|
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.
| 03-27-16 01:32PM |
|
Three
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 278 |
quote:
Originally posted by Three
Can somebody explain to me what is difference between the two broom heads that a typical front end uses? I see all the time that if a rock is light only one sweeper sweeps and the person holding the broom in the house comes out to help sweep for distance. Meanwhile the other person on the front end wanders about helplessly yelling encouragement? I've seen this all week at the women's worlds and just don't understand it. Only thing I can gather on these forums is the other head makes it curl more which slows it down?
Sorry guys I still don't understand this. Somebody responded to my question above and said the skip comes out to save the other sweeper's newer head. That still doesn't make sense...if that's true in which end does the team make the decision to start using the newer broom. Commentators don't talk about this craziness enough. In the bronze game Amy called for Carey's broom and they switched while the rock was moving. It's Nuts. If somebody could CLEARLY explain what is going on I would appreciate it.
Also, if we are looking to employ some new rules how about "you must only sweep with YOUR designated brush". Each player could have a 1,2,3,or 4 clearly designated on the shaft and that is the only broom you can sweep with. Perhaps that would limit some of the directional brushing effectiveness.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 03-27-16 01:36PM |
|
jamcan
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340 |
quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
golf also continued to enforce the other rules in their rulebook, didn't give the lame excuse that they were to hard to enforce or didn't have the officials available. The solution is easy and clear. Enforce sweeping rules in the book and the thing fixes itself.
Although I think the sweeping motion rules need to be changed to reduce the impact of directional sweeping I agree with your comments about officiating-well said.
Sure, we all wish we could continue to self-officiate our sport and that every athlete would respect the spirit and intent of the rules. But that would be delusional, wouldn't it? How many examples from other sports have to be shoved in our faces before we accept the simple fact that there will ALWAYS be individuals who will break or bend the rules in order to win?
Self-officiating only allows more of this. True, human officials are not 100% accurate or perfectly unbiased. But they are better than none at all. And if a human being can call, with amazing accuracy I should add, a ball or strike based on a millisecond of visual input, then as a species we are more than capable of determining a legal or illegal sweeping motion over the length of time any stone travels from hogline to hogline.
Now I've read many posts from Gerry and others decrying the need for more and better officiating. And we all want the game to grow. But there are prices to be paid for this. And one of those is the increased presence of umpires and officials to ensure athletes keep to the spirit of the sport.
__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson
Last edited by jamcan on 03-27-16 at 01:46PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 03-27-16 02:41PM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
quote:
Originally posted by curlky
Sorry for teh delay. Not forgotten, just busy with non curling stuff. Here are my comments about your 3 ideas.
1.) Broom handle over the rock cylinder. - In teis case, even with traditional 90 degree sweeping, the person closest to teh rock many times would have their forst or last stroke over the cylinder. How do you handle this very subjective interpretation. FUrthermove, I am only making this angle measurement up, but I woudl suspect that even staying outside of teh rock cylinder area, you can still sweep at an angle almost straigth snow plow. If you say that a direct staight snow plow is 0 degrees, I think that you can still sweep at a 10 degree angle and not be over the cylinder. Are you OK with almost snow plowing?
2.) Feet not in teh bath behidn the rock. 2 counters to this, if you stand in a closed stance, you could still sweep almost a direct snow plow stance and have yrou feet outside. All this rule does is eliminate open stance snow plowing. FUrthermore, if a sweeper were to stand way in front of the rock, like 3 feet in front of the rock they could then sweep at the rock, rather than the traditional away frmo teh rock. So you coudl get the same angles, and same relative distances form the tock, but have yoru feet no where near behind teh stone
3.) FInal brush stroke cannot end in the path of the rock - What is teh point of this one. You basically say you can snow plow all the way down the ice, and only teh last stroke must move outside. What have you really gained. FUrthermore, if you make yoru last stroke a clean style, with almost no down force, you can still leave debris on the ice even with an outside the path release.
Your turn to refute my thoughts
None of the ideas you presented effectively sweep a rock, please produce a video showing how your ideas would be effective because it's just not there. a zero angle snowplow where the handle is not in the cylinder would go against the angle and side of the path of the rock to produce the "directional" effect, sweeping 3 feet away and in the wrong direction towards the rock would be awesome and i would have no objection if your team decided they wished to sweep that way, and the final brush stroke rule would be on top of the other two rules. Show how you can effectively " directional"sweep using these parameters please, will be interesting.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 03-27-16 03:48PM |
|
Phil_D
Drawmaster
Registered: May 2014
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 629 |
quote:
Originally posted by Three
Also, if we are looking to employ some new rules how about "you must only sweep with YOUR designated brush". Each player could have a 1,2,3,or 4 clearly designated on the shaft and that is the only broom you can sweep with. Perhaps that would limit some of the directional brushing effectiveness.
I think this is a great idea, and relatively easy to enforce.
If you want to throw with a different brush, or use a stabilizer, no problems there. But you get your one sweeping broom and have to use it.
Also, how about all four players have to have the same head? Doesn't matter what (currently "legal") style as long as they are all the same.
Both of these options can be enforced pretty easily I think.
__________________
Recreational curler & resident armchair curler at Windy City Curling Club.
Co-host of the NerdCurl podcast & occasional blogger.
http://www.nerdcurl.com
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 10:40AM |
|
MCC_PE
Hitting Paint
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 140 |
quote:
We have suppliers who said that our equipment would be the equivalent or better than the other teams but that didnt prove to be the case.
I wonder if they were using the Norway or Moen pads but, either way, she's calling out Goldline.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 10:52AM |
|
RockDoc
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399 |
Re: Muirhead unhappy with present brooms
quote:
Originally posted by Observer
Eve Muirhead has a column in her local newspaper, and has posted today in it about her displeasure with the brooms in use at the recent Women's Worlds. Link here:
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/sport/b...carpet-1.931847
A little hyperbole, perhaps, but there is no question that the top teams are really adept at carving hack-weight shots to good advantage. I don't think this detracts too much from the game, as long as it can be kept to a dull roar.
I think the simplest rule-making solution is to hobble the effectiveness of brushing materials to limit the carving effect. This will be much simpler and equitable than enforcing subjective rules about positioning and angle of sweeping.
It's a tricky deal to navigate. One the one hand, you could just issue the same equipment to everyone, but that would stifle innovation by manufacturers. On the other hand, the wild west where there are no regulations of equipment has led us to this point. Perhaps there is a middle ground we can find before next season, where limited innovation is possible but brushing materials can't be too effective. I think it will take a while to find that point.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 11:56AM |
|
dks
Hitting Paint
Registered: Oct 2012
Location:
Posts: 119 |
Well I guess Goldline will be reevaluating their sponsorship with that team next year. I' m sure there are differences with brushes, but, blaming your performance on brushes seems a bit stretched. Canada used Hardline brushes and what did that do for them? Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. It usually still comes down to who makes the critical shot in a game.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 12:03PM |
|
RockDoc
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399 |
quote:
Originally posted by dks
Well I guess Goldline will be reevaluating their sponsorship with that team next year. I' m sure there are differences with brushes, but, blaming your performance on brushes seems a bit stretched. Canada used Hardline brushes and what did that do for them? Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. It usually still comes down to who makes the critical shot in a game.
Yep. There are still some subtle differences in the performance of the various brushes/heads, but it's much less than before. There are so many factors in play: the "patterning" and coating hardness of the fabric materials, the relative stiffness of the backing materials, and the pressure distribution on the brush head. And of course, technique.
But the playing field is much more level than it was before. Or rather, the choice of materials is much less diverse and more alike than it was before. Progress, but not there yet.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 12:36PM |
|
broomsmith
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Apr 2016
Location:
Posts: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Three
Sorry guys I still don't understand this. Somebody responded to my question above and said the skip comes out to save the other sweeper's newer head. That still doesn't make sense...if that's true in which end does the team make the decision to start using the newer broom. Commentators don't talk about this craziness enough. In the bronze game Amy called for Carey's broom and they switched while the rock was moving. It's Nuts. If somebody could CLEARLY explain what is going on I would appreciate it.
Also, if we are looking to employ some new rules how about "you must only sweep with YOUR designated brush". Each player could have a 1,2,3,or 4 clearly designated on the shaft and that is the only broom you can sweep with. Perhaps that would limit some of the directional brushing effectiveness.
I can answer this. When a brand new fabric is on the broom (literally never used even once) it will do crazy things. The fabric is so abrasive for the first 20-40 individual brush strokes that it will slow the rock down and make it turn left or right depending on the stroke direction. The outside sweeper is holding that brand new broom. Their role is to stop a rock if its heavy or make it turn if it is going to miss the target.
However, it's such an important point that this only works for about 20-40 strokes (no source - just experience). The Canadian womens team didn't understand this and they continued to treat the broom like a secret power-up tool in a video game long after the brooms 20-40 stroke secret power life had expired. As a result, we were left witnessing this perplexing sweeping production.
We are living in a strange time and very few people know as much as they think they know, the elite being no exception.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 01:31PM |
|
Three
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 278 |
quote:
Originally posted by broomsmith
I can answer this. When a brand new fabric is on the broom (literally never used even once) it will do crazy things. The fabric is so abrasive for the first 20-40 individual brush strokes that it will slow the rock down and make it turn left or right depending on the stroke direction. The outside sweeper is holding that brand new broom. Their role is to stop a rock if its heavy or make it turn if it is going to miss the target.
However, it's such an important point that this only works for about 20-40 strokes (no source - just experience). The Canadian womens team didn't understand this and they continued to treat the broom like a secret power-up tool in a video game long after the brooms 20-40 stroke secret power life had expired. As a result, we were left witnessing this perplexing sweeping production.
We are living in a strange time and very few people know as much as they think they know, the elite being no exception.
Wow, thank you so much for answering my question with the EXACT kind of details nobody else has previously explained to my satisfaction.
Welcome aboard broomsmith and your first post was awesome (at least for me)
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 03:05PM |
|
RockDoc
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399 |
quote:
Originally posted by curlky
I am a bit surprised that I have been in debates with so many in this thread and others on this topic, that when I posted my idea on a solution in another thread (so as to no hijack this one) tons of views, but very few responses.
http://www.curlingzone.com/showthre...?threadid=11853
Too complicated, or TLDR. Not that I disagree with the sentiment, but if the rules are long and complex and/or may require subtle subjective judgments it will be difficult to enforce.
Some of the suggestions are quite simple, easy to enforce, and are being experimented with now: you get one brush head for the event, brush head must be approved equipment, sweepers must not be on the same side of the stone, etc. These are objective and/or non-controversial to enforce.
Other possible rules, such as foot positioning and sweeping angle are highly personal, subjective, and possibly impractical to enforce, especially when the difference between "legal" and "illegal" are quite small. It seems like a difficult morass to me.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 03:21PM |
|
RockDoc
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399 |
quote:
Originally posted by broomsmith
I can answer this. When a brand new fabric is on the broom (literally never used even once) it will do crazy things. The fabric is so abrasive for the first 20-40 individual brush strokes that it will slow the rock down and make it turn left or right depending on the stroke direction. The outside sweeper is holding that brand new broom. Their role is to stop a rock if its heavy or make it turn if it is going to miss the target.
However, it's such an important point that this only works for about 20-40 strokes (no source - just experience). The Canadian womens team didn't understand this and they continued to treat the broom like a secret power-up tool in a video game long after the brooms 20-40 stroke secret power life had expired. As a result, we were left witnessing this perplexing sweeping production.
We are living in a strange time and very few people know as much as they think they know, the elite being no exception.
Every little difference can be exploited. If you can save 1-2 shots a game you would otherwise lose, at almost any level of curling it can make the difference between winning and losing the game. The artificially textured brush materials retained their magical properties over a long period of time. This is why they were placed under moratorium. But even under the moratorium there are some exploitable differences.
More traditional, coated fabrics have similar properties to artificially textured materials when they are brand new. (That is, regular series of relatively hard, patterned "bumps" due to the fabric weave.) When the coatings wear down they become less textured, softer, and hence less effective. Some fabrics are "bumpier" than others, depending on the nature of the weave, the diameter of the fibers, and the nature of the coating material. Lots going on here.
As with most sports, it takes a while for athletic practice to completely conform with the science. (And sometimes the science takes painfully long to develop adequately.) The first serious peer-reviewed questioning of why stones curl was posited in 1930 by Macauley & Smith [Nature (1930) 3150, 408-409]. It took 83 years to arrive at a defensible hypothesis, which only in 2015 we learned how to exploit.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-01-16 05:25PM |
|
Flat Hat
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86 |
Re: Re: Muirhead unhappy with present brooms
quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc
I don't think this detracts too much from the game, as long as it can be kept to a dull roar.
I think the simplest rule-making solution is to hobble the effectiveness of brushing materials to limit the carving effect. This will be much simpler and equitable than enforcing subjective rules about positioning and angle of sweeping.
I completely agree! Games are still exciting, skill is still rewarded (whether shooting or sweeping or skipping) and misses still happen even at the highest levels.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-03-16 03:22PM |
|
Hardline
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Nov 2015
Location:
Posts: 15 |
Rock Doc
With all due respect, in science, is it not fair to just say we need to do testing with sweeping, fabrics, etc, to try and figure out what to do next? Watching Worlds and simply cant believe the commentary going on. Russ said get rid of the abrasive fabrics and problem solved. Hey Russ, how about the governing bodies get with the program and get some testing done?
We were in contact with the National Research Council of Ottawa to get testing underway. We had 2 rules for them. 1- That any testing that took place was to be an open and transparent. Every supplier would get the invite to attend testing. 2- That the products to be tested would not have brand names attached to results. Each pad was to be known as sample A, sample B...etc. The governing bodies would then look at the results and make decisions as to which sample was good or bad.
NRC asked if they could use Brier ice for testing. We asked Curling Canada if we could use an empty sheet on Friday, Saturday or Sunday. We also asked CC to contact all the suppliers to get samples of all the pads for testing. CC asked what was name of the testing facility, to advise all the suppliers. Next email from CC was we couldnt use Brier ice.
We contacted NRC for a Plan B for the ice, and they advised us that they were in contact with Curling Canada and could not comment any further until all discussions were complete.
It has been 6 months weve been waiting for testing, and so far nothing. It has been mentioned many times they will test over the summer. This is not an option for suppliers. They come out with approved gear next fall? Exactly how are suppliers supposed to prepare for the season with 0 notice?
Its truly incredible how some people are being spoon fed the BS idea of ice scratches, and carving, and sharpness of fabrics, without looking at technique, or how rocks are sanded. Every fabric scratches the ice. Rocks scratch the ice. How about we do some testing to see how much effect sweeping has, and what would be accepted. How rock sanding play a role. How fabrics play a role. How sweeping plays a role. Put them all in play and make the rules based on evidence.
If anyone wants sweeping rules, its easy. How about you have 2 sweeping brooms. a left side broom, and a right side broom. Sweepers can switch sides, but the brooms have to stay on their designated sides. This way, all sweeping brooms will get used equally. At least, this will get rid of all the idiotic commentary on TV.
Lastly, concerning the double standard that exists, FIF...I mean, the WCF, has allowed pads to be used by curlers, that dont have to be sold anymore, as long as the fabric has already been approved. Here is a picture of Edins pad http://worldcurling.org/wmcc2016/day-one-gallery 1st pic . They are obviously using some sort of honeycombed insert. Wouldnt this be an unfair advantage? Not saying the pad is better or worse, but using something that isnt available to all curlers? Rumour has it that Team Jacobs used these pads at the Brier. Since these pads arent sold, wouldnt it fall under the no homemade equipment category also? Anyway, as usual, just sayin.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-03-16 04:51PM |
|
Alice
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324 |
Hardline,
You've fallen down a rabbit hole where rules are like "Alice in Wonderland" or at best a moving target. One day we'll all find out this totally nonsensical behavior by WCF and CC is due to the Own the Podium Secret Squirrel contracts with signatures from CC and UNO plus WCF, too, because nothing else makes sense from this broom fiasco to this lawyer and 25+ year curler.
Curioser and curioser,
Alice
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-03-16 05:00PM |
|
Alice
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324 |
And, I'll bet the Own the Podium squirrels are twitching their tails very nervously tonight after the USA and Denmark nearly toppled their men in Basel.
It will likely take a Lobster Quadrille to force transparent WCF broom testing and standards. Grab your dance partner and start reeling.... As I recall from "Alice in Wonderland" one of the first dance steps in that famous dance is throw your lobster partner into the sea which makes more sense than any of the broomgate steps we've seen so far.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-03-16 09:25PM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
I still feel that transparency is what is needed but apparently the governing bodies don't like the idea, were they out of line in their "jump the gun"rulings and are now worried about what might be revealed. Also, what is that head Edin has, and are the Moen heads available to the public? Hardline is being given the run around and it's time for these organizations to put up or shut up. Maybe curlers should refuse to pay their fees until transparency is achieved.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 12:04AM |
|
curlky
Drawmaster
Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559 |
quote:
Originally posted by Hardline
We were in contact with the National Research Council of Ottawa to get testing underway. We had 2 rules for them. 1- That any testing that took place was to be an open and transparent. Every supplier would get the invite to attend testing. 2- That the products to be tested would not have brand names attached to results. Each pad was to be known as sample A, sample B...etc. The governing bodies would then look at the results and make decisions as to which sample was good or bad.
I am going to be very blunt. Your idea here is idiotic at best. Your system cannot be a truly blind test. The people watching the test will be able to see how each sample performs (will be easy to identify which curled most or least for example). Sure they can change names to Sample A when they submit, but anyone who watches the tests will know which was which, and someone can leak names to WCF. I would think you, who assumes everyone is out to get your company would have thought of this.
quote:
Originally posted by Hardline
It has been 6 months weve been waiting for testing, and so far nothing. It has been mentioned many times they will test over the summer. This is not an option for suppliers. They come out with approved gear next fall? Exactly how are suppliers supposed to prepare for the season with 0 notice?
This falls into the not my problem category. Why should your problems be my problems?
quote:
Originally posted by Hardline
Its truly incredible how some people are being spoon fed the BS idea of ice scratches, and carving, and sharpness of fabrics, without looking at technique, or how rocks are sanded. Every fabric scratches the ice. Rocks scratch the ice. How about we do some testing to see how much effect sweeping has, and what would be accepted. How rock sanding play a role. How fabrics play a role. How sweeping plays a role. Put them all in play and make the rules based on evidence.
I find it humerous how you call some opinions that aren't your BS because they dont have science, yet you have ABSOLUTELY ZERO science on your side. Pot meet kettle.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 03:55AM |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by Hardline
If anyone wants sweeping rules, its easy. How about you have 2 sweeping brooms. a left side broom, and a right side broom. Sweepers can switch sides, but the brooms have to stay on their designated sides. This way, all sweeping brooms will get used equally. At least, this will get rid of all the idiotic commentary on TV.
Agree with him or disagree, but it's hard to call Russ Howard's commentary "idiotic", given his experience in the game.
quote:
Originally posted by Hardline
Lastly, concerning the double standard that exists, FIF...I mean, the WCF, has allowed pads to be used by curlers, that dont have to be sold anymore, as long as the fabric has already been approved. Here is a picture of Edins pad http://worldcurling.org/wmcc2016/day-one-gallery 1st pic . They are obviously using some sort of honeycombed insert. Wouldnt this be an unfair advantage? Not saying the pad is better or worse, but using something that isnt available to all curlers? Rumour has it that Team Jacobs used these pads at the Brier. Since these pads arent sold, wouldnt it fall under the no homemade equipment category also? Anyway, as usual, just sayin.
Playing 'Devil's Advocate' for a moment here... This photo of Edin would be dismissed if offered as evidence in court of him using it to sweep - because he is pictured throwing with that broom. What if all he does is throw with that broom/pad, and does not sweep with it?
I have no idea if he sweeps with that pad or not (and even if he does, he's a Skip!)... and I have no idea if the other members of his team are using the same pad as is in the photo, and are sweeping with it.
I'm on nobody's 'side' in this issue - I simply want the truth to be known, whatever that truth may be. But I would suggest that if you are going to use a photo of a pad to help your argument - which it is fine to do -, you should use a photo that shows actual evidence of what you're claiming - and not merely a photo of what could be only someone's throwing broom (which they may not sweep with).
Show evidence that an individual or team is actually sweeping with that 'honeycomb' pad, and it will help your argument.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Last edited by On The Nose on 04-04-16 at 03:59AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 11:21AM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
"Agree with him or disagree, but it's hard to call Russ Howard's commentary "idiotic", given his experience in the game.
I don't know, at the beginning of the season all we heard Vic and Russ talk about was "wow look at this directional brushing" like it was the best thing in the world ( go back and watch broadcasts from earlier in the year if you don't believe me). Now you listen to Vic and Russ talk about directional brushing like it is the worst thing in the world. These are also the same announcers that commentated last years events when people were sweeping with "the brooms" and never said a word about the ice or scratching ( guess the brooms weren't scratching the ice last year, must have been magic).
we've established that curlky doesn't care about anyone but himself based on his previous post but the sport is played with brooms and manufactures need lead time to produce their product, they don't just magically appear so if the powers that be take until the start of next season to decide what is allowable and what is not ( and current brooms are not legal) the good old Mr. Curlky will be S.O.L. for a sweepimg device to play with.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 01:42PM |
|
curlky
Drawmaster
Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559 |
quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
we've established that curlky doesn't care about anyone but himself based on his previous post but the sport is played with brooms and manufactures need lead time to produce their product, they don't just magically appear so if the powers that be take until the start of next season to decide what is allowable and what is not ( and current brooms are not legal) the good old Mr. Curlky will be S.O.L. for a sweeping device to play with.
that is a bit harsh ans short sided. In an economy based upon capitalism, if one supplier cant make enough product to sell, someone will step up and fill the void. That's how it works in all industries. At the beginning of this season, archie of hardline whined about not having enough time to make manufacture goods to sell. Guess what, somehow he managed to sell brooms all year long, or he would be out of business now. I'm sure it was inconvenient for him, and maybe he lost a bit of revenue, but he managed last time. And if he wants to stay in business, he will manage next time, or diversify his product portfolio so he is not dependent on 1 single item.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 02:24PM |
|
jamcan
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340 |
The real question here is why did the CCA refuse a very reasonable request from an independent, unbiased federal government testing agency.
Once Round-Robin games were completed there was more than adequate free ice and time available to conduct some, if not all the testing. And being able to compare club to arena ice results could certainly have value.
Curlky,you may have some issues with Hardline. But you cannot argue against their complete willingness to have their products tested and their request that ALL manufacturer's products undergo the same tests and that techniques also be scrutinized.
__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 02:42PM |
|
curlky
Drawmaster
Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559 |
jamcan, it may have been refused because HLs proposed plan was not considered valid. See my point in a few posts earlier about how HLs proposal for labels of Sample A, etc was flawed.
I think also a good reason is that you do not want the testing done not only in front of manufacturers, but in front of everyone, whether that be fans, ice makers, officials, volunteers, etc. If I were in charge, this would be why I would not have agreed. Your point about access to championship ice is valid. But with that many eyes, it would be so easy to have rumors spread about what actually happened during testing. (ie Joe teh security guard saw the reulsts, and they dont match what was released)
And you said "you cannot argue against their complete willingness to have their products tested and their request that ALL manufacturer's products undergo the same tests and that techniques also be scrutinized."
Well, I can argue against it, and here is how. Archie wants thigns done how he sees fit, and only how he sees fit. Any suggestion contrary to his view he bashes as a conspiracy between BP and the WCF to put him out of business. HL continues to state that testing MUST ONLY BE DONE in the presence of the suppliers. This is asking for trouble, and is not consistent with just about any scientific testing.
What ultimately should happen is that the governing body releases a set of test criteria for a product to be approved. From there, you can test your own products, or even test your competitors products. I fully expect that the WCF never releases the results of any tests that they do, and really they have no reason as to why they should. HL will spin this as a conspiracy, as will their supporters, but that is indicative of how most real world testing goes.
The WCF is not going to endorse 1 product as superior or inferior. They will come up with a set of standards that if your product meets them, then the game will be played in the vision that the WCF views as appropriate.
Last edited by curlky on 04-04-16 at 02:45PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is . |
  |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > WCF broom summit!
1 2 )
In the run up to Christmas Day, 1893, the Aberdeen Peoples's Journal offered a prize of one guinea for the best letter about curling! That's the invitation... (read more)
A quick break for the Memorial Day holiday and we're back with our guest and new USA Curling Womenâs National Team & Juniors Director Jessica Schultz.... (read more)
I am in week 3 of isolation/quarantine/home schooling and getting a little squirrel-y. Personal hygiene has become optional. The kids have watched the entire... (read more)
On today's World Curling Report...we recap Day 1 of the 2019 Canada Cup. (read more)