Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

Watching the Brier and it struck me going into the 5th tied 0-0 that the better the curlers and the ice gets, the fewer points end up getting scored. The FGZ rule which was touted as the cure for 'boring TV' in curling has zero effect when conditions are perfect and the teams are curling in the upper 80%. Teams still resort to the winning strategy of conservative play until they get 'their miss'.

I for one never once thought it was boring just because the score wasn't incrementing. Great shots and great sweeping are all part of the game, scoring shouldn't determine 'interesting' or 'boring' for our game.

That said, if the goal is to have lots of rocks in play, should we be perfecting the ice, the rocks, and creating pro curlers who throw hundred rocks every day? It seems that on the championship ice we're seeing now that you can't hide anything and ice reading is almost unnecessary. As curling becomes more and more a game of perfect, do we need to keep changing the rules to keep things exciting or has the FGZ just proved that ultimately the game is more checkers on ice than chess?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Most games that are 3-2 after 8 ends with 5 blank ends are pretty boring -- but not this Brier final. Having said that, I do think something has to be done to get more rocks in play. There have been lots of low-scoring and boring games in Brier, but this is an exception.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2014
Location: Alberta
Posts: 131

One thing that bugs me a bit is how the 10th (or 11th) of tie game is almost always the exact same. Guard, tick attempt, guard, tick attempt, draw, peel guard, guard, peel, etc. I'm not really sure how to fix that though, because following that pattern appears like the best way to win.

As for blanks and/or open play.. nothing is worse in curling than wasting ends watching the first rock go into the house and an exchange of 15 hits afterwards. Other than a drastic rule change (eg - can't remove ANY of the first 4 rocks), curling fans are really at the mercy of the teams in order to see an exciting game (if a team decides they want to play open, there aren't too many things to stop them).

But maybe this is what curling is meant to be. Not all ends are exciting. Not all games are thrilling. But then we get finishes to games like Gushue's game-winner this week or tonight's final draw which make up for any deficiencies.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

I've written about first end auto-blanks before, during the Trials when every single game went like that, which is bad for the game if it becomes a thing.

But it doesn't seem to have become a universal thing. Russ Howard mentioned last night that the first end strategy was different from the rest of the week due to the pressure of the big game.

The issue isn't the blanks themselves - it's the way they happen. The blank in the 4th end last night was good television. The 1st end blank wasn't.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

ngm, you are right that guard/peal/guard isn't as fun as a double and roll out or even a raise double and roll out. I have noticed that those types of shots that might have been one per game or considered 'circus shots' are very often 1st option on the championship ice we see. At least among the high echelon curlers like those we saw last night.

My post was about just that, the better the ice, livelier the rocks, better the shooters, cleaner the ice with synthetics, the harder it is to get anything going - it almost becomes the same heavy take out strategy as the FGZ rules were intended to stop... only now it takes a better shot to accomplish the same goal. With the fast consistent ice we have today, shooting those shots seems easier, you can shoot less weight and take a lot longer between hack and hog to stabilize than the high back-swing days when hack to hog took 3 seconds or less on a takeout.

If I recall, wasn't the discussion back in the dawn of the FGZ that the best teams would just figure a way around it? Looks like it came true.

Interesting discussion

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
Posts: 631

Unless peels are outlawed, you're always going to have the guard/peel/guard/peel dynamic in a late game situation (particularly tied in the last end). But, that's ok. While the shots thrown leading up to the final throws are generally easy, they build up the tension to the conclusion. Last night was a good example. I'm not going to turn the channel in the middle of the end. First, I want to see if there's a miss, and second, the suspense builds up to what the final thrower's gonna be left with and is he going to make it? The tension building is one of the things I like about curling.

The game is obviously better with the FGZ, even if teams have figured out how to deal with it. I am generally in favour of going to the five rock rule though. The question is what to do about the tick shot and I'm not sure there's a good answer. If a lead makes two perfect tick shots in a tie game final end situation, there really isn't much tension to build. However, I'm not sure there's a great rule change to cover this situation, and you want to reward teams that make good shots. Perhaps they could look at making the sheet a bit narrower as I think it used to be in Canada. Would take away a few less ticks. For now, I think the game is still pretty great.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2012
Location:
Posts: 119

One rule change I would consider would be this. The team with hammer in the first end would lose the hammer in the second unless someone scores. This would probably reduce the number of first end blanks. Again, you would lose hammer only in the first end if you blank.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 459

quote:

---

Originally posted by peteski
The game is obviously better with the FGZ, even if teams have figured out how to deal with it. I am generally in favour of going to the five rock rule though. The question is what to do about the tick shot and I'm not sure there's a good answer. If a lead makes two perfect tick shots in a tie game final end situation, there really isn't much tension to build. However, I'm not sure there's a great rule change to cover this situation, and you want to reward teams that make good shots. Perhaps they could look at making the sheet a bit narrower as I think it used to be in Canada. Would take away a few less ticks. For now, I think the game is still pretty great.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

I wouldn't want to change the rules so much that we see bumper cars in the 4 foot become the only winning strategy. I like to see games where the whole house is used, not just the 4'. That said, maybe we could do something to make the tick shot more risky. I like the notion that if a tick shot moves the guard out of play, both rocks are returned to the front of the house - perhaps frozen in the spot of the original guard with the shooter outside the guard.

The 'use it or lose it' approach to the hammer is interesting as well, but I think it changes the play of the game to the opposite. The team without the hammer would play to blank the end, while the team with the hammer would play to score. Instead of hammer team throwing corner guards, they would throw center guards. It would probably just result in the same thing.

I thought the Brier was great, the competition was evenly matched and the shot making was superb. I think it is ironic that we see such nail-biting games with so many blank ends, when the FGZ was supposed to force skips to come up with new strategies. Instead the shot making just got better so the same strategy still works even though the execution got harder. In my opinion, that is good enough - curling like that is exciting and the skills shown are amazing! It has raised the game to new levels in terms of shooting, while making strategy and ice reading less important.

Gone are the days when you could play against the weaknesses of the other team, or hide rocks in plain sight by picking up the ice faster than your opponent.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 19

The reason why we see so many blanks these days is not do to the strategy but due to the hitting abilities of the top curlers and the change in stones. If you notice most ends start out with rocks in play but if a team doesn't like the situation they throw the high hard one a clear all rocks. Most of the shots these guys make are impossible at the club level, not from an ability standpoint but from a rock and ice standpoint. The 2 things I would change is make the rocks and rings less lively so it makes it tougher to clear multiple rooks and also penalize a team for blanking by giving up the hammer in the next end. Just a thought.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: St. Albert
Posts: 839

We've covered changing the rocks to be less lively before, not going to happen.

My first thought is, what was wrong with the games this past weekend? Was there not enough excitement?

Yes, numbers are indicating that tied in the final end is becoming less likely for a team to steal...
http://curlwithmath.blogspot.ca/201...adian-open.html

Gerry has mentioned perhaps putting back the four foot lines (the length of the sheet) and if a centre guard is pushed out of it completely it is replaced. Perhaps for the whole game or maybe only in the final end.

So far, I think it was entertaining enough that we should leave well enough alone, and continue to bet the under.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 459

quote:

---

Originally posted by milobloom
My first thought is, what was wrong with the games this past weekend? Was there not enough excitement?

Gerry has mentioned perhaps putting back the four foot lines (the length of the sheet) and if a centre guard is pushed out of it completely it is replaced. Perhaps for the whole game or maybe only in the final end.

So far, I think it was entertaining enough that we should leave well enough alone, and continue to bet the under.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged