Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W5 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00am CT
Giroux 4th
Schapman  Watch Live Curling!
Johnson 4th
Scheel  Watch Live Curling!
Berg 4th
Viau  Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz 5th
Berg  Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  
Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
Page 6 of 9 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
05-15-13 07:08PM
VanillaIce is offline Click Here to See the Profile for VanillaIce Find more posts by VanillaIce Add VanillaIce to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
VanillaIce
Administrator

 

Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 154

No spinning...

No need for spinning Alice. Al Hackner was added to the staff as Women's National Team Coach this year. Previously, Derek had been filling that role as the position was unfunded. This year Erika Brown's team, who had not worked with Al, had their team coach, Derek, and myself at worlds.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-15-13 11:13PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Just for chuckles and laughs, why last year was the Women's coach slot unfunded while the Men's was last year?

And, does the current and/or proposed HP plan update give any funds for coaches of teams who win big but have not used the national staff coaches?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-16-13 07:57AM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

Alice, you do seem to enjoy looking for a pot of trouble to stir up. I'm pretty sure you won't find it with gender inequality. The Ladies have had equal access to coaching. Unlike the Men, the Ladies and the Wheelchair teams often carry their own coaches. Both programs have had better results in recent times. Correlation? I'll leave that to Third Nerd.

I do hate it when Third Nerd is writing better and making better points than me. Yet problems still demand answers. TN points out that current answers are unlikely to improve the situation. Are there answers? I think that totally rebuilding the High Performance Program is the long-term answer, but some adjustments might be in order.

Moving Nationals earlier (say, mid-January) might give the coaches and teams more time to properly prepare for Worlds, yet still send the "hot" team. It isn't Joey C.'s plan (that ruins the cash spiel season), but it might get a win or two.

Helping dedicated curlers become even more dedicated is a tough nut to crack unless you have tons of money. As we face semi-pro curlers, it may become that important part of the equation. From Fast Eddie's Incentive Program to giving byes to Nationals to the current Proposal, we strive to encourage good curlers to play often and often in Canada. What is the next idea that can fit into a budget?

Me? I believe in exposing a maximum number of teams to high level coaching input and exposing them to World level ice often is the answer. I remain strong in my belief that depth is the answer.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-16-13 11:04AM
Third Nerd is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Third Nerd Click here to Send Third Nerd a Private Message Find more posts by Third Nerd Add Third Nerd to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Third Nerd
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Dec 2008
Location:
Posts: 87

Thinking a little bit more about the analysis I posted above (I promise this is the last one) I decided to try a different approach to see if Team Fenson has out performed all the other US teams in the last 11 years.

Just looking at a team's final ranking is too crude of a measure. Although used for the Olympic Qualifier, it opens the analysis to the vagaries of the tie breaker rules etc. One quick examples. Fenson's Round Robin record was 8-3 in both 2005 and 2010. And they were ranked 6th and 4th respectively. Birr's had the identical 8-3 RR record but was ranked 3rd. So probably a better way to look at the teams is winning percentage in the Round Robin. I used winning percentage since some of the data had 10 team RR and some had 12 team RR.

So here is Fenson's record followed by their winning percentage
2003 - 2 -7 0.222
2005 - 8 - 3 0.727
OG 2006 6 - 3 0.667
2006 7 - 4 0.636
2010 8 - 3 0.727
2011 3 - 8 0.273

Average Winning percentage 0.542 +/- 0.231


The Non Fenson team records and winning percentage
2004 Larway 2 - 7 0.222
2007 Birr 8 - 3 0.727
2008 Brown 5 - 6 0.454
2009 Shuster 7 - 4 0.636
OG 2010 Shuster 2 - 7 0.222
2012 McCormick 4 - 7 0.364
2013 Clark 5 - 6 0.454

Average Winning percentage 0.440 +/- 0.192

So although the results are still within the margin of error I think that a bigger difference is visible. Team Fenson posted 4 winning records and two poor records. The Non Fenson teams only posted 2 winning records, 3 average results and 2 poor results.

If we convert the winning percentage back to Round Robin record. Fenson would be expected to go 6-5 while the non Fenson teams would be expected to go 5-6.

TN

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-16-13 04:36PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Tuck, If we who love to curl didn't stir the pot at least occassionally, the stew would be burned on the bottom. And, I am still waiting for answers to some questions like why there wasn't a funded national womens coach last year and if a winning but not national staff coach can get any USOC financial support in the HP proposal on the table since nationals now is essentially a cashspiel for HP funds. Also, why did the HP program stop travel stipends for national teams travelling to nationals from distant states? Maybe I will never get answers to these questions - at least this year. If so, I will take the mushrooms and saute them for a lovely meal with friends.

Meanwhile, I started thinking today perhaps one solution to some of our HP dilemnas is to have the World Curling Federation lobby the IOC to understand our sport since joining the Olypics is growing like gangbusters all over the planet and that all our fellow curling NGOs need Olympics' exposure..... so why not make curling look like soccer at the Olympics? Lots of soccer teams start playing in different venues before the games start (eliminating the central athletes village population restrictions) and ending the Twister Game contortion fiasco we go through each four years to jam our normal competitive season schedule into the early (for us) Winter Olympics schedule. This link has good info how national soccer teams qualify to play. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footba...Summer_Olympics

Imagine: In soccer, 16 mens teams and 12 womens teams roundrobin then move to the central Olympic venue for semis and finals. More TV time for all. Maybe even some "easy" games to encourage curling in new places. The end of the 10-teams only mess. Just as scores of golfers play weekly qualification rounds in professional golf since their field is so deep so too should the ever deeeping field of curling do that at least for the Olympics. Where is the downside to this idea?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-17-13 03:36PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Well said GTS. We have an Olympic qualifier this year -- does anybody expect that to be televised by NBC? Is anybody excited by and looking to that playoff? I think NOT. Alice asks "what is the downside to this idea?" I ask what is the upside?
The format for Olympic curling is not our problem. We continue to send USA champions that are average teams [6-5 or 5-6] at Worlds. A format change is not going to elevate our curling. That takes time and hard work.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-17-13 05:57PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

GTS, I did not say increase the number of Olympic curling slots because the USA teams are sometimes struggling and our men haven't qualified yet this year. Instead, I want to suggest increasing the number of slots since the level of play has deepened all around the world and maybe - just maybe - the IOC and TV networks would be interested in broadcasting a pile of round robin curling games just as is done for soccer now.

The WCF meets next year in Reno, Nevada. What an opportunity..... just a 5 hour drive for me.

I was fascinated on that wiki link how many FIFA low ranked teams got to the Olympics for geographic diversity reasons. Those five different colored rings in action.

It is arrogant to think the USA or even Canada will always qualify for all Olympic curling events over the next 50 years if we limit the number of qualifying teams. Good lord! Look how soccer has taken off all over the world and how many traditional powerhouses do not always qualify for Olympic soccer.

Last edited by Alice on 05-17-13 at 06:00PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-13 07:47AM
jhcurl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jhcurl Click here to Send jhcurl a Private Message Visit jhcurl's homepage! Find more posts by jhcurl Add jhcurl to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jhcurl
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: US - CT
Posts: 1431

For those non-HP curlers out there, save your money and take lots of vacation for those trips to get points.

http://www.curlingrocks.net/news/us...esponsibilities

JH
Of course its the format, what else could it be?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-13 05:56PM
jhcurl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jhcurl Click here to Send jhcurl a Private Message Visit jhcurl's homepage! Find more posts by jhcurl Add jhcurl to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jhcurl
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: US - CT
Posts: 1431

A whole day passes, no responses. Guess no one cares. So, win a bunch of spiels go to the Worlds, no need to play in the Nats. I am done. Find me in ramblin' thread or email me. See ya all on the other side.

peace out
JH
MY PERSONAL OPINION (CAPS intentional)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-13 09:29PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

JH, Word about this has only just started to trickle out. Besides, the vast majority of dues paying members will only find out what has happened after the Sochi Olympics (or perhaps also the 2018 Games, too) and also after we all see who "we" send to worlds after our next Nationals... oops, meant to write our next "Cashspiel" for HP money via NBC TV ... but only if your team is already holding the winning lottery tickets of favoristim, cherrypicking, and read-their-minds......

Curling for bookies and other odds-makers instead of on-ice results.

I am not stacking my brooms on this the issue of how USCA selects its world teams and runs its HP cash dole... not until after I've used my broom for some serious sweeping off ice.

This current battle over sportsmanlike checks and balances within the USCA HP program was lost when the 2013 Olympic Trials rules were set. But, the war rages on and will be over when the the Spirit of Curling wakes up in the USA. I know which "side" will win in the long run.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-13 12:10PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:
Originally posted by jhcurl
A whole day passes, no responses. Guess no one cares...

peace out
JH
MY PERSONAL OPINION (CAPS intentional)



USCA made their decision -- interesting that it was made before the last meeting but not announced until after that meeting. I think the 6 pages of comments on CZ show that people do care. But not sure what is left to be said?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-13 12:38PM
Gabrielle is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Gabrielle Click here to Send Gabrielle a Private Message Find more posts by Gabrielle Add Gabrielle to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Gabrielle
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Aug 2011
Location: California
Posts: 9

This is Gabrielle Coleman, and I'm a USCA Board Director elected by MoPac. I was at the board meeting in April and there wasn't a hint of this - despite the fact that there was a 5 hour Championships meeting in which the idea of changing the Juniors and Mixed Doubles formats was discussed at length and tabled because of opposition. I did not receive official notice of this change until late last week, though I did find out about it earlier via other curlers and was able to talk to USCA President Jim Pleasants about it.

Those of us who oppose this resolution aren't a bunch of whacked-out nut jobs who don't want the US to succeed. Heck - some of us even support bigger changes to High Performance, like having professional players. We just want reasonable checks and balances in our organization - like the ones they have in Canada in which the Staff can propose changes to Nationals, but the Board needs to approve them. This is not obstructionist micro-management, it's sensible, balanced governance.

IF YOU OPPOSE THESE CHANGES - DON'T GIVE UP! There will likely be a special meeting of the full board within a few weeks to discuss this and try to overturn it. If that doesn't work, the Members (region presidents) can overturn it through bylaws changes. That would be an extreme solution, but that's what this kind of bad policy causes. (I am on the USCA's Governance Committee, and have been working for a sensible, balanced plan that could be a great alternative to this.)

IF YOU OPPOSE THESE CHANGES - WRITE TO THE USCA STAFF, BOARD DIRECTORS, AND THE LEADERS OF YOUR REGION! This is not to harass them, but to let them know that people do oppose this plan. I often hear statements in Board meetings like, "I only heard complaints about the current system and no one told me they like it, so I think there's support for change." Silent majority - speak up! I've written a short letter to the board of my region (MoPac) outlining my objections to this decision and asking them to support overturning it. (Link: http://goo.gl/dLWUY ) There's also the most current list I could put together of Board Directors' and Staff contact info. (Both the USCA website and 2012-13 Media Guide are a little out-of-date.)

Opposing this doesn't mean you don't support High Performance or US excellence. It just means you want a system with sensible checks and balances.

Thanks and Good Curling,
Gabrielle

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-13 02:21PM
MNIceman is offline Click Here to See the Profile for MNIceman Click here to Send MNIceman a Private Message Visit MNIceman's homepage! Find more posts by MNIceman Add MNIceman to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
MNIceman
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 159

Half empty

It seems like people sure like to think of worst case scenarios when it comes to this topic. I don't like the point based proposal simply because I don't believe it will do anything to improve our chances of success at Worlds. The fact is we simple don't know exactly how this would effect things until all the details are worked out. Seems like everyone is assuming that next year the World's teams will all be decided before Nationals even begins. How likely this could happen depends on the details.

Complaints about increased time and money commitment don't really make sense to me either. If you want to be the best you need to make the commitment. If you're good enough to be the best then money won't be a big issue because you'll be winning money at the events you play in.

I'd really like to hear what ideas were being thrown around regarding Jr's and Mixed Doubles.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-13 02:32PM
jhcurl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jhcurl Click here to Send jhcurl a Private Message Visit jhcurl's homepage! Find more posts by jhcurl Add jhcurl to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jhcurl
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: US - CT
Posts: 1431

If you read the letter from President Jim Pleasants that is posted on the USCA website, the word "selection" is used multiple times. That gives me cause for concern. By winning Nationals, that team is not "selected" to go to World's they go because they won. So, "selecting" a team to go to World's seems to say the winner might not go.

As far as the Juniors is concerned, there were a couple of proposals to eliminate the regional playdowns and have a more open style format with events held in 2 to 4 areas of the country. Teams could enter any event. There was heavy opposition to this concept. I think the fear there (and I share this) is that if the HP team can make any change they want as far as Men's/Women's is concerned then they could change to a non-regional playdown for Juniors without any type of BOD approval. In my opinion that would be very, very bad and most likely would greatly reduce Junior participation. There is precedent for such a reduction, the Men's went from 100+ teams (regional) to about 30 teams in playdowns. Regionals make sense for juniors.

JH

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-13 10:56PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Isn't juniors already a quasi-regional playdown? While it appears the juniors qualify for nationals by winning their state playdown, isn't it true that juniors do not need to play in their state of residence?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 12:52AM
MCC_PE is offline Click Here to See the Profile for MCC_PE Click here to Send MCC_PE a Private Message Find more posts by MCC_PE Add MCC_PE to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
MCC_PE
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 140

quote:
Originally posted by tuck
Any of you math guys out there know where the keyboard key is for "squared"? I'm not fond of typing dbsdbs and would prefer dbs-squared.


To get the "" character, type [ALT]-0178, as in hold down the [ALT] key and use the number keypad to enter 0178. Better late than never, right? Unfortunately typing dbs isn't faster than typing dbsdbs.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 06:02AM
TNH is offline Click Here to See the Profile for TNH Click here to Send TNH a Private Message Find more posts by TNH Add TNH to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
TNH
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: May 2011
Location:
Posts: 161

Yes, JH, i also see lots of wiggle room for the committee to select a team. Nationals are defined as a significant component of the process - it did not (and clearly could have) say the national champions become Team USA at international events.

Figure skating is like this. I believe at the last Olympic cycle a fading woman with name recognition performed poorly at nationals and failed to earn her way to the Olympics. The committee gave the spot that a young upstart wonon ice, gave it to the veteran for a stronger chance of medalling. Did't work. Why curling would aspire to be anything like figure skating is beyond me.

The driven players know more about what it takes to win than any board. Give them more flexibility in building teams (so they are less constrained by geography for example), and get out of the way.

Someone mentioned that the women are doing better. One thing I noticed is that a lot more women with recently successful junior careers have continued competing (Potter, Sormunen, Walker, ...) while it seems fewer guys make that transition (Beighton, Plys, and). Hope I am wrong on this one.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 08:57AM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

I care.

Seeing the details will interest me.

For instance, if the Gold at Nationals is worth a lot more points than the Silver, the National Champion will almost always be our representative at Worlds.

If qualifying for the playoffs at a Slam is worth a lot more points than winning any other spiel and winning a Slam is worth an absolute ton of points, I could see some justification in the Proposal. Say Team X wins a Slam but loses to Team Y in the Finals. It could be argued that Team X should represent us at Worlds. I would still maintain that not sending our National Champion is morally bankrupt, but I can see the logic.

However, if the points are given out so that a team that is hot in the autumn garners tons of points at spiels that do not overly impress like a Slam impresses...then they beat a good team in the Finals...that would be a disappointment...that would be just-plain-wrong.

Two years ago, Heater McCormick had a tough schedule (mostly on their own dime) and won some huge games. Luck and tough pools, however, limited their point total. They won Nationals and deserved to go. They went undefeated in Philly. Fenson had a lot of points that year, but Heater beat him three straight times in Philly. Tyler George had a lot of points that year, but failed to make the playoffs.

Heater went on to a disappointing Worlds. Would Fenson have done any better? His last Worlds wasn't that good. Would George have done any better? I don't know.

What I do know is that we now have an Olympic medal contender in the McCormick rink. They now have experience and are built to contend with a dynamic skip supported by a committed front end.

Would we have this contender if we played Philly under this Propsosal? We can't answer that until we see the details. How many more points will the Gold be in relationship to the Silver? Will the Slams (and nothing else) get allotted serious points?

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 09:45AM
Dcasper is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Dcasper Click here to Send Dcasper a Private Message Find more posts by Dcasper Add Dcasper to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Dcasper
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Jun 2011
Location:
Posts: 24

Lets say Pete had even more points last year. and McCormick had none... Are you really going to tell a guy that goes undefeated, and beats your points leader 3 times they cant go to worlds? No matter the details I cannot support a system that the winner potentially will not go. Make the final a best 2 of 3. 2 team playoff for the worlds spot after the round robin. Bronze game between 3 n 4 for cash, funding, or whatever.

I hope other options are still on the table. in the 22 years I have been curling I think thre have been atleast 14 changes to the playdown system. I think it's time to say enough is enough with format changes and start pointing the finger elsewhere... players, coaches, the games culture in this country...

You can fund teams all you want it will not fix the real problem.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 11:42AM
Gabrielle is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Gabrielle Click here to Send Gabrielle a Private Message Find more posts by Gabrielle Add Gabrielle to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Gabrielle
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Aug 2011
Location: California
Posts: 9

Team Allison Pottinger 2011-12 is another great example of the points/Nationals results dilemma. That season, Team Pottinger chose to play a tough Canadian schedule and did not earn enough points to be one of the four teams that qualified for Nationals via points. However, they won Nationals and finished 5th at Worlds. Will a points plan penalize teams for taking a risk and playing tougher events (that ultimately offer better preparation?)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 02:34PM
curlny is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlny Click here to Send curlny a Private Message Find more posts by curlny Add curlny to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlny
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 180

You've hit it on the head. Do I take my team to the toughest competition, or to the event where I stand the best chance to win points?

__________________
JL

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-13 06:07PM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

Mr. Casper, I agree with you absolutely. I'm just trying to point towards details that minimize the impact and, perhaps, the injustice.

Let us say that Team Fenson had won a Slam that year...or qualified for the playoff in two Slam events. It could be argued that Team Fenson really did deserve to be Team USA and the longterm health of USA curling would be best served by them representing us.

It is an exercise in imagination, however. If we have a team capable of winning a Slam or qualifying in two Slams...they are not going to lose Nationals very often. Teams of that caliber are named Stoughton, Martin, Howard and McEwen.

But to get back to my poorly worded point:

I don't like The Proposal, but the details might make it less objectionable. High points for Nationals Gold and for Slam events...low points for Nationals Silver and all other spiels.

Would that, however, achieve the objective of encouraging our teams to play more and at the highest levels? I doubt it. Wait a couple of months and you'll see that our Trials Teams are already on that path.

Ben Tucker
PS Speaking of messing with the format, I'm growing disenchanted with the Page. I'm thinking that the winner of the round robin should go straight to the Finals while #2 and #3 play in the only semifinal. Hard to lobby for the change if Worlds remains a Page. What the teams will see in Worlds is what they should see at Nationals. Change Worlds?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-13 09:47AM
MiniMark is offline Click Here to See the Profile for MiniMark Click here to Send MiniMark a Private Message Find more posts by MiniMark Add MiniMark to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
MiniMark
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Jan 2012
Location: DeWitt, MI
Posts: 100

Page v No page

Another discussion entirely. Why bother having a RR if you're handing the silver medal to the team that finishes first in the RR? What if you have 3 teams tied at 8-3? Someone gets a medal based on a tiebreaker??? Really?? That's un-American.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-13 07:08PM
ethan.b.meyers is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ethan.b.meyers Click here to Send ethan.b.meyers a Private Message Find more posts by ethan.b.meyers Add ethan.b.meyers to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ethan.b.meyers
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: May 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 18

Full disclosure: I had my wisdom teeth removed yesterday and am currently on Lortab. I'm not actually in any condition to write this.
-----------

What everyone seems to be forgetting (except Tuck, who mentioned it in passing) is that Nationals will surely be worth a lot of points.
Let's take a look at the things I think we all want out of the system:

- We want Nationals to be a dramatic event that comes down to the last rock of the last game
- We want to send our best, most consistent team to Worlds, but we want proof that that team will medal when it counts
- We want our system to encourage the best teams to form, for those teams to gain experience competing against other high-level teams, and to be competitive at the world level
- We want to fund and be able to work with the team between when they qualify for Worlds and when they go there, but at the same time:
- We want the qualification to be close enough to Worlds that, at the time of Worlds, that team is still "hot".
- We want the selection process to be "fair" and "inclusive", so that any team has the same shot at getting to the Worlds


Combine numbers four, five, and six, and what you get is the HP program, the way it was this year: take the most promising teams and fund them and work with them for a whole year, and then at the end of that year, soon before Worlds have them play Nationals against a field of open-qualified teams.

Now, you have the problem of the incompatibility between sending the most consistent, proven team over the course of the season and making Nationals "dramatic" enough. How do you demand both that a team has long term, proven results, and that they play in a single game at the end of the season where a bad day, pick, or burnt stone could change who goes?

It's actually simple, and I think the USCA has come up with the right foundation, but the details are going to be extremely important:

The point system is clearly the only way to go. However, it needs to be done right, and Nationals Gold, Silver and Bronze need to be worth the right number of points.

The only way to do this is to make Nationals Gold worth slightly more than 100% of the top team's total YTD OOM points, and then make Silver and Bronze worth significantly less, and I might argue for fixed values of something like 15 and 10 points, respectively.

This year, Fenson topped the OOM listing at 32.195 points. So, let's take a look at what happens if we base the Nationals points values off of that, and then make up a couple other values on the spot:

Gold: 35 points
Silver: 15 points
Bronze: 10 points.

This way, if you have 12.195 points or more and you win Gold, you are automatically in. If you have 7.195 points and win gold, you can still be in if Fenson (and for this year, Shuster) place third or below (which they did).
Since the Gold medal points are set to slightly higher than the top team's points, no team can ever go if they fail to medal at Nationals. If you had between 7 and 12 points, and barely edge out a team who had three times your success in a final, I still don't think you were the best team of the season. (Note: the 12.195 and 7.195 figures can easily be adjusted by changing the point value of Silver and Bronze; hopefully whoever is implementing this system will take more than the 2 minutes I just did to pull those out of thin air).

Now, take the top two placing teams for HP, and you've satisfied "want" number four again; you're working with the best, most promising teams for a whole year, but if they cool off before Worlds or another team rises up to be better than them or they got lucky to place in the top two, you're not stuck with that team, a la Vancouver.

The points system will give our most consistent, best teams an advantage. Those are the teams we want representing us at Worlds; I don't think there's any measure at all by which Clark's upset win at Nationals and then failure to secure an Olympic berth was a good thing for USA curling. Would Fenson, Shuster, or George have been more likely to get it done? Frankly, I think the odds would have been better if we had had this points system in place and sent Shuster instead of Clark.

The points system will also applies a pressure that encourages the best teams to form, get experience against high-level teams, and be competitive at the world level. In other words, this points system encourages teams to play in Canada where all the high-point events are, which we need. They'll also have to form the best teams and seek the best coaching so that they can win those events. If you apply the right pressures, the teams will self-organize to be the best USA curing can be, without the need for USCA handpicking of teams. The points system is that pressure.

Last edited by ethan.b.meyers on 05-25-13 at 02:56PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-13 11:50AM
Gerry is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Gerry Click here to Send Gerry a Private Message Visit Gerry's homepage! Find more posts by Gerry Add Gerry to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Gerry
CZ Founder

 

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

quote:
Originally posted by ethan.b.meyers
The points system will also applies a pressure that encourages the best teams to form, get experience against high-level teams, and be competitive at the world level. In other words, this points system encourages teams to play in Canada where all the high-point events are, which we need. They'll also have to form the best teams and seek the best coaching so that they can win those events. If you apply the right pressures, the teams will self-organize to be the best USA curing can be, without the need for USCA handpicking of teams. The points system is that pressure.


This is the most important reason for going to a points structure. Make the point values whatever you want to still make Nationals an important component as it's probably the best way to pick the Worlds rep now, but if teams want to continue to self-organize and make their own decisions, this is the best way to maintain that status-quo.

__________________
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

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 6 of 9 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W5 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00am CT
Giroux 4th
Schapman  Watch Live Curling!
Johnson 4th
Scheel  Watch Live Curling!
Berg 4th
Viau  Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz 5th
Berg  Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Homan Brings Home Gold

Homan Brings Home Gold

Sydney, Canada - In front of a full house with over 4,000 spectators, Canada (photo: Stephen Fisher, World Curling) beat Switzerland by 7-5 to take gold at the BKT Tires World Women's Curling Championship 2024.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑