Frequently Asked Questions

A. No. There are currently four ways to tag events for a hockey game:

1)  Manually during the game by a person (or team of people) using pen and paper or technology to improve efficiency,

2)  Manually after the game by team staff or an outsourced third party using video and technology,

3)  Automatically after the game using video and technology such as artificial intelligence to identify events based on predetermined rules (this methodology can be supplemented by manual tagging), or

4)  Automatically during the game through a nearly continuous flow of data captured using an array of cameras and GPS chip tracking (not a realistic option outside of the NHL and a few other professional leagues).

While each methodology has advantages and disadvantages, the API system has been designed for a person (or people) to manually tag events during the game using our efficient tablet-based app (methodology 1).  Events can always be edited, enhanced or added after the game to help address any concern over the speed of hockey leading to inaccurate data.

Additionally, which API's technology was designed to be used live during a game, that same technology can also be adapted to tag a completed game off video.

A. That depends on the number of events and level of detail that a team would like to tag.  With a little practice one person should be able to tag a variety of standard events (faceoffs, goals and shot attempts, etc.) while more experienced users can typically track most available events.  We recommend dividing the events being tagged between two people if a team would like to tag a wide variety of events or fewer event types but with greater detail.

A. Once the video(s) have been uploaded to YouTube and the link(s) pasted into the Game Details page the video and filters are ready to be used.  If videos have varying amounts of time between the start and the opening faceoff an offset should be entered to standardize the video start time and improve the sync.

A. When first building the system and considering the alternatives for video storage and retrieval, we found YouTube to be a cost effective, technologically efficient solution. We are always evaluating other video sources and hope to expand the alternatives as our user base grows.