Was NHL Ever Best of 5? Unraveling the Past of NHL Playoff Series

The NHL Playoffs Format: A Quick Overview

Well, if you’re a hockey fan, you know that the NHL playoffs have evolved quite a bit over the years. Most of us are used to the current best-of-seven format, but there was a time when things were quite different. The NHL has experimented with playoff series formats, and one of the most intriguing questions I’ve seen floating around is: Was the NHL ever a best-of-5 series?

Honestly, I had the same question after a conversation with a buddy who’s a huge hockey fan (he’s practically encyclopedic when it comes to NHL trivia). He mentioned how there used to be a time when some playoff series were shorter than the current best-of-seven. I was curious, so I dug a little deeper to find out more about it. And you know what? It turns out, the NHL did indeed have best-of-5 series, but not in the way you might think.

The Early Years: Shorter Series for the NHL Playoffs

A Time of Transition: 1919-1967

Alright, let’s rewind the clock a bit. Back in the early days of the NHL, the format for the playoffs wasn’t always consistent. In fact, it was in the early-to-mid 20th century that the NHL tried a best-of-5 format in various playoff rounds. This was particularly true before the NHL expanded and before the regular season grew to its current 82-game schedule.

The first big shift came after the 1919 season, where the NHL had a bit of a makeshift playoff structure. The Stanley Cup Finals in those early days often consisted of a best-of-five series, as the league was still figuring out how to balance its regular season and the playoffs. The Cup Finals were even contested over a best-of-three in some years. Yeah, can you believe that?

The Shift to Best-of-Seven

Honestly, it wasn’t until the late 1960s that the NHL fully embraced the best-of-seven format that we know today. The change was part of an overall shift in how sports leagues viewed the importance of longer series to create more excitement for fans. It wasn’t just hockey — other sports like basketball were making similar changes around that time.

But back in the 50s and 60s, the playoff system often had best-of-5 series for the first two rounds, before the Stanley Cup Finals. The second round of the playoffs, for instance, sometimes consisted of best-of-five matchups. While the format has largely been standardized now, these shorter series added a different dynamic to the playoff atmosphere.

The Era of the Best-of-Five Series in the NHL

How the Best-of-Five Format Played Out in the NHL

Okay, so how exactly did the best-of-five format play out in those earlier days? Well, it wasn’t just used for the Stanley Cup Finals. Some seasons had best-of-five for multiple rounds. In the 1950s and 1960s, the opening rounds of the playoffs (before the Stanley Cup Final) were actually best-of-five series. Think about it: that kind of series format could have dramatic consequences, especially in the earlier rounds when teams were playing with such tight margins.

What made these early formats interesting was how teams would have to approach each game. With only five games to work with, a single loss could feel like a death sentence. One bad game could send you packing. It made for intense, high-stakes hockey, where the smallest mistake could turn into a major issue.

The Last Best-of-Five NHL Playoffs

It’s interesting to note that the best-of-5 format officially became a thing of the past after the 1986 NHL playoffs. From there on out, the league decided to switch entirely to best-of-seven series for the entire playoff bracket. That included the first round, the second round, the Conference Finals, and of course, the Stanley Cup Finals.

I’ve always thought it was a bit of a bold move to switch to a best-of-seven format across all rounds. But honestly, I can see the reasoning. With a best-of-five, there was just less room for a team to really prove itself. With a best-of-seven, you get more chances to show that you’re the better team over time. And let’s face it, hockey can get pretty unpredictable in the heat of the moment!

Why Did the NHL Move Away from Best-of-Five?

More Time for Drama and Better TV Ratings

Honestly, there’s always a business side to these decisions, right? The switch to best-of-seven for all rounds was, in part, about creating more drama for fans and TV networks. More games meant more chances for upsets, more memorable moments, and of course, more advertising dollars for the NHL. The longer the series, the more hype could be built up.

In fact, I remember reading about the impact of the longer series when the 1994 Stanley Cup Finals were one of the most exciting and tightly contested series in NHL history. If those teams were playing best-of-five, would they have had enough time to truly showcase their talents? Maybe, but I doubt it.

The Shift in Competitive Balance

Another reason for the change was that the longer series gave a better representation of each team’s overall strength. Shorter series, while thrilling, could sometimes create unfair outcomes. A hot goalie or a lucky bounce could win a series in a best-of-five, and that wasn’t always the best way to crown a champion. With best-of-seven, you’re more likely to see the team that’s truly the best over the course of a series.

Conclusion: NHL Playoffs Evolving Over Time

To wrap it up, yes, the NHL did have best-of-5 series, especially in the early days of the playoffs. But over time, as the league expanded and the demand for more dramatic playoff series grew, the NHL switched to the best-of-seven format we know today. Whether or not it was the right move for the sport, I guess that’s up to each of us to decide. But, if you ask me, the best-of-seven format has definitely given us some of the most iconic moments in hockey history.

I don’t know about you, but I’ll always be curious about what might have happened if we kept those shorter series — they certainly added a different kind of pressure and intensity. But hey, that’s sports for you, always changing, always evolving.

Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old?

The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too. It's a very normal height for a girl.

Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old?

How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 137 cm to 162 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/3 feet). A 12 year old boy should be between 137 cm to 160 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/4 feet).

How tall is a average 15 year old?

Average Height to Weight for Teenage Boys - 13 to 20 Years

How to get taller at 18?

Staying physically active is even more essential from childhood to grow and improve overall health. But taking it up even in adulthood can help you add a few inches to your height. Strength-building exercises, yoga, jumping rope, and biking all can help to increase your flexibility and grow a few inches taller.

Is 5.7 a good height for a 15 year old boy?

Generally speaking, the average height for 15 year olds girls is 62.9 inches (or 159.7 cm). On the other hand, teen boys at the age of 15 have a much higher average height, which is 67.0 inches (or 170.1 cm).

Can you grow between 16 and 18?

Most girls stop growing taller by age 14 or 15. However, after their early teenage growth spurt, boys continue gaining height at a gradual pace until around 18. Note that some kids will stop growing earlier and others may keep growing a year or two more.

Can you grow 1 cm after 17?

Even with a healthy diet, most people's height won't increase after age 18 to 20. The graph below shows the rate of growth from birth to age 20. As you can see, the growth lines fall to zero between ages 18 and 20 ( 7 , 8 ). The reason why your height stops increasing is your bones, specifically your growth plates.