Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Thanks yet again, Gerry for more info. From those three Arnold blog entries some thoughts-

The "Top Secret Own the Podium" progran was still going on it seems for Sochi 2014 according to one of those entries. That would explain why UWO lead researcher Jenkyn has never, it seems, published his data anywhere. Is the Top Secret program still going on for PyeongChang 2018? Is Jenkyn still leading it?

I don't begrudge Canada for having curling secrets, I just question the ethics of CCA and WCF making broom and sweeping technique rule changes while privy to any unpublished remaining or new secrets. As I wrote earlier, if I were Canadian and had to compete against Team Canada players privy to such secrets while I was not I'd not be a happy camper and screaming pithy sentences from the "Spirit of Curling" rule atop all other curling rules. And, if I were playing at worlds I'd be wondering who has "top secret" equipment or techniques and who does not.

Loved the line in Arnold's 11/2010 entries about the Top Secret research showing some fabric brooms damage the ice. Jenkyn and team: please publish whi h fabrics and what methodology you used to determine "damage" to ice. And was any of that "preliminary" research or later research shared with WCF during the current broom rule kerfluffle? If so, why is the data still top secret even if used by WCF months ago?

FWIW, I believe more in blind-leading-the-blind or we-need-more-time-for-definitive-research excuses than any clever conspiracy theories to explain this broom fiasco. It's the abrasive fabric! No, the inserts! No, the waterproofing! No, it's all snowplowing!!! Hair is Ok! No, it's NOT! What a mess. Hence the need for published scientific data, not just incomplete conclusions like those Arnold blog entries.

Last edited by Alice on 02-24-16 at 03:35AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2015
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 50

I don't really think how the players handled this situation is so awful. There is a lot at stake for these teams, no different than any other professional athlete. I don't like some of what went on but any reduction in the integrity of the game is a result of the lack of direction and regulation from the governing bodies. I don't think there are two many people at home going "man those curlers used to be so cool but ever since they started arguing about brooms it's just become like steroids in baseball".

That Gushue video absolutely shows proper sweeping technique, under the "old rules" there is no way that would have been illegal. You can especially see in the brushing against the curl that the brush head is traversing the running path of the rock. Correct me if I'm wrong please but I don't believe there was ever any rule in place governing the angle of the sweeping, just that it had to be across the face of the rock.

This post:
http://www.curlingzone.com/showthre...5522#post155522

Will lead you to this video helpfully provided by RandyPark:
http://www.lightguidesystems.com/in...gy/sweeptracker

The guy in this video is using a "normal" synthetic pad. Using the technique that should cause more curl. It does exactly what we expect sweeping to do, the rock stays straighter and goes farther. So to me that says that equipment is playing a role in the directional sweeping controversy. That being said I don't think that equipment is the only component to directional sweeping. I would also bet that with testing and regulation of the equipment both the Hardline pad (without the insert) and good old hair could be brought within acceptable tolerances. I bet a hair broom that has been used for a few games isn't nearly as effective as a brand new one, so that could be addressed in regulation which could then be passed on to manufacturers.

The video I posted in my last post that shows the scratches in the ice is granted an extreme example but the scratches are across the entire running surface of the rock, not just in one corner and the rock still curls in the direction of the scratches. If you make these scratches perpendicular to the rock does the rock then not curl more? Maybe. Does it slow it down more? Maybe. Does corner sweeping make directional sweeping more effective? Probably. Does sweeping from behind the rock like Brett Laing make it more effective? I'm not sure but I kind of doubt it. To me it doesn't look to me like he is moving the broom in the direction of the curl or against it enough to even make a difference. What I'm trying to get at here is that I don't think regulating the way we sweep is going to eliminate or make directional sweeping entirely ineffective. However I have no problem with bringing back the sweeping across the face rule. But there will never be a rule about angle or 2 sweepers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2014
Location:
Posts: 88

Hair today, gone tomorrow. WCF rules it out.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by draway8
Hair today, gone tomorrow. WCF rules it out.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2002
Location:
Posts: 222

Will the Canadian teams, who win the Scotties and Brier, be faced with a different sweeping rule in the Worlds, and if so will it have an affect on directional sweeping ?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by Netz
Will the Canadian teams, who win the Scotties and Brier, be faced with a different sweeping rule in the Worlds, and if so will it have an affect on directional sweeping ?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002

quote:

---

Originally posted by Netz
Will the Canadian teams, who win the Scotties and Brier, be faced with a different sweeping rule in the Worlds, and if so will it have an affect on directional sweeping ?

---

quote:

---

WORLD CURLING FEDERATIONS RULES

R7. SWEEPING
(a) The sweeping motion is in a side-to-side direction (it need not cover the entire width of the stone), deposits no debris in front of a moving stone, and finishes to either side of the stone.

---

__________________
CurlingZone
Everything...Curling!

Please click on our sponsors' banners periodically, as visiting their sites helps keep CurlingZone.com Free!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Anyone have a link to the "independent academic institution" studies WCF cites for the new no-hair rule in USCA's latest email blast to members this morning? Or, if no link is available, would someone please leak what institution did the testing?

For those who didn't get the email blast it was fun to read the list of approved broom manufacturers and compare with the logos of USCA supporters on that email.

Last edited by Alice on 03-01-16 at 11:26PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2002
Location:
Posts: 222

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gerry
The only thing the rule seems to push-back against is the obvious north-south snowploughing, which is easy enough to avoid doing. While the WCF is saying they're going to enforce their rules, not sure how they can make any real changes otherwise.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002

quote:

---

Originally posted by Netz


Gerry, what I object to is the 'steering' of the rocks, what I do not understand is how this done, I thought it was by directional sweeping.

Again I thought directional sweeping was done by not sweeping across the face of the rock, but by sweeping from behind and sideways, which I understand is going to be banned at the worlds.

Is this correct ?

---

__________________
CurlingZone
Everything...Curling!

Please click on our sponsors' banners periodically, as visiting their sites helps keep CurlingZone.com Free!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gerry


I posted the rule above and I don't think there's anything in it that will stop directional sweeping as long as it has some side-to-side motion.

The whole thing about not sweeping across the face of the rock is also allowed under WCF rules as well.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by RockDoc


The way the rule is written, the angle of sweeping is not specified, and "side to side" is not well-defined, leaving this rule open to interpretation.

In practice, it will be challenging (not to mention intrusive) to enforce a rule that specifies some particular maximum allowed angle of sweeping: Was that rock swept at 60 degrees? 61 degrees? (Get out your protractors.) I would think that sweeping at a 45 degree angle, which is how most players are taught anyway, is going to be acceptable. This sweeping angle is sufficient to provide significant steering action, and you can do it at the club level on club ice. Does sweeping at a steeper angle (60-80 degrees) steer more efficiently? Maybe. I'd like to see some empirical evidence, which would be easy enough to collect and document. If the angle doesn't have a significant impact on steering ability, then rules modifications will not be so urgently necessary. If steeper angles change steering ability by, say 50%, compared to a 45 degree angle, then some thinking will be required about how to deal with it. Limiting the effectiveness of equipment (which is where we are currently headed) may yet be the simplest and least obtrusive to the game.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

the easiest way to police it is as I've said before, the players broom can not enter a cylindrical space above the rock and the players feet can not touch the path of the rock including the path extended behind the rock ( similar to the rules for putting in golf). Easy to enforce and you warn players at the start of competition that this will be enforced, pull the first few rocks where the offense occurs and the players will fall in line very quickly.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2015
Location:
Posts: 17

When will three-player teams begin to show up?

CCA rules only state that a team has to have at least three members.

Since most teams are moving to one sweeper, it makes sense that they would soon move to just three shooters.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2002
Location:
Posts: 222

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ
When will three-player teams begin to show up?

CCA rules only state that a team has to have at least three members.

Since most teams are moving to one sweeper, it makes sense that they would soon move to just three shooters.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2015
Location:
Posts: 15

RockDoc,

At the Truro Slam, Gerry Geurtz attended testing between Hardline and non-Hardline players and results were that testing with IcePad and insert were similar to all the other pads on the market. So much so, that a non-Hardline player said “okay, I’ll shut up now”. Here’s the link to remind everybody http://www.curlingzone.com/talk/?p=217

Another secret testing took place at the Oshawa Slam back in November with players (non-Hardline and Hardline players) and Curling Canada. Results were that icePad with insert did not make rocks back up. In fact, results were similar to a Norway pad. Also, no evidence was seen affecting the path of the next rock thrown after the previous shot was swept with the icePad.

However, World Curling has confirmed to us that those test results were used to take the insert out of play. According to the WCF, those tests revealed that the icePad with insert made the rocks back up. At the time, we had no proof of test results. Once we got our hands on the confidential report of the results of the testing, we informed WCF and Curling Canada that the test results were completely contradicting what we are being told by the governing bodies. Both WCF and Curling Canada have refused to answer us on this matter.

It has been over 3 months now, and we still have not seen one shred of evidence of the icePad with insert making these magical shots that everybody is talking about. We asked for video evidence from any game that was played that showed this. Denied. We have been told they will send us evidence of the WCF testing results. We are still waiting. We asked to speak to the University who did the testing so we can ask them how the testing was conducted. Denied. We asked to see what other evidence they had to base their decision of taking out the insert. Denied again.

And JB42, you listed several examples that convinced you that the governing bodies did the right decision. We read these examples attentively. One thing we noticed was that not one of your examples ever mentioned the IcePad. In fact, the only evidence you have is that the players all agreed, however all the player testing that we know of to date shows very minimal differences between the icePad with insert and other pads.

And as it pertains to your own club deciding to use the rules for the “spirit of the game”, all we can say is that your club actually went against the rules because the moratorium clearly says this is for Elite play only and only good for events that leads to World events. You should also read Nolan Thiessen’s blog that reiterates that this should not be imposed at club play. If you have any player in your club that can back up a rock, please post a video. And since your club is so in favour of the “spirit of the game”, why not be a guinea pig for everybody and instead of imposing the moratorium, impose new sweeping rules and see if you notice any funny shots. You might actually save some members a lot of money on replacement pads. What we really want to see is the icePad with insert against all other brushheads. It has been 4 months and no one has ever posted a video of the icePad doing anything different than any other pad on the market. And God knows, people have tried. Gerry Geurtz tried it himself. Still waiting for that footage from October. We would really like to see it. And if you are asking then why did the TCA impose the moratorium, you really do not have to go very far than to see who the TCA President is.

We built a great product. It is light, efficient, you exert less energy, get less tired and have a cover that lasts for 150+ games to save you money. All your club is doing is making Hardline clients spend more money on replacements.

Everything said, Curling Canada icemakers who run the pro-shops in their local clubs, believe this is complete nonsense. They claim the icePad does not break down the pebble anywhere near like other pads do, including at major events.

What really bothers us though, is the fact that it is a lose-lose for Hardline and our players. If a Hardline team wins, others will claim that the icePad still provides an unfair advantage, and still needs to be modified. If they lose, they will say these players simply can not win without the icePad. The talents of Hardline athletes will never be given the credit they deserve. And this is so unfortunate.

Sadly, the governing bodies continue to govern under a blanket of secrecy. They continue to deny everyone test results on why these rules were implemented. We just do not think this is right. Curling deserves better.

Throughout all of this, Hardline athletes, have exhibited class, sportsmanship and professionalism. We are very proud to have them represent Hardline.

Good curling to all at the Brier.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 621

I have never made any claims of evidence about the HL brooms for the simple reason that I have never played with an HL broom either pre or post insert. I do however have an opinion about hair brooms as I purchased one to do directional brushing with my team.

We have not taken any videos sorry to say. And the reason that I am sorry is that the first game that we used a hair broom with directional brushing we curled 90% as a team. And I'd love to have that on video because to say that this is rare for us is like saying it's rare for me to shoot under par. I.e. It happens but it doesn't happen every year, and as I get older the years in between lengthen.

For sure part of the reason we shot so well is that we had just had ice maintenance and the ice was perfect. However we have ice maintenance regularly and still don't shoot 90%. You can either take my word for it or not that I could see that we were both making the rock back up as well as making the rock curl and thereby increasing our margin for error. The latter - making the rock curl with sweeping - being the one I find more contentious.

As to our club and what our members choose to do. The men's committee has stayed entirely out of the issue. There has been no public statement of any kind at any level directing our members behaviour with this issue. The members have individually decided their response. My team abandoned the hair brush the same day as the CCA moratorium. I also know of club members that have followed the CCA's rule vis-vis the icepad. I have done zero investigation of what the whole of the membership has done. I do know that there is no team in A or B of Thursday Night Men's Competitive that has not moved to the CCA rules. ( I don't know what Monday players have done)

As to whether or not the evidence supports the decision of the CCA in relation to the icepad I have no knowledge one way or another. As to whether the icepad with insert does more than the other brooms that are legal I again cannot say anything definitively.

What I can say is that Rockdoc's explanation of the physics of a 'pressure plate' I find convincing.

What I also believe is that the elite players of this game are credible and honourable. What I do not believe is that they would cheapen their integrity for the sake of the bottom line of a broom manufacturer. To me such an assertion is so unlikely as to be worthy of being called silly at best and malign at worst.

Finally. Your desire to see the results of any tests are perfectly understandable and should be honoured. I can only hope that this off-season will see further testing done, and that it will be done in an open and transparent manner. I say I can only hope because my influence over any and all aspects of this are precisely zero.

I also agree that how this issue was handled has created rancour, accusations, counter-accusations and a great many insinuations. For me at least this all traces back to the CCA's ignoring of the request by some of the players for testing to be done last off-season.

I wish Hard Line nothing but the best. I have no dog in this hunt as the saying goes. That I like curling a lot is the entirety of my 'stake' in this ongoing saga.

Last edited by JB42 on 03-02-16 at 11:37PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

I purchased a Hardline broom this year to support them after all this B.S. Started. Have seen no evidence of an unfair advantage. Curling Canada and WCF continue to skirt the real problem which is the sweeping techniques being used but it will be interesting to see what happens when teams go to the world and have to abide by stricter sweeping rules.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2015
Location:
Posts: 38

quote:

---

Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
I purchased a Hardline broom this year to support them after all this B.S

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:

---

Originally posted by Miz5508


I typed a novel here but decided to boil it down to this.

Have hardline broom (like it)
Compete in usca tournaments (need fabric compliance)

12 pack of tour elite heads (HL's legal head) $170 usd ($14 per) <- GOOD
12 eq heads $360 usd ($29.99 per) <- BAAAAD (doesn't leave beer moneys)

But wait, there's more!!!
$14 tour elite is invertable! Which makes it new, twice!!
- makes the valuation of one new tour elite surface $7 <- very GOOOOD
-$7 vs $29.99???? Really?!?

Seriously, these brooms will pay for themselves in under 2 years (depending on how often you use a fresh head, I like fresh heads)

Furthermore, the tour elite fabric (for those who might wonder) feels very similar to the goldine Norway material. (Before HL I preferred Norway heads)

Conclusion: Archie, when will you start making shoes??

---

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hardline


It has been over 3 months now, and we still have not seen one shred of evidence of the icePad with insert making these magical shots that everybody is talking about. We asked for video evidence from any game that was played that showed this. Denied. We have been told they will send us evidence of the WCF testing results. We are still waiting. We asked to speak to the University who did the testing so we can ask them how the testing was conducted. Denied. We asked to see what other evidence they had...

...What really bothers us though, is the fact that it is a lose-lose for Hardline and our players. If a Hardline team wins, others will claim that the icePad still provides an unfair advantage, and still needs to be modified. If they lose, they will say these players simply can not win without the icePad. The talents of Hardline athletes will never be given the credit they deserve. And this is so unfortunate.

Sadly, the governing bodies continue to govern under a blanket of secrecy. They continue to deny everyone test results on why these rules were implemented. We just do not think this is right. Curling deserves better....

---

Last edited by Alice on 03-04-16 at 10:08PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2015
Location:
Posts: 18

quote:

---

Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
I purchased a Hardline broom this year to support them after all this B.S. Started. Have seen no evidence of an unfair advantage. Curling Canada and WCF continue to skirt the real problem which is the sweeping techniques being used but it will be interesting to see what happens when teams go to the world and have to abide by stricter sweeping rules.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2014
Location: Peg
Posts: 8

Surprised to see some Brier BP teams with HL Icepads on their BP Litespeeds. Are these teams really saying the Icepads with Tour Elite covers are better than the Litespeed with the BP EQ? Or... is this a fresh attack on the Icepad, drawing attention that it is the most effective or TOO EFFECTIVE! Here we go again, round 2?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2015
Location:
Posts: 38

While I do think hardline is the best broom on the market (see previous post), I believe that the problem stems from the marketing genius that they acquired through dragons den. As with all sports equipment marketing ploys, you want the best athletes to be representing your brand. So the question I ask you is; are the best teams hardline teams or are hardline teams the best teams? I think I know what Balance Evil wants us to think.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2015
Location:
Posts: 11

Hard to believe Team Howard would use a Hardline, thought I was seeing things with the rounded head on their brooms.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged