Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 6 -- Mon, Mar 18 -- 7:00pm AT
Gagn/Mori Final
Rees/Ches (EE)
Sand/Crai Final
Gamb/Kalt (8)
Arms/Grif Final
Pete/Gall (7) Watch Live Curling!
Zhen/Piet Final
Gion/Desj (7)
Wasy/Koni Final
Jone/Lain (EE)
Wise/Smit 12  Final
Weag/Eppi (6)
Lott/Lott 12  Final
Bouc/Char (7)
Krev/Math Final
Whit/Whit (6)
M: Aberdeen International Curling Championship
Aberdeen, SCO
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 2:45pm GMT
Mouat Final
Shuster (7)
W: Biktrix Saskatchewan Senior Women's Curling Championship
Martensville, SK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 3:00pm MT
Foster Final
Streifel (8) Watch Live Curling!
W: CCAA / Curling Canada College Championships
Sudbury, ON
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sat, Mar 16 -- 2:30pm AT
Southern Alberta IoT Final
Concordia U (10)
UofA - Augustana Final
Humber College (10)
D: WCT Slovakia Mixed Doubles Cup II
Bratislava, SVK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 12:00pm CET
Han/Zou Final
Paul/Paul (7)
Cihl/Mace Final
Yang/Tian 10  (6)
: NWTCA Mixed
Yellowknife, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 4 -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 10:00am MT
Delorey Final
Koe (5)
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 2 of 4 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
05-19-16 12:21PM
mr. lucky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for mr. lucky Find more posts by mr. lucky Add mr. lucky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
mr. lucky
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 142

quote:
Originally posted by biterbar



Come to any two or three sheet club in Wisconsin and ask a rank and file member what the USCA did for you this year and you will get a blank stare. I remember some brochures with a lion on them. The "Roaring" game. Wisconsin has had a couple of drop outs from dues in the last couple years although Superior is back in the fold.



I absolutely agree, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t good work being done. It means they are terrible at self-promotion.

Last edited by mr. lucky on 05-19-16 at 09:47PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-19-16 01:44PM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
SO many people on these boards would like the Canadian model for everything, things such as self formed teams, anyone can earn their way into nationals, national champ goes to worlds.

I would like to point out that Canada has a higher standard than the US standard of entry into Olympic playdown. The US has a rule that states you have to be Top 5 in the world to get a spot into the Olympic playdowns guaranteed. Canada requires a national champ to medal at worlds to get a spot into Olympic playdowns.



But Canada gives a straight berth to the Canada Cup winners, which is more the equivalent to the US nationals than the Brier or Scotties, and the top ranked Canadian teams earn berths. Then the pre-trial is filled based on ranking.

If we have an exact repeat of last season Team Brown will go to worlds in consecutive years, qualify the US for the Olympics, be the top ranked team from the US, but still need for the committee to give her a spot in the trials. The committee could skip over her team for the favored HP team. If I'm reading it right the discretionary selections are not even required to be existing teams, the committee can cherry pick players when setting the teams for the trials.

The trials themselves will be settled on the ice. And the guidelines given the committee for selecting teams is performance based. But it's not a defined objective standard like the Canadian format.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-19-16 11:24PM
jtphoto2020 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jtphoto2020 Click here to Send jtphoto2020 a Private Message Visit jtphoto2020's homepage! Find more posts by jtphoto2020 Add jtphoto2020 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jtphoto2020
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location: Eau Claire Wisconsin
Posts: 20

quote:
Originally posted by mr. lucky


Want the USCA to run its own national championships? They already do, in the form of Club nationals.
In a sense, HP and the USCA are already two separate entities. And, like I mentioned earlier, the Member Service part (sport Ed) has some great things in the que for next year.



I've been saying this for quite a while now. Give up on this "trying to please everybody" situation that ultimately pleases nobody. Ditch the current national championships that do not guarantee a path to the worlds and go to a straight selection of teams for a world representative playoff. Make those selections based on OOM or whatever.

Next, rework the club nationals to be more like the old regionally based nationals. It's too hard to make solid teams from most clubs anyway. Put your team together, win your state or region and go to what will now be the "real" nationals.

Everybody knows exactly what they are playing for - to be the national champion - nothing more or nothing less. No worrying about points or rooting for other teams to lose and all that junk associated with the current nationals.

Or maybe, like the Canada Cup, the winner gets into that world representative playoff.

It's clear the current system is killing participation on the womens side at least and ultimately could do the same on the mens side. I believe with this system you would see a great increase in participation. People wouldn't have to travel far for their qualifier which would increase participation and more teams would likely give it a shot because the playing field would be level.

Just my summer two cents.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-16 12:21PM
IceMelter is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IceMelter Click here to Send IceMelter a Private Message Find more posts by IceMelter Add IceMelter to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IceMelter
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Apr 2009
Location:
Posts: 25

Give Brown an inch and he'll take a mile... in four years we'll be wishing this process was still in play because he'll have full authority at that point.

Make Curling Great Again!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-16 01:17PM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by AlanMacNeill


Like, you know "Our international Team selection criteria will be guided by fair and open principles open to all members to earn their way in"

Something like that...

So yeah, this is *EXACTLY* within the purview of the Board. We're not saying the Board needs to declare how many teams will be in, or what the format of the trials will be, but they do need to tell Derek that his path is unacceptable.

Pretty clear, really.



IIRC the HPP director reports to the EO, not the board. If the board thinks that their strategic wishes are not being carried out, the EO can be held responsible. If the board provides guiding language that's one thing. If they venture into micromanaging, no one will be willing to work with the organization. And if the board hires poorly, well there's no fixing that after the fact.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-21-16 05:20PM
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

When the USCA board several years ago ceeded world team selection to HP, then allowed incremental watering-down of selection by picking away at "on-ice" results at nationals, this Brave New World of off-ice selection becomes inevitable.

We saw the "national champion" patches eclipsed by new Team USA embroidered badges. I chuckled at USCA website pix of the 2016 men's team at Worlds this year wearing their national champ patches from a previous year. At least some still find a meaning in a "national champion".

The board sat by during this year's national mixed doubles and later, the closed door selection for the world team which was not all about on-ice results,. No results were published anywhere...anyone?

This latest development for our mens and womens teams is not a surprise at all. Athletes as fungible commodities, interchangeable by their Wiser Betters on the HP staff. Why do I keep picturing in my mind Roman emperors giving thumbs up and thumbs down signals to gladiators far below on the sand of the Coliseum?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-16 08:40AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc


IIRC the HPP director reports to the EO, not the board. If the board thinks that their strategic wishes are not being carried out, the EO can be held responsible. If the board provides guiding language that's one thing. If they venture into micromanaging, no one will be willing to work with the organization. And if the board hires poorly, well there's no fixing that after the fact.



Yes and no,

When a program goes off the rails, a board is still very entitled to say "Fix it" to the EO. It is, in fact, what they exist for, the Buck Stops There.

The EO *should* be handling it on his own authority, but appears to be at least tacitly endorsing the plan by allowing it to double down on field restrictions.

And since we, the membership, ultimately are the *actual* bosses, we have every single right to tell the Board (since we have no input at all on the EO selection) that the ship is heading for an iceberg, it might be appropriate to change course a bit.

To follow that iceberg metaphor, the Captain of the Titanic didn't get off scot free because his officers didn't control the ship correctly, and his radio officer didn't control his radioman correctly, the Captain got blamed and castigated.

The Board is acting damned near the same...the Ship is bright and shiny, via the work of a team that had as little to do with the HPP as possible (remember, Shuster was only *in* the HPP this past year because the HPP's hand was forced by his performance in the 14/15 season), participation in Men's and Womans Nationals is down, dramatically, and the HPP is rearranging the deck chairs all facing away from the iceberg.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-22-16 09:09PM
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

Board meetings are open to anyone that wants to attend. I would encourage all that have an opinion to attend a meeting. Next meeting will be in Phoenix in conjunction with the members meeting in October. Yes, you have to travel, so do I.

JH

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-16 10:18AM
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

quote:
Originally posted by jhcurl
Board meetings are open to anyone that wants to attend. I would encourage all that have an opinion to attend a meeting. Next meeting will be in Phoenix in conjunction with the members meeting in October. Yes, you have to travel, so do I.

JH



Perhaps you could convey the feelings of some frustrated US Curling fans on our behalf.

The big question is does the USCA Board of Directors feel that Derek's HPP path to the Olympics for the Men's and Women's teams fits their intent to have the Team's selected on the ice given that it is entirely possible that all Olympic Trials teams could get there through discretionary selection.

Last edited by MNIceman on 05-23-16 at 10:22AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-16 06:26PM
fanofcurling is offline Click Here to See the Profile for fanofcurling Click here to Send fanofcurling a Private Message Find more posts by fanofcurling Add fanofcurling to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
fanofcurling
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 81

quote:
Originally posted by jhcurl
Board meetings are open to anyone that wants to attend. I would encourage all that have an opinion to attend a meeting. Next meeting will be in Phoenix in conjunction with the members meeting in October. Yes, you have to travel, so do I.

JH



Here’s the problem with your suggestion to provide feedback at the board of directors meeting. First of all, no one is going to fly to Arizona to express an opinion. It’s unrealistic to think anyone would. Second, to get opinions or comments from those not directly or indirectly involved in or showing interest in the HP Program will have little influence. Third, those athletes directly or indirectly involved in the HP Program would never offer their opinions because of repercussions from the HP Staff.

There’s not a single athlete in the HPP that would say a negative thing about the HP Program or Staff. The athletes like being in the program. They like getting many (maybe not all) of the events they attend paid for. They like the invites they get to events because of their involvement in the program. Why would they say anything against the program and risk being dropped from the program that pays for their opportunity to curl?

However, IF the athletes were interviewed and assured complete confidentiality, I think you might be surprised by the responses you get.

About a year ago I asked about program assessment. And it was mentioned that the athletes are surveyed. Really? Do you really think they would respond honestly? Without anonymity, you won’t get honest answers.

One last comment. The last two years it has been reported that MOST of the HPP goals were met. BUT, if you excluded the results by Shuster (a self-formed team) and E. Brown (a self-formed team), how many of the HPP goals would have been met????? What does that really tell you about the HPP?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-16 09:51PM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

Fly to Arizona, there's more to the Members' Assembly than just a board meeting. Can't go, then email your club president and region's director. They probably won't change anything at this stage, but I think enough noise could help steer the direction long-term.

Don't assume that because the USCA likes to publicize the goals they meet that they are completely satisfied with the program and the staff. Keep in mind that a vote of confidence for the coach is often the last public statement from an owner before a coach gets fired.

As far as Olympic qualification, I like to think that it would do more that just raise eyebrows in the USCA offices if Derek's Olympic trials criteria are not met by any of the teams on either the men's or women's side, especially any of the HPP teams. That would be marks against the criteria and the ability of the HPP to get results from their teams.

There are really two aspects of the HPP that need to be reviewed. One is having a positive effect on the athletes in the program. This is where the athletes should be surveyed, and I think would be willing to give honest answers because it's their chance to make the program better.

The other is raising the overall standing of US curling. This means more high quality teams and better international results. For detractors to the direction of the HPP there's not much to be done in the short term. The commitment has been made to follow the current path through 2018, and do their best to improve our Olympic results. That is when the real evaluation of our National and Olympic team criteria will be made, and hopefully adjusted based on what is working, and what changes were made that went to far.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-23-16 11:51PM
Curlrock is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Curlrock Click here to Send Curlrock a Private Message Find more posts by Curlrock Add Curlrock to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Curlrock
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 96

Based on what I!ve read on this thread, why should the USCA be involved in high performance curling? This USOC continues to increase their influence over the program. It appears that what happens in the USCA has less and less influence on the HPP. It' really seems like the USCA should get out of international curling.

To much time and resources are spent on a very small number of athletes and coaches. I know the money comes from the USOC, but the focus seems to be skewed. At the very least, the USCA has an image problem. It's not my intention to bash the USCA. I know many individuals who have given time and expense for the organization. I'm just not sure they are doing everything they can for the 99%.

The significant growth in curling since becoming an Olympic sport cannot be attributed to the USCA. This growth would have occurred whether the USCA was involved or not in Olympic curling.

It's unlikely that anything will change as 50-60% of curlers don't even know about the USCA,. The small percentage of curlers that make the decisions about high performance curling and its connection to the USCA are the same one that reap the benefits by association.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-16 12:27AM
IceMelter is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IceMelter Click here to Send IceMelter a Private Message Find more posts by IceMelter Add IceMelter to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IceMelter
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Apr 2009
Location:
Posts: 25

Deceitful Derek is gaining more and more power every year over the USCA.

He ruined curling in Scotland and the States are not too far behind.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-16 02:35PM
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

USA Curling won medals in 4 of 5 World Championship events where the USOC is investing funding into competitive play.

USA Curling had teams finish the highest in both Men's and Women's ranking on the Order of Merit than ever before. John Shuster finished the season ranking 11th on the OOM Year to Date, which becomes next season's starting ranking. While not part of the High Performance program, Erika Brown finished 14th overall.

USA Junior Men won a silver medal while the USA Junior Women also won a silver medal. These young athletes are being developed as the next generation of USA Curling.

USA Mixed Doubles pair went on to the Worlds and won a Bronze Medal, the first ever in the discipline for the USA and of course John Shuster's Bronze Medal in the Men's Worlds.

Seems to be the goals of the program are being met and the overall development of High Performance curling is moving in the right direction.

__________________
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

05-24-16 02:42PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

Well said Gerry, could not agree more

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-16 02:49PM
jtphoto2020 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jtphoto2020 Click here to Send jtphoto2020 a Private Message Visit jtphoto2020's homepage! Find more posts by jtphoto2020 Add jtphoto2020 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jtphoto2020
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location: Eau Claire Wisconsin
Posts: 20

Agree with everything Gerry said. At the top level the results are starting to come in. This is why I continue to hammer on the idea that there needs to be more emphasis on juniors and bringing up the next generation(s) of competitive curlers.

To their credit - USCA is doing this by expanding the junior HP program to two teams of each gender and supporting a U-18 national championship.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-24-16 03:07PM
rbi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rbi Click here to Send rbi a Private Message Find more posts by rbi Add rbi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
rbi
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: May 2014
Location:
Posts: 143

if all is going swimmingly, then there should be no need to define a USA Olympic Quals criteria that essentially prevents most (all?) USA teams from earning their way into the quals via on-ice performance and puts the quals invitations almost entirely into the hands of the HPP Director.

Here's a suggestion to improve the process: give the Director one discretionary invite, and let the bulk of the field in the USA Olympic Qualifier earn their way into the competition via on-ice achievements. So if the field is deemed to be 8 teams, then take the top 7 as ranked by YTD OOM points (or some other fair, reasonable achievement-ranking system) and then let the Director choose one more team at their discretion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 07:59AM
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

Re: USA Olympic Qualifications Criteria

quote:
Originally posted by fanofcurling
I just looked at the US Olympic Team Trials qualifications criteria. Here’s a summary:

In 2016-17 you need to finish in the top 5 at the World Championships.
Question: The USA World Championships representative for 2016-17 is not sufficient to qualify for the trials? They need to finish top 5? What’s the rationale?

In 2016 -17, you need to finish in the top 15 OOM OR Year to Date top 15 OOM.
Question: Why was the criteria set so high? Prior to 2015-6, has any USA curling team finished in the top 15 for OOM?

Statistics: 2016 YTD OOM Top 15 for Men: 11 Canadian Teams, 1 Scottish Team, 1 Swedish Team, 1 Norwegian Team, and 1 USA Team(11th)
Statistics: 2016 Overall OOM Top 15 for Men: Same stats with Team USA 14th

What’s the logic by setting the criteria so high?



There is an open opportunity for anyone to go out and win games and qualify for the Trials. Both John Shuster and Erika Brown did it last season, one a funded program team and the other a self-funded team.

The criteria is set high because the USCA is looking for teams who can compete for a medal. This is no different than any other country that has an open playdown for the Olympics.

Canada, Switzerland hold playdowns for the Olympics, but not just anyone gets into them. Top 15 Order of Merit is a reasonable standard as teams in both these playdowns will likely be inside or close to that ranking.

__________________
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

05-25-16 08:29AM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

Gerry, the problem is not that it's a hard criteria, it's that the it's likely the majority of the field will be filled out by selection rather than results because multiple teams won't meet the criteria.

The uproar really comes if a team of HPP players is selected over a team with better results. Or force a team that's outperformed the HPP teams to replace a player with an HPP athlete to get a trials spot. Right now the best we can do is hope that doesn't happen, but the rules make it possible.

Last edited by Grat on 05-25-16 at 08:34AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 09:20AM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by Grat
Gerry, the problem is not that it's a hard criteria, it's that the it's likely the majority of the field will be filled out by selection rather than results because multiple teams won't meet the criteria.


That is not the fault of the system, that is the fault of the players. If you are serious about getting in the trials, play more and get results.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 09:50AM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

It is a fault in the system when playing more and getting better results doesn't earn a spot over a hand picked team that has lesser results.

Getting serious and earning a spot means that all the teams at the trials should be the teams with the best results. Not the one team who earned their way and two teams the HPP chooses to round out the field.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 10:03AM
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

Earning the right to be Team USA isn't about proving you're the best in the world, it's about proving you're the best in the USA. If Derek didn't want to have the control of selecting the teams in the Trials the qualification criteria could have easily been written as the #1 ranked US team in YTD and Overall OOM rankings after next season earn a spot in the Trials. The only reason to not do it this way is if a non HP team finishes #1 out of US teams but not in the top 15 overall then Derek can pick a HP team.

To me the HPP policies show that they are not confident in their own teams winning. They are scared of the HP teams not qualifying on their own and of how that would reflect on the HP program leaders in the eyes of the USOC. So to take care of that problem they make it impossible for the HP teams to not qualify for Nationals and the Olympic Trials.

This is not a good way to build confidence and a culture of winning in the HP teams.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 11:49AM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by Grat
It is a fault in the system when playing more and getting better results doesn't earn a spot over a hand picked team that has lesser results.

Getting serious and earning a spot means that all the teams at the trials should be the teams with the best results. Not the one team who earned their way and two teams the HPP chooses to round out the field.



My problem with your statement is based upon the wording "better results". I want a team with elite results. If your team does not get elite results, then you have no one to blame but yourself. Perform at an elite level and your team gets a spot. If you don't, then you leave it in the hands of the judges.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 01:39PM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

If you want only teams with elite results at the trials then don't allow the committee any ability to select the majority of the trials team from a pool of teams that has not achieved elite results. If only one team achieves elite results, then they shouldn't have to play down against the non-elites to go.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-25-16 04:59PM
rbi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rbi Click here to Send rbi a Private Message Find more posts by rbi Add rbi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
rbi
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: May 2014
Location:
Posts: 143

quote:
Originally posted by curlky


... Perform at an elite level and your team gets a spot. If you don't, then you leave it in the hands of the judges.



Maybe I could get behind that sentiment if the "judges" weren't also the same people who manage the HPP.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 2 of 4 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | »»   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: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 6 -- Mon, Mar 18 -- 7:00pm AT
Gagn/Mori Final
Rees/Ches (EE)
Sand/Crai Final
Gamb/Kalt (8)
Arms/Grif Final
Pete/Gall (7) Watch Live Curling!
Zhen/Piet Final
Gion/Desj (7)
Wasy/Koni Final
Jone/Lain (EE)
Wise/Smit 12  Final
Weag/Eppi (6)
Lott/Lott 12  Final
Bouc/Char (7)
Krev/Math Final
Whit/Whit (6)
M: Aberdeen International Curling Championship
Aberdeen, SCO
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 2:45pm GMT
Mouat Final
Shuster (7)
D: WCT Slovakia Mixed Doubles Cup II
Bratislava, SVK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 12:00pm CET
Han/Zou Final
Paul/Paul (7)
Cihl/Mace Final
Yang/Tian 10  (6)
: NWTCA Mixed
Yellowknife, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 4 -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 10:00am MT
Delorey Final
Koe (5)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Canadian mixed doubles championship starts in Fredericton on Sunday

Canadian mixed doubles championship starts in Fredericton on Sunday

Marlee Powers and Luke Saunders of Halifax, Nova Scotia won 6-5 over Papley/van Amsterdam in the opening draw streamed on Curling Canada's Plus platform.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑