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!
M: New Holland Canadian Junior Championships
Fort McMurray, AB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 11 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm MT
NL (Tipple) Final
BC (Fenton) (10)
NB (Stewart) 11  Final
QC (Bedard) (8)
MB (McDonald) Final
NS (Mosher) (8)
ON (MacTavish) Final
SK (Derksen) (10)
NO (Deschene) Final
MB (Freeman) (9)
NS (MacIsaac) Final
PEI (MacFayden) (9)
NO (Rajala) Final
ON (Mulima) (9)
BC (Duncan-Wu) Final
AB (Wipf) 10  (8)
M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M6 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 12:00pm CT
Church  
Rose    Watch Live Curling!
Brenden  
Guentzel    Watch Live Curling!
Fitzgerald  
Hebert    Watch Live Curling!
Lannoye  
Cenzalli  
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!  

CurlingZone : Powered by vBulletin>
<smallfont><b><a href=CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > 20+ Top-Level Teams Sign Broom Agreement

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 4 of 7 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
10-26-15 07:59PM
draway8 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for draway8 Find more posts by draway8 Add draway8 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
draway8
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Jan 2014
Location:
Posts: 88

quote:
Originally posted by JB42


The following article in the Winnipeg Free Press expresses well what I believe is the correct interpretation of events.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sp...-333111391.html

Here in the opening line it shows the media's take on this controversy: "An unprecedented leap in sweeping technology threatens to dramatically change the sport of curling."

You can find any number of articles saying the same thing. I have found none taking the Jamcan and JAH line. I.e. The status quo was fine, wait for evidence, proof, and rules.




Well if the ratings-crazed media have decided to characterize this "controversy" in this manner, then it must be true.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-26-15 08:36PM
JB42 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JB42 Click here to Send JB42 a Private Message Find more posts by JB42 Add JB42 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JB42
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 621

I hope you are better at drawing to the four foot than you are at drawing conclusions.

The point is not that the media is proof of anything one way or the other. The point is that if the media is reaching this conclusion then we have a four alarm problem that needs immediate attention.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-27-15 12:08AM
aluchko is offline Click Here to See the Profile for aluchko Click here to Send aluchko a Private Message Find more posts by aluchko Add aluchko to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
aluchko
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Dec 2013
Location:
Posts: 25

quote:
Originally posted by JB42
This declaration makes no claims to being binding. It does the very opposite of claiming authority over the rule's bodies and instead express their confidence that these bodies will act promptly to enact the standards needed.

It is a simple statement of aspirations by the teams who chose to sign on. Their aspiration being that the skill and athleticism of the game not be negatively impacted by broom technology.


Though we know from Amy Nixon that Howard was exerting a lot of pressure to get teams to sign. The declaration is also very vaguely worded so it could either apply to Hardline brooms or only the unreleased BP+ brush heads. I suspect there'd be a lot fewer signatures if it made clear that Hardline brooms were included. It's possible some of the teams didn't even realize that Hardline was the intended target and they thought only the brand new BP blackheads were implicated.

quote:
Originally posted by JB42
The following article in the Winnipeg Free Press expresses well what I believe is the correct interpretation of events.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sp...-333111391.html


Actually the article has numerous errors and/or misrepresentations.

New brushes hitting the market recently changed all that.

"It's a type of fabric that allows you to virtually steer the rock," Howard said. "I use the phrase 'joystick'. I can now joystick right, left, forward, back.


Except the BP blackhead fabric that Howard was actually describing never hit the market and no one has ever described a Hardline broom like that.

Curling equipment companies have been pushing the envelope on directional fabric. It came to a head this past week at the StuSells Toronto Tankard.

"It's not something I believed or my team believed until we saw it," Jacobs said. "It's quite incredible what has happened here. It's negating the purpose of having two sweepers on any kind of shot."

Gushue's team began using brooms with directional fabric this season "because we had an absolutely horrible record against teams using this equipment last year and we felt we were at a competitive disadvantage," he said.

Teams using the latest version of the broomhead caused the ice to deteriorate in Toronto and ruined subsequent shots, the skip said.


That's completely misleading. Only the BP blackhead broom heads are generally accepted to have "directional fabric". I'm aware of no one applying that term to Hardline except for BP, Howard, and maybe Jacobs. Certainly if you asked most Hardline owners they'd have no idea what you were talking about.

I certainly don't believe that Gushue considers his Hardline brooms to be directional yet the article basically claims that he knowingly used directional fabric. More than that it actually implies that so far this season he's been using something substantially similar to the brooms that caused an outrage at StuSells and other teams were using them last year!!

More than that the article doesn't even mention the background of BP, Hardline, or BP's claimed motive for releasing the brooms in StuSells.

Personally I think it's quite probable that BP had no idea what the fallout would be from StuSells. Maybe they thought they invented a superbroom and when all the outrage hit they panicked and came up with this whole story about trying to prove a point and Hardline also having direction fabric.

Just look at the dates, StuSells was from the 9th-12th, the elite team statement was October 14th, yet BP didn't say anything till October 16th

http://www.curlingzone.com/event.ph...in&eventid=3860
http://www.balanceplus.com/press101615.htm
http://www.teamcanadacurl.ca/blog/r...lite-teams-125/

If you were deliberately doing that to prove a point and never intended to release them to market then why wait an entire week to actually tell people what you were doing?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-27-15 04:24AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

Well written and researched riposte to JB42. I look forward to his response which will no doubt ignore the factual arguments you state in favor of his 'the top 22 teams know all, see all and can't possibly be wrong' stance.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-27-15 10:06AM
brycejmcewen is offline Click Here to See the Profile for brycejmcewen Click here to Send brycejmcewen a Private Message Find more posts by brycejmcewen Add brycejmcewen to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
brycejmcewen
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 211

JB42 - while it is ok for a team like Gushue or Jacobs to say they have had "an absolutely horrid record" against teams using Hardline brooms last year, we should probably check out if what they are saying is accurate, as people are pretty terrible when it comes to finding patterns that don't exist.

So, lets look at Gushue and Jacobs record against the three main hardline teams - McEwen, Laycock and Carruthers.

2014/2015 Gushue vs McEwen (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...85891&drawid=19)

Played 6 times. Gushue's record 1-5. That is horrible. But if you look at his record agains McEwen since 2008 they've played 28 times, and Gushue is 7-21. So Brad actually has "an absolutely horrid record" against McEwen no matter what broom they use.

2014/2015 Jacobs vs McEwen (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...92315&drawid=19)

Also played 6 times. Jacobs record is 2-4. Not good. But again, if you look back to 2010, they've played 18 times, and Jacobs record against Mike is 6-12 - not good no matter what broom team McEwen is using.

So Gushue went from a .27 winning % before Hardline to a .16 winning % after Hardline. Jacobs went from a .5 winning % before Hardline to a .5% winning % after Hardline.

So when it comes to playing McEwen, Gushue basically lost 1 more game than he historically would have, and Jacobs lost the same number of games he historically would have. Considering the absolutely dominant season McEwen had, I'm going to go ahead and call them both wrong, as they both played up to their standards.

Let's look at Laycock now.

2014/2015 Gushue vs Laycock (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...88441&drawid=18)

Played 4 times, Gushue 3-1.

They have played 16 times since 2011, and Gushue is 13-3. So again, wrong about Laycock.

2014/2015 Jacobs vs Laycock (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...68311&drawid=24)

Played 3 times. Jacobs record 2-1. Historically played 9 times, Jacobs is 6-3. So again, Jacobs was wrong about Laycock.

2014/2015 Gushue vs Carruthers (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...=86377&drawid=6)

Played 4 times. Gushue went 0-4. Overall, they've only played 9 times, and Gushue is 4-5. Gushue might have something here.

2014/2015 Jacobs vs Carruthers (http://www.curlingzone.com/forums/s...86386&drawid=11)

Played 5 times. Jacobs went 3-2. They've only played 7 times, and Jacob is 4-3. I'm going to say Jacobs won what he should have historically.

So I'm going to go ahead and say that both Gushue and Jacobs are wrong about their record against Hardline teams - they weren't horrid, instead, they were as expected. The one exception might be Gushue vs Carruthers, but that could even out the more they play, as 2 of the 9 games were actually from 2008 when Reid had a very different team.

I don't believe Gushue or Jacobs were intentionally trying to mislead anybody, they're both just wrong. So using that comment to justify the ban on Hardline brooms is invalid, as the facts don't support the premise.

__________________
It's colder when you're losing...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-27-15 10:36AM
JB42 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JB42 Click here to Send JB42 a Private Message Find more posts by JB42 Add JB42 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JB42
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 621

It is possible for principled people to have differences of opinion. However for this to be possible you first have to be a person of principle. What is at the core of a person of principle is the respect they have for others and their opinions. And in this particular case the respect they have for the game.

There is quite simply no one in the last thirty years that better exemplifies such a person than Glenn Howard. No one who has shown more respect for his teammates. No one as a result who has been easier to play with. No one who has taken the ups and downs, misses and makes with more grace, humour and even wit. No one who has shown more respect for his opponents win or lose. And how do we know this? Simple. We have got to watch it first hand as he took more bad beats than anyone in the history of curling. Beats he handled in such a way as to bring credit to the entire game. And beats he came back from as strong as ever.

All of this, and a great deal it is, as everyone here knows is only the beginning of his and his brother's contribution to the game. A contribution that stretches back some thirty years.

Yes BP came out with a 'steering broom'. No they did not try to hide it. The very opposite. They brought it out to make a point. And how do I know that? He was willing to talk to me about it during the Stu Sells. A spectator, never an elite player, and a person he barely knows. Hardly the way to keep a secret.

Was BP's decision the best method for dealing with this issue? This is precisely where people of principle can disagree. What I can tell you is that BP and Team Howard were not the only teams that felt that the HL broom was a 'bridge too far' technologically speaking. In fact every top team that I spoke too that wasn't HL felt the same way. Hardly scientific I know but the Stu Sells had quite a field and I made a point of talking to and listening to every top team there. It wasn't hard as there was pretty much nothing else being talked about.

Gushue's team obviously felt 'If you can't beat em, join em.' Getting out of a sponsorship deal they had with Goldline so convinced were they the playing field was no longer level. Was this the best way for them to deal with this issue? Again people of principle can disagree. Remembering that respect is the first part of that principle.

As I've said before I was at the Stu Sells for some twenty hours. The level of respect that the players showed each other was a credit to them and to our game. Did they realize that BP had 'thrown the cat among the pigeons'? You bet. Where they all agreed that this was the best thing for BP to have done? By no means. Did they on the other hand respect the intent behind the BP move and believe that Team Howard and the other BP Teams had the best interest of the game in mind? They most certainly did.

I was deeply proud of the collegiality, respect, humour, and intelligence on display during the off ice time by the teams at the Stu Sells. Proud to be part of the same game, if of course not the same level.

This is why I am optimistic that there will be a good solution to this significant problem.

In the meantime if we here on CZ could exemplify the same level of respect we would do ourselves and our game proud.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-27-15 04:14PM
Beermaker is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beermaker Click here to Send Beermaker a Private Message Find more posts by Beermaker Add Beermaker to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beermaker
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Kingston, ON
Posts: 559

Here is an article from Doug Graham on Ted Brown, the inventor of the Brownie Brush, very interesting:

http://www.thewhig.com/2015/10/26/b...ith-controversy

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 12:34AM
aluchko is offline Click Here to See the Profile for aluchko Click here to Send aluchko a Private Message Find more posts by aluchko Add aluchko to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
aluchko
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Dec 2013
Location:
Posts: 25

quote:
Originally posted by JB42
It is possible for principled people to have differences of opinion. However for this to be possible you first have to be a person of principle.


This is very vague but are you accusing people here of lacking principle? If so I think the principled thing to do is state so directly and justify your opinion.

quote:
Originally posted by JB42 There is quite simply no one in the last thirty years that better exemplifies such a person than Glenn Howard. No one who has shown more respect for his teammates. No one as a result who has been easier to play with. No one who has taken the ups and downs, misses and makes with more grace, humour and even wit. No one who has shown more respect for his opponents win or lose.


I'm sorry but this is a little ridiculous, curling is full of respectable characters and I don't see what Howard has done to make himself the lead in any of those categories. Now I believe Howard is currently the longest active elite player, but that doesn't make him the moral arbitrator you make him out to be.

quote:
Originally posted by JB42 Yes BP came out with a 'steering broom'. No they did not try to hide it. The very opposite. They brought it out to make a point. And how do I know that? He was willing to talk to me about it during the Stu Sells. A spectator, never an elite player, and a person he barely knows. Hardly the way to keep a secret.


Perhaps they were very open and communicative at Stu Sells, but that didn't extend outside the club as it took days for anyone to really figure out what what going on. As for Howard I do have some specific issues with his conduct.

1) He was quoted in the media talking about make rock fall four feet and slow down and etc, all along with the implication that the brooms in question were HL. Never was it made clear that this was about BP's demo brush heads.

Perhaps that was the fault of the media but Howard never tried to clear up the confusion and people were mislead as a result.

2) I find the circumstances around the signed letter to be very questionable:

http://calgaryherald.com/sports/cur...nto-broom-issue

From an impromptu meeting at the Stu Sells Toronto Tankard

So the HL teams see these Frankenbrooms dropped into competitive game and then the same weekend a meeting is set up that crafts a statement implicating HL's main product?

That's a tactic for railroading people, if they wanted an honest discussion they'd present the brushheads outside of a competitive game. Now that's mostly on BP, not Howard, but using those brooms in a competitive game and using them to blackmail the other team into switching brooms they'd played with for a season or more was wrong.

Frankly if I was one of those BP competitive teams, with full knowledge of what the BP brooms could do and the belief that their capabilities were so obviously unfair that they would cause an uproar and likely rule change then I would not have participated in the stunt. I think that harms the integrity of the sport.

We received an e-mail containing minutes from that meeting players minutes via Curling Canada.
Then we receive an e-mail from Team (Glenn) Howard, very much a strong stance in summary that (said) we will shame anyone who uses directional fabric, Nixon said.


I find that to be very inappropriate behaviour from Howard. It's not his place to decide that HL is directional fabric and that teams using it are subject to shaming, particularly when those teams have not had an opportunity to see the evidence driving that decision.

So we have a letter with a lot of signatures from teams who probably wouldn't have signed if they weren't ambushed and threatened with shaming.

quote:
Originally posted by JB42 Was BP's decision the best method for dealing with this issue? This is precisely where people of principle can disagree. What I can tell you is that BP and Team Howard were not the only teams that felt that the HL broom was a 'bridge too far' technologically speaking. In fact every top team that I spoke too that wasn't HL felt the same way. Hardly scientific I know but the Stu Sells had quite a field and I made a point of talking to and listening to every top team there. It wasn't hard as there was pretty much nothing else being talked about.


You should keep in mind you stumbled right into a PR stunt by BP. Note that BP had probably prepped their teams as well, that doesn't mean the teams were conspiring but BP likely spent some time selling them on the concept that the HL brooms should be banned.

Recall we don't actually have any evidence that HL brooms make rocks do unnatural things or cause additional picks, just a few anecdotes can be infamously misleading, particularly if you have a biased party who's pushing a particular narrative. The only actual evidence we've seen is blurry videos from BP that they've made a broom that seemingly causes unnatural behaviour.

Yet based on this complete lack of evidence HL teams have not only been pressured into playing with their pads inside out but are now being shamed and having their accomplishments since they started using HL called into question.

quote:
Originally posted by JB42 In the meantime if we here on CZ could exemplify the same level of respect we would do ourselves and our game proud. [/B]


As Internet forums go this is actually fantastically civil.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 01:21PM
JB42 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JB42 Click here to Send JB42 a Private Message Find more posts by JB42 Add JB42 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JB42
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 621

Bob Weeks article posted online at TSN: http://www.tsn.ca/inside-curling-s-...oversy-1.381050

"There were occasions last year when Brad Jacobs thought perhaps his front end players were losing their strength. Despite having two of the strongest and fittest curlers on the planet in Ryan and E.J. Harnden, there were games when they simply weren't able to do to a rock what their opponents could."

Point A) It has been repeatedly emphasized in this thread that the HL broom is not illegal. This is true. What is pretty much never mentioned is that neither is the new BP head or the developmental Goldline fabric for that matter.

Point B) Pretty much everyone agrees that a broom that steers the rock negatively impacts the skill and athleticism of the game. And as far as most of the elite players are concerned this truth is independent of whether or not such a broom damages the ice.

Point C) There are many who believe that the HL broom steers the rock. And everyone agrees the new BP broom does. The new Goldline fabric has flown entirely under the radar.

Point D) Those who asked for testing of the HL broom by the regulatory bodies were rebuffed.

Point E) The feeling that the playing field is uneven has been going on for over a year.

For those with no skin in the game counseling patience carries no cost. For those like Team Gushue, Koe, Howard, Jacobs, Canada, et al, who feel the playing field has been tilted against them patience is rather more difficult.

I put them in this order because this is the chronological order their responses have surfaced to the public eye.

Team Gushue get themselves out of a sponsorship deal to gain an advantage they believe real. They use the 1 sweeper tactic in the first Grand Slam. The first inkling for most of us that something unusual was going on with broom technology.

Team Koe members Marc Kennedy and Ben Hebert talk about the problems with broom technology on The Curling Show. At 15 minutes: http://www.thecurlingshow.com/2015/...team-kevin-koe/

When asked about the Gushue 1 sweeper move: "We did some testing last week and it's crazy what you can do go into the rock and going away from the rock with these brooms."

This is before the Stu Sells. Very informative. What they say point blank is that to their mind the athleticism and the skill of the game is being negatively impacted by the HL brooms.

Team Howard brings out the new BP broom along with Team Balsdon, Team Kean and Team Bailey at the Stu Sells. The issue explodes into the media.

What is never mentioned is that Team Jacobs brought out the new fabric they were given by Goldline in their semi-final against Howard. Showing that if it wasn't BP it was inevitably going to be someone else that countered the HL tech.

I spoke at length with Team Edin and they did not equivocate at all. As far as they are concerned they know that the HL brooms negatively impacts the game.

Team Canada comes out with their statement and 22 teams sign on.

The CCA and the WCF come out with their statements on the issue.

And so here we are. It will be very interesting to hear how the commentators deal with the issue this weekend at the Slam in Truro.

There is one element to this story that has yet to be mentioned anywhere I've looked. And that is that we have in fact been here before. All the way back in 2011. Y'all can read the article for yourselves.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor.../article621656/

At that time it was BP that was reaping the benefits of a technological innovation and Team Martin that was unsure as to the damage this was causing the ice. At that point seemingly no one was concerned with the harm this may cause to the athleticism and skill of the game. Instead it was characterized in the article in the following manner: If you dont have to sweep as hard and you can be more effective, whats not to like?

All of which goes to show that the regulatory bodies have been glacial in their response to this issue.

My p.o.v. is we got here not out of any ill intent. We instead got here because everyone was doing what they are supposed to do, absent any regulations telling them not to.

I.e. Sports equipment manufacturers are supposed to build a better mousetrap and then sell that mousetrap to as many mousers as they can.

Players are supposed to seek out the best equipment and use it.

In golf good examples would be Titleist golf balls, Taylor drivers, square grooves or anchored putters. The first two highly regulated, legal and with dominant market share. The latter two considered 'a bridge too far' and banned.

Now curling has it's very own version of the same thing that golf has to deal with on an ongoing basis.

It's part of the process of becoming an ever more professional sport. Once we allowed smoking and drinking on the ice. Once the club player who played a lot could beat the best in the game every once in a while. Once we were not an Olympic sport. Once it was impossible to make a living at the game.

It's still really hard to make a living at the game but the money is getting better. As is the sport.

I stand by my opinion that this will blow over and be nothing more than an arcane footnote in the annals of the game.

In the meantime there really is no good that can come to the game from tarnishing the names and reputations of teams and players regardless of what side of the HL fence they sit.

And as I really do believe that in fairly short order this issue will dissolve into nothingness, this will be my last post on the subject.

Back to the only reason for being on this forum in the first place. My love for watching the best in the world play this best in the world game.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 02:04PM
JustAnotherHack is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JustAnotherHack Click here to Send JustAnotherHack a Private Message Find more posts by JustAnotherHack Add JustAnotherHack to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JustAnotherHack
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Dec 2012
Location: BC, Ontario (and a few other places too...)
Posts: 268

I'm trying really hard to keep myself out of this debate until I see some new piece of information being added but... I failed.

JB, I respect your opinion, and the opinion of the elite curlers. Doesn't mean I agree with it. It's just your opinions, and opinions without testable and repeatable evidence is just an opinion. That and a Toonie might get me a cup of coffee...

We're not going anywhere here in this debate. There are two distinct camps. You're in one, a lot of us are in the other. After multiple posts, threads and comments, we're still going no where with this. The only thing I'd like to think we agree on is that the WCF and Curling Canada need to step up.

I'm not going to go point for point to refute your opinions, mostly because the other side has clearly states why they disagree with you, Balance Plus and certain elite teams. But you seem to feel the need to restate things over and over again without actually address the points made by the other side. The stats don't seem to bear out the options that the teams with Hardline brooms have a sudden advantage. There is no video evidence, except with the EQ+ Blackhead broom. There is a lot of "we know" "we feel" and "we think" without a lot of real "we can demonstrate" and "we can prove empirically with recordable and repeatable evidence".

You may suspect, and that's fine. But you need to prove before pointing the finger and hanging a company and teams out to dry.

And you still haven't commented on the behaviour of some of those elite teams and BP in shaming and acting in a manner which is contrary to the principles of sportsmanship that our sport is supposedly based on.

This whole debacle and they way it is being handled is a farce.

__________________
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
- Calvin (Calvin & Hobbs)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 02:11PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

JB42, its a pleasure to read a post of yours that isn't talking about 'principle' and holding up the top ranked players as the only curlers who should be allowed to speak up. Because everyone has a stake in this issue and all opinions matter. Not just those who have high rankings on the WCT or CTRS.

Principle has nothing to do with the issue. This is an issue that needs to be solved by science and fact. Not subjective, anecdotal opinions and overblown claims of 'superbrooms'.

For the record, my own team is not top-ranked. Nor are we sponsored by an equipment manufacturer (however, if any one reading this is interested, please send me a PM. we're not shy, we'll gladly take your money-lol). But we are like the majority of teams on the tour; playing in the events that we can afford and make time for and preparing for playdowns. Because we're not in it for the money and we have no sponsorship dog in this fight.

We want to see proof before fingerpointing-which is exactly what has taken place these past 3 weeks. Our front end uses the HL Icepad while the backend uses Furgale Transformer brush heads. In all the games we have played, against teams using the same brooms or BP or Goldline products not ONCE have we seen anything even remotely close to the allegations being made.

We also point out that no real evidence other than two poorly made videos, using a test product radically different than those currently on the market, has been brought forward to back up these allegations. The videos and their methodology are suspect and provide little proof of anything.

We concur with the notion that standards and rule revisions need to take place for the future good of the game and it's a positive thing that the issue has been brought forward. But we do not agree with the method used to do so and the so-called 'agreement' signed by some of the competitive teams.

Nor do we agree that 'shaming' teams using any of the aforementioned products is acceptable behavior. Regardless of any teams ranking they have no right, moral or otherwise, to act as judge, jury and executioner of any other team who are using the brooms legally and within the spirit and intent of the rules as they now are.

For the record, Team Stephen Schneider from Vancouver BC will continue to use the HL Icepad according to the CCA and WCF rules and not be pressured into participating in an agreement which is, in our opinion, unfounded with allegations that are not scientifically proven.

We suggest ALL competitive teams urge the governing bodies to begin proper testing and evaluations of ALL equipment, not just brooms, and implement new rules and standards based on those findings.

Until such time, we also ask that teams adhere to the letter and spirit of the current rules regarding sweeping. Nothing further should be done than this, in our opinion, it is in the hands of the officials and their responsibility.

Beyond that, we as players then have the responsibility as players to provide the governing bodies the time necessary to execute these tests and develop the standards as they see appropriate. When, and if, things change our team promises as curlers dedicated to the spirit of the game, to adhere to them.

Jamie Sexton, Vice
Team Stephen Schneider

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 10-28-15 at 02:39PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 03:24PM
JustAnotherHack is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JustAnotherHack Click here to Send JustAnotherHack a Private Message Find more posts by JustAnotherHack Add JustAnotherHack to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JustAnotherHack
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Dec 2012
Location: BC, Ontario (and a few other places too...)
Posts: 268

I think I've mentioned that before as well fresca... this genie was let out of the bottle some time ago. Today it's "directional fabric" (which Hardline doesn't use but don't let that stop a good argument), tomorrow it's... what?

Oh, let's not forget who licensed the patten from the developers of that fancy new broom head back in 2010... Balance Plus.

Think they may have an interest in keeping their market share against a new product that is gaining popularity? Even if they have to use a bit of skullduggery to pull it off?

If we're going down this path of reviewing equipment and sweeping mechanics (and you really need to do both), then everything that is on the market needs to be looked at, including the EQ/EQ+ broom heads, the Norway Pad, the Hardline broom fabric... not just cherry pick and point fingers at one company.

Oh boy, I think I need to stop posting. I'm agreeing with fresca on something!

__________________
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
- Calvin (Calvin & Hobbs)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 04:25PM
ASquires is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ASquires Click here to Send ASquires a Private Message Find more posts by ASquires Add ASquires to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ASquires
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: May 2013
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 8

I want to simplify the issue and disregard any comments referencing directional fabric. Without a doubt, curling has evolved tremendously over the years in terms of fitness, equipment, olympics, team changes, and even the social aspect has dwindled.

We have never once in our lifetime seen such a negative impact of sweeping to the point where the integrity of the game has been lost. Anyone who denies the effectiveness of the Hardline broom has either not watched a stone delivered/swept by a top tier team, or is simply stubborn. Not to mention, the strategy used for sweeping by Team Gushue makes it quite visible. Kudos to them for establishing an extremely effective system for sweeping and it has certainly contributed to their success. Due to the competitive advantage of teams in the years prior, they felt the need to get on board and I do not blame them at that level.

With that being said, it is simply too effective and is truly ruining the integrity of the sport. For years we have been coached to practice day in and day out to establish the best line/delivery/release possible in order to see consistent results. This would allow us to call line more effectively, and sweep accordingly. Yet, at this point, we can get away with being tight and as long as our ONE (hardline) sweeper is relatively effective, the shot could be made.

This past weekend, most hardline teams used the "inverted" ice pad, yet used it in the same fashion and saw very similar if not the same results. Sweeping strategies did not change, and stones were manipulated in the same fashion. It was rather frustrating, and was difficult to get out of our minds in order to focus on the game.

For years, I have had some of the best sweepers in my opinion and they have made a countless amount of shots for me (a true team shot). Yet, no rock ever stayed straight for an extended period of time on ice that typically curls. No rock ever finished unnaturally past a guard after remaining straight the length of the ice. Good sweeping results were attributed to fitness, effective line calls, and the proper weight/line thrown. I will not deny that some equipment advancements were required but never brought our sport to the point where its a game of strategy and a team could play 8 ends with only one missed shot.

All in all, I believe we need a universal fabric at which no team is at an advantage based on equipment. I believe, we have reached the point where sweeping truly is too effective and its not even fun at times.

One final point I want to make before I am disputed... I am not trying to discredit Team Gushue at all. I do believe they are the best team in the world at this time, and will continue to see major success regardless of the equipment they use.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 10:46PM
aluchko is offline Click Here to See the Profile for aluchko Click here to Send aluchko a Private Message Find more posts by aluchko Add aluchko to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
aluchko
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Dec 2013
Location:
Posts: 25

quote:
Originally posted by JB42
Point A) It has been repeatedly emphasized in this thread that the HL broom is not illegal. This is true. What is pretty much never mentioned is that neither is the new BP head or the developmental Goldline fabric for that matter.


Well if the demo BP head did ruin the ice for the next few shots then it is arguably 'damaging the ice' and therefore illegal. But I agree it's a grey area.

As for HL brooms conferring a significant advantage the same could be said of the straw to hair and then synthetics transitions, even if true it doesn't necessarily mean it ruins the spirit of the game.

As for Gushue's sweeping tactics I actually think that's a good thing, now strong sweepers can actually help if a rock is slightly outside. That on its own doesn't detract from importance of the thrower or the sweeper. It may also be possible with ordinary brooms as well.

Now since you were at Stu Sells there's one thing I'm actually quite curious about.

I have two hypothesis about what BP was trying that weekend.

1) It's exactly as they said. They never intended the brooms to be used outside that event but only did so as a stunt to show that if they really wanted they could make a superbroom, and while the HL broom wasn't as good it was still unfair.

2) They knew the broom would be controversial (hence the "only use against HL teams) but they thought it would be received positively and would be their ticket to winning the broom wars. Only after the resulting backlash from curlers did they decide on the integrity and moratorium narrative.

Since you were there and actually heard a lot of what was being said and know the timelines, are you able to shed light on which narrative is the right one?

Either way I think elite curlers and the WCT need to get together, figure out a proper way to actually test the different brooms.

Get a group of proficient sweepers, a bunch of brooms, a rock throwing machine, and start recording results. Find a decent league, hand out brooms before each game, and start taking statistics on the number of picks on each sheet.

Get some reasonable numbers on how far the different brooms can drag a rock, how much corner sweeping can make them curl or fall, how much the different sweepers matter, and how they affect the number of picks.

Once everyone has some data they can have a reasonable discussion on what to do about it, but right now all we have is a bunch of anecdotes and grainy video of a broom that no one is even using.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-28-15 11:18PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

One more thing before I opt out of this thread now that our team has stated it's official position on the issue.

How many of you have actually considered the very limited options that the CCA and WCF have?

If they were to take the top ranked teams allegations as fact and try to implement something in the interm, the only thing they can do is ban all synthetic brooms from their sanctioned events. Presuming that a majority of member countries would vote to apposed such a motion.

Would they do this? No. Because it means tarring all manufacturers with the same brush since there is no scientific data backing up the various claims. And to that is to court legal action from those manufacturers.

And I, for one, would give even odds that the folks at Hardline have already discussed the situation with their lawyers and have them on speed dial ready to go. And if they did turn the sharks loose it wouldn't be at just the CCA. I'd wager actions launched at balance plus and every non-Hardline team who signed the agreement.

Remember, they've claimed from the start that their broom is non-directionable and was submitted to the CCA for approval and given same.

The CCA is not going to open that can of worms. So nothing will happen until the testing is up and running and real data can be used for decision making. My guess is nothing g will likely change, if it does, until the 2017-18 season.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 10-28-15 at 11:27PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:03AM
Radio-Man is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Radio-Man Click here to Send Radio-Man a Private Message Find more posts by Radio-Man Add Radio-Man to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Radio-Man
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jan 2015
Location: Ontario & Santa Monica
Posts: 268

quote:
Originally posted by ASquires
I want to simplify the issue and disregard any comments referencing directional fabric. Without a doubt, curling has evolved tremendously over the years in terms of fitness, equipment, olympics, team changes, and even the social aspect has dwindled.

We have never once in our lifetime seen such a negative impact of sweeping to the point where the integrity of the game has been lost. Anyone who denies the effectiveness of the Hardline broom has either not watched a stone delivered/swept by a top tier team, or is simply stubborn. Not to mention, the strategy used for sweeping by Team Gushue makes it quite visible. Kudos to them for establishing an extremely effective system for sweeping and it has certainly contributed to their success. Due to the competitive advantage of teams in the years prior, they felt the need to get on board and I do not blame them at that level.

With that being said, it is simply too effective and is truly ruining the integrity of the sport. For years we have been coached to practice day in and day out to establish the best line/delivery/release possible in order to see consistent results. This would allow us to call line more effectively, and sweep accordingly. Yet, at this point, we can get away with being tight and as long as our ONE (hardline) sweeper is relatively effective, the shot could be made.

This past weekend, most hardline teams used the "inverted" ice pad, yet used it in the same fashion and saw very similar if not the same results. Sweeping strategies did not change, and stones were manipulated in the same fashion. It was rather frustrating, and was difficult to get out of our minds in order to focus on the game.

For years, I have had some of the best sweepers in my opinion and they have made a countless amount of shots for me (a true team shot). Yet, no rock ever stayed straight for an extended period of time on ice that typically curls. No rock ever finished unnaturally past a guard after remaining straight the length of the ice. Good sweeping results were attributed to fitness, effective line calls, and the proper weight/line thrown. I will not deny that some equipment advancements were required but never brought our sport to the point where its a game of strategy and a team could play 8 ends with only one missed shot.

All in all, I believe we need a universal fabric at which no team is at an advantage based on equipment. I believe, we have reached the point where sweeping truly is too effective and its not even fun at times.

One final point I want to make before I am disputed... I am not trying to discredit Team Gushue at all. I do believe they are the best team in the world at this time, and will continue to see major success regardless of the equipment they use.



Find it interesting that no one has commented on this post. I appreciate the honesty. Thumbs up.

__________________
"I'm not seeking penance for what I've done, Father. I'm asking forgiveness... for what I'm about to do"

"It means that I'm not the Samaritan. That I'm not the priest, or the Levite. That I am the ill intent...who set upon the traveler on a road that he should not have been on."

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:36AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by Radio-Man


Find it interesting that no one has commented on this post. I appreciate the honesty. Thumbs up.



Why? Because regardless of who this poster is, it's just another statement with nothing to back it up. It carries as much weight as the BP videos.

If anything it might indicate that the broom has less to do with this than the technique used. And all it points to, again, is the need for proper testing.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:50AM
Radio-Man is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Radio-Man Click here to Send Radio-Man a Private Message Find more posts by Radio-Man Add Radio-Man to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Radio-Man
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jan 2015
Location: Ontario & Santa Monica
Posts: 268

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Why? Because regardless of who this poster is, it's just another statement with nothing to back it up. It carries as much weight as the BP videos.

If anything it might indicate that the broom has less to do with this than the technique used. And all it points to, again, is the need for proper testing.



Well he believes it enough to post it, which I respect, whether he has actual evidence to "back it up". I'm certainly not going to brush it off.

Obviously we need proper testing yesterday.

__________________
"I'm not seeking penance for what I've done, Father. I'm asking forgiveness... for what I'm about to do"

"It means that I'm not the Samaritan. That I'm not the priest, or the Levite. That I am the ill intent...who set upon the traveler on a road that he should not have been on."

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 10:45AM
draway8 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for draway8 Find more posts by draway8 Add draway8 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
draway8
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Jan 2014
Location:
Posts: 88

quote:
Originally posted by ASquires
This past weekend, most hardline teams used the "inverted" ice pad, yet used it in the same fashion and saw very similar if not the same results. Sweeping strategies did not change, and stones were manipulated in the same fashion. It was rather frustrating, and was difficult to get out of our minds in order to focus on the game.


Thanks for your post and observations. I wonder if this suggests that it's more about innovation in sweeping than it is about fabric/technology.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 10:56AM
ASquires is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ASquires Click here to Send ASquires a Private Message Find more posts by ASquires Add ASquires to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ASquires
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: May 2013
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 8

quote:
Originally posted by ASquires
Anyone who denies the effectiveness of the Hardline broom has either not watched a stone delivered/swept by a top tier team, or is simply stubborn.


Yes I have no video evidence.. but I personally believe I have curled long enough to know how a rock should react to sweeping. Not to mention, we played a variety of teams on the same ice conditions, using different brooms, and it was quite obvious. Call me a fool, but its just my opinion.

I'm not sure how anyone can argue the request for equality?

Sweeping will once again benefit the best physical fitness, weight judgement, communication, and delivery (reaction to different releases) as it should.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:23PM
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

Let's summarize what we KNOW, and work from there:

1. The Hardline IcePad and Balance Plus EQ+ have artificially textured sweeping surfaces that makes them significantly different from other synthetic brushes, which have coated or uncoated fiber weaves on the sweeping surface.

2. There are highly suggestive observations (games and rink work) that the artificially textured brushing surfaces are especially effective at influencing the path of the rock.

3. These observations do not constitute evidence, but have raised enough concern among players to goad them into self-imposition of a moratorium on artificially textured brush materials. I think it is unfortunate that curling associations basically initially avoided any decision making and punted this to the players.

Next steps

Next steps will require a better physical characterization and understanding the brushing materials, and CONTROLLED comparative testing to establish performance characteristics, which can be correlated to physical properties. Once that is done, some decisions will have to be made about what is acceptable to maintain the competitive character of the game. This cannot be left solely to players. It MUST be done by the curling associations while adhering to the highest standards of avoidance of conflict of interest. These next steps will not be easy, but neither are they particularly difficult. There are plenty of good, independent minds involved in curling to get this done. For clarity and fairness to the game and its supporters (including curling equipment manufacturers) this issue cannot be ignored.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:29PM
Justintwiss is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Justintwiss Click here to Send Justintwiss a Private Message Find more posts by Justintwiss Add Justintwiss to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Justintwiss
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location: St.Claude
Posts: 128

quote:
Originally posted by ASquires
I want to simplify the issue and disregard any comments referencing directional fabric. Without a doubt, curling has evolved tremendously over the years in terms of fitness, equipment, olympics, team changes, and even the social aspect has dwindled.

We have never once in our lifetime seen such a negative impact of sweeping to the point where the integrity of the game has been lost. Anyone who denies the effectiveness of the Hardline broom has either not watched a stone delivered/swept by a top tier team, or is simply stubborn. Not to mention, the strategy used for sweeping by Team Gushue makes it quite visible. Kudos to them for establishing an extremely effective system for sweeping and it has certainly contributed to their success. Due to the competitive advantage of teams in the years prior, they felt the need to get on board and I do not blame them at that level.

With that being said, it is simply too effective and is truly ruining the integrity of the sport. For years we have been coached to practice day in and day out to establish the best line/delivery/release possible in order to see consistent results. This would allow us to call line more effectively, and sweep accordingly. Yet, at this point, we can get away with being tight and as long as our ONE (hardline) sweeper is relatively effective, the shot could be made.

This past weekend, most hardline teams used the "inverted" ice pad, yet used it in the same fashion and saw very similar if not the same results. Sweeping strategies did not change, and stones were manipulated in the same fashion. It was rather frustrating, and was difficult to get out of our minds in order to focus on the game.

For years, I have had some of the best sweepers in my opinion and they have made a countless amount of shots for me (a true team shot). Yet, no rock ever stayed straight for an extended period of time on ice that typically curls. No rock ever finished unnaturally past a guard after remaining straight the length of the ice. Good sweeping results were attributed to fitness, effective line calls, and the proper weight/line thrown. I will not deny that some equipment advancements were required but never brought our sport to the point where its a game of strategy and a team could play 8 ends with only one missed shot.

All in all, I believe we need a universal fabric at which no team is at an advantage based on equipment. I believe, we have reached the point where sweeping truly is too effective and its not even fun at times.

One final point I want to make before I am disputed... I am not trying to discredit Team Gushue at all. I do believe they are the best team in the world at this time, and will continue to see major success regardless of the equipment they use.



I for one would like to see the rules enforced about sweeping that seems to get over looked. No more snow plowing rocks, no more crazy corner sweeping or anything. If the sweepers on a team cant be good enough to drag stones then maybe hit the gym boys and put the time and work into bettering yourself.

Throw the right weight on the right line and have 2 sweepers that can carry a rock and judge weight. Not 1 sweeper dancing around the rock corner sweeping one side to hold it then jumping to the next side to bury it around a guard. Then snow plow it like crazy or sweep to dump junk infront of the rock.

Just like putting in golf. You read a green much like you read a sheet of ice. Combo of the right speed on the right line and make the putt or shot. Not hit the ball 8 inches off line and have some crazy putter that make the ball do tricks on the green or brooms that can make a rock dance.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 12:40PM
ngm is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ngm Click here to Send ngm a Private Message Find more posts by ngm Add ngm to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ngm
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

quote:
CONTROLLED


And I hope that the powers that be hire a statistician before doing the experiments rather than after.

Because a "controlled" experiment is often misconstrued to mean "all physical aspects of the experiment made the same".

Many things in curling, for example, cannot be made exactly the same even from one shot to the next.

Designing an experiment controlling for several factors (some of direct interest, some not of interest but unavoidable) is more than just imagining trying to automate rock throwing/sweeping/pebbling and so on and quality control on the materials involved. It's also about determining the order in which things are done, exactly what is to be randomized, what is an appropriate sample size, and other things that have nothing to do with curling at all but would allow for a straightforward analysis of the results.

The worst thing a governing body could do is have a bunch of technology people and curling blowhards imagine what a good way to proceed might be, collect some data, and then hope for the best in the subsequent analysis.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 02:00PM
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 ngm
The worst thing a governing body could do is have a bunch of technology people and curling blowhards imagine what a good way to proceed might be, collect some data, and then hope for the best in the subsequent analysis.


Couldn't agree more. Quite frankly, the necessary measurements to get meaningful and informative data are not that hard to design or collect. If the effects are large enough to influence the game, they will be relatively easy to observe and document. If the effects are suggestive but below the statistical threshold of detection, then the effect on the game is probably minimal. I don't think you need a bank of statisticians to work this out. Any practicing physical scientist will know how to treat the data appropriately. We're talking about calculating standard deviations and confidence limits: freshman physics or psychology stuff.

I do this kind of experimental design and analysis in the physical sciences as a part of my job as an educator and a research scientist. Quite frankly, I think I could make a set of robust preliminary measurements in one working day with a few able-bodied and proficient curling assistants.

The biggest mistake one could make is to design an all-encompassing and excessively complicated global analysis. I would never do this for a research project in my lab. Rather, you typically start with some very focused, preliminary studies designed to test whether or not an effect can be observed, and if observed, attempt to provide some quantification of the magnitude of the effect. Those initial results will help guide and focus more in-depth studies, if necessary. Sometimes, the initial studies are sufficient to make decisions, and are perhaps are repeated or tweaked to give more interpretable results.

Above all, any analysis must be carried out under conditions of rigorous avoidance of conflict of interest. That means no direct participation or observation by anyone with any stake in curling equipment manufacture or sales. Even the appearance of bias will render the results unusable.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

10-29-15 03:05PM
Phil_D is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Phil_D Click here to Send Phil_D a Private Message Visit Phil_D's homepage! Find more posts by Phil_D Add Phil_D to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Phil_D
Drawmaster

 

Registered: May 2014
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 629

Things are heating up in Truro.

Teams are apparently getting testy with each other, or at least having "spirited" discussions.

Ulsrud just demanded that Carruthers switch over to hair in their game.

This is getting ugly...

__________________
Recreational curler & resident armchair curler at Windy City Curling Club.

Co-host of the NerdCurl podcast & occasional blogger.

http://www.nerdcurl.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 4 of 7 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | »»   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: M6 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 12:00pm CT
Church  
Rose    Watch Live Curling!
Brenden  
Guentzel    Watch Live Curling!
Fitzgerald  
Hebert    Watch Live Curling!
Lannoye  
Cenzalli  
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 ↑