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.