Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

In discussing the new WCF rules about electronic devices on the ice, it automatically got many people starting to think about stopwatches, and if they were OK. This got me to thinking, why are stopwatches allowed on the ice anyway?

I understand what they can be used for, and why they are advantageous to use for many people, so I guess I don’t need that part explained to me. But to me, it seems to go against “the spirit of curling”. Please read my complete thought before answering. The spirit of curling, for those of us that have forgotten, is that I would rather lose than win unfairly. The immediate thought on this is that both teams can use the stopwatch, so it’s not unfair. Maybe that is true on the surface just reading the words, but for me I wonder if it crosses the line of what you can do. This may not be the best analogy in the world, but we have rules in place that say you can’t use performance enhancing drugs. Would it be fair if both teams were simply allowed to use performance enhancing drugs?

Curling doesn’t allow skips who are quiet to use a bell or whistle to help their sweepers hear their calls (I know a few exceptions have been made on special cases such as a skip with damaged vocal chords). I know I have played on a few teams where it is almost impossible to hear the quiet skip when you are at the other end of the sheet. Isn’t it an unfair advantage if I have a skip who has a booming voice over one who is whisper quiet. Perhaps this last comment isn’t relevant, but it is something that popped into my head as I was thinking whether stopwatches should be allowed.

And I know that curling is not any other sport, but I still wanted to think about how electronics are used in any other sports or competition based activities (I don’t want to start a debate about what is and what is not a sport). So in terms of “on the field/ice/track/etc. in competition activities, which ones allow electronics to be used by their participants” Here is what I came up with

Baseball – None
Soccer – None
Hockey – None
Tennis - None
Football – Was none, now they have added the coach to speak to the quarterback & defensive captains to relay plays, but even those systems have to be turned off before the play is about to begin.
Horse racing – None
Golf - None
Auto Racing – Lots of it from speedometers to communication to safety indicators, to fuel gauges.

I guess the closest example that I could think of to the curling stopwatch was GPS distance finders in golf. They have devices that will give you the exact distance to the pin, but those can only be used in practice. Caddies will write down distances from certain markers on the fairways such as a tree or sand trap, and can step off the distance, but there is no way to be exact.

I feel like the stopwatch in curling is something that is great for practice, but probably doesn’t have a place during a game. I feel like Judging Weight is an essential fundamental in the game of curling, and to have it be performance enhanced with a stopwatch goes to far. Shouldn’t we just expect people to just get a feel for how fast the rock is traveling, and have to make decisions based upon feel, not what the LCD display tells you?

So in summary, can anyone explain to me why stopwatches are ever allowed on the ice while curling?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

I think the simple reason that stopwatches are allowed to be used is because they are not disallowed by the rules. Curling rules in general appear to be "permissive" rather than "restrictive."

For example, you can deliver a stone standing on your head as long as you use the correct hack. (The rules don't specify any particular body part has to be used in the hack.) About a quarter of the players in our club use an unusual knee-slide that utilizes the "wrong" foot out of the correct hack, and it is perfectly within the rules. (It's kind to bad backs and knees, which is how it got invented.)

In general, I find the official curling rules rather poorly written, and at times a bit ambiguous. They could stand some serious editing and some explanatory common interpretations. Baseball does a much, much, better job; even the most arcane baseball rules are painfully explained, using examples if necessary to make the point clear. And baseball is an infinitely more complicated game.

As far a stopwatches go, I don't get too excited about them. I think stopwatches, if intelligently used, can provide information about the (changing) ice conditions and can provide some information to sweepers when stones are thrown down defined paths by players with consistent deliveries and releases, but I don't see them as providing a decisive or even significant advantage to a team. At the developmental level, stopwatches are misused as much as they are useful. So I really don't care that much.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2014
Location:
Posts: 106

RockDoc,

I agree with you 100%. Great for practices. When game time comes, may the curler with the best abilities, strategy or mental skills win . Stopwatches have brought nothing to the game itself. Like stopwatches in curling, GPS have substituted judgement with an electronic tool. While we are at it, while don't we have brushes that sweep on a click of a button.

Riculous? Exactly my point.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by Itsjustagame
When game time comes, may the curler with the best abilities, strategy or mental skills win . Stopwatches have brought nothing to the game itself.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

I don't feel like either of you really answered my question as to why they are allowed. Again, I understand what they can be used for, including for judging changing ice conditions. And I understand that they are not against the rules. I feel like they should not be allowed at all. And I want someone to explain to me why they should not be banned.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 900

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky
I feel like they should not be allowed at all. And I want someone to explain to me why they should not be banned.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2014
Location:
Posts: 106

I do not know why they are not allowed. Teams such as Ed Werenich use to have a system for weight that went like ''give it 6 more feet that at Avonlea''. I then believe stopwatches came into play by André Ferland, the great inventor and innovator from Trois-Rivières, Quebec. The old rule in the curling book prevented the use of electronic device TO COMMUNICATE amongst players. My guess is that stopwatches did not break that rule and therefore were allowed to stay. Quick acceptance in the curling community made them hard to be removed.

Why they are still accepted by the rules, that I cannot understand or answer.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

Well, I can't read the collective minds of the WCF, but I strongly suspect that if they thought stopwatches gave teams an unfair advantage, they would prohibit them. That's essentially what they did with curling sticks at the competition level.

In this latest go-round the WCF apparently acknowledges that stopwatches have been routinely used in play too long now to turn around and ban, so they elected not to do that in the proposed rule regarding electronic devices.

That's about the best I can do to explain why watches are allowed (not prohibited). Some may not like it, but its the rules (or lack of same).

I don't like the DH rule in baseball, but it is allowed in one league, which is even stupider IMO. But there you are. It's in the book.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
Posts: 92

Curling is also the only sport I know of that doesnt have a coin flip or something similar to determine advantage in OT.

I think its terrible after an even game one team is just given the advantage in OT because they didnt score last.

Imagine trying to put that into the NFL. They would laugh at you.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by Itsjustagame
I do not know why they are not allowed. Teams such as Ed Werenich use to have a system for weight that went like ''give it 6 more feet that at Avonlea''.,, Quick acceptance in the curling community made them hard to be removed.

Why they are still accepted by the rules, that I cannot understand or answer.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs
I think watches should be banned -- that would add another variable/talent to shot making that has disappeared with the advent of watches. [/B]

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

I'm not trying to say that watches ruin the game. And I agree that sweeping is more than just a watch, that even with the watch, you still need some amount of judgement. But still, I don't feel like anyone has given a single good reason why they should be allowed, or why anyone ever thought they were a good idea to begin with. Can anyone help a new curler to understand?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 219

The only logical use of stop watches, should be to determine when the bar will be open. This in itself, if nothing else... will help to speed up the game of curling.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky
But still, I don't feel like anyone has given a single good reason why they should be allowed, or why anyone ever thought they were a good idea to begin with. Can anyone help a new curler to understand?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

Alice had provided me the first logical use of the watch, as I had never considered the deaf aspect. My opinion is that stopwatches are OK if you are deaf, but anyone have a reason why those with hearing should be able to use them?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2009
Location:
Posts: 36

Stopwatch is used in baseball ... by 1st base coach to time the pitcher's delivery. Also runner's steal time. And catcher's throw to 2nd time.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by OverAndOut
Stopwatch is used in baseball ... by 1st base coach to time the pitcher's delivery. Also runner's steal time. And catcher's throw to 2nd time.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location: nova scotia
Posts: 5

As a long time competitive front ender, I can say that stop watches are an annoyance during a game. They create doubt when two players disagree about the information provided, which happens a lot.
I only use split times before a game to match a pair of rocks, and so it would not bother me if they were banned during actual play.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

They are allowed because they are not deemed to provide a competitive advantage. Also because of this, from the rationale section of the document:
Stopwatches will be allowed as long as they don’t give active advice when to sweep. They have been a part of the game for such a long time that the Competitions and Rules Commission does not see it feasible as to ban them.

They are allowed because the rules specifically provide their legality. That really settles that part of the debate.

I play lead. I stopped using a watch last year and it was liberating. It allows you to pay more attention to the ice as it changes during the game. I'm not going back to it. I love playing vs teams that are married to the watch.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2014
Location:
Posts: 106

quote:

---

Originally posted by MiniMark


I play lead. I stopped using a watch last year and it was liberating. It allows you to pay more attention to the ice as it changes during the game. I'm not going back to it. I love playing vs teams that are married to the watch.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 490

I don't see any reason to not allow them in the game. It doesn't change the outcome of the game, it doesn't make a players slide or delivery better, it doesn't make a sweeper apply more pressure to their broom.

Personally, as a sweeper, I learned how to read the changing conditions of the ice better using a stopwatch, than I could following the rock and trying to make judgement. So now after years of using the stopwatch, I don't need to do a split time, whenever a rock is delivered. I now only use it once every end or two. As a skip standing in the house, it helps me understand why rocks are coming up short, or going deep or through the house, and can pin point if it's the ice changing, or my teammate(s) having a tough game.

I don't think you can compare with other sports to say curling should not use stopwatches. Specifically the reference in the rules to electronic devices is geared to cellphones, tablets, laptops etc. I really don't see any reason to nitpick about it because it doesn't change the game. You could have ice time and split times figured out for your venue, have a rock in motion, mentally know where it's going to end up in the house, and suddenly the rock hits a flat spot or debris and takes a quick right or left turn. Right then and there the outcome of the game is changed by someones hand/foot/knee print, sweater fuzz, broom hair etc, and the stopwatch had no impact on that outcome!

I think there is more things wrong with how the game is governed, (eg Men and Women's nationals that now have relegation rounds to exclude teams, just to keep it at 12 team round robin, thus excluding 3 provinces/territories from play, therefore not really making it a national championship), than to worry about a little device that starts, stops, laps, and resets time! But that's just me!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky
Alice had provided me the first logical use of the watch, as I had never considered the deaf aspect. My opinion is that stopwatches are OK if you are deaf, but anyone have a reason why those with hearing should be able to use them?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 36

Running (road, not track) watches are allowed - GPS isn't for competitive events, yet a large proportion of recreational runners use them (much like GPS in golf, I guess). On the track, I'm not sure if a watch is allowed or not. Regardless, coaches are always giving their athletes splits from the side of the track.

Most sports it doesn't come up because they aren't allowed for safety in contact sports.

The stopwatch is of such little utility at the top levels of competition that it's not a big deal. It's not precise enough to be better than a skilled sweeper judging a thrown rock, and even half-decent teams will be able to pick up on a speed change pretty quickly. For teams that play once a week and bonspiel once or twice a year, having a measured scale to assess speed and whether conditions are changing during a game is useful. I personally prefer that maximum one sweeper at a time ever uses a stopwatch, no matter how seldom or much they curl. As skip, I use it more often while observing the opponent's shot (like 1B coach).

I really think this is a non-issue.

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky


Please note that these are things done by coaches, not done by the players themselves. My point was about the player/athlete themselves using a timing or electronic device in actual competition.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Watches are allowed in track racing, but they are essentially superfluous...

In a sprint, you don't have time to look at it.

In a distance race, there are multiple clocks around the track, admittedly intended for the spectator's convenience, but still, the runners can and do use them.

Likewise, there are an ever increasing number of occasions in American Football where a player admits to looking up at a Jumbotron TV screen to see where his would-be tackler may be.

Tech happens, but it's still the human who is making the decision what to DO with the information. That's why the WCF has banned watches that advise what to do, but still allow watches that just give you a time stamp.

In my opinion, that's a very good compromise...and I can't even use a watch on my stones, since stopwatching a stick delivery stone is an exercise in futility.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Burlington
Posts: 638

You could probably use the same arguments with just about every piece of equipment. I bet the first sliders opened eyes!

I guess every sport has it's rules but as long as it makes the sport better and doesn't give an "unfair" advantage there is nothing wrong with advancements.

I think I have seen the stick abused more than any other single thing but without it look how many club curlers we would lose!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged