Question: In case of projection functions of ordered pair, how many predicate symbols of arity 2 are enough?

Answer: two

It is also possible to restrict the arities of function symbols and predicate symbols, in sufficiently expressive theories. One can in principle dispense entirely with functions of arity greater than 2 and predicates of arity greater than 1 in theories that include a pairing function. This is a function of arity 2 that takes pairs of elements of the domain and returns an ordered pair containing them. <hl> It is also sufficient to have two predicate symbols of arity 2 that define projection functions from an ordered pair to its components. <hl> In either case it is necessary that the natural axioms for a pairing function and its projections are satisfied.

It is also possible to restrict the arities of function symbols and predicate symbols, in sufficiently expressive theories. One can in principle dispense entirely with functions of arity greater than 2 and predicates of arity greater than 1 in theories that include a pairing function. This is a function of arity 2 that takes pairs of elements of the domain and returns an ordered pair containing them. It is also sufficient to have <hl> two <hl> predicate symbols of arity 2 that define projection functions from an ordered pair to its components. In either case it is necessary that the natural axioms for a pairing function and its projections are satisfied.


Question: What kind of sorted first-order logic would end up as a result of reduction of many-sorted first-order logic in case of finitely many sorts in a theory?

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols

P

1

(
x
)

{\displaystyle P_{1}(x)}

 and

P

2

(
x
)

{\displaystyle P_{2}(x)}

 and the axiom

Answer: many-sorted

<hl> When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. <hl> One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, <hl> many-sorted <hl> first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom


Question: What kind of predicate symbol is evoked into the single-sorted theory in case of the many-sorted theory?

Answer: axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. <hl> One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. <hl> For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an <hl> axiom <hl> saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom


Question: What is added in the case of the many-sorted theory?

Answer: unary predicate symbol

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. <hl> One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. <hl> For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a <hl> unary predicate symbol <hl> for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom


Question: What is said to be divided by the unary predicates?

Answer: domain of discourse

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. <hl> One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse . <hl> For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the <hl> domain of discourse <hl>. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the <hl> domain of discourse <hl> .


Question: What kind of predicates are understood as the divider of the domain of discourse?

Answer: unary predicates

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. <hl> One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these unary predicates partition the domain of discourse. <hl> For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom

When there are only finitely many sorts in a theory, many-sorted first-order logic can be reduced to single-sorted first-order logic. One introduces into the single-sorted theory a unary predicate symbol for each sort in the many-sorted theory, and adds an axiom saying that these <hl> unary predicates <hl> partition the domain of discourse. For example, if there are two sorts, one adds predicate symbols P 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{1}(x)} and P 2 ( x ) {\displaystyle P_{2}(x)} and the axiom


Question: Which order formulas of Bernays-Schonfinkel class are decidable?

There are systems weaker than full first-order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

Answer: first

<hl> There are systems weaker than full first -order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. <hl> These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than full <hl> first <hl>-order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than full <hl> first <hl> -order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable.


Question: Subsets of of which order logic are studied in regards to the framework of description logics?

Answer: first

<hl> There are systems weaker than full first -order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. <hl> These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than full <hl> first <hl>-order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than full <hl> first <hl> -order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable.


Question: Logical consequence relation of systems weaker than which order logic are decidable?

Answer: full first-order

<hl> There are systems weaker than full first-order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. <hl> These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than <hl> full first-order <hl> logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.


Question: Propositional logic is weaker than which order logic?

Answer: full first-order

<hl> There are systems weaker than full first-order logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. <hl> These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.

There are systems weaker than <hl> full first-order <hl> logic for which the logical consequence relation is decidable. These include propositional logic and monadic predicate logic, which is first-order logic restricted to unary predicate symbols and no function symbols. Other logics with no function symbols which are decidable are the guarded fragment of first-order logic, as well as two-variable logic. The Bernays–Schönfinkel class of first-order formulas is also decidable. Decidable subsets of first-order logic are also studied in the framework of description logics.


Question: Lowenheim-Skolem theorem involves which theory of cardinality?

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

Answer: first-order theory of cardinality λ

<hl> The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. <hl> One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a <hl> first-order theory of cardinality λ <hl> has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).


Question: What type of model is discussed in Lowenheim-Skolem theorem?

Answer: infinite model

<hl> The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model , then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. <hl> One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an <hl> infinite model <hl>, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an <hl> infinite model <hl> , then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ.


Question: Lowenheim-Skolem theorem compares infinite cardinality to what?

Answer: models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ

<hl> The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ . <hl> One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has <hl> models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ <hl>. One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has <hl> models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ <hl> .


Question: In model theory, countability or uncountability of what language cannot be characterized?

Answer: first-order

<hl> The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a first-order theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. <hl> One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem shows that if a <hl> first-order <hl> theory of cardinality λ has an infinite model, then it has models of every infinite cardinality greater than or equal to λ. One of the earliest results in model theory, it implies that it is not possible to characterize countability or uncountability in a first-order language. That is, there is no first-order formula φ(x) such that an arbitrary structure M satisfies φ if and only if the domain of discourse of M is countable (or, in the second case, uncountable).


Question: Which theorem postulates about axiomatization of infinite structures?

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.

Answer: Löwenheim–Skolem

<hl> The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. <hl> For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.

The <hl> Löwenheim–Skolem <hl> theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.


Question: Theory satisfied by the real line would also be satisfied by what models?

Answer: nonstandard

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. <hl> Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. <hl> When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some <hl> nonstandard <hl> models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.


Question: First-order theory with infinite model would have cardinality larger than what?

Answer: continuum

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. <hl> For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum . <hl> Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the <hl> continuum <hl>. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox.

For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the <hl> continuum <hl> .


Question: What paradox is involved in the application of Lowenheim-Skolem theorem to first-order set theories?

Answer: Skolem's paradox

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. <hl> When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as Skolem's paradox . <hl>

The Löwenheim–Skolem theorem implies that infinite structures cannot be categorically axiomatized in first-order logic. For example, there is no first-order theory whose only model is the real line: any first-order theory with an infinite model also has a model of cardinality larger than the continuum. Since the real line is infinite, any theory satisfied by the real line is also satisfied by some nonstandard models. When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as <hl> Skolem's paradox <hl>.

When the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem is applied to first-order set theories, the nonintuitive consequences are known as <hl> Skolem's paradox <hl> .


Question: The compactness theorem discusses the presence of model in what order sentences?

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

Answer: first

<hl> The compactness theorem states that a set of first -order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. <hl> This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

The compactness theorem states that a set of <hl> first <hl>-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

The compactness theorem states that a set of <hl> first <hl> -order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model.


Question: What subset of first-order sentences are discussed in the compactness theorem?

Answer: finite

<hl> The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. <hl> This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every <hl> finite <hl> subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.


Question: Who came up with the first theorem regarding the aftermath of the completeness theorem?

Answer: Kurt Gödel

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. <hl> This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. <hl> It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by <hl> Kurt Gödel <hl> as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.


Question: Compactness theorem is a core tool of which theory?

Answer: model theory

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. <hl> It is a central tool in model theory , providing a fundamental method for constructing models. <hl>

The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in <hl> model theory <hl>, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

It is a central tool in <hl> model theory <hl> , providing a fundamental method for constructing models.


Question: What theorem helps with constructing models?

Answer: compactness theorem

<hl> The compactness theorem states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. <hl> This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.

The <hl> compactness theorem <hl> states that a set of first-order sentences has a model if and only if every finite subset of it has a model. This implies that if a formula is a logical consequence of an infinite set of first-order axioms, then it is a logical consequence of some finite number of those axioms. This theorem was proved first by Kurt Gödel as a consequence of the completeness theorem, but many additional proofs have been obtained over time. It is a central tool in model theory, providing a fundamental method for constructing models.


Question: Hockey pucks approach goaltenders at upwards of what speed?

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Answer: 100 mph

Goaltenders use different equipment. <hl> With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. <hl> Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to <hl> 100 mph <hl> they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.


Question: What kind of skates do goaltenders wear?

Answer: specialty goalie skates

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. <hl> Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates , (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. <hl> Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear <hl> specialty goalie skates <hl>, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders wear <hl> specialty goalie skates <hl> , (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey.


Question: Specialty goalie skates are designed for more of what type of movement?

Answer: side to side

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. <hl> Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. <hl> Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement <hl> side to side <hl> rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.


Question: There are size restrictions in certain leagues for what type of goaltender apparel?

Answer: leg pads

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. <hl> Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads , (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. <hl> Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large <hl> leg pads <hl>, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes.

Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large <hl> leg pads <hl> , (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey.


Question: Larger goaltender equipment results in what?

Answer: fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. <hl> Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes . <hl>

Goaltenders use different equipment. With hockey pucks approaching them at speeds of up to 100 mph they must wear equipment with more protection. Goaltenders wear specialty goalie skates, (these skates are built more for movement side to side rather than forwards and backwards) a jock or jill, large leg pads, (there are size restrictions in certain leagues) blocking glove, catching glove, a chest protector, a goalie mask, and a large jersey. Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to <hl> fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes <hl>.

Goaltender's equipment has continually become larger and larger leading to <hl> fewer goals in each game and many official rule changes <hl> .


Question: Ice skates protect the skater's feet from what?

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

Answer: contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. <hl> In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself . <hl> Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from <hl> contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself <hl>. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from <hl> contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself <hl> .


Question: Speed and figure skates differ in what?

Answer: Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width)

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. <hl> Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. <hl> Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. <hl> Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) <hl> are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.


Question: Rigidity in an ice skate protects the skaters feet but also improves what?

Answer: the overall maneuverability of the skate

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. <hl> Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate . <hl> Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves <hl> the overall maneuverability of the skate <hl>. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick.

Rigidity also improves <hl> the overall maneuverability of the skate <hl> .


Question: What is the width of most skate's?

Answer: 1/8 of an inch thick

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. <hl> Most skate's width are about an 1/8 of an inch thick . <hl>

Ice hockey skates are optimized for physical acceleration, speed and maneuverability. This includes rapid starts, stops, turns, and changes in skating direction. In addition, they must be rigid and tough to protect the skater's feet from contact with other skaters, sticks, pucks, the boards, and the ice itself. Rigidity also improves the overall maneuverability of the skate. Blade length, thickness (width), and curvature (rocker/radius (front to back) and radius of hollow (across the blade width) are quite different from speed or figure skates. Hockey players usually adjust these parameters based on their skill level, position, and body type. Most skate's width are about an <hl> 1/8 of an inch thick <hl>.

Most skate's width are about an <hl> 1/8 of an inch thick <hl> .


Question: What component of a hockey stick has a large impact on performance?

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

Answer: The curve

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. <hl> The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. <hl> A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. <hl> The curve <hl> itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.


Question: What does a hockey stick with a shallow curve allow for?

Answer: easier backhand shots

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. <hl> A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots . <hl> The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for <hl> easier backhand shots <hl>. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for <hl> easier backhand shots <hl> .


Question: What does a hockey stick with a deep curve allow for?

Answer: lifting the puck easier

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. <hl> A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. <hl> The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for <hl> lifting the puck easier <hl> while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.


Question: What is attached to an ice hockey stick shaft?

Answer: a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade

<hl> The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade , attached to a shaft. <hl> The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of <hl> a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade <hl>, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of <hl> a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade <hl> , attached to a shaft.


Question: What kind of hockey player is a less flexible hockey stick made for?

Answer: a stronger player

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. <hl> Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for a stronger player since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. <hl> It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.

The ice hockey stick consists of a long, relatively wide, and slightly curved flat blade, attached to a shaft. The curve itself has a big impact on its performance. A deep curve allows for lifting the puck easier while a shallow curve allows for easier backhand shots. The flex of the stick also impacts the performance. Typically, a less flexible stick is meant for <hl> a stronger player <hl> since the player is looking for the right balanced flex that allows the stick to flex easily while still having a strong "whip-back" which sends the puck flying at high speeds. It is quite distinct from sticks in other sports games and most suited to hitting and controlling the flat puck. Its unique shape contributed to the early development of the game.


Question: What is the risk factor of injury when playing ice hockey?

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Answer: high risk

<hl> Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. <hl> Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a <hl> high risk <hl> of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.


Question: What is allowed in men's ice hockey but not allowed in women's ice hockey?

Answer: body check

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. <hl> Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check . <hl> There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to <hl> body check <hl>. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to <hl> body check <hl> .


Question: What is one thing that both men's and women's ice hockey share besides the game of ice hockey itself?

Answer: physical contact

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. <hl> Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. <hl> Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the <hl> physical contact <hl> between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.


Question: What are some injuries that are common in women's ice hockey?

Answer: concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. <hl> Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains . <hl>

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are <hl> concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains <hl>.

Some common injuries are <hl> concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains <hl> .


Question: When playing ice hockey, at what speeds are players moving?

Answer: 20 – 30 mph

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. <hl> Players are moving at speeds around approximately 20 – 30 mph and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. <hl> Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.

Ice hockey is a full contact sport and carries a high risk of injury. Players are moving at speeds around approximately <hl> 20 – 30 mph <hl> and quite a bit of the game revolves around the physical contact between the players. Skate blades, hockey sticks, shoulders, hips, and hockey pucks all contribute. The types of injuries associated with hockey include: lacerations, concussions, contusions, ligament tears, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains. Women's ice hockey players can have contact but are not allowed to body check. There are many injuries in women's ice hockey too. Some common injuries are concussions, broken bones, hyperextensions, and muscle strains.


Question: What is thought to be the most frequent types of injury in hockey?

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

Answer: Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face

<hl> According to the Hughston Health Alert, " Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. <hl> Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade. "[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "<hl> Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face <hl> are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, " <hl> Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face <hl> are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood.


Question: What accounts for an estimated 80% of all hockey injuries?

Answer: direct trauma

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. <hl> Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. <hl> Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade. "[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that <hl> direct trauma <hl> accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.


Question: What is boarding?

Answer: delivering a check from behind

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade. "[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. <hl> Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind , many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). <hl> Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of <hl> delivering a check from behind <hl>, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

Due to the danger of <hl> delivering a check from behind <hl> , many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding").


Question: What is head contact?

Answer: a check to the head

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade. "[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). <hl> Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). <hl> A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussions is <hl> a check to the head <hl> resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.


Question: What is the most dangerous effect of a head injury?

Answer: concussion

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade. "[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). <hl> Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact concussion s is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). <hl> A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

According to the Hughston Health Alert, "Lacerations to the head, scalp, and face are the most frequent types of injury [in hockey]."[citation needed] Even a shallow cut to the head results in a loss of a large amount of blood. Not only are lacerations common, "it is estimated that direct trauma accounts for 80% of all [hockey] injuries. Most of these injuries are caused by player contact, falls and contact with a puck, high stick and occasionally, a skate blade."[citation needed] One of the causes of head injury is checking from behind. Due to the danger of delivering a check from behind, many leagues, including the NHL have made this a major and game misconduct penalty (called "boarding"). Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact <hl> concussion <hl>s is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact"). A check to the head can be defined as delivering a hit while the receiving player's head is down and their waist is bent and the aggressor is targeting the opponent player's head. The most dangerous result of a head injury in hockey can be classified as a concussion. Most concussions occur during player-to-player contact rather than when a player is checked into the boards. Checks to the head have accounted for nearly 50% of concussions that players in the National Hockey League have suffered. Concussions that players suffer may go unreported because there is no obvious physical signs if a player is not knocked unconscious. This can prove to be dangerous if a player decides to return to play without receiving proper medical attention. Studies show that, ice hockey causes 44.3% of all traumatic brain injuries among Canadian children. In severe cases, the traumatic brain injuries are capable of resulting in death. Occurrences of death from these injuries are rare, but occur all too much in a variety of sports.

Another type of check that accounts for many of the player-to-player contact <hl> concussion <hl> s is a check to the head resulting in a misconduct penalty (called "head contact").


Question: What kind of tactic is checking?

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

Answer: defensive

<hl> An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. <hl> Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

An important <hl> defensive <hl> tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.


Question: What is checking?

Answer: attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play

<hl> An important defensive tactic is checking— attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play . <hl> Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

An important defensive tactic is checking—<hl> attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play <hl>. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

An important defensive tactic is checking— <hl> attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play <hl> .


Question: What are the legal methods of using the stick to gain possession of the puck?

Answer: Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. <hl> Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. <hl> The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. <hl> Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking <hl> are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.


Question: What kind of checking makes use of the player's shoulder or hip?

Answer: Body checking

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. <hl> Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). <hl> Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. <hl> Body checking <hl> is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.


Question: Most often what does the term checking refer to?

Answer: body checking

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). <hl> Often the term checking is used to refer to body checking , with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game. <hl>

An important defensive tactic is checking—attempting to take the puck from an opponent or to remove the opponent from play. Stick checking, sweep checking, and poke checking are legal uses of the stick to obtain possession of the puck. The neutral zone trap is designed to isolate the puck carrier in the neutral zone preventing him from entering the offensive zone. Body checking is using one's shoulder or hip to strike an opponent who has the puck or who is the last to have touched it (the last person to have touched the puck is still legally "in possession" of it, although a penalty is generally called if he is checked more than two seconds after his last touch). Often the term checking is used to refer to <hl> body checking <hl>, with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.

Often the term checking is used to refer to <hl> body checking <hl> , with its true definition generally only propagated among fans of the game.


Question: In what year did the NHL make the two-lane pass legal?

Offensive tactics include improving a team's position on the ice by advancing the puck out of one's zone towards the opponent's zone, progressively by gaining lines, first your own blue line, then the red line and finally the opponent's blue line. NHL rules instated for the 2006 season redefined the offside rule to make the two-line pass legal; a player may pass the puck from behind his own blue line, past both that blue line and the centre red line, to a player on the near side of the opponents' blue line. Offensive tactics are designed ultimately to score a goal by taking a shot. When a player purposely directs the puck towards the opponent's goal, he or she is said to "shoot" the puck.

Answer: 2006

Offensive tactics include improving a team's position on the ice by advancing the puck out of one's zone towards the opponent's zone, progressively by gaining lines, first your own blue line, then the red line and finally the opponent's blue line. <hl> NHL rules instated for the 2006 season redefined the offside rule to make the two-line pass legal; a player may pass the puck from behind his own blue line, past both that blue line and the centre red line, to a player on the near side of the opponents' blue line. <hl> Offensive tactics are designed ultimately to score a goal by taking a shot. When a player purposely directs the puck towards the opponent's goal, he or she is said to "shoot" the puck.

Offensive tactics include improving a team's position on the ice by advancing the puck out of one's zone towards the opponent's zone, progressively by gaining lines, first your own blue line, then the red line and finally the opponent's blue line. NHL rules instated for the <hl> 2006 <hl> season redefined the offside rule to make the two-line pass legal; a player may pass the puck from behind his own blue line, past both that blue line and the centre red line, to a player on the near side of the opponents' blue line. Offensive tactics are designed ultimately to score a goal by taking a shot. When a player purposely directs the puck towards the opponent's goal, he or she is said to "shoot" the puck.


Question: What are offensive tactics designed for?

Answer: to score a goal by taking a shot.

Offensive tactics include improving a team's position on the ice by advancing the puck out of one's zone towards the opponent's zone, progressively by gaining lines, first your own blue line, then the red line and finally the opponent's blue line. NHL rules instated for the 2006 season redefined the offside rule to make the two-line pass legal; a player may pass the puck from behind his own blue line, past both that blue line and the centre red line, to a player on the near side of the opponents' blue line. <hl> Offensive tactics are designed ultimately to score a goal by taking a shot. When a player purposely directs the puck towards the opponent's goal, he or she is said to "shoot" the puck. <hl>

Offensive tactics include improving a team's position on the ice by advancing the puck out of one's zone towards the opponent's zone, progressively by gaining lines, first your own blue line, then the red line and finally the opponent's blue line. NHL rules instated for the 2006 season redefined the offside rule to make the two-line pass legal; a player may pass the puck from behind his own blue line, past both that blue line and the centre red line, to a player on the near side of the opponents' blue line. Offensive tactics are designed ultimately <hl> to score a goal by taking a shot. <hl> When a player purposely directs the puck towards the opponent's goal, he or she is said to "shoot" the puck.