Registered: Dec 2008
Location:
Posts: 87

Any one who knows me, knows that I am a curling tradionalist. Hell. I am still upset that they reduced the number of ends from 14 to 12. So I was all prepared to hate Mixed Doubles, but after watching the webcast I kind of like it. Not love it in the same way that I LOVE watching "real" curling but I found it better than not watching any curling and better than working.

I thought that Dean and Sara's commentary was entertaining as they tried to figure out the strategy. The players seemed to be enjoying themselves. There were lots of rocks in play each end and even a lead of 4 or 5 points wasn't safe.

To me it seems like a harmless variation on the game we love. If it gets more TV time great. If it gives newer curling nations a chance to send a team to a World event, great. If it gets more people in the door of the local club, even better.

As long as it doesn't take away from "real" curling at the Olympics I don't see any harm.

No it is not real curling in the same way that the skins format is not real curling and shouldn't be used at the Brier etc. but what is the alternative. Regular Mixed curling at the Olympics seems to me to be more of the same just a lite version. Singles? doesn't seem right. A Hot Shot skills event? That is even further from "real" curling. So to add more curling to the Olympics Mixed Doubles may be the best solution.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Trying again to watch team USA. It looks like there is not one person in the arena that is not a curler, coach or official. Is nobody watching? How about seniors - are they attracting any fans?
I was able to watch most of the game but only because I know the Stolts. I thought the announcers did a great job. But...it still is not curling.
I would much prefer that the energy and resources being put towards mixed doubles would instead be focused on real curlng And while Tuck and many others share my view of this "sport," I understand that the ship has sailed.

Last edited by dbsdbs on 04-16-13 at 07:18PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 96

What' s sad is I would love to see mixed curling as an Olympic sport. I realize that does not solve the WCF goal of getting more countries involved. But, what a great spectator sport. I'm confident that the exposure would be great for the sport. As I have stated before, mixed doubles interest only those that do it, their families and maybe a few close friends.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 6002

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs
My apologies to Spain -- one just does not expect Canada to lose to a curling newbie. That is not likely to happen in real curling which some would say is why mixed doubles is a good addition - it gives newer countries with fewer curlers a chance to compete. While that may be true, the problem is that they are competing in something that is not curling. SergeantlV makes another strong argument against mixed doubles in the Olympics but I fear the WCF and IOC have other things on their mind [$$$$] besides what is good for curling.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 57

Why should the Olympics stop with handicapping curling?

How about doubles ice hockey? A throwback to those summer pick-up street games of our youth.

Or doubles snowboarding? I'd pay good money to see Gretchen Bleiler and Elena Hight strapped together on the same board.

...

Not sure that reducing the level of play is the right way to get other countries involved. And from what I've seen, that's what mixed-doubles does. It's pretty one-dimensional. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing rocks in play. But it kinda loses its excitement when you can play an end without fear of your opponent reliably throwing a runback.

I think 8-end mixed curling is worth a look. It preserves the integrity of the game and adds plenty of nuance. The Men's side has shown us this year that parity among nations is starting to grow.

I'd rather see top team compete at the highest level at this prestigious event rather than strip it down to the least common denominator.

Or maybe I'm the crazy one. Perhaps we should just give everyone who competes in the Olympics a "Participation Medal" and do away with the antiquated gold, silver, bronze system.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Actually the Olympics has already added events that are "smaller" versions of traditional events, how about beach volleyball? 2 players instead of 6/8 (I have no idea). I think the scoring might be different? Anyway, so there is a precedence there as well.

The IOC also is thrilled when they can add sports with men/women competing together - equestrian, figure skating, tennis(?) why not curling?

Also, an argument could be made that "snowboard" is not really similar to "skiing" if you look at the traditional events - downhill, slalom, etc. Half pipe is another "subjective" type event as well as slope style (do they have that?). Board cross actually came before ski cross. They added moguls and aerials to skiing (both subjective).

I think that is the other factor, they are looking for objective events rather than subjective given all the issues in the past with "scoring favoritism".

Certainly the adding countries argument does come into play. It is harder to attract countries to the winter Olympics than the summer I would think. Could "x hot weather" country send a runner/track person - sure, could they send a skiier/sledder/skater - doubtful. Think that Brazil might be interested in sending a mixed doubles curling team?

JH
Lots of things I could have checked but didn't. Nice to have a meaningful discussion on here for a change.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Not sure mixed doubles curling is analagous to beach volleyball. Beach v-b has basically the same rules except for modifications for 2 players. Unlike mixed doubles which was created specifically to try to get into Olympics, beach v-b has been played since the 1920s and has had a world championship since the mid-1970s.

If the IOC really is thrilled to have sports with men/women competing together, how about mixed curling - the real thing? It also has objective scoring and, to Melvin's point, it would show curling at its finest without stripping it down to enable more countries to compete.

Not sure what you are getting at with your argument that snowboard is not similar to skiing? or what that has to do with mixed doubles "curling."+

And don't forget the Jamaican bobsled team.

On a different note, looks like USA will again come home without medals [Sr Men, Sr Women, Mx Dbls]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 57

Good call on the beach volleyball thing, though I think it's a bit apples-and-oranges.

First, there are some differences besides the number of players:

- Smaller playing area
- No 3ft rule at the net
- 3 sets of 21, rather than 1 to 25

With the above changes, going from indoor to the beach has made the game more entertaining in my opinion. It encourages action and more scoring. The athleticism required is at least on par if not more than indoor. And one can't deny the visual appeal.

Doubles curling doesn't have the same effect. Sweeping your own stone is not visually appealing. It does not look athletic. Removing the sweepers greatly impacts the types of shots that can be made consistently.

I think you are right on with your snowboard vs. skiing analysis. The board events, as well as the cross events, are an obvious (and effective) effort to get a younger audience engaged. Relating this to curling is difficult. I'm picturing a hotshots type skills competition sponsored by Monster energy drink, where a Brady Clark in a tight-fitting Underarmour shirt steps into the hack to throw, needing a perfect hit and roll to the 4ft to take home the.... yeah, you get the picture.

Where does this rambling leave us? Ah, yes... I agree with another of your points. Mixed sports are good. Mixed curling is good. Mixed doubles is not.

Glad to have this discussion. Let's leave doubles curling where it belongs - Matinee leagues when you don't have enough people to play an actual game.

I'll throw in a wrinkle... I -might- be a bit more tolerant if the second person was not required to be in the house, and instead could sweep. I reiterate: -MIGHT-.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL (originally from Richmond, VA)
Posts: 85

One reason why I have not taken Mixed Doubles as seriously (at the elite level) is the World Curling Federation's bizarre format for the quarterfinals.

It is fairly common to have a format where third place teams from the group stage qualify for the quarterfinals. FIFA's format for the Women's Olympic and World Cup football tournaments are one example. But in all other instances no two teams from the same group ever play each other in the quarterfinals, or first round of the playoffs. Ever! Scotland and Sweden should not be playing each other again until at the earliest the semifinals. Why they have been forced to play each other in the quarterfinals is bizarre and if the WCF wants Mixed Doubles to get more credibility in the wider international sports movement, I would recommend that they adjust their competition format so that it is inline with other standardized formats.

__________________
If you want to win a race run the 100m. If you want an experience run the marathon. - Emil Zatopek

Last edited by SargentIV on 04-19-13 at 02:14PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Not sure WCF is very worried about the draws. Look at draws for Mixed and Seniors - lots of room for improvement

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location:
Posts: 33

Late to the party here but thought I'd post for completeness!

I competed in MD in Fredericton (we qualified for playoffs but lost in the quarters). I also competed in the seniors at the same venue. It was a first class tournament.

I've e-mailed the WCF with some suggestions on how the rules of doubles could be tweaked a bit to make it more fan-friendly.

Although new to doubles (like everyone) - it is definately fun to play! You definately have to be fit. But I agree its really hard to watch, and even harder to watch at the arena. This needs to be fixed (and Ben I even have ideas how - and they don't involve uniform choices for the female player!).


Cheers Hans

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Don't be a tease, Kiwi...shoot us some ideas.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location:
Posts: 33

Ok. Move the stationary stone of the team with the hammer from the back of the pin, to the back of the four foot.

This opens up the scoring zone a bit. Importantly for me - it would make the team without the hammer have to make an actual shot choice. My problem with the current rule is that the first shot for the team without the hammer is *always* a freeze to the stone at the back of the pin. Team without the hammer should have to make some kind of shot choice.

One of the reasons its hard to watch is that the pin area is always crowded. That means fan-pleasing hits to score points don't happen a lot (and even when they do, there are so many rocks in the button area, even when they move it's not clear to the fan who scored and how many).

Open up the button area a bit, and I think you'd get a greater variety of shots, and it would be more interesting to watch.

Like I said - its already a pile of fun to play!

Hans

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged