Registered: Jan 2014
Location:
Posts: 88

quote:

---

Originally posted by My three sons

If in the current game shooting skill is 80-90% of the game and sweeping is 10 - 20% then the best players rise to the top. If utilizing these brooms makes shooting 50 - 60% skill and 40 - 50% sweeping, then this radically changes the dynamics of our game.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2668

quote:

---

Originally posted by draway8


That's a pretty big "if". Those percentages have already been shifting. For years we've been witness to the huge value of a killer front end. Kevin Martin is a legendary shot maker but I can't tell you how many times I watched Heebs and Kennedy turn misses (a little light, a little tight) into makes. What we're seeing is further evolution of sweeping skill and technique. It's unfortunate that an excellent product has been prejudiced and jeopardized because people haven't taken the time to figure this out.

---

__________________
Well Behaved Women Don't Make History.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 61

ok....for anyone that says it was 'fine' for the last 2 years. again, listen to the 10/7 Curling Show podcast. Marc and Ben said there has been animosity building over abrasive/directional fabric for a long time and couldn't get anything done about it.

people saw that EQ+ seems to be 'out' now right?
(i haven't seen it in use in the GSOC since the player agreement anyway)
...i'm guessing that some of the other manuf's may have 'pressed' and/or waterproofed 'non-compliant' fabrics in their lines that will likely be deemed ineligible as well at events.

i get that most people here heard of the BP 'blackhead' fiasco. well, yes, i don't like how that went down either....but, players were complaining with no response. i think it's safe to assume the BH was more abrasive than the IP, yes? let's just say it was 50% more abrasive, for example. you don't think BP could've made one that was 10% more? so, where does it end? THAT is the point. the cca seemed to know people were complaining and turned a relative blind eye (when they could've been proactive in the off-season). this IS a huge mess....no question.

again, this year starts a new cycle for olympic qualifying....there is a lot on the line starting now. it sucks for sure. but, i don't see the option....b/c if they didn't do anything...it wasn't going to be the 'blackhead' vs the 'icepad'...it was going to be smaller escalations between manufacturers and would've gotten to the same place much later.

i don't think there's one person on these boards that doesn't want testing and for it to be figured out. so, why all the bad feelings here and on twitter and the like? i don't want to see rifts within our clubs over equipment. Anyone who bought the hardline package or the EQ+ or whatever has been banned at the elite level now...clearly thought they were gaining an 'advantage' over their last piece of equipment. the 'spirit of curling' says we don't try to gain an unfair advantage. definitely a shame that the cca and the wcf left it to the manufacturers and all of us to figure out what that line is.

Last edited by livem1 on 11-19-15 at 01:13PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

So exactly which broom heads are banned from the WCT events?

I have seen several posts that say different things from hardline, eq+, GR8, ECT all banned from use. Seen others say that the WCT events dont have any ban in place yet.

Just wanting to know whats what.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 57

This is simple.

1. Unreasonable mid season actions by WCF, 2.no science based evidence, 3. logic not applied fairly to all manufacturers 4. Extraordinary SELF serving behaviour by BP. Anger here should be directed at WCF/CCA for idiotic bumbling and NOT HL

Resolution has to be more compromising than this joke.

__________________
shaqdaddy

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2005
Location:
Posts: 22

So reading all the post and the press releases i still cant figure out with certinty which heads are permitted and which ones are not. If any one knows for sure can they just name brushes or heads( they all have a name of some sort) that are allowed and ones that are not, regardless of who manufacturer is. I am sure the CCA will follow suit soon and it may help the average curler know which head to purchase going forward. Any help would be great.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2007
Location:
Posts: 7

quote:

---

...the spirit of curling says we don't try to gain an unfair advantage...

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 61

Yesterday on twitter...Hardline responded to curler, Mark Kean's comment about taking out the insert and flipping....should be no big deal was the implication. HL said "Basically change the entire broom!"

On the hardline website...it says this about the icePad
"....if you just want a softer feel, no problem! The versatile icePad can be easily transformed into a regular pad. Check out our instructional videos!"
(meaning take out the insert)

So is this 'entire broom' a waste?
Or, is this very light broom with an "icePad head that can be placed on most competitors shafts" 'versatile'?

well....p.s. HL also told Mark "For 2 years you asked us for sponsorship. Now you speak out against it." (when he mentioned they "don't have to get rid of (their) broom"...I didn't get the feeling that he was piling on.)

Last edited by livem1 on 11-19-15 at 01:05PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Quesnel
Posts: 420

Will be interesting to see what Curl Canada does. HL says they were asked before HL starting selling and marketing and seemed to feel brooms were ok. Hard now to say not legal. With no executive director whose decision is it? Maybe Peckham will be wishing he retired?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rock On ft
So reading all the post and the press releases i still cant figure out with certinty which heads are permitted and which ones are not. If any one knows for sure can they just name brushes or heads( they all have a name of some sort) that are allowed and ones that are not, regardless of who manufacturer is. I am sure the CCA will follow suit soon and it may help the average curler know which head to purchase going forward. Any help would be great.

---

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 23

quote:

---

Originally posted by livem1
ok....for anyone that says it was 'fine' for the last 2 years. again, listen to the 10/7 Curling Show podcast. Marc and Ben said there has been animosity building over abrasive/directional fabric for a long time and couldn't get anything done about it.

people saw that EQ+ seems to be 'out' now right?
(i haven't seen it in use in the GSOC since the player agreement anyway)
...i'm guessing that some of the other manuf's may have 'pressed' and/or waterproofed 'non-compliant' fabrics in their lines that will likely be deemed ineligible as well at events.

i get that most people here heard of the BP 'blackhead' fiasco. well, yes, i don't like how that went down either....but, players were complaining with no response. i think it's safe to assume the BH was more abrasive than the IP, yes? let's just say it was 50% more abrasive, for example. you don't think BP could've made one that was 10% more? so, where does it end? THAT is the point. the cca seemed to know people were complaining and turned a relative blind eye (when they could've been proactive in the off-season). this IS a huge mess....no question.

again, this year starts a new cycle for olympic qualifying....there is a lot on the line starting now. it sucks for sure. but, i don't see the option....b/c if they didn't do anything...it wasn't going to be the 'blackhead' vs the 'icepad'...it was going to be smaller escalations between manufacturers and would've gotten to the same place much later.

i don't think there's one person on these boards that doesn't want testing and for it to be figured out. so, why all the bad feelings here and on twitter and the like? i don't want to see rifts within our clubs over equipment. Anyone who bought the hardline package or the EQ+ or whatever has been banned at the elite level now...clearly thought they were gaining an 'advantage' over their last piece of equipment. the 'spirit of curling' says we don't try to gain an unfair advantage. definitely a shame that the cca and the wcf left it to the manufacturers and all of us to figure out what that line is.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 23

quote:

---

Originally posted by jamcan


Unfortunately Fred, CCA and WCF refuse to name the products and models involved. I suspect it's because they have been advised to do so would put them in a precarious legal situation. But it's poor leadership to not name the brooms and the knee Jerk reaction to unfounded and unproven allegations is worse.

It is refreshing to read the level headed comments here. The vast majority of which are demanding proof before reacting.

By the way, for the person suggesting we go back to corn? 👍 But we never dipped corn in 7up. That would be against the rules.

Besides, Coke worked way better...😆

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 61

I'm not saying anyone is trying to gain an unfair advantage.

What I was saying is that whenever one buys equipment it's almost always because one is trying to upgrade the advantage/performance that they had with the older equip. (def: benefit resulting from some course of action).

But, at some point, the 'advantage' from equipment some company is producing may cross the lines of the accepted standards/rules of the game. And some governing body has to be the steward over this....and figure it out. (everyone agrees this is not an ideal situation for the manufacturers that have invested money into a fabric that is non-compliant for the rest of this season)

You or any other recreational curling can take your Hardline broom and icePad head to any tournament you/they want. Neither Curl Canada nor Manitoba seems to have put any restrictions on fabrics yet. Worst case is no plastic insert and inside-out cover. Well, the WCF didn't specifically write out 'compliance' procedures. But, the USCA did and that is one of the compliance methods...and I'm sure they took that from the WCF.

I guess I'm not understanding....Hardline has a video of how versatile their broom is and says you can take out the insert for a softer 'feel' and nobody is stopping them from making a woven compliant head cover. Besides Hogline and Hardline....There doesn't seem to be another brush company that locked themselves in with only one fabric type.

Last edited by livem1 on 11-19-15 at 04:17PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 61

quote:

---

Originally posted by dnero


I would still like to know what current rules the HardLine brooms are breaking.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 23

quote:

---

Originally posted by fresca
pretty sure no curlers are overpaid. ... i think that $26 mil for 2 years was in baseball - wasnt going to buy a blue jay ticket but that sealed the deal...

doubt that the financial aspect plays any part in certain players wanting a level playing field - Glen has said many times he wants to keep playing because he " loves " the game - based on watching him a lot for 25 years i believe him. -

there are probably 20 teams that are the reason we. get to see free curling a dozen times a year ..

howard , martin, ferbey, stoughton , koe, mcewen, jones, homan, jones, moore, bernard, simmons, howard, menard,gushue and five more .. ( no hurt feeling)

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 23

quote:

---

Originally posted by livem1


The same one that the EQ+ is apparently breaking

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2015
Location:
Posts: 8

Are we certain that the EQ+ heads (which are very different from the blackhead) are part of the new moratorium? With the USCA adopting the WCF ruling, this matters to anyone going even to club playdowns - my lead bought a LiteSpeed before the season. I don't want to panic him before we have some official guidance on this, which once again points to the need for the WCF to come up with at least a partial in/out list.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

This controversy has been going on for a few weeks now.

I've been hoping to see an actual demonstration of the disastrous effects on the path of a stone using an off-the-shelf sweeping product.

For some reason the hundreds of hours of televised curling coverage from the past two years involving thousands of rocks have failed to produce a single example of such an effect.

I've seen the video made using the clown brush they produce to prove some point or another. I'm not so interested in that.

Why do I want to see video? Because it's 2015. We live in a world where lots of us walk around with a movie studio in our pockets.

Video or it didn't happen.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2007
Location:
Posts: 7

From the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/s...d=tw-share&_r=2

For those thinking it's not about the money...I would note that this article points out exactly who is sponsored by which company when soliciting opinions for the piece. I would also note that it's information that's been conspicuously missing from almost every Canadian article written on this whole matter...without looking, I wonder if BP or Goldline or any of the other manufacturers buy advertising space on CBC, Sportsnet, TSN, etc.

Hmm.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2668

quote:

---

Originally posted by dixarone
From the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/s...d=tw-share&_r=2

For those thinking it's not about the money...I would note that this article points out exactly who is sponsored by which company when soliciting opinions for the piece. I would also note that it's information that's been conspicuously missing from almost every Canadian article written on this whole matter...without looking, I wonder if BP or Goldline or any of the other manufacturers buy advertising space on CBC, Sportsnet, TSN, etc.

Hmm.

---

__________________
Well Behaved Women Don't Make History.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 57

You mean the GL shoe ad by spokeswoman Jones? O yea she wears Asham.....oops. Let's see what HL teams say about this witch hunt. No coincidence at all this has been led by BP teams.....right.

__________________
shaqdaddy

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:

---

Originally posted by dixarone
From the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/s...d=tw-share&_r=2

For those thinking it's not about the money...I would note that this article points out exactly who is sponsored by which company when soliciting opinions for the piece. I would also note that it's information that's been conspicuously missing from almost every Canadian article written on this whole matter...without looking, I wonder if BP or Goldline or any of the other manufacturers buy advertising space on CBC, Sportsnet, TSN, etc.

Hmm.

---

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2013
Location: California
Posts: 19

Well, since it seemingly impossible to determine exactly which equipment is banned, and we can't get that precise guidance from any of the governing bodies, I think we should just extend the moratorium to sweeping in general. Just imagine the joy of playing lead with no sweeping responsibilities.

I guess it's pretty much a given that the HL is now illegal, but where does it say (aside from this forum) that the EQ+ is banned? Does it also have the plastic insert?

I know curlers who don't want to buy new brush pads every month, so they re-cover their own - I guess I have to also check them at the door and not allow their brooms?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Amen, Dynomite. I also have a sneaking suspicion that while we've been told 2 "good sweepers" can bring a rock "10+" feet farther I now doubt that since I've never seen a published scientific study proving that much less a single published study on the actual "damage" or "mar" to ice of any corn, hair or pad broom. Wouldn't it be a hoot if corner sweeping did the most to affect stone trajectory rather than the broom type and if corn brooms damage the ice more than any sealed or directional fabric, or insert!

I fondly recall the "word" we got from the unpublished Canadian "Own the Podium" studies that sweeping didn't melt ice but just warmed it after decades of our telling all and sundry that effective sweeping melts the ice. I bought one of the new foil insert brooms after the Vancouver Olympics thanks to other "Own" discoveries. I will buy a Hardline broom even if it is forever illegal just to support a company trying to push new technolgy.

But, this corner and snowplow sweeping has to stop or yes, we kill off 4-person teams at world level. That would not be good for the clubs or the sport.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dynomite2910


Sorry to disagree My three sons but this has smelled like a witch hunt all along...

I still think we are going see Hardline take WCF and CCA to court for damages which is only going to hurt our game even more. There is not enough money in our sport for them to be wasting it on lawyers.

I also think from what I have seen that the real problem is this new one man one side brushing technique that is the real issue and no one is talking about addressing that properly. Gushue was making rocks move on Sunday with a hairbroom in play.

---

Last edited by Alice on 11-19-15 at 06:34PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2013
Location:
Posts: 25

First I'm very dubious that any of the BP+ or GL teams are actually trying to be misleading about something, and I think the whole "invert the fabric" trend is proof of that.

The fact is I'm not convinced that elite curlers have the ability to tell if the HL are significantly better. If they did have that ability then within a year of them being on the market they would have bought one to try it out, realized they could drag a rock 50% further, straighter, or whatever they think the effect is, and acted accordingly.

Similarly before proposing the first "flip the fabric" solution one of them would have tried it out and realized it didn't really make a difference (or maybe it does, they don't seem sure).

To me this looks entirely like a bunch of young teams getting HL brooms and having big breakthroughs around the same time. People look at the new teams and think "I didn't expect them to be that good", they look at the brooms and think "those brooms are really different" and they start assuming the brooms are the cause.

Now they could be right. These are highly skilled players and they may be able to legitimately notice things about the brooms that others can't, the HL brooms are unfairly effective, the HL teams dominance is due to the brooms, and the tech needs to go back to some pre-HL state. But they're a long way from proving that.

There's tons of people who have all sorts of unsubstantiated beliefs, homeopathy, gambler's fallacy, heck there's a widespread belief in South Korea that fans kill people. I have no doubt that a bunch of elite curlers could convince each other that a certain broom is far more effective than it actually is. I've yet to see a single piece of actual evidence that HLs are any more effective than other brooms.

I'm really disappointed in the WCF, ever since BP+ ambushed a WCT event with frankenbrooms there's been confusion everywhere and they had an opportunity to provide some leadership by doing some proper tests. Instead they just seem to be listening to the group of elite curlers who have most convinced themselves that there's a problem.

I wouldn't be shocked if these rules about waterproofing and inserts change again. They don't present any evidence, they just seem to be centreing on the latest theories for why the elite HL teams are doing better than people expect.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged