Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

And Ethan Meyers is a nice kid too, so if you cannot hang the name on Dropkin then don't hang it on Meyers. After all, the only thing Meyers did wrong was WIN the championship game -- which is what the playdown is supposedly about. It is unfortunate that either Dropkin or Meyers have to be tagged here. When the same thing happened in the US Womens Championship back in 1991 and the rule was changed after those upstarts from Texas had the audacity to win the championship, nobody hung that name on them.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Totally different. I think Ethan would love to have the rule named after his upset. Somebody ask him.

2 loss provision works just fine. Does it apply to Men's and Women's as well?

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

The "midget" idea could help develop more young competitive curlers as the 5-and-under has done for new adult curlers. How about having something like the Canadian high school provincial championships?

High school kids usually stick closer to home while the the best junior teams often have members in college with teamates all over the map. HPP thinks it can manage and farm juniors to achieve consistent Olympic success while paying lip service to the idea that our high school and college students mustn't hurt their education by being on the adult tours.

"High school" teams could represent clubs and states like our non-WCF adult arena/club teams. They could playdown in clubs and regionally as arena/club teams. Events leading to WCF competitions have turned into HPP "from Blaine" teams plus skip-choice teams - both of which have been killing off state and regional playdowns for mens, womens and now also doubles, too.

Each curling region could have a high school championship with less travel needed to enter to encourage participation. At those regionals the players can see and be seen to self-assemble ever better teams which would enter the juniors' qualification track which likely will be increasingly tinkered with by HPP to favor its own teams. Boys, girls and doubles could have regional high school championships earning the winners berths at the juniors national leading to worlds. That would be a good way to improve both the number and quality of junior teams.

Last edited by Alice on 01-12-16 at 11:36PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by tuck
Totally different. I think Ethan would love to have the rule named after his upset. Somebody ask him.

2 loss provision works just fine. Does it apply to Men's and Women's as well?

Ben Tucker

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs


No idea if the 2-loss rule applies to men and women. I know it was applied to women after those Texans won the title and then finished 9th in worlds, and pretty sure Kakela's got burned by it at least once in mens play. No idea what applies today and, whatever the rule is, whether it will still apply tomorrrow.

---

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location:
Posts: 99

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alice
The "midget" idea could help develop more young competitive curlers as the 5-and-under has done for new adult curlers. How about having something like the Canadian high school provincial championships?

High school kids usually stick closer to home while the the best junior teams often have members in college with teamates all over the map. HPP thinks it can manage and farm juniors to achieve consistent Olympic success while paying lip service to the idea that our high school and college students mustn't hurt their education by being on the adult tours.

"High school" teams could represent clubs and states like our non-WCF adult arena/club teams. They could playdown in clubs and regionally as arena/club teams. Events leading to WCF competitions have turned into HPP "from Blaine" teams plus skip-choice teams - both of which have been killing off state and regional playdowns for mens, womens and now also doubles, too.

Each curling region could have a high school championship with less travel needed to enter to encourage participation. At those regionals the players can see and be seen to self-assemble ever better teams which would enter the juniors' qualification track which likely will be increasingly tinkered with by HPP to favor its own teams. Boys, girls and doubles could have regional high school championships earning the winners berths at the juniors national leading to worlds. That would be a good way to improve both the number and quality of junior teams.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 206

quote:

---

Originally posted by tuck
OK, we simply CANNOT call it the Dropkin Rule. WAY too nice of a young gentleman. WAY too nice of a family.

I do understand that it's easier to say and type than Two Loss Provision On Top Of Page Playoff Advantage, but it just ain't right.

Let's call it the Meyers Rule. He's the guy who upset the apple cart. If he hadn't have won that game, we wouldn't have the rule. Ethan would probably be proud of it and remember it all fondly.

I think I prefer Ethan's Rule, but I can live with The Meyers Rule.

Ben Tucker

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

quote:

---

Originally posted by youngen


Alice, you are a little behind here. High School curling has already came and passed. Most midwest curling towns had high school curling and their respective states had a high school state curling championship. In ND they used to be a big deal. Clubs like Grafton, ND still have pictures up of teams that won the high school state championship dating back to at least the early 1980's that I can remember. It eventually became a namesake tournament regarded more as a bonspiel for fun. Any team that wanted to be competitive focused on juniors because "Worlds" was a much bigger carrot to go for. And with the addition of Bantam curling having groups like U-14 and U-18 it kind of eliminates the need for a separate high school playdown system.

---

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2016
Location:
Posts: 1

Korey's team has a major sponsor, Red Elephant Chocolate. They are running a promotion tied to Junior Nationals. If you send an email to curling@redelephantchocolate.com then, for each game Team Dropkin wins in the tournament next week, an added 3% discount accumulates for you towards an online chocolate order.

They are building their email list, of course. But, they have financially supported curling. Plus you get an extra reason to either cheer for team Dropkin or feel better if the team you are backing loses to them. Win-Win!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by biterbar


A little history and perspective.

The "Texan's may have finished 9th at worlds but the ten years prior to that the US women finished: (1981-1990) 8th, 8th, 6th, 9th, 9th ,7th, 5th,7th, 9th, 8th. The year after Schoeneberg took the silver but then we fell to 8th in 1993.

In fact the Silver in 1992 was the first medal beating the previous best of 5th.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

I find it amusing that anyone, including the USCA powers-that-be, would be surprised that in a one-game playoff format even a heavily favored team might lose now and then. You have to consider that playoff teams will likely be among the best in the round robin field, so winning probabilities for any team in the playoffs would not be expected to be too far from 50%. In a one-game exposure, an unexpected outcome might be reasonably common.

If you want to maximize the probability of the best-prepared and talented team of winning an event, you should go with a pure round robin. When you introduce sudden death playoffs with one- or two-game exposure, any single result may not mirror the "expected" outcome, mainly because any one game can only represent 0% or 100% success. (If the weaker team has only a 25% chance of winning the game, they will nevertheless win one of 4 meetings--the ONE time they win, it will look like there was a breakdown in the system, when in fact it's just random variation.) If the same teams play twice and the weaker team has to win both, the probability of the weaker team winning declines to just over 6% instead of 25% in this same scenario. Change the winning percentage to 40%, and the weaker team wins almost half of the encounters in a single game, but only 16% of a two-game must-win situation. This is probably closer to the truth of playoff teams meeting, both of which are reasonably closely matched.

Playoffs add drama, but you have to accept that there will be "upsets," although in a relatively deep field any of the playoff teams may be very close in performance.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

Wasn't the reason for Page Playoffs to be implemented in the first place? Top two cannot be eliminated with one loss. It guarantees two losses for any non-winner.

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2012
Location:
Posts: 136

The 2 loss provision applies to all national championship events now. Mixed doubles had an extra game just in case an undefeated team lost the final.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2012
Location:
Posts: 136

quote:

---

Originally posted by biterbar
Wasn't the reason for Page Playoffs to be implemented in the first place? Top two cannot be eliminated with one loss. It guarantees two losses for any non-winner.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by biterbar
Wasn't the reason for Page Playoffs to be implemented in the first place? Top two cannot be eliminated with one loss. It guarantees two losses for any non-winner.

---

Last edited by RockDoc on 01-13-16 at 02:50PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by RockDoc


No system can guarantee that the "best" team will win always.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 39

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs


But the HPP feels it should be able to guarantee that the team they like the best will go to worlds, regardless of which team wins the nationas

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location:
Posts: 99

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs


But the HPP feels it should be able to guarantee that the team they like the best will go to worlds, regardless of which team wins the nationas

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location:
Posts: 99

And now I smell like dead horse, too!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Format discussion? Really? OK, here's my opinion even though it isn't worth two cents:

Whether it's TESN or ESPN 3 or some future viewing platform, nothing is better in sport that a True Sudden Death Winner Goes On Final.

Viewership is important. It may be the most important. Viewership spurs growth and invites sponsors and every good thing.

So: While the winner of a round robin (or, even better, a double round robin) send on your best team more frequently, it sucks for viewership. Same with some 2 Loss Provision.

We need to drive viewership instead of waiting for it to come to us. Think beyond this year and the current viewing platforms. Think to the future and the good of the game and you'll want a True Final.

Ben Tucker (yeah, dbsdbs, they've figured out that you and I aren't thrilled with the High Performance Program...and I still think that Ethan would be thrilled if we called it the Meyers Rule)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by youngen


The HPP cannot guarantee any outcome if the other teams win their games.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002

Doesn't having your best team (ideally winning late into the event) at the World Championships provide an even better opportunity to increase viewership and interest in the sport?

__________________
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

Registered: May 2014
Location:
Posts: 143

basketball, baseball and hockey seem to do OK viewership-wise with multi-game finals.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by rbi
basketball, baseball and hockey seem to do OK viewership-wise with multi-game finals.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Sorry, Gerry, but non-curlers in the USA are not going to watch Worlds...even if we could get them televised on some platform in the future. They flock to watch the Olympics. I believe they would watch the National gold medal game. We tried it in Green Bay, but it has yet to get traction.

Basketball and baseball do OK with multi-game finals that may or may not go the distance, but the real excitement in basketball is March Madness and its sudden death.

Baseball? The only real excitement is in Game 7.

I digress. Juniors. The Mankato girls have to drive a bunch to play or practice. Was the Bemidji upset at State a sign on rust or demise? I'm guessing rust. We'll know soon. They should be a stone cold lock to make the playoffs if it's just rust.

Ben Tucker (still waiting for Mr. Lucky to call me pretty while my son is trailing at Clubs)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged