You are on page 1of 7

Definitions of Expertise: A Review of “Miracle” and Olympic Hockey

By: Craig Misiewicz

A consistent theme of class discussions and persistent barrier to a

general theory of expert performance involves difficulties rigidly defining

expertise. Janet L. Starkes and K. Anders Ericsson, editors of our class text,

“Expert Performance in Sports: Advances in Research on Sport Expertise”,

outline 4 dimensions of expertise. To obtain expertise, athletes must excel

in these 4 dimensions: physiological, technical, cognitive, and emotional.

Through these dimensions it would seem attainment of expertise is broken

down and compartmentalized. It is necessary to note, however, that each of

these dimensions interacts in a complex manner such that deficiency in one

dimension can greatly affect capability in another (Janelle & Hillman, 2003).

Other methods of defining expertise discussed this semester include an

expert as an individual who can earn a living in a specific domain and

differentiation between absolute vs. relative expertise. It is possible that

these differences in defining expertise are never more apparent than during

the Olympic Games, given the multitude of nations and sports represented.

Because a primary goal of the Olympics aims to bring nations together in

competition, they provide an excellent platform for examining discrepancies

in definitions of expertise. These discrepancies are on display in the 2004

Walt Disney Pictures film, “Miracle”, the true story of the 1980 United States

Men’s Olympic Hockey team.

“Miracle”, starring Kurt Russell, depicts the events surrounding what is

often arguably referred to as the greatest sports moment in American


history. The 1980 Men’s U.S. Olympic Hockey team defeated the world-

renowned powerhouse from the Soviet Union in the medal round to advance

to the gold-medal game, a feat that was thought near impossible. One

nation defeating another in a hockey game at an international competition of

course does not seem all too impressive on the surface, but looking into the

contextual factors in terms of definitions of expertise helps explain how the

event has been dubbed “the miracle on ice”. The tremendous emotional

reaction elicited by the United States’ win over the Soviet Union was

unquestionably compounded by tensions brought on by the Cold War, but

these considerations are beyond the scope of this review. The film is filled

with historically accurate facts about the nature of both the U.S. and Soviet

Olympic Hockey teams that lend themselves to determining factors that

define expertise. Determining each individual athlete’s level of expertise in

the 4 dimensions of expertise outlined in our text would warrant extensive

research. In addition, the availability of such information would be difficult to

find given the time of development of the dimensions relative to the 1980

Olympic Games.

For this reason, it is beneficial to examine the teams based on other

definitions of expertise. The most prevalent fact outlined in the film deals

with the amount of time each team had to prepare for the Olympics, an area

not extensively researched in team sports. It is well documented in the film

that the Soviet squad consisted of individuals who had been playing together

for over ten years with access to world-class facilities prior to the Olympics.
Twelve players on the Soviet roster were age 25 or older. The U.S. team was

pieced together by head coach Herb Brooks (Kurt Russell) 7 months prior to

the Olympic Games. Of the twenty-man roster, not one was older than

twenty-five and all held amateur status having only played collegiate hockey.

The Soviet Union dominated their international schedule in the months

leading up to Olympic play, compiling a record of 42-1, including a 6-0 win

over the North American NHL All-stars in October of 1979. Using the

definition of expertise as the ability to earn a living in a given domain, it

would seem that the Soviet Union had a clear advantage.

The fact that no player on the U.S. roster had any NHL experience also

clouds the definition of expertise in terms of absolute and relative expertise.

It would be difficult to argue that any athlete competing in the Olympic

Games is not an expert. It is the goal of all nations to send the best that

their population has to offer in a given sport domain to compete for a medal.

At the time, the rules of the Olympics stated that no team could use

professional players. Of course, becoming “professional” implies some level

of superiority or absolute expertise, defined as the top % of the given sport

domain. It is for this reason that all teams in the Olympic Games likely did

not possess absolute expertise. It is more likely that the players all exhibited

a level of relative expertise which implies expert status in a more specific

domain, in this case relative to available players in a given nation who are

not professionals. However, Russian athletes were prohibited from joining

the NHL in 1980 as a result of the ongoing conflict between the Soviet Union
and the U.S. Therefore, the best Russian players were available for the

Olympic roster. Though no objective measure exists, the Soviet Union’s

relative expertise logically outweighed that of the United States given that

the best American players played in the NHL. It is important to recognize

that a systematic determinant of relative expertise has not been extensively

researched, further complicating the issue of defining expertise.

The question of how a clearly disadvantaged U.S. team was able to

defeat the Soviets in 1980 remains. One possible explanation for this

phenomenon is prevalent in the film “Miracle” and deals with tactics

employed by head coach Herb Brooks. Shortly after establishing a

preliminary roster for the 1980 team, Brooks emphasized a change in style

of play that he insisted would help his team defeat the Soviet Union. He

stated that the NHL refused to alter their style of play, which ultimately led

to defeat at the hands of the Soviets. Brooks insisted on developing a hybrid

style of play, or a cross between Canadians and Russians. This style he

claimed was up-tempo and necessitated flow and creativity. He wanted to

take the Russians style, modify it, and beat them at their own game. In

order to do this, he insisted that his team would be the best conditioned on

the ice, allowing them to “skate with anybody”. This need for extreme

conditioning applies to the physiological dimension of expertise mentioned

earlier. Still, it would be difficult to determine which team’s conditioning was

in fact superior.
Above all, the criterion that was most important for success in Lake

Placid in 1980, according to Brooks, was team chemistry. In the film, this

emphasis on chemistry was apparent when Brooks refused to allow United

States Olympic Committee (USOC) to have a say in the selection of players

during the tryout in June of 1979. His claim was, “I’m not looking for the best

(players), I’m looking for the right ones”. After establishing his roster,

Brooks used unusual team building tactics in the development of chemistry.

By pushing his players to their absolute physical limits with a dictatorial, no

excuse style, he created an atmosphere in which the players began to resent

him. In this way, they became a close-knit, cohesive unit. The short period

of time with which Brooks had relative to the playing experience of the

Soviet Union makes the distinction of level of expertise unclear still. Yet it is

possible that the Soviet Union never reached this level of team unity and

relied more heavily on the individual skills of each player. Extensive

research on team chemistry could be a subject of great inquiry in the future.

The event highlighted in “Miracle” is only one example of how

objectively defining expertise can be very difficult. Even if there were an

agreed upon set of criteria for objectively measuring expertise in a team

sport such as hockey, the 1980 Olympic Game between the United States

and the Soviet Union would have been a profound exception to the rules.

The current Olympics taking place in Vancouver, Canada have revealed

tremendous discrepancies in definitions of expertise in various nations,

perhaps most prevalently in women’s hockey. The United States and


Canada won games by such lopsided scores that it seems athletes from

other nations would have no chance at becoming an “expert” in North

America. It is obvious that despite a solid base of research that has been

established in the area of sport expertise, vast gaps exist and subjects for

future study are abundant.

References

Ciardi, M. & Gray, G. (Producers) & O’Connor, G. (Director). (2004). Miracle

(Motion Picture). United States: Walt Disney Studios.


Janelle, C.M. & Hillman, C.H. (2003). Expert performance in sports:

Advances in research and sport expertise. Starkes, J.L. & Ericsson, K.A.

(Eds.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

You might also like