Game Structure

Hockey Standings Explained

March 29, 2026
Hockey Standings Explained
Home » Hockey Basics & Rules » Game Structure » Hockey Standings Explained

The entertainment value of hockey often comes down to one question: who’s higher in the standings, and why. The standings aren’t just a list of teams by points. They reflect how a league values different types of wins, how it resolves ties in results, and how a regular season turns into a playoff bracket. The NHL has a quirk that keeps the standings a constant source of debate: games that go beyond regulation distribute more total standings points than games decided in 60 minutes.

Table of Contents

Why hockey standings matter and what they determine

Why hockey standings matter and what they determine

The standings rank teams over the regular season and set the rules for getting into the playoffs—who qualifies, who gets a higher seed, and when home-ice advantage comes into play.

In the NHL, the standings sit inside a conference-and-division structure, so a team’s position depends not only on how much it wins, but also on how those points were collected. In IIHF competitions the logic is similar, but regulation wins and outcomes after 60 minutes are more often separated more strictly; the exact details depend on the tournament rules and the season.

How to read NHL standings: GP, W, L, OT/OTL, PTS, P%

In hockey stats, the word points is used in two meanings: team points in the standings (standings points) and a player’s points (goals + assists). In NHL standings, it’s specifically about team points.

GP (Games Played) — games played.  

W (Wins) — wins by any method: in regulation, overtime, or a shootout.  

L (Losses) — regulation losses.  

OT / OTL — overtime or shootout losses (in NHL tables this is usually a single column).  

PTS (Points) — standings points. In the NHL they’re calculated as: PTS = 2×W + 1×OTL.  

P% (Points Percentage) — the share of points earned out of the maximum possible: P% = PTS / (2×GP). This is a convenient way to compare teams during the season when they’ve played different numbers of games. In the final table after 82 games, points and tie-breakers decide things, not P%.

Standings tables on sites often add a few more columns—for example, home/away splits, record in the last 10 games, and the current streak. They don’t affect point totals, but they add quick context: whether a team is collecting points through consistency or through a surge over a specific stretch.

RW and ROW in NHL standings: why regulation and overtime wins matter

In NHL standings you’ll often see RW and ROW. These metrics are useful not only for reading a season, but also for tie-breakers.

RW (Regulation Wins) — wins in regulation.  

ROW (Regulation + Overtime Wins) — wins in regulation and overtime, excluding shootout wins.

The league separates results achieved before the shootout from results earned in the shootout format, which is structurally different from standard hockey. That’s why, when points are tied, “wins without shootouts” are checked first.

GF, GA, and goal differential: how goals help explain the standings

GF (Goals For) — goals scored, GA (Goals Against) — goals allowed, DIFF — goal differential (GF–GA).

In the NHL, goal differential and goals scored are not near the top of the tie-breaker order, but they’re strong reference points when people read a season. They show whether a team is consistently outscoring opponents over time, or whether it more often plays games decided by one moment and one goal.

In IIHF tournaments and in some national leagues, the tie-breaker order can differ, so the role of goal differential can sometimes feel more significant than it does in the NHL.

The NHL points system (2–1–0) and the “loser point” debate

The NHL uses a two-point model: 2 points for a win (including overtime and shootouts), 1 point for an overtime or shootout loss, 0 points for a regulation loss. Historically, the “point for losing after 60 minutes” is tied to how the league developed overtime formats and moved away from ties while still keeping the incentive to play for a win late in games.

The controversial effect is mathematical. A game decided in regulation distributes 2 points (2–0). A game that goes to overtime or a shootout distributes 3 points (2–1). So part of the schedule generates more total standings points than the rest. That imbalance is the main reason the idea of switching to a “flat” model—where every game distributes the same number of points—keeps resurfacing.

NHL overtime and shootouts: how regulation vs OT wins affect the standings

In the NHL regular season, if the game is tied after regulation, it goes to a short 3-on-3 overtime, then—if necessary—a shootout. The 3-on-3 format is almost never seen during regulation time, so strategically it differs noticeably from standard hockey: possession is valued more, line changes often happen on the move, and mistakes can quickly turn into odd-man rushes.

In the NHL playoffs, there are no shootouts, and overtimes are played 5-on-5 until a goal (in 20-minute periods, as many as needed). As a result, the regular season uses accelerated formats to produce a winner, while the playoffs keep the familiar structure of the game. That contrast is where the question comes from: how equal are different types of wins if the standings reduce them all to the same two points.

In IIHF competitions, overtime and shootout formats depend on the stage and the specific rulebook: the group stage and playoffs are often set up differently, so it’s more accurate to compare by the points-awarding principle than by minutes or number of skaters.

NHL divisions, conferences, and wild cards: how teams make the playoffs

The NHL is split into two conferences, each made up of two divisions. Eight teams from each conference make the playoffs.

The top three teams in each division qualify automatically, and two more get in via wild cards—the best teams by points among the remaining teams in the conference. Then the bracket is formed: division winners play the wild-card teams, and the second- and third-place teams in each division meet in the first round.

Because of that, the standings don’t turn into the playoffs in a straight line. A team with a strong overall season can draw a tough first-round opponent simply because the divisional model works that way—this isn’t a standings “mistake,” it’s a feature of the seeding system.

NHL tie-breakers: the order of criteria and why RW/ROW matter

Ties on PTS happen constantly, so tie-breakers aren’t a formality. In the NHL’s logic, priority goes to wins earned without shootouts, and only after that do head-to-head results and goal-based metrics come in.

The order of criteria is formally defined in the season rulebook and can be refined over time, so it’s safer to think in terms of the logic: with equal points, the first comparison is what happened within standard play before the shootout (wins in regulation and overtime), then the overall volume of wins, then head-to-head results (with caveats for uneven numbers of games and home-ice distribution), and only then goal differential and goals scored.

During the season, media and analysis often use P% as a fair way to compare teams with different numbers of games played. It’s useful for reading the standings in the moment, but it doesn’t replace the official tie-breakers applied once teams have played an equal number of games.

The 3–2–1–0 points system in IIHF tournaments and the PWHL

In international hockey under the IIHF and in the PWHL, a model is common where every game distributes the same total number of points: 3 for a regulation win, 2 for a win after 60 minutes, 1 for a loss after 60 minutes, 0 for a regulation loss. For the IIHF, it’s more accurate to view this as a typical approach across many modern tournaments, because the details depend on the specific competition and the edition of the rulebook.

This model makes a regulation win more valuable and removes the “extra point” effect that exists in the NHL. More granular schemes are sometimes discussed too—for example, valuing overtime wins and shootout wins separately. They make the standings more sensitive to the type of result, but they make the system harder to read and seasons harder to compare, so most debates still revolve around 3–2–1–0.

NHL points calculation example: what 32–17–8 means and how P% works

A 32–17–8 record in the NHL means 32 wins, 17 regulation losses, and 8 overtime/shootout losses. Points are calculated as: 32×2 + 8×1 = 72. Over 57 games the maximum is 57×2 = 114, so P% = 72/114 ≈ 0.632.

If two teams have the same PTS, the higher team will be the one with better non-shootout win metrics (first of all RW/ROW), and then the other criteria apply, including head-to-head results and goal-based metrics, in the order set by the season rulebook.

Why a team can have more wins but fewer points in the standings

In the NHL, a win is almost always worth the same amount—2 points—but losses come in “zero-point” and “one-point” versions depending on whether the game reached overtime/shootouts. So a team with fewer wins can be ahead of an opponent thanks to a large number of OTL games—matches where it pushed the game to extra time and took the single point. Over a long season this noticeably changes how tight the standings are: the race for spots stays open longer, and the gap between teams often looks smaller than it would if you only counted wins.

Choosing a points system and tie-breakers in hockey leagues

If a league wants regulation wins to be clearly more valuable and wants every game to add the same number of points to the standings, it usually chooses 3–2–1–0 in the international style. If audience familiarity, simple arithmetic, and compatibility with North American tradition matter more, leagues more often stick with 2–1–0.

For tie-breakers, it’s practical to prioritize criteria that depend less on shootouts: that’s why RW and ROW work as stable early filters, and it makes sense to leave goal differential and goals scored for later spots. Head-to-head results should be written especially carefully: different leagues define them differently, and in the NHL there are rulebook caveats for cases where two teams don’t have an equal distribution of home games against each other.