Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W5 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00am CT
Giroux Final
Schapman (7) Watch Live Curling!
Johnson 10  Final
Scheel (9) Watch Live Curling!
Berg Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz 11  Final
Berg (7) Watch Live Curling!
: Canadian Wheelchair Championship
Moose Jaw, SK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 7 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 6:30pm MT
AB (Kuchelyma) Final
NB (Fitzgerald) (8)
AB (Purvis) Final
ON (Rees) 10  (7)
SK (Dash) Final
MB (Thiessen) (EE)
ON (Morris) Final
SK (Pederson) (EE)
QC (Marquis) Final
NL (Carroll) (8)
M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
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 3 of 4 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
05-05-15 09:45AM
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

No, that is not acceptable, for the following reasons:

1. Without knowing how many teams will qualify in a given year, you make scheduling virtually impossible...and, for that matter, you make it possible that no US teams will meet the mark (unless you're planning on setting the bar so low as to be meaningless), or too many teams qualify for Nationals to be a round robin test (unless you're planning on setting the bar so high as to be impossible unless you have HPP funding and are a full time professional team).

2. The OOM is not a fair system. There are too many events on the calendar (and soon to be more, it appears) that are not open, instead giving berths to those *already in* the top 12/16/20 in OOM points. The system rewards teams for their performance last year with seeds into High Value ("Slam") bonspiels. Not a desireable way to find the best team of this year

3. There's already a better system to determine 10 worthy teams.
- Give 3 slots to the top 3 US OOM teams
- Give 1 slot to the defending National Champion
- Give 1-4 slots to teams that win Slams
- Open Qualifier for the remaining slots (2-8 depending on how many teams qualify above)

Then let those teams compete it out and see who's best.

The current system was just proven woefully inadequate at *Guaranteeing* a podium, as no US teams got there, and the one that got closest wasn't part of the HPP Golden Ticket program.

Derek has gone too far, he needs to be reined back in before his reign destroys US curling for those who aren't his version of elite.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 10:46AM
OHCurler is offline Click Here to See the Profile for OHCurler Click here to Send OHCurler a Private Message Find more posts by OHCurler Add OHCurler to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
OHCurler
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2011
Location:
Posts: 31

Isn't the solution as simple as in other Olympic sports? You win Nationals/Qualifying tournament, you're in... IF you have a previous qualifying time/score that meets the world standard. In curling's case, that could be as long as the winner of Nationals is in Top X (whatever it fair as far as points) or has X number of wins in OOM events (whatever).

That doesn't change much from the current setup, just shifts the balance back to favor winning Nationals. You still have to put in your season work and win important other games if you want to win Nationals AND go to Worlds.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 11:02AM
ChiefIceMinion is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ChiefIceMinion Click here to Send ChiefIceMinion a Private Message Find more posts by ChiefIceMinion Add ChiefIceMinion to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ChiefIceMinion
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: In the crawlspace
Posts: 83

quote:
Originally posted by AlanMacNeill

2. The OOM is not a fair system. There are too many events on the calendar (and soon to be more, it appears) that are not open, instead giving berths to those *already in* the top 12/16/20 in OOM points. The system rewards teams for their performance last year with seeds into High Value ("Slam") bonspiels. Not a desireable way to find the best team of this year



At least two of the Slams (Elite 10, Players' Championship) use the YTD Order of Merit, not the full 2-year OOM total, to determine invitees. The other three, at least per the Grand Slam website, do not explicitly state whether they use the YTD or Full OOM standings to create the invitee list.

As far as your point #1 is concerned, setting the field size can be accomplished by stating the Top N US teams in the (US) OOM are the qualifiers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 11:26AM
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

Doesn't matter.

You know what the easiest way to get YTD OOM points is?

Spiel early in the season against someone who did well *last year*, since strength of field is a self-referencing system (it rewards those who already have points with *more points*, making it so that, theoretically, if the top 16 teams in the OOM were to conspire to never play outside their sphere, then team #17 could never crack into the top 16.)

Self-referencing scoring systems as the *sole* way to gain access to the National Championships is not valid. As a way to gain *some of the berths?*, sure...I'll even go as far as 5 of the 10...but to claim "This event crowns the best team in the nation" without a way for a team that doesn't have the gift of sponsorship to get in and prove they belong is not appropriate.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 02:08PM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

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

Curlky,

I've been dragged forward in my thinking into today's different world More and more semi-pro teams. Tougher Worlds. Higher stakes for missing the Olympics. An Olympics field that should be 16 teams instead of that small field and Canada should get 2 teams. I'm willing to be dragged even farther into this new world. I'm willing to concede changes and look forward instead of backwards.

I'd agree that dedicated teams are what we should be looking for. Conceding berths at Nationals to the highest point totals, however, favor the wealthy. I'd rather see a requirement that a team has "X" number of quality events before they are allowed to go to Nationals.

We are talking about the privilege of representing the USA. USA curling has much on the line. Reasonable demands and minimal standards seem appropriate.

Yes, the gold medalists from Nationals should go to Worlds. Perhaps I'm too old, but anything else seems unAmerican and definitely contrary to the spirit of curling. Besides, I'm not sure that any team fresh off losing Nationals will ever do well at Worlds.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 02:23PM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

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

An unintended consequence of reserving all the spots at Nationals (or even most of the spots) will be getting teams searching for the easiest points. Teams will avoid Canada and those lofty (but hard to cash) points and favor weaker spiels. The points won't be as many, but they'll be more attainable.

Another downside of hinging too much on Points is the likely scenario of teams changing midyear. Let's say Heater decides against the HPP this year and goes back to curling with Stop and Duck. Let's further say that their cash spiels go as they used to back when they won Nationals...mediocre with several close calls but few Points. Now let's say they add a seriously good player in December.

Do you want to exclude that team from Nationals? How about a team that was terrible in October but looks great in December, but doesn't have the Points? How about if Brady Clark breaks his leg and misses October and November? Do you want Brady out?

Too much resting on Points is a bad idea. I prefer some minimal requirements. Set them high or set them low. Make them wide ranging (fitness, coaching, clean criminal record...whatever) or make them narrow (be a real team that works at curling). Just try to encourage and not discourage as much as possible. I don't think we're on that path right now and it might cost us in the long run.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-05-15 10:29PM
SPMFromPCC is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SPMFromPCC Click here to Send SPMFromPCC a Private Message Find more posts by SPMFromPCC Add SPMFromPCC to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SPMFromPCC
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 440

quote:
Originally posted by tuck
Yes, the gold medalists from Nationals should go to Worlds. Perhaps I'm too old, but anything else seems unAmerican and definitely contrary to the spirit of curling.



Yes, the system is un-American, and that's precisely the point I've been trying to make ever since it started. It was decided that the old "American" system was not good enough to determine the best team to represent the USA at worlds. Not a statement of support, just a fact.

Personally, I'm slowly moving past caring about what system is in place, how representatives are determined, and entering the most difficult freaking spiels to get the most freaking points. It's a conversation that I am getting very tired of. The point is that it's not just about playing and doing well for a season and off you go to worlds. It's SO much more than that now. Can anyone do it? No. In fact, the group who can is infinitesimally small.

quote:
Originally posted by tuck
Conceding berths at Nationals to the highest point totals, however, favor the wealthy.



This is 100% true and something everyone should remember. Wealth can be measured several ways here: independent wealth, sponsorship, HP funding, etc. It takes a TON of money to be a top points team, period. Not everyone has it, and not everyone is capable of attaining it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-15 08:47AM
biterbar is offline Click Here to See the Profile for biterbar Click here to Send biterbar a Private Message Find more posts by biterbar Add biterbar to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
biterbar
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

So I see on social media Erika Brown has a new team consisting of:

Erika
Allison P.
Nicole J.
Natalie N.

I assume that most or all of Erika's team from last year are in the HP program at this moment.

In my opinion this team will be the favorite no matter what comes out of HP, any takers on an early wager?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-15 08:50AM
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

Depends...

*IF* they adopt the Shuster Strategy (which I am from now on going to refer to as the SPP) of getting their own sponsors and hitting the circuit, then yes, I would give that team pretty good odds.

If, however, they choose to just play smaller local events and then play into nationals, I give them good odds to make it to Nationals, and even decent odds to win said event, but given that the HPP formula has made it so unless you spend money, lots of money, from some source, you can't be Team USA, they won't be wearing Red, White, and Blue next April.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-15 09:03AM
biterbar is offline Click Here to See the Profile for biterbar Click here to Send biterbar a Private Message Find more posts by biterbar Add biterbar to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
biterbar
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

I am talking about Nationals, not being the World representative.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-15 12:13PM
Gerry is online now 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

1. The Grand Slams are open to anyone who goes out and play a schedule worthy of an elite teams and wins games. Roth, Shuster and McCormick earned their way into Grand Slam events.

To suggest it's impossible to qualify is to not understand the process. Adam Casey and Brendan Bottcher both started the season ranked 29th and 30th last season and worked their way into the Slams. There is lots of turnover from event to event and if you're successful when you get there you can stay in the Slams.

2. Setting an OOM standard for the Team winning Nationals is another way to manage the system, but there are drawbacks here too. In Switzerland, they have used a 35 points YTD minimum prior to Nationals to advance to Worlds. This would mean that ONLY teams who meet this standard are eligible for Worlds.

At least in the USA system, everything still has a hypothetical chance of going to the Worlds. Had Sormunen finished 4th, then any other team in the field could have gone. Under this system, ONLY Roth or Sormunen would have been eligible to go and on the Mne's side only Shuster, Brown and McCormick would have been eligible.

Be careful what you wish for. Had both Sormunen and Roth both missed the playoffs, one of them would still be going to Worlds.

__________________
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

05-06-15 01:48PM
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

Bringing the discussion back to John Benton's earlier comments:

The "Us vs. Them" problem could be greatly reduced with a system that looks like this:

A. up to 4 teams qualify for Nationals based on OOM points
B. up to 4 teams qualify for Nationals based on results in a selected set of cash spiels (call it the "USA Tour").
C. remaining teams for overall Nationals field of 10 qualify via an open qualifier event such as the current challenge round.

the numbers in categories A and B could be changed from year to year according to changes in the competitive field(s), could be different for Men and Women. The number for category B could be 0 at first until a proper set of spiels can be identified and certified as tour-worthy.

HPP teams continue to be hand-selected from among USA's best curlers and continue to receive support money, expert coaching, training, ice time, etc.

Eliminate Nationals exemptions for HPP teams and junior teams.

Send winner of National Championship to Worlds.

This will produce the best medal chance at Worlds AND greatly reduce the "Us vs. Them" problem. There will still be disappointed curlers left out of the selected HPP teams, but otherwise everybody will appreciate and cheer for whoever wins and represents USA.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-15 01:57PM
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

Other ways to reduce or eliminate the "Us vs. Them" problem:

2. Ask people to stop commenting, criticizing, complaining. Explain to all that regardless of fairness, we have already decided on the system, and it is pointless to complain about it. It's a dead horse, stop beating it. You are just being a nuisance, so stop talking now.

3. Ask strong non-HPP teams to stop playing, stop competing. Shuster, Erika, Ethan, etc. please take up another sport. When there is no "Them" there is only "Us".

for the record, I don't favor either of these two options.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-08-15 09:23AM
chubb is offline Click Here to See the Profile for chubb Find more posts by chubb Add chubb to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
chubb
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 52

Tuck:
I think the solution is pretty easy. Winner should ALWAYS represent the USA at Worlds. Have the final the best 2 out of 3. That way the creme should rise to the top. IMO.

Cheers

Tet

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-08-15 11:51AM
VAcurler is offline Click Here to See the Profile for VAcurler Click here to Send VAcurler a Private Message Find more posts by VAcurler Add VAcurler to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
VAcurler
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Jan 2012
Location:
Posts: 136

quote:
Originally posted by Tet
.. Winner should ALWAYS represent the USA at Worlds...


+1

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-08-15 03:54PM
first27 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for first27 Click here to Send first27 a Private Message Find more posts by first27 Add first27 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
first27
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Aug 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 7

US winner to Worlds.

quote:
Originally posted by chubb
Tuck:
I think the solution is pretty easy. Winner should ALWAYS represent the USA at Worlds. Have the final the best 2 out of 3. That way the creme should rise to the top. IMO.

Cheers

Tet



I agree, Ian. Can you imagine what the reaction in Canada would be, if the CCA put in a point standard, for determining the World rep., and NOT the Brier winner? That is the silliness from the USCA leadership that US teams have been shackled with for the last two years.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-09-15 08:08AM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

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

2 out of 3? I don't know, Chubb. I still dream of Nationals being a fairly significant TV event and 2 out of 3 might be harder to sell them. Maybe it's time I give up on that dream, but I'm not ready. It could be so very big for our sport. TV factors into lots of my thinking; like going to 8 ends and downplaying Mixed Doubles.

Conversely, a TV finals where the World representative is already predetermined is very good TV either.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-09-15 10:05AM
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

THe major sports networks seem to survive with the playoffs for other sports being Best-of...hell...best of 7's.

If NBC can't crank open 9 potential hours for the NAtional Finals (knowing 6 of em are booked) on the sport that outrates cycling coverage...then we need to be looking for another network.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-09-15 04:56PM
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

USCA, Inc. might be locked tight to NBC in golden handcuffs until 2032. Any bets on that assumption?

http://m.teamusa.org:80/News/2014/M...-Deal-For-Games

If so, those who don't like or trust that Mega Sports Monopoly can just do what the Monopoly allows the grassroots to do like directly supporting competitive teams we like and the off-the-Monopoly-board groups like the Brier's Sociables, Worlds' Pond Hoppers, Margarita CC, S.O.B. and Curling Geek.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-10-15 10:46AM
Gerry is online now 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: US winner to Worlds.

quote:
Originally posted by first27


I agree, Ian. Can you imagine what the reaction in Canada would be, if the CCA put in a point standard, for determining the World rep., and NOT the Brier winner? That is the silliness from the USCA leadership that US teams have been shackled with for the last two years.



If Canada was posting similar World Championship and Olympics results as the USA, there would be big changes here too.

__________________
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

05-10-15 11:49AM
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

Re: Re: US winner to Worlds.

quote:
Originally posted by Gerry


If Canada was posting similar World Championship and Olympics results as the USA, there would be big changes here too.



The BIG changes would NOT include abandoning the Brier Champion as the World representative.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-12-15 09:46AM
peglegg is offline Click Here to See the Profile for peglegg Find more posts by peglegg Add peglegg to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
peglegg
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2005
Location:
Posts: 101

Problem with the continued arguing over who goes is turning a blind eye to the fact that none of the teams are ready to compete for a gold medal or even compete regularly for any medal. While I don't like the idea of a not sending the champion, the real issue to me is under the current regime things are getting worse not better.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-12-15 03:50PM
IMWright is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IMWright Click here to Send IMWright a Private Message Find more posts by IMWright Add IMWright to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IMWright
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 206

quote:
Originally posted by peglegg
Problem with the continued arguing over who goes is turning a blind eye to the fact that none of the teams are ready to compete for a gold medal or even compete regularly for any medal. While I don't like the idea of a not sending the champion, the real issue to me is under the current regime things are getting worse not better.


It seems there's only going to be big changes after the next Olympics. Anything else before then will just be written off. Only when there's another big fail at the Olympics will the USCA be forced to overhaul the HPP. Until then, we're all along for the ride. I hope that there isn't a big failure at the next Olympics. Although any marginal increase in performance will be taken as "see, the system is working", where it could very well be within the noise.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-14-15 10:56AM
Gerry is online now 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: Re: Re: US winner to Worlds.

quote:
Originally posted by fanofcurling


The BIG changes would NOT include abandoning the Brier Champion as the World representative.



There is already discussion about using the Canada Cup to determine who goes to the World Championships. Sport Canada (who funds the elite programs and funding dependent upon International medals) would have the same influences as the USOC if Canada were to start missing the podium on a regular basis.

__________________
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

05-14-15 01:32PM
VanillaIce is offline Click Here to See the Profile for VanillaIce Find more posts by VanillaIce Add VanillaIce to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
VanillaIce
Administrator

 

Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 154

Not sure why I'm doing it.

(DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions below are my own and they are not necessarily a reflection or indication of the views of USA Curling or the High Performance Staff or any other coach or staff member working for USA Curling) (My feeble attempt at CYA)

Not sure why I'm posting again but I guess am hoping to illustrate the REAL problem that I feel we are attempting to solve. I again apologize for the length of my posts but its hard to get my points across in short form.

Firstly, as an organization we are the NGB with the responsibility (granted to us by the USOC) to select and send athletes as Team USA to the Olympic Games. Since the World Championship Rankings are the way these representatives are selected, this also means that we are responsible for performance at these events as our way to ensure participation in the Olympics. It is this tie between the two events that drives everything we do. Please note the word "responsibility" in the above. In the USOC's eyes, being invited to be Team USA is neither a right nor an entitlement....it is a responsibility for the organization, the coaches and the teams that are invited to be Team USA. This "invitation" cannot be earned simply by winning one or two events. In all other Olympic disciplines this invitation to be Team USA or part of Team USA is a multi-staged and / or multi-factored process that can span multiple years leading up to the Olympic Games. It may be that other disciplines send their National Champion as their rep. However, if you look closely, I am sure you will find that the qualification standard to even participate in the National Championship in those disciplines is quite high. It should also be noted that because this is an "invitation", not a right or entitlement earned, to become Team USA or part of Team USA, it is assumed that once the invitation is accepted, that team or athlete accept the "responsibilities" mentioned above as Team USA. Part of which, are taking direction from National Coaches who are hired by the NGB to ensure that we live up to these responsibilities.

As peglegg stated, our teams (regardless of who they are or how they qualify) are not ready to compete at the world level. Occasionally we are able to make a good run..Mens Birr, Shuster, Fenson and Womens Brown, McCormick, Johnson. But in large part we have been sending a different team to the Worlds and Olympics year after year. Our system up until now has bred mediocrity. It was a system that said everyone has a shot at winning, which is great. It should be that way. But it was also a system that had extremely low expectations. In one season a team could form and compete in a bare minimum of events with a very low time and financial commitment, qualify for Nationals and play well enough against other teams doing similar things to become Team USA. Back in the Second Chance days and the early days of the Challenge Round it was actually slightly better because the route was a little longer for the teams coming through those secondary events. They were forced to play more high level games late in the season leading up to Nationals. However, they were still, in large part, only competing against U.S. teams to prepare, with the exception of a few top teams. I personally credit that process for putting our 2009 team on a roll. To summarize, the majority of our teams do not see enough high level competition. They are not battle tested. So winning our National Championship, while it means that team was the best team that week, is simply not an indication that they are prepared to play at the World Level.

So what does being battle tested mean? It means having experience playing against and beating the best in the world; being physically and mentally prepared to have every game come down to the last rock; knowing your competition; knowing your own team and players and having absolute trust in them in any situation on or off the ice; possessing the skill, knowledge, and creativity to be able to beat the best when it counts. I have posted this before but I think it warrants posting again because this is part of what the USOC is looking at. In the last 5 years here are the average number of LIFETIME GAMES AGAINST THE FIELD PRIOR TO the World Championships and the Olympics:

Men's Teams
European 70 to 120
Pacific / Russia - 40 to 70
Canada 30 to 40
USA 20 or less

Women's Teams
Europeans 60 to 90
Canada - 50 to 60
Pacific / Russia 40 to 80
USA 40 or less

It isnt hard to figure out where the medals are going and why. So our results have very little to do with who we actually send right now. Its mostly simple math.getting top teams and athletes playing the top teams and athletes over time will yield results.

This math is a starting point and the basis for many of the decisions we are making in my opiniion. We are trying to create an environment to give the athletes, who are willing and able to commit nearly everything, EVERY opportunity (through a travel and training program with coaching) to become battle tested. At the same time, we needed to build a system that would incent a similar type of commitment from those outside of the program. In short, we are driving teams (both in and out of the HPP) to play more high level, meaningful games against world level teams. Playing in events where the field is a majority of U.S. teams, while great developmentally, is just not a great measuring of world-level readiness anymore. Unfortunately this INCLUDES our National Championships right now. And this absolutely still includes HP Teams; as evidenced by some of our HP World results so far. However, if we can get more teams and players willing to commit to a tougher schedule and we end up with more teams at our National Championship that are battle tested, we will have something. Yes, it takes time, money, effortmore than some are able to commit. Thats just the way it is.

Remember who we are trying to beat and the resources that many of them have to become battle tested. Remember the kind of time and effort that they are committing to it. Its May 2015. The season just ended and I am already seeing FB posts from European Teams in the weight room. Lifting, training, sweeping! Ill say this again. If I wanted to be a World Class, Olympic skier, gymnast, etc. I wouldnt be sitting in Minnesota waiting for someone to invite me to a camp or write me a check so I could compete. And I wouldnt spend my time complaining about the qualification system that I ELECTED to take part in when I knew the conditions before I made that choice. Nobody is holding a gun to anyones head saying YOU MUST CURL. If all you are interested in is getting to worlds and being a representative then you are in the wrong sport and wrong system. Fortunately I see most of this complaining here MOSTLY from people who are not directly affected.

The best example is John Shuster. The HPP cannot and should not claim much of Johns Teams success last year. However, knowing John Shuster, I believe he would have set his schedule as he did regardless of being in or out of the HPP because he understands the principles above. And despite his disappointment in not making the National Team last year, he didnt use it as an excuse to quit working and chasing the dream. I am not surprised in the least. I am also not surprised at their great result and the fact that he and his team all applied for the Combine because they are all willing to do what it takes. They worked within the system as it was set out and became Team USA within the rules of the system.

This system is a long-term solution that was never intended to yield immediate results. However the USOC is pleased with our progress in that we were able to achieve 5 of 7 milestones that THEY SET FOR US. The USOC still sees this as a success for USA Curling as a whole because the Milestones were set for the NGB not the HPP only. In other words, the USOC is fully aware and pleased that a team outside of the HPP had success. That coupled with the fact that our investment in the junior ranks is paying dividends with respect to the principles above are good signs in the USOCs eyes.

Is it a perfect system? Far from it. But we ARE making headway toward solving the battle tested issue in multiple ways. We can argue about the National Championships and points all day long, but in the end our intent and efforts are merely to solve the primary problem of our top teams and athletes gaining this essential experience regardless of HPP support or not. There may be other ways to utilize OOM or create a higher bar for qualification that doesnt include granting byes to the Nationals for HP teams. I personally, think there is room to move there in the future but only if we start seeing more teams out earning points at a high level. Until then, artificially creating this opportunity for HP teams and incenting non-HP teams to get out and play is the method we are going with.

I want to share a personal story here. Bear my soul a bit as it were. In the Spring of 2009, I had just seen my former teammates win a National Championship just one season after we parted ways. I was crushed. It was hard to watch. I searched around for a team without much luck. I knew I didnt want to do the same thing I had been doing and getting the same results. But I had a hard time getting anyone interested in committing to the kind of schedule and a multi-year commitment that I felt was required to take the next step. I was ready to retire. Then I got a phone call. You all know who that was and what the result was. I would never want to change that and I am thankful to John for taking a chance on an old guy. But the point I really want to make here has to do with what it was like living in the Athlete Village for me after all of those years of trying. It was thrilling and amazing of course! But there was also a ton of inner conflict for me. Inner conflict simply because I looked around at all of the other athletes there and realized that I didnt belong. It was a horrible feeling knowing..KNOWINGthat, even with all of my years of experience and work that I hadnt done nearly enough.that I hadnt committed to anything close to what the rest of these athletes had. This is not the feeling that any athlete should have when they are about to compete in the event of their life.

I only relay this story to emphasize my other points and hopefully make it clear as to why I do what I do. It is my number one goal, wish, and intention as a coach, mentor, friend, club manager, and curler that no U.S. curler EVER has this feeling when they get to that place.

Lastly, I again encourage any of you to actually take the time to do the research on what we are doing. And REALLY look deep at what other top countries and teams, including Canada, are doing. If you think its only about the number of teams they have in Canada, you are mistaken. Its a part of their equation but its not the only reason their teams have success. They simply have more teams and athletes who have been battle tested. You are seeing this play out in Europe and Asia right now....the investment in sending teams to the top competition to take their knocks and earn their stripes cannot be underestimated. The Swiss seem to be the best example right now.

So even if you cannot agree with the method I emplore you understand the intent of what we are doing. In my opinion, it's not an overnight process and it's anything but a "Win Now" proposition.

Sincerly and humbly,
John Benton

Last edited by VanillaIce on 05-14-15 at 04:22PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 3 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

W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W5 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00am CT
Giroux Final
Schapman (7) Watch Live Curling!
Johnson 10  Final
Scheel (9) Watch Live Curling!
Berg Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz 11  Final
Berg (7) Watch Live Curling!
M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Homan Brings Home Gold

Homan Brings Home Gold

Sydney, Canada - In front of a full house with over 4,000 spectators, Canada (photo: Stephen Fisher, World Curling) beat Switzerland by 7-5 to take gold at the BKT Tires World Women's Curling Championship 2024.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑