|
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.
| 04-04-16 03:03PM |
|
Alice
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324 |
quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
The real question here is why did the CCA refuse a very reasonable request from an independent, unbiased federal government testing agency.
Once Round-Robin games were completed there was more than adequate free ice and time available to conduct some, if not all the testing. And being able to compare club to arena ice results could certainly have value.
Curlky,you may have some issues with Hardline. But you cannot argue against their complete willingness to have their products tested and their request that ALL manufacturer's products undergo the same tests and that techniques also be scrutinized.
Why did CCA do that? They must have signed some trade secrets pact with Own the Podium, UNO and, I forgot to add above, the broom manufacturers who are sponsors of CCA. CCA is in on some or all of the secrets paid for by OtP/Canadian Olympic committee. The alterntive is they know they jumped the gun with the new rules and don't want to look like idiots when the independant testing comes out.
Besides not paying dues to CCA to enable this rolling fiasco why don't Canadians and others who don't like it just boycott those manufacturers who are in on the secret deals until they pledge to support Hardline's requests for transparent and independant testing? The testing need not reveal trade secrets since the only thing truly needing testing is damage to ice, no?
The "Spirit of Curling" demands fair play. A regulating organization like WCF who got in bed with secret deals favoring one country over another by enabling the UNO lab to keep secrets much less favoring some broom manufacturers over others by sponsorship deals simply stinks.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-04-16 07:24PM |
|
Alice
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324 |
And, If CCA, UNO, and their secret broom manufacturer buddies want to keep any secrets there is no conflict of interest unless CCA and WCF use those secrets for equipment or sweeping rules of any kind. How a WCF ethics committee allowed these conflicts of interest to fester is a head scratcher.
How to prevent these conflicts? WCF rules committee could make rule changes only every four years, after each Olympic cycle when evy new piece or equipment or techique should be at its best, and only equipment for sale on the open market two whole season in advance of the Games could be used in WCF sanctioned tournaments. That way we'd have at least two years before each Olympics to test and flush out "bad" equipment and techniques. The alternative is a Cold War of escalating secrets.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 09:11AM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
Russ and Vic did it again this morning during the Canada-Sweden game when an official came out to call the Canadians for illegal sweeping. which Edin blew off. Russ said the way to fix illegal sweeping "is to find a universal fabric that doesn't scratch the ice". Sorry but this is the most moronic statement yet. First off the "scratch theory is still just that, a theory and secondly no matter what fabric, ,material or device players use, they will still employ the illegal sweeping technique. Holy Crap Russ, stop toeing the Balance Plus line.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 10:43AM |
|
windy
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Dec 2003
Location:
Posts: 19 |
Regulating Brooms
I'm going to assume there are some influential decision makers monitoring this forum so it seems like as good a place as any to continue brainstorming fixes for the sweeping problem. I think there is a clear majority of curlers and fans that believe the status quo is unacceptable so I don't think we need to argue about whether a problem exists.
The proposed solutions fall into 2 main categories...
1. Outlaw certain sweeping techniques.
2. Regulate the equipment used.
Obviously, there may be some combination of both. However, I come down strongly in favour of #2. I believe #1 is by far the more dangerous rabbit hole. Part of my love for this game is the fact that it requires so little "in game" officiating. Historically, games have virtually never been decided on official's rulings where there is some kind of arbitrary judgement. This is a necessary evil in almost every other sport. Power plays in hockey, flags in football and judge's scoring in boxing and figure skating..... In every case, the outcome of the game can ride on a borderline decision by an official. Last night, I watched the Blue Jays lose on a very arbitrary video review. I just don't want to go there with curling.
I recognize the difficulty of regulating equipment. However, I still believe there is a reasonable solution. Steps have been taken to restrict the type of fabric and inserts. This is clearly not enough.
I would propose that the WCF mandate a specific depth and a specific density of foam between any form of stiffener and the fabric (and the fabric rules needed to be thought out a little better). Basically, I am proposing a "pillow on a stick" and all manufacturers would have to meet these specifications. This would still allow polishing of the ice for helping speed/carry but it should have a very limited effect otherwise on the ice surface. The officiating of the brooms would largely be about the pre-game inspection. If the foam compresses to much with a quick test by the officials, the broom is not allowed in play. The current equipment being used effectively has no padding. I also like the idea presented earlier of one broom assigned to one player (no switching).
Let's keep the discussion going.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 05:50PM |
|
Russ
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Apr 2015
Location:
Posts: 17 |
Consider this: Teams that want to be competitive next season will need four new rush heads every game.
At $25 a head, that's $100 per game. That's more than $500 per event.
This will bankrupt teams that are not sponsored.
This also applies to bantams and juniors. Kiss the future of curling goodbye!
Leaving this until the summer to sort out is underhanded. The teams with inside information (sponsored teams) will again have a big head start on the competition.
I'm afraid the hay days of curling are all in the past. Get ready to witness the collapse of a great sport.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 06:04PM |
|
My three sons
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: May 2013
Location:
Posts: 32 |
quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
Russ and Vic did it again this morning during the Canada-Sweden game when an official came out to call the Canadians for illegal sweeping. which Edin blew off. Russ said the way to fix illegal sweeping "is to find a universal fabric that doesn't scratch the ice". Sorry but this is the most moronic statement yet. First off the "scratch theory is still just that, a theory and secondly no matter what fabric, ,material or device players use, they will still employ the illegal sweeping technique. Holy Crap Russ, stop toeing the Balance Plus line.
Doug it is quite evident that you have a hard-on for BP. I am all about innovation from manufacturers. The minute we stifle the manufacturers is the time the game does not grow.
I think we all owe HL a debt of gratitude for broadening and growing the game of curling. Look where we have come in the last year and a half.
One fabric rule is idiotic in my opinion. It is like having only one golf ball (even though Jack Nicklaus lobbied for this).
I do agree we need to tightly control fabrics,foam pad density, and inserts.
The other part is hair brooms scratch and pads file. Lets be clear on what is what.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 06:22PM |
|
RockDoc
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399 |
quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
the "scratch theory is still just that, a theory
A well established theory I might add, buttressed by predictive power, quantitative predictions that are physically reasonable, and experimental verification of key aspects of the model. I think you will begin to see new peer reviewed information within the year. But knowing how the theory works allows sweeping technique to maximize the predicted effects, which strengthens the basic argument. If anything, the whole issue of sweeping materials and technique has only strengthened the likely correctness of the model.
A lot of folks have theories and explanations of curl that do not withstand the scrutiny of physics, going back to 1930. Some of these old ideas have been killed multiple times only to resurface. The Nyberg model is the first one to withstand serious examination and make verifiable predictions.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 07:00PM |
|
Toronto_curler
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Jan 2015
Location: Toronto, On
Posts: 20 |
quote:
Originally posted by Russ
Consider this: Teams that want to be competitive next season will need four new rush heads every game.
At $25 a head, that's $100 per game. That's more than $500 per event.
This will bankrupt teams that are not sponsored.
This also applies to bantams and juniors. Kiss the future of curling goodbye!
As heads become more consumable, someone is going to undersell the $30 you see for EQ and Norway pads. Margins should narrow.
Last edited by Toronto_curler on 04-06-16 at 07:07PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-06-16 07:25PM |
|
Alice
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324 |
quote:
Originally posted by Russ
Consider this: Teams that want to be competitive next season will need four new rush heads every game.
At $25 a head, that's $100 per game. That's more than $500 per event.
This will bankrupt teams that are not sponsored.
This also applies to bantams and juniors. Kiss the future of curling goodbye!
Leaving this until the summer to sort out is underhanded. The teams with inside information (sponsored teams) will again have a big head start on the competition.
I'm afraid the hay days of curling are all in the past. Get ready to witness the collapse of a great sport.
Well said.
I read the CZ linked blog Twine Time's new interview with HP member Chris Plys. He mentioned Red Bull has just started to sponsor him, already taken some pictures of him and an ad campaign of him is in the works for next winter. As a current HP contractor, his sponsorship deals must be with USCA consent and thus, does UCSA get a cut of any Red Bull cash? Only if he stays an HP contractor?
(A couple of years ago, the US Figure Skating Association left off its Sochi Olympic team Ms. Nagasu, a medalist in favor of a 4th place nationals skater, Ms. Wagner, since she had the most lucrative ad contracts benefitting USFSA and a committee had decided she was "better" than the dumped "not consistent!" medalist, Ms. Nagasu. Heaven help us who favor on-ice results at nationals to select world slots since Ms. Wagner just won a world's silver last weekend beating out Ms. Nagai who got to worlds this year only because another national's medalist got ill at the last minute. At least for US curling there's that one good sign proposed of no more auto-berths for HPers to nationals.)
I watched the WCF You Tube show on the Scot coach.... 2 Scot players showing bags chock full of broom heads.
Admired Team Shuster's Hollywood CC logos on the front of their shirts at the Worlds this week. I understand Hollywood made that deal directly with Team Shuster before he became an HP contractor? One hopes USCA does not get a cut of any of that cash.
If WCF equipment rules end up requiring new brush heads every few ends for competitive play, yes, this will hurt all new and upcoming teams. It will favor nationally supported teams and those skips who can hustle and find their own sponsors like Mr. Plys.
Last edited by Alice on 04-06-16 at 08:43PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-07-16 12:03AM |
|
Miz5508
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Dec 2015
Location:
Posts: 38 |
quote:
Originally posted by Russ
Consider this: Teams that want to be competitive next season will need four new rush heads every game.
At $25 a head, that's $100 per game. That's more than $500 per event.
This will bankrupt teams that are not sponsored.
This also applies to bantams and juniors. Kiss the future of curling goodbye!
Leaving this until the summer to sort out is underhanded. The teams with inside information (sponsored teams) will again have a big head start on the competition.
I'm afraid the hay days of curling are all in the past. Get ready to witness the collapse of a great sport.
This reinforces my fondness for hardline products. When purchased in a 12 pack tour elite heads are $14 (U.S.) and are invertable providing a fresh, new and scratchy surface for, effectively, $7.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-07-16 02:39AM |
|
Phil_D
Drawmaster
Registered: May 2014
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 629 |
I think I posted it earlier in this thread, and I'm pretty sure others have suggested it as well, but requiring pad uniformity and not allowing teammates to trade brooms would cut down on the effectiveness of directional sweeping and probably limit the number of "carving" shots you see in a game. It's also a lot easier to enforce than sweeping technique rules.
Right now it's getting downright ridiculous with players/teams obsessing about keeping pads sharp & fresh, and making sure the right sweeper has the right broom with the right pad for each shot. It's like a merry-go-round of trading brooms at times. I get why they're doing it, and I understand that it does matter, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. But I digress...
Anyway, if all brooms used by a team were required to have the same pad (fabric & manufacturer, color variation OK), and players were only allowed to use their broom for sweeping, you take brush trading out of the equation, and therefore limit the ability of players to rotate brooms to keep a pad sharp.
Sure, it doesn't eliminate directional sweeping, nor does it eliminate "carving" shots. It should, however, limit their frequency and effectiveness.
__________________
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
|
|
| 04-07-16 06:27AM |
|
Gerry
CZ Founder
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002 |
quote:
Originally posted by Alice
Admired Team Shuster's Hollywood CC logos on the front of their shirts at the Worlds this week. I understand Hollywood made that deal directly with Team Shuster before he became an HP contractor? One hopes USCA does not get a cut of any of that cash.
Shuster's deal with Hollywood Curling was done for the Curling Night in America and has continued since.
__________________
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
|
|
| 04-07-16 10:13AM |
|
ngm
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272 |
My current favoured solution, subject to revision multiple times per day...
People smarter than me will determine what kind of sweeping tech will be allowed.
Then, allow teams two brooms per game, which cannot change sides. "Low side" broom is always used closer to Sheet "A" or "1", however it is labeled. "High side" broom is always used further from "A" or "1". Person in charge of house can sweep behind the tee line or their own stones set in motion by the other team with the broom they happen to be holding.
If you use a broom on the wrong side, the rock is removed from play. No discretion.
If your broom breaks somehow, you can move the brush head to another broom. If the brush head itself becomes unusable, too bad. (Does this ever happen?)
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 04-07-16 03:19PM |
|
gonzobob
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Apr 2013
Location: Brooklyn Park, MN
Posts: 33 |
quote:
Originally posted by ngm
If your broom breaks somehow, you can move the brush head to another broom. If the brush head itself becomes unusable, too bad. (Does this ever happen?)
Erika Brown broke a brush head once. Didn't Team Koe have some issues with a brush head earlier in this Men's Worlds?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is . |
  |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > WCF broom summit!
In the run up to Christmas Day, 1893, the Aberdeen Peoples's Journal offered a prize of one guinea for the best letter about curling! That's the invitation... (read more)
A quick break for the Memorial Day holiday and we're back with our guest and new USA Curling Womenâs National Team & Juniors Director Jessica Schultz.... (read more)
I am in week 3 of isolation/quarantine/home schooling and getting a little squirrel-y. Personal hygiene has become optional. The kids have watched the entire... (read more)
On today's World Curling Report...we recap Day 1 of the 2019 Canada Cup. (read more)