One for sure or three maybe - Empirical evidence for overtime play from Swiss ice hockey
Egon Franck () and
No 24, Working Papers from University of Zurich, Center for Research in Sports Administration (CRSA)
In order to avoid too many tied games after playing the five-minute overtime period, the National Hockey League introduced two rule changes in the 1999-2000 season. First, a team that loses in overtime receives one point instead of zero points. Second, the number of skaters in overtime is reduced from five to four. The theoretical literature analyzing these rule changes predicted that they would also produce the unintended side-effect that more games would reach overtime and recommended that a team that wins in regulation should receive three points (instead of two) in order to counterbalance the converse effect. We are the first to empirically support this theoretical prediction using NHL data and data from Swiss ice hockey, in which the rule changes of the NHL were copied in the 2006-2007 season and in which the three-point rule was also introduced.
Keywords: NHL; Swiss Ice Hockey League (NL); overtime; incentive effects; three-point rule, rule changes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 14 pages
Date: 2008, Revised 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Working Paper: One for sure or three maybe - Empirical evidence for overtime play from Swiss ice hockey (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:rsd:wpaper:0024
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Working Papers from University of Zurich, Center for Research in Sports Administration (CRSA) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by IBW IT Support ().