Ringette = best sport ever

[metroid composite]

Growing up I played an obscure Canadian sport which I rather liked called Ringette.  I had a group of friends in the sport who all dreamed of moving to Finland to play professionally (the one country with professional Ringette).  I had silently assumed that the reason I love the sport more than any other is nostalgia.  A conversation with Dunie last night got me thinking, though, and I think actually the sport can be shown to be objectively excellent in several categories.

Maneuvering

I remember a comment that Zenny made in the world cup topic a while back: that a sport is exciting for him to watch if there's a lot of opportunities to maneuver around an opponent (so he likes Soccer, Basketball, Hockey).  Ringette does this flat out better than any other sport I know, and here's why:

1. It's an ice sport.  You can maneuver with skates in ways you just can't with shoes.
2. Moving with the ring is just much easier than moving with a puck, basketball, etc, so the maneuvers are much crazier.  See:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-3K5TfZ-0
I can do maneuvers with a Ringette ring on a consistent basis that I just don't see done in Hockey even at NHL level.  This isn't me being arrogant (I'm actually not that great at Ringette) just pointing out the difference equipment makes.
3. There's no bodychecking in Ringette, which means you can maneuver close to an opposing player (same as Soccer or Basketball, except with ice skates).
4. In Hockey, zone is almost more important than which team has the puck, so you'll see defenders dump the puck into the mid zone.  In Ringette, possession is very powerful, so it's better to maneuver with the ring until you have a clear pass.

Teamwork and plays

Picture this scenario: a pass is thrown to a player way deep in the offensive zone, who then proceeds to score in spectacular fashion.  What game am I thinking of?  A lot of you probably thought American Football (and yes, that's something American Football does very well).  But it could also be Ringette:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-imWSH4vSo
Ringette doesn't have the offside rules that most sports have.  Teamwork is extremely powerful.  (And also pretty much mandatory: you have to pass over both blue lines.  You can't just one-man army it).

Simple rules

Not the only sport to pull this off, but I can think of a few sports that fail.  (I recall my Canadian Hockey-watching parents asking "wait, how does Icing work again?")  Ringette I can explain in about two minutes "pass over both blue lines.  Never enter the goalie's crease.  3 max per team (plus goalie) in the end zones.  Your team has 30 seconds to take a shot after gaining possession."


It's honestly a sport I would watch on TV if I could...and yet I can't seem to find full games on Youtube (just videos set to terrible eurodance tracks.)

[Dark Holy Elf]

The problem, I think, with making statements like this is that the value of the sport, at least for a spectator (player is a whole 'nother discussion, but not one I'm interested in at the moment), is judged by how entertaining the sport is to watch at a high level of play. And in ringette's case, I uh, haven't done so! In principle the sport resembles hockey well enough, which suggests it'd be pretty awesome to watch, but this discussion feels speculative to me.

Regarding ringette's specific quirks... I do think the greater amount of control could lead to some real sweet moves (the video you linked supports this, since we're seeing some beautiful-looking maneuvers despite the low level of the players), which would excite me about watching it. On the other hand, I do think there's a reason offsides exist, and the fact that ringette doesn't have them seems potentially alarming, although it's hard to say without seeing high-level play of the game how much. I definitely agree about the simple rules part; I certainly think this is one of the main appeals of soccer (despite the fact I don't terribly enjoy it, it's an undeniable merit it has over... all the major North American sports).

[Hunter Sopko]

In hockey's manuevering defense... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obp8G2JFgkM

Agreeing with NEB's comments about speculative arguments, but I'll take a firmer stance here.

While I agree that some of the stuff in that video is pretty cool it... I dunno. If it's not that difficult why should I get excited? It also surprises me that there is no physicality when they have THAT much control over the ring. 

No offsides is unbalanced playwise in sports like this. I can see why the equipment would slightly offset this for Ringette (catching a pass is much more difficult, I'd imagine). It's not a selling point if I would have to watch two guys hanging the entire game. Also, goals like the one you showed in the second video happen all the time in the NHL as well. They just start outside the offensive zone- for a simple reason: you don't want anyone on your team outside the defensive zone when you're defending, at least until you have possession. It's bad teamwork to leave your side down a man on defense. It's a desperation move in ice hockey.

Dumping the puck is also a last resort. You generally WANT to keep possession of the puck, but there are just times you need to get rid of it.

Ringette doesn't have the offside rules that most sports have.  Teamwork is extremely powerful.  (And also pretty much mandatory: you have to pass over both blue lines.  You can't just one-man army it).

You're stereotyping a lot of sports here. While yeah, a lot of the super, all-time highlights of some sports are one-man army type stuff, those are the exceptions, not the rule. Especially in hockey, football, etc. Running backs can't make a good run unless THE ENTIRE TEAM does their job blocking. Trying to one-man things in hockey is generally suicidal as well. Teamwork is just as powerful in other sports as what I saw here. Not sure where you're coming from with this without watching more Ringette.

[metroid composite]

In hockey's manuevering defense...

Oh I know stuff like that is possible in Hockey, just...for instance the maneuver you linked there is like my default when approaching the net in Ringette.

While I agree that some of the stuff in that video is pretty cool it... I dunno. If it's not that difficult why should I get excited?

I'm going to quote a quote said about Marvel vs Capcom 2 here..."MvC2 is a surprisingly fun game because everyone is uber."  Consier: why is the fictional sport of Quidditch as popular as it is?  Certainly not because of the rules, which are stupid.  No, it's popular because it's Jetpack Basketball.  I'd watch Jetpack Basketball if people got skilled at aerial maneuvering.

No offsides is unbalanced playwise in sports like this. I can see why the equipment would slightly offset this for Ringette (catching a pass is much more difficult, I'd imagine). It's not a selling point if I would have to watch two guys hanging the entire game. Also, goals like the one you showed in the second video happen all the time in the NHL as well. They just start outside the offensive zone- for a simple reason: you don't want anyone on your team outside the defensive zone when you're defending, at least until you have possession. It's bad teamwork to leave your side down a man on defense. It's a desperation move in ice hockey.

Fairly similar to Ringette then.  (Where yes, you're sacrificing some defence for offence; even if the opposing team sends a defender to cover you, it's less clutter in the defending zone.)

Dumping the puck is also a last resort. You generally WANT to keep possession of the puck, but there are just times you need to get rid of it.

Sure.  And this is the case in every game Ringette included.  It's just a question of how often it's the right move.

You're stereotyping a lot of sports here. While yeah, a lot of the super, all-time highlights of some sports are one-man army type stuff, those are the exceptions, not the rule. Especially in hockey, football, etc. Running backs can't make a good run unless THE ENTIRE TEAM does their job blocking. Trying to one-man things in hockey is generally suicidal as well. Teamwork is just as powerful in other sports as what I saw here. Not sure where you're coming from with this without watching more Ringette.

Perhaps I should clarify:

Imagine the best NHL player playing solo against a full team of skilled 13-year-old Hockey players.  The NHL player would win fairly easily.  Now, take the same NHL player, train him in Ringette, and put him solo against a team of skilled 13-year-old Ringette players, the 13-year-olds would win.  (Two NHL players, on the other hand, would be enough to take such a team of five).

Of course teamwork is important in every team sport.  Of course you would rather have a full team of top-notch players working together.  (I may have exaggerated a few points due to being a silly peron).  Ringette's rules just happen to emphasize teamwork more than most sports I can think of (less than Ultimate Frisbee though!)

[Hunter Sopko]

While I agree that some of the stuff in that video is pretty cool it... I dunno. If it's not that difficult why should I get excited?

I'm going to quote a quote said about Marvel vs Capcom 2 here..."MvC2 is a surprisingly fun game because everyone is uber."  Consier: why is the fictional sport of Quidditch as popular as it is?  Certainly not because of the rules, which are stupid.  No, it's popular because it's Jetpack Basketball.  I'd watch Jetpack Basketball if people got skilled at aerial maneuvering.

Quiddich would be awesome because of the spectacle of it. In addition, it would also be freaking difficult to play at all despite the relative simplicity of the rules. Same with Jetpack Basketball minus the simplicity I would imagine. Ringette seems to be a fairly conventional sport and not at all an apt comparison, especially when addressing my point. Even then, there's a lot in the sports that would probably become fairly routine. Relativity of Awesome, and all.

Moves like the one I linked are awesome not just because they're awesome to watch, but also because they're ridiculously difficult. Watching people pull off superhuman things is awesome. The commonplace becomes pretty boring pretty fast. Again though, don't watch Ringette, so high level play might offer some really great stuff that's more in line with what I expect out of it.

You're stereotyping a lot of sports here. While yeah, a lot of the super, all-time highlights of some sports are one-man army type stuff, those are the exceptions, not the rule. Especially in hockey, football, etc. Running backs can't make a good run unless THE ENTIRE TEAM does their job blocking. Trying to one-man things in hockey is generally suicidal as well. Teamwork is just as powerful in other sports as what I saw here. Not sure where you're coming from with this without watching more Ringette.

Perhaps I should clarify:

Imagine the best NHL player playing solo against a full team of skilled 13-year-old Hockey players.  The NHL player would win fairly easily.  Now, take the same NHL player, train him in Ringette, and put him solo against a team of skilled 13-year-old Ringette players, the 13-year-olds would win.  (Two NHL players, on the other hand, would be enough to take such a team of five).

Of course teamwork is important in every team sport.  Of course you would rather have a full team of top-notch players working together.  (I may have exaggerated a few points due to being a silly peron).  Ringette's rules just happen to emphasize teamwork more than most sports I can think of (less than Ultimate Frisbee though!)

That's... not that great an argument there. Especially since what you've said of Ringette makes it legally impossible for the single player to do anything unless he wants to score from the far blue line. I have no problem with rules making teamwork a necessity in most instances, but it's not exactly a point in it's favor either, for many reasons.

An NHL level player with no goalie would also be a much closer match than you think. He would get exhausted. Especially if you mean he's playing against a full team as in 18. He might dominate for the first five, ten minutes or so, but then he'll have to start playing conservatively, then eventually he'll be too exhausted to even move.

Unless you meant just a quick, 30 second scrimmage as the NHL player rips through them all. Even then... one kid sacrifices the body, manages to bump the player off the puck, other team picks up and scores. I mean, you've seen how big I am. I used to put people near Gate's size ON THE GROUND playing hockey. Strategy can overcome skill even in that situation. Not wholly likely there, I'll admit, but doable.

Again, Ringette doesn't look that bad, but... not my thing, probably. I'm just debating for the fun of it. As a sports fan/former player of many sports, you'd best back up the claim of Best Sport Ever<G>

[metroid composite]

Again, Ringette doesn't look that bad, but... not my thing, probably. I'm just debating for the fun of it. As a sports fan/former player of many sports, you'd best back up the claim of Best Sport Ever<G>

Well yes, I'm just taking this stance mostly for the fun of it.  (If I was seriously trying to prove rigorously the quality of the sport, I'd have used the Discussion forum).

Though for the record, I played a good variety of sports myself.  Growing up and in university I also played hockey (ice and street varieties), soccer (both indoor 5v5 and outdoor 11v11), field hockey, basketball (regular and wheelchair), baseball, ultimate frisbee, volleyball.  So...most of the big team sports (missing Water Polo, Cricket, American Football, Rugby, Lacrosse, Handball, and Polo.  Is this a conclusive list...checking wikipedia it's not bad, minus some hillarious exceptions).

Ringette was certainly my favourite to play.  Wasn't necessarily my favourite to watch at the highest levels of play (they didn't add the shot clock until later, which at the tip top levels of play meant people were able to abuse how strong possession is).

Moves like the one I linked are awesome not just because they're awesome to watch, but also because they're ridiculously difficult. Watching people pull off superhuman things is awesome. The commonplace becomes pretty boring pretty fast. Again though, don't watch Ringette, so high level play might offer some really great stuff that's more in line with what I expect out of it.

Well, right; my point is that there's two aspects to this:

1. How hard something actually is, as judged by someone who knows the sport well.
2. How hard it looks.

For an example from videogames...compare Starcraft and Starcraft 2.  Can a casual observer tell that in Starcraft you can only move 12 units at a time?  Not really.  Does it add any depth of strategy that the Starcraft pros have to move their hands 10 more times to perform what appears to us as the same action?  Not really.

Actually, as an interesting anecdotal note, long-time Ringette players who switch to Hockey often figure out how to transfer some of the maneuverability skills (so they can quickly move the puck from one side of the net to the other and flick a shot).  So...to some degree it's a mindset thing--if you're thinking to yourself "what I really should be doing here is moving the puck from the right side of my stick reach to the left side of my stick reach superfast and then firing a shot" then you can train yourself to do that.

Especially since what you've said of Ringette makes it legally impossible for the single player to do anything unless he wants to score from the far blue line.

It's possible--you'd just have to bounce it off the other team and then pick it up again.  (The bigger issue is more that Ringette doesn't use Faceoffs.)

[Hunter Sopko]

Moves like the one I linked are awesome not just because they're awesome to watch, but also because they're ridiculously difficult. Watching people pull off superhuman things is awesome. The commonplace becomes pretty boring pretty fast. Again though, don't watch Ringette, so high level play might offer some really great stuff that's more in line with what I expect out of it.

Well, right; my point is that there's two aspects to this:

1. How hard something actually is, as judged by someone who knows the sport well.
2. How hard it looks.

For an example from videogames...compare Starcraft and Starcraft 2.  Can a casual observer tell that in Starcraft you can only move 12 units at a time?  Not really.  Does it add any depth of strategy that the Starcraft pros have to move their hands 10 more times to perform what appears to us as the same action?  Not really.

Actually, as an interesting anecdotal note, long-time Ringette players who switch to Hockey often figure out how to transfer some of the maneuverability skills (so they can quickly move the puck from one side of the net to the other and flick a shot).  So...to some degree it's a mindset thing--if you're thinking to yourself "what I really should be doing here is moving the puck from the right side of my stick reach to the left side of my stick reach superfast and then firing a shot" then you can train yourself to do that.

Not surprising at all, considering the similarities between the two sports. Stuff like that are obvious things that transfer over, in the same way that certain basic, routine things can be turned into martial arts. One still takes a whole lot more skill than the other, though I know that's not the best analogy. Knowing what to do is a far cry from actually doing it.

Also depends on how noticable things are. This is probably again where my familiarity with hockey holds me back from approaching the argument correctly, but while I was impressed with the Ringette manuevering video, it was only about two seconds before I went "Wait a minute... with the stick and ring like that, it'd make stuff like that really simple." Then finding out there's no physical play as well?

I guess it depends on how casual a person we're talking. No familiarity with any sports or Sports fan with no familiarity with Ringette? The latter would probably figure out what I did fairly quickly. Your Starcraft example is also incredibly specific and doesn't really help or hinder your case.

Especially since what you've said of Ringette makes it legally impossible for the single player to do anything unless he wants to score from the far blue line.

It's possible--you'd just have to bounce it off the other team and then pick it up again.  (The bigger issue is more that Ringette doesn't use Faceoffs.)

Actually that makes it a heck of a lot more possible, though still makes it very unlikely. My points still stand though. Faceoffs would actually favor the team of 13-year-olds over the NHL player most times.

[metroid composite]

Then finding out there's no physical play as well?

I suppose I should go into more detail on this.  The amount of physical play is similar to, say, basketball.  You can't crunch someone against a wall, but you can set picks, lean against each other, bang each other's sticks (which is the standard method of checking--basically lift the stick up from underneath and the ring goes loose).  Hmm, might be easier to show in a video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzIfzRud8MQ

As someone who's played a lot of defence in Ringette, checking is actually pretty interesting because of the maneuverability of the offence; you have to out-predict or out-skate her to guarantee success  (or just two-on-one her, but that leaves your team weak elsewhere).  I actually don't think it would be as strategically interesting if my obvious choice was to plow into the player.  I have to decide "do I reach around the front or the back; also do I try to mirror their movement, or do a flyby."

Faceoffs would actually favor the team of 13-year-olds over the NHL player most times.

I assume the NHL player would generally win the faceoff; but sure--the 13-year-olds would have more people to pass to, opening up more options in the faceoff (for the most part, they just need to bat the puck away.

[Hunter Sopko]

Then finding out there's no physical play as well?

I suppose I should go into more detail on this.  The amount of physical play is similar to, say, basketball.  You can't crunch someone against a wall, but you can set picks, lean against each other, bang each other's sticks (which is the standard method of checking--basically lift the stick up from underneath and the ring goes loose).  Hmm, might be easier to show in a video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzIfzRud8MQ

As someone who's played a lot of defence in Ringette, checking is actually pretty interesting because of the maneuverability of the offence; you have to out-predict or out-skate her to guarantee success  (or just two-on-one her, but that leaves your team weak elsewhere).  I actually don't think it would be as strategically interesting if my obvious choice was to plow into the player.  I have to decide "do I reach around the front or the back; also do I try to mirror their movement, or do a flyby."

You do all that in hockey too. You just have an added weapon in playing the body, and it's never the most obvious one because a skilled player can skate around you or just pass. You really have to time it right.

Faceoffs would actually favor the team of 13-year-olds over the NHL player most times.

I assume the NHL player would generally win the faceoff; but sure--the 13-year-olds would have more people to pass to, opening up more options in the faceoff (for the most part, they just need to bat the puck away.

Win it how? Winning a faceoff by keeping it yourself is pretty hard. There's a reason no one does it, though I guess this is considering teams of equal skill. Shovelling it to your team is much, much easier and a better idea. The two main ways I can see it is if he pulls it backwards and skates after it, outspeeding the 13 year olds, but that won't work forever as energy will be at a premium. The other is if he times it perfectly and turns around backwards to protect the puck, but that still leaves him vulnerable to the wingers, whose best option there is for one to head straight up to the blueline in case he does option 1, and the other to go assist the center once the puck is dropped.

[Idun]

My experience with sports in general:

The popular ones are really only enjoyable as a spectacle for me (baseball, football, etc.). Basketball is a great sport to play, but watching it on TV is straight up boring (unless it's during playoffs, when they actually play). This is why I prefer college sports - they still have a sense of urgency.

I do enjoy watching hockey in all respects though. Granted, I haven't watched TV since High School unless I turn it on to catch a specific show  . . . but I do believe that I wouldn't like it as much without the overboard checking they do. There's something about men hitting each other that I just doth enjoy.