Sochi 2014

[Yakushev72]

Keep in mind that those Canadian practitioners who dismissed Percival were likely the same guys who said the Soviets couldn't shoot, had terrible goaltending and would be swept in '72. In other words, about as open-minded as those in Russia who now believe they've got nothing to learn about hockey from foreigners. How's that working out?

I can't speak for Percival's hockey expertise but he was definitely ahead of his time in terms of conditioning.

As I mentioned, I haven't read Percival's book, and actually, this all started with the suggestion that the current Russian national team would be better off if they turned the program over to a Canadian coach like Mike Keenan. Scotty B moved from that line of discussion to his claim that Percival "invented" Russian hockey. That's a direct quote. There was certainly no components of Soviet hockey that resembled the hockey being played in Canada, and Tarasov, considered the "Father" of Soviet hockey, has repeatedly been quoted in the past as saying that he refused to allow anything that was not home grown to influence the nature of the program.

If in fact Percival outlined a formula for developing a hockey program through dry land simulation of on-ice execution, then clearly Tarasov was influenced by him. I don't know enough about Percival to know how much he outlined programs for dry land training. Yes, conditioning was certainly a key building block of Soviet hockey, but that is just common sense, and not necessary anything revolutionary.

 

[Scotty B]

Yakushev72

Scotty B moved from that line of discussion to his claim that Percival "invented" Russian hockey. That's a direct quote.

Yes, but earlier I said

a goodly share of his ( Tarasov’s ) supposed innovations actually came from Lloyd Percival's Hockey Handbook

Also elsewhere , I credited Tarasov with being an innovator and genius in his own right.

Also, in my defense, I was responding to your ( Yakushev72 ) own overblown assertions .that he ( Tarasov )

refused to allow anything that was not home grown to influence the nature of the ( Rus ) program... that.there was no ( Canadian ) influence...( that ) its all 100% Russian... uniquely Russian... ( and that all claims to the contrary are ) completely false, and frankly, a bit laughable .

To me, what’s laughable is the myth that Tarasov developed everything in a vacuum...Indeed, for those who know better, that’s hyperbole and revisionist history at their finest...Moreover, even for others who didn’t know about that Percival/ Tarasov connection , but whose hockey world view is being sorely challenged here, by cold stark reality, the term cognitive dissonance, at a bare minimum, seems apropos

Yakushev72

...At the risk of extending this conversation, Wikipedia authors are permitted to offer personal opinions as long as factual claims are adequately documented.

Sorry to burst ur bubble ( cough cog, cough diss ) but knowledge of this early CCCP/ Tarasov/ Percival connection didn’t just fall off the back of a Wiki-Turnip Truck...I heard tell of it way back in 72, in high school.. Moreover — and at the risk of repeating myself ad nauseam – Tarasov invited one of my relatives, back in 1950's, behind Iron curtain, to help instruct his CCCP’ers

Yakushev72

...The author's claim that the Soviets based their hockey program on Percival's book is documented by a complement that Tarasov allegedly paid to Percival about his "wonderful book" that introduced him to the "mysteries of Canadian hockey." .

Tut Tut, there’s a plethora of documentation for what I'm contending, from a wide variety of sources, which u’d know yourself, IF you did a little research...But I won't hold my breath ( cough, cognitive, cough, dissonance )

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/2014/01/interview-with-gary-mossman-author-of.html

January 12, 2014
Interview With Gary Mossman, Author of Lloyd Percival: Coach And Visionary

Recently we discussed Gary Mossman's new book - Lloyd Percival: Coach and Visionary. In many ways it is a book about the most important hockey book ever written. Here is the full book review for further information....

...Below is the transcript of an email interview I did with Mr. Mossman about his new book...

....Question - Would you say The Hockey Handbook was the most important book in hockey history?

Answer - I think it would be fair to say that “The Hockey Handbook” (1951) is the most important book in hockey history. It stood alone for thirty years and some experts say it is still the most complete hockey instruction book ever written. NHL coaches tried to ignore it; however, for minor hockey coaches and college coaches in Canada and the United States it was essential reading.

The first real instruction book for hockey was Percival’s, “How to Play Better Hockey”, published in 1946. It holds a special place in hockey history because Anatoly Tarasov was probably given a copy in 1951. It was the first hockey instruction book he read and the basic philosophy and style of Russian hockey were derived from it.

“The Hockey Handbook”; however, was much bigger and more detailed. We know that Tarasov shipped 500 copies from New York in 1955 and that it was translated into Russian. The book was also the primary source for hockey instruction in Sweden, Finland and Czechoslovakia.

When Russian and European hockey players, as well as American college players, began impacting on the training of Canadian hockey players and the style of play in the NHL, it was a style of hockey, derived from the pages of ”The Hockey Handbook” that paved the way for the “New NHL”.

Question - While Europeans, especially the Russians, loved the book, Canadians dismissed it and mocked it. Why?

Answer - Canadian hockey is built on tradition and has never easily accepted change. Until recent decades it was a blue collar sport. Hockey players did not go to college, or university and coaches were retired, ex-players (professional hockey, like baseball, lagged behind football and basketball for this reason). Although he was self-educated, Percival was perceived as a “college guy”, an outsider, and Canadian professional hockey people did not want to listen to him. According to them, there was no need, because Canada produced the best hockey players in the world and the NHL was far and away the best hockey league in the world.

It was not until the Summit Series of 1972 that Canadians began to question their dominance of world hockey and it was another dozen years before real change began. Sadly, Percival died in 1974 and received only scant recognition for his knowledge and his prescience.

Question - Lloyd Percival died in 1974. Did he ever realize how big of an impact his book had on Russian hockey? Did Anatoli Tarasov ever get a chance to further talk with Percival?

Answer - Yes. On at least two occasions, Tarasov visited Percival at his health and fitness centre in Toronto, The Fitness Institute. While Tarasov was reluctant to admit to Russians that there were any foreign influences in the evolution of Russian hockey. He was free with praise for Percival when they were together, as well as when he spoke with American hockey experts, such as Lou Vairo.

On one of his visits (in 1969), Tarasov gave Percival a copy of his book “Russian Hockey Secrets: Road to Olympus,” with the inscription:“Respectfully to Lloyd, Your wonderful book which introduced us to the mysteries of Canadian Hockey, I have read like a schoolboy. Thank you for a hockey science which is significant to the hockey world.”

The performance of the Russians at the Summit Series of 1972 was a complete surprise to almost every Canadian, except for Lloyd Percival, who not only warned us about how good the Russians would be, but offered Team Canada advice on how to counteract the Russian strengths, advice which was rejected by the Canadian coaches. Percival was naturally proud to see his hockey theories played to perfection by the Russians, but he was a loyal Canadian and was saddened to see Team Canada struggle. He said at the time “it didn’t have had to be that way.”

The failure, back in the fifties, of an NHL old guard to accept change, or to even consider any of the brilliant innovations championed and ( yes ) originally conceived of by Percival have obvious parallels vis a vis a contemporary, and no less obstinate and intractable IMO, Russian old Guard...

 

[Yakushev72]

Yakushev72

Yes, but earlier I said

Also elsewhere , I credited Tarasov with being an innovator and genius in his own right.

Also, in my defense, I was responding to your ( Yakushev72 ) own overblown assertions .that he ( Tarasov )

To me, what’s laughable is the myth that Tarasov developed everything in a vacuum...Indeed, for those who know better, that’s hyperbole and revisionist history at their finest...Moreover, even for others who didn’t know about that Percival/ Tarasov connection , but whose hockey world view is being sorely challenged here, by cold stark reality, the term cognitive dissonance, at a bare minimum, seems apropos

Yakushev72

Sorry to burst ur bubble ( cough cog, cough diss ) but knowledge of this early CCCP/ Tarasov/ Percival connection didn’t just fall off the back of a Wiki-Turnip Truck...I heard tell of it way back in 72, in high school.. Moreover — and at the risk of repeating myself ad nauseam – Tarasov invited one of my relatives, back in 1950's, behind Iron curtain, to help instruct his CCCP’ers

Yakushev72

Tut Tut, there’s a plethora of documentation for what I'm contending, from a wide variety of sources, which u’d know yourself, IF you did a little research...But I won't hold my breath ( cough, cognitive, cough, dissonance )

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/2014/01/interview-with-gary-mossman-author-of.html



The failure, back in the fifties, of an NHL old guard to accept change, or to even consider any of the brilliant innovations championed and ( yes ) originally conceived of by Percival have obvious parallels vis a vis a contemporary, and no less obstinate and intractable IMO, Russian old Guard...

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis. But still, your entire thesis rests on a book inscription from one friend to another. You are taking the overly flowery sentiment that is so commonplace as to be mandatory for those occasions and extrapolating it thousands of times beyond what is actually said.

By the way, who in the world is Gary Mossman? You keep bringing up these names of people that seemingly no one on these boards have ever heard of, and then ask that we concede them sufficient authority to accept their opinion as superceding the claims of Tarasov, Tikhonov, and other Russians who really were the most prestigious hockey figures. Why should we give sway to these anonymous people who have no credentials that are worth deferring to? If its important to you to push back on the revisionist Russian ranks to prove that a Canadian outcast deserves credit for inventing Russian hockey, give us something a little more than a book inscription or a few words from an anonymous author.

 

[Caser]

I'm sorry to interrupt you guys, but is that a Russia Vs. Canada historical hockey holywar going on here? Can I participate? Please! Please!

Anyway, did I understand correctly and all the stuff is about did Tarasov read the Perceval book or not? Was it forbidden for Soviet coaches to read foreign books at that time?

 

[Scotty B]

I'm sorry to interrupt you guys, but is that a Russia Vs. Canada historical hockey holywar going on here? Can I participate? Please! Please!

Anyway, did I understand correctly and all the stuff is about did Tarasov read the Perceval book or not? Was it forbidden for Soviet coaches to read foreign books at that time?

Highly doubtful, ...it only seems to have been verboten for the father of Soviet hockey to admit his deep indebtedness to a Canuck

 

[Scotty B]

Yakushev72:

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis. But still, your entire thesis rests on a book inscription from one friend to another.

Yup and one friend was none other than Tarasov, and the other Percival , with the former calling what others have called ‘ The Most Important Book in Hockey History’,

THE BIBLE

...rather telling commentary from Anatoli no?

Yakushev72:

You are taking the overly flowery sentiment that is so commonplace as to be mandatory for those occasions and extrapolating it thousands of times beyond what is actually said.

So overkill eh? Kinda reminiscent of Tarasov, reportedly, having 500 copies of Percival’s most famous book shipped overseas, a book which was , subsequently, translated into Russian, or so I hear tell...

Yakushev72

By the way, who in the world is Gary Mossman? You keep bringing up these names of people that seemingly no one on these boards have ever heard of, and then ask that we concede them sufficient authority to accept their opinion as superceding the claims of Tarasov, Tikhonov, and other Russians who really were the most prestigious hockey figures...

.

Hmmm...get ready for a shock...Many heroes have feet of clay. Moreover, even prestigious hockey men don’t always tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth...

Tarasov, in trying to lay claim to something he derived, in no small part, from Percival, and in trying to insinuate that the CCCP style was uniquely Russian + his brainchild...has been caught in a lie.., as evidenced by Tarasov's tacit admission on a copy of his own book lovingly inscribed to Percival ..

Yakushev72:

... If its important to you to push back on the revisionist Russian ranks to prove that a Canadian outcast deserves credit for inventing Russian hockey

Ah yes, ad hominem attacks the last refuge of a desperate man...

Not to change the subject Yak...But what say we skip past stage one of Authur Schopenhauer ‘s three stages of truth, and proceed to stage two...angry rebuttal/ opposition

That way we can finally come to stage three, an acceptance of a self evident truth, sooner

As a Summit Series Fan Yak72, I’m sure you’ll appreciate this

http://www.1972summitseries.com/tarasovsbible.html

Tarasov's Bible

A lot of people know that Anatoli Tarasov is considered to be the great architect of the Soviet hockey empire.

But even Tarasov had to learn from someone. That someone was a Canadian coach and author named Lloyd Percival.

Percival was Canada's leading expert on fitness through out the mid 20th century. Although he was best known for coaching track and field, he would often make forays into other sports in order to help those athletes attain greatness.

In 1951 Percival attempted to make a big splash in hockey when he published The Hockey Handbook. Percival was years, even decades, ahead of his time here in Canada.

His book featured the oddest things Canadian hockey coaches and players had ever heard of? Breathing control? Gymnastics? Goal setting? No way we scoffed. Goal scoring is what we practice!

Hall of Fame coach Dick Irvin (no, not the television broadcaster, that is his son) blasted Percival's notions. It was "the product of a three year old" he unceremoniously snorted.

While the NHL was quick to dismiss The Hockey Handbook, Europeans were quick to adore it. It is not a coincidence that European hockey exploded and caught up to Canadian hockey only a generation or so after the publishing of this book.

One person who especially appreciated the book was Tarasov. He called it "the bible."

Yakushev 72,

...give us something a little more than a book inscription or a few words from an anonymous author.

The Hockey Handbook: The Book That Taught the Russians Hockey

http://books.google.ca/books?id=p4z...a=X&ei=YhpoU-nQBMybyATY8IGABQ&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA

Yak...Why not do a little research yourself ? [Mod]

 

[Yakushev72]

I'm sorry to interrupt you guys, but is that a Russia Vs. Canada historical hockey holywar going on here? Can I participate? Please! Please!

Anyway, did I understand correctly and all the stuff is about did Tarasov read the Perceval book or not? Was it forbidden for Soviet coaches to read foreign books at that time?

This is about a Canadian guy who is trying to argue, without any proof or serious documentation, that not only was Canadian hockey invented by Canadians, but that Russian hockey was invented by a Canadian also. [Mod]

 

[Caser]

Guys, you probably didn't understand my point: ok, Tarasov has read the book and found aproaches from there rather useful for his coaching practice, what's the big deal about it? I mean, it is no secret that at that time there were a lot of influences that made Russian hockey style the way it is:

Bandy hockey traditions
Football (soccer) training methods
Czech hockey school
Latvian hockey school
...
That's just what I can remember without studying the subject specifically, probably there are more influences including Canadian hockey school influences and the Perceval's book. Still I can't understand what's wrong about it?

 

[Jussi]

5-man units could be re-established around KHL players who trained as a national team in the offseason. I don't know if that will be done, but it certainly could.

Players are already too tired after KHL season so it seems that attempts to shorten the off season are doomed to fail.

 

[Yakushev72]

Players are too tired after KHL season it seems that attempts to shorten the off season are doomed to fail.

There could be some practical barriers to convincing players to extend their season, but they could devise some rewards that could make it more attractive. Most Russian players in the KHL are based in Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, so it could be feasible to do it. NHL players need not be excluded, but it would be less likely to have them.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Was not aware at the extent at how much The development of the old Russian hockey style(and hockey in general) is indebted to Canadian hockey. I always knew it was significant because where else were they going to look for education on an unfamiliar game then the leading place of that game, everyone has learn from somewhere and they always go to the leading practitioners, no surprise there.

But you are always led to believe they just got the overall basics from Canada and developed that old soviet system and style on their own and it's quite something to learn they didn't , that is also thanks to Canada.

This is something that should be well known and not hidden by Russian hockey fans.

Plagarism is not pretty.

 

[Yakushev72]

Was not aware at the extent at how much The development of the old Russian hockey style(and hockey in general) is indebted to Canadian hockey. I always knew it was significant because where else were they going to look for education on an unfamiliar game then the leading place of that game, everyone has learn from somewhere and they always go to the leading practitioners, no surprise there.

But you are always led to believe they just got the overall basics from Canada and developed that old soviet system and style on their own and it's quite something to learn they didn't , that is also thanks to Canada.

This is something that should be well known and not hidden by Russian hockey fans.

Plagarism is not pretty.

If Canadians are responsible for all this, you would think that Canada would have the decency to apologize and make reparations.

 

[Caser]

Was not aware at the extent at how much The development of the old Russian hockey style(and hockey in general) is indebted to Canadian hockey. I always knew it was significant because where else were they going to look for education on an unfamiliar game then the leading place of that game, everyone has learn from somewhere and they always go to the leading practitioners, no surprise there.

But you are always led to believe they just got the overall basics from Canada and developed that old soviet system and style on their own and it's quite something to learn they didn't , that is also thanks to Canada.

This is something that should be well known and not hidden by Russian hockey fans.

Plagarism is not pretty.

Sure, man! Russians are not only soft and lazy, but they also had stolen hockey from Canada! Since the evidence is indisputable, Canada should sue Russia and demand them to give it back.

 

[Yakushev72]

Was not aware at the extent at how much The development of the old Russian hockey style(and hockey in general) is indebted to Canadian hockey. I always knew it was significant because where else were they going to look for education on an unfamiliar game then the leading place of that game, everyone has learn from somewhere and they always go to the leading practitioners, no surprise there.

But you are always led to believe they just got the overall basics from Canada and developed that old soviet system and style on their own and it's quite something to learn they didn't , that is also thanks to Canada.

This is something that should be well known and not hidden by Russian hockey fans.

Plagarism is not pretty.

Let me urge caution in concluding that Canadians contributed to the development of Soviet hockey, because these are all unsubstantiated claims of dubious origin. Scotty B, who is a distant relative of Harold Schooley, who played minor league hockey for a few years in Canada in the 1950's, claimed that Lloyd Percival, a former star Canadian Cricket player, wrote a book that in effect shaped European hockey and actually "invented" Soviet hockey. Drawing on his command of Cricket, Percival's publication "the Hockey Handbook" outlined the methods beginning coaches should use to develop a hockey program. Chided by a contemporary NHL coach as being "the product of a three-year old mind" (see Wikipedia article on Percival), Percival nonetheless elaborated on basic principles, such as (1) learn to skate really well, (2) learn to stickhandle and pass really well, (3) instead of playing by yourself, learn to use your teammates, and (4) get in great shape physically. Now, why that NHL coach would imply that any three-year old on the pond would know all that is beyond me??

Scotty B quoted from Wikipedia in saying that Percival's book went on to have international impact." But Scotty overlooked the part of the quote that said {citation needed}. "Citation needed" means "I have no idea whether what I just said is true - could someone please substantiate my assertion for me?" Sadly for Scotty, no one ever supplied a citation for that claim. Later on, Scotty quoted the Wikipedia as saying "Anatoli Tarasov, the godfather of Soviet hockey once told Percival: "Your wonderful book introduced to the mysteries of Canadian hockey, and I have read it like a schoolboy {Citation needed}." Once again, no one has come forward with a citation to document this seemingly ridiculous claim.

So, your assignment is to go out and substantiate claims of Canadian patronage for Soviet hockey. Your mission will not be aided by the fact that Soviet hockey more closely resembled football (soccer) than Cricket.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Very interesting discussion between both parties. Just a tidbit I remember reading earlier this year which might augment further conversation between all involved. Take a look.

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/2014/01/interview-with-gary-mossman-author-of.html

 

[Yakushev72]

Very interesting discussion between both parties. Just a tidbit I remember reading earlier this year which might augment further conversation between all involved. Take a look.

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/2014/01/interview-with-gary-mossman-author-of.html

If you were starting a hockey program out of nothing back in the late 1940's, it would have certainly made sense to check out what instruction books were available in Canada, since Canada was the only country in the world that was really serious about playing hockey back in those days. There were almost no home-grown programs in the US, and European programs were sparse at best in those days.

Percival, according to his biographers, was first and foremost a fitness guru, and both Tarasov and Tikhonov used advanced scientific concepts of physical conditioning as a weapon of advantage for Soviet teams. But, without having seen Percival's book, I have no basis to conclude that he outlined advanced programs for dry-land simulation of on-ice conditions, for which Tarasov became famous, or integration of football concepts for hockey application sufficient to win world championships and ultimately challenge the best of the NHL to a standstill. That level of guidance and leadership is in no way documented or evident. On ice, Canadian and Soviet hockey couldn't have been further apart. Let's say that Percival was a man of vision ahead of his time, and leave it at that.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Sure, man! Russians are not only soft and lazy, but they also had stolen hockey from Canada! Since the evidence is indisputable, Canada should sue Russia and demand them to give it back.

Good idea!!

Intellectual theft is a no-no in my books.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Let me urge caution in concluding that Canadians contributed to the development of Soviet hockey, because these are all unsubstantiated claims of dubious origin. Scotty B, who is a distant relative of Harold Schooley, who played minor league hockey for a few years in Canada in the 1950's, claimed that Lloyd Percival, a former star Canadian Cricket player, wrote a book that in effect shaped European hockey and actually "invented" Soviet hockey. Drawing on his command of Cricket, Percival's publication "the Hockey Handbook" outlined the methods beginning coaches should use to develop a hockey program. Chided by a contemporary NHL coach as being "the product of a three-year old mind" (see Wikipedia article on Percival), Percival nonetheless elaborated on basic principles, such as (1) learn to skate really well, (2) learn to stickhandle and pass really well, (3) instead of playing by yourself, learn to use your teammates, and (4) get in great shape physically. Now, why that NHL coach would imply that any three-year old on the pond would know all that is beyond me??

Scotty B quoted from Wikipedia in saying that Percival's book went on to have international impact." But Scotty overlooked the part of the quote that said {citation needed}. "Citation needed" means "I have no idea whether what I just said is true - could someone please substantiate my assertion for me?" Sadly for Scotty, no one ever supplied a citation for that claim. Later on, Scotty quoted the Wikipedia as saying "Anatoli Tarasov, the godfather of Soviet hockey once told Percival: "Your wonderful book introduced to the mysteries of Canadian hockey, and I have read it like a schoolboy {Citation needed}." Once again, no one has come forward with a citation to document this seemingly ridiculous claim.

So, your assignment is to go out and substantiate claims of Canadian patronage for Soviet hockey. Your mission will not be aided by the fact that Soviet hockey more closely resembled football (soccer) than Cricket.

Looks like the above post by globe has already done my work for me.

Come on Russia, play fair, acknowledge sources.

I don't mind that a book from our hockey was used to build Russian hockey, why shouldn't it use something to start off with? but to claim credit for your style as solely your own, over here we call that ripping somebody off.

 

[Caser]

Looks like the above post by globe has already done my work for me.

Come on Russia, play fair, acknowledge sources.

I don't mind that a book from our hockey was used to build Russian hockey, why shouldn't it use something to start off with? but to claim credit for your style as solely your own, over here we call that ripping somebody off.

You probably didn't read my previous post:

Guys, you probably didn't understand my point: ok, Tarasov has read the book and found aproaches from there rather useful for his coaching practice, what's the big deal about it? I mean, it is no secret that at that time there were a lot of influences that made Russian hockey style the way it is:

Bandy hockey traditions
Football (soccer) training methods
Czech hockey school
Latvian hockey school
...
That's just what I can remember without studying the subject specifically, probably there are more influences including Canadian hockey school influences and the Perceval's book. Still I can't understand what's wrong about it?

And yes, what makes Canada so special, that it has to get more credit than mentioned Latvia or Czechs, that actually taught Russians hockey basics by themselves, not via the books?

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I never said anything about special credit, just credit when taken from.

Don't claim something as your own work if you took it from someone else,it's called lying/theft.

 

[Jussi]

There could be some practical barriers to convincing players to extend their season, but they could devise some rewards that could make it more attractive. Most Russian players in the KHL are based in Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, so it could be feasible to do it. NHL players need not be excluded, but it would be less likely to have them.

Oskar Osala said that he was too tired after the KHL finals to play at the Worlds and Mozyakin said something similar. The fact that the season in KHL starts in early July (IIRC SKA began their training camp on July 10th) so for those playing in the national team, the season could end mid-to-late May. That would leave only about a 6 weeks of off-season. Now for comparison, NHL season ends early/mid June and begins in September (though players are doing individual training in August at the latest), making their off-season 2-3 months, depending on team success. Finnish league has a mandatory 6 week individual training period that begins in mid June and ends last week on July. Players are also guaranteed 3 weeks off after the last game of the season. Teams usually have try-outs or conditioning training in late May and early-mid June. One can see that Russian players would be much more fatigued than other. Such a short off season is simply not functional/practical, unless the KHL season is kept at ~50 games and they at least get rid of the Hopeless Cup.

 

[Caser]

I never said anything about special credit, just credit when taken from.

Don't claim something as your own work if you took it from someone else,it's called lying/theft.

Probably we should clarify the 'own work' definition then. If, for example, you're a songwriter and you've heard a song, that has some new interesting guitar playing techniques there, and then you write your own song, using these techniques, does it make this your new song belong to the guy invented the techniques or is it your own work?

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I suppose it is your own work in that sense.

It just tends to be in Russian hockey circles to make out that development of the game there never borrowed or looked to other sources for it's development, as if it was totally original which it was not and that is the part that has always rubbed me the wrong way.


I am not a big fan of that type of myth making that's all.

 

[Yakushev72]

Looks like the above post by globe has already done my work for me.

Come on Russia, play fair, acknowledge sources.

I don't mind that a book from our hockey was used to build Russian hockey, why shouldn't it use something to start off with? but to claim credit for your style as solely your own, over here we call that ripping somebody off.

No it hasn't! Read my post #404. I ask the question which STILL remains unanswered: who the hell is Gary Mossman? My guess is that he's not Russian, and my speculation would be that he is Canadian. That's why the Wikipedia claims are unattributed and unsubstantiated. Because Gary decided to write a book about Lloyd Percival, he decided that was in his best interest to make Percival seem like not just another Cricket star, but instead a really interesting person who makes it worth spending some money on to buy Gary's book. I don't blame someone for making false claims in order to hawk a book and make a fast dollar. But let's not quote him in an honest discussion.

 

[Yakushev72]

I suppose it is your own work in that sense.

It just tends to be in Russian hockey circles to make out that development of the game there never borrowed or looked to other sources for it's development, as if it was totally original which it was not and that is the part that has always rubbed me the wrong way.


I am not a big fan of that type of myth making that's all.

Once again, you either did not read my post (#416), or you are just trying to keep your tradition going as HF Boards most well-known and obsessive Russia-hater. Go back through the history of your posts and calculate what percentage are designed to either start a fight or keep a fight going until it gets nasty on Russian-oriented threads. It wouldn't hurt you to take a look at your posting profile!

What I said in post #416 is that its very likely that Tarasov, when preparing to launch a hockey program for the Soviet Union, looked to Canada and other external sources for information that could aid him in his mission. If you'll note, I acknowledged that Canada was the only nation in the world that had any real interest in hockey in the 1950's, and that Canada would most likely be the best place to look for ideas. Most philosophers reject the concept of an "original idea" as being nonexistent. But, by the same token, Percival's book was a how-to book for Canadian amateur coaches to compete in Canadian amateur leagues, was very simplistic and general (thus the NHL coach branded it as the "product of a three-year old mind"), and not directly applicable to the realities of the Soviet Union in the 1950's. Maybe you could credit him as being a source for ideas, but there is no evidence to credit him with "inventing" Soviet hockey.