Fenwick Per Situation Calculator
Calculate fenwick per situation with our free tool. See your stats, compare against averages, and track progress over time.
Reviewed by Sher, Sports Science & Nutrition Specialist
Formula
Fenwick For (FF) = Shots on Goal + Missed Shots | FF% = FF / (FF + FA) x 100
Fenwick counts all unblocked shot attempts (shots on goal plus missed shots, excluding blocked shots). Fenwick percentage measures the share of unblocked shot attempts belonging to a team.
Worked Examples
Example 1: Even Strength Fenwick Analysis
Problem:A team has 32 shots on goal and 14 missed shots for, versus 27 shots on goal and 11 missed shots against at even strength over 5 games.
Solution:Fenwick For (FF) = 32 + 14 = 46\nFenwick Against (FA) = 27 + 11 = 38\nFenwick % = 46 / (46 + 38) = 46 / 84 = 54.76%\nFenwick For per game = 46 / 5 = 9.2\nFenwick Against per game = 38 / 5 = 7.6
Result:FF% = 54.8% (above average, strong possession team)
Example 2: All-Situations Fenwick Breakdown
Problem:At even strength: 30 FF, 25 FA. On power play: 10 FF. On penalty kill: 8 FA.
Solution:Total Fenwick For = 30 (ES) + 10 (PP) = 40\nTotal Fenwick Against = 25 (ES) + 8 (PK) = 33\nTotal FF% = 40 / (40 + 33) = 40 / 73 = 54.79%\nES FF% = 30 / (30 + 25) = 30 / 55 = 54.55%\nFenwick Differential = 40 - 33 = +7
Result:Total FF% = 54.8% | ES FF% = 54.5% | Differential = +7
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Fenwick in hockey and how is it calculated?
Fenwick is an advanced hockey statistic that measures shot attempt differential by counting all unblocked shot attempts, which includes both shots on goal and missed shots but excludes blocked shots. It was named after blogger Matt Fenwick who popularized this metric in hockey analytics circles. The basic formula is Fenwick For (FF) = Shots on Goal + Missed Shots, and Fenwick Against (FA) follows the same logic for the opposing team. Fenwick percentage (FF%) is calculated as FF / (FF + FA) multiplied by 100, where a value above 50% indicates a team is generating more unblocked shot attempts than its opponent.
Why does Fenwick exclude blocked shots from its calculation?
Fenwick excludes blocked shots because blocking is considered a repeatable defensive skill that can distort possession metrics. When a team blocks many shots, it inflates the Corsi against number even though the blocking team may actually be controlling play well. By removing blocked shots from the equation, Fenwick provides a cleaner measure of actual shot generation and territorial dominance. Some analysts believe Fenwick is a better predictor of future goal scoring than Corsi because it strips out the noise introduced by shot blocking tendencies and focuses on genuine offensive pressure.
What is the difference between Fenwick and Corsi?
Corsi counts all shot attempts including shots on goal, missed shots, and blocked shots, while Fenwick only counts shots on goal and missed shots, deliberately excluding blocked shots. Both metrics aim to measure puck possession and territorial control, but they differ in philosophy regarding blocked shots. Corsi treats every shot attempt equally as evidence of offensive zone time, whereas Fenwick argues that blocked shots reflect defensive positioning skill rather than true possession. In practice, the two metrics correlate highly (typically above 0.95), but Fenwick can reveal differences when teams have unusually high or low shot blocking rates.
How do you interpret Fenwick percentage by game situation?
Fenwick percentage varies significantly by game situation, which is why situational analysis matters. At even strength (5-on-5), a Fenwick percentage above 52% is considered strong, indicating the team consistently outgenerates opponents in unblocked shot attempts. On the power play, Fenwick For should be substantially higher since the team has a man advantage and more offensive zone time. On the penalty kill, a lower Fenwick Against is desirable, showing the shorthanded team limits opponent chances. Analysts often focus on even-strength Fenwick because special teams situations are heavily influenced by strategy rather than pure talent.
References
Reviewed by Sher, Sports Science & Nutrition Specialist · Editorial policy