5 rows of seats and adjusting the incline of the bowl of the rinks so that the 1st row of seats wasn't now 2 ft above the glass. Some rinks MIGHT also need to have the subfloor pattern of brine pipes extended to be able to get good ice out along the boards. It would be good to go to the Olympic size rink, unfortunately the league should have mandated all new rinks built since say about '90 be able to accomodate the larger ice surface. They didn't because it's cheaper to build the rink without the rink being adjustable and also because they didn't want to lose a few hundred expensive seats when the league changed rink dimensions. Another reason, albeit less important, is all of the minor leagues use the smaller rink as well. Teams probably wouldn't want the players in their system playing on smaller rinks than the big clubs use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHAAAUGHT!!! Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 It's just a theory of mine; but I don't think it is the size of the rink, its the quality of equipment they use to televise the game. I've noticed other teams have closer zooms and a better quality about them (i.e. a brighter, sharper picture). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 The Aud - 196' x 85' Boston Garden - 191' x 83' Chicago Stadium - 188' x 85' Olympia - 200' x 83' All others - 200' x 85' Unfortunately it would take more than 1 row of seats to get the rinks 15' wider. It would probably take removing 3 - 5 rows of seats and adjusting the incline of the bowl of the rinks so that the 1st row of seats wasn't now 2 ft above the glass. Some rinks MIGHT also need to have the subfloor pattern of brine pipes extended to be able to get good ice out along the boards. It would be good to go to the Olympic size rink, unfortunately the league should have mandated all new rinks built since say about '90 be able to accomodate the larger ice surface. They didn't because it's cheaper to build the rink without the rink being adjustable and also because they didn't want to lose a few hundred expensive seats when the league changed rink dimensions. Another reason, albeit less important, is all of the minor leagues use the smaller rink as well. Teams probably wouldn't want the players in their system playing on smaller rinks than the big clubs use. How big is the rink in Rochester? That ice seems small! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 How big is the rink in Rochester? That ice seems small! 197' x 85' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber61 Posted March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 i think the ice is ok the way it is... the sabres arena seems quite big but in comparison its small to montreals.... i think montreal holds over 21,000 fans in there arena... compared to our 18,000 so yes i think it would feel bigger in montreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreKan Posted March 7, 2006 Report Share Posted March 7, 2006 it is mostly the Camera postion. in some place its closer to the ice. and others it mid to high level. See more ice but Players are a little smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted March 7, 2006 Report Share Posted March 7, 2006 197' x 85' I guess 3 feet really makes a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.