Collective Hockey Against the Grit and Grind: Ice Hockey as a Reflection of Cold War Differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the 1980 Miracle on Ice has been thoroughly examined from both the American and Soviet viewpoints, these studies set the game upon a pedestal of its own, a one-off incident that persists in American sports memory today because of its improbability and the subsequent public reaction. However, hockey played a role in Cold War tensions long before the Miracle and exemplified international dynamics and tensions on multiple levels. Through a review of existing literature, this thesis holistically examines the sport of ice hockey as a microcosm of the Cold War. Differences between communism and capitalism produced differences in the organization and play of hockey between the Soviet Union and North America. Moreover, Soviet propagandists took advantage of differing attitudes towards amateurism and capitalist exploitation of sport in order to denigrate the North American game and praise their own. Furthermore, smaller states such as Canada and Czechoslovakia were also able to leverage their substantial hockey programs in order to assert some modicum of independence from their respective superpowers. While many of these differences faded after the end of the Cold War allowed freer and easier exchange of ideas and practices, notably equalizing the playing field, the resumption of US-Russia tensions as well as increasing pressure for American athletes to use their platforms to voice political views mean that lessons learned during the Cold War regarding the politicization of sport are still relevant today.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".