ProCurlingWear - Look & Play Like a Pro

Curling Scores

Click Event to Show Scoreboard
W: Mother Club Fall Curling Classic
W: KW Fall Classic
M: KW Fall Classic
W: Colonial Square Ladies Classic
M: Mother Club Fall Curling Classic
: Balmoral Harvest Junior Womens Classic
M: Balmoral Harvest Junior Mens Classic
M: Larry Jones Junior Classic
M: Service Experts Mixed Doubles Classic
W: Larry Jones Junior Classic
M: Anita Cochrane Memorial Junior Men
W: Anita Cochrane Memorial Junior Women
M: Lakeshore Curling Club Cashspiel
W: Lakeshore Curling Club Cashspiel
M: CCT Tallinn Mixed Doubles International
M: Moosehead Fall Open Men
M: Moosehead Fall Open
W: Danish International Wheelchair Cup
Central European Time (CET)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Curling Pick'em

CurlingZone : Powered by vBulletin>
<smallfont><b><a href=CurlingZone > Chat Forums > Tours, Events and Major Championships > U.S.A. Curling > USA Olympic Trials teams selected

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 2 of 4 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
07-08-17 09:21PM
Miz5508 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Miz5508 Click here to Send Miz5508 a Private Message Find more posts by Miz5508 Add Miz5508 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Miz5508
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Dec 2015
Location:
Posts: 40

Maybe the HPP excluded Birr so that they could (and did) pluck Dr. Double from that team, to be McCormick's fifth.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-17 12:52PM
jimivey is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jimivey Click here to Send jimivey a Private Message Find more posts by jimivey Add jimivey to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jimivey
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Oct 2007
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 14

quote:
Originally posted by Miz5508
Maybe the HPP excluded Birr so that they could (and did) pluck Dr. Double from that team, to be McCormick's fifth.


More likely version:

Maybe the HPP plucked Dr. Double to undermine any potential challenge Team Birr would make about their exclusion from the Olympic trials.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-17 06:04PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 761

quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc


... There are lots of ways this could have been structured objectively and transparently. You just have to be prepared to live with the results--something that seems to be the apparent sticking point.



And therein lies the rub

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-17 08:00PM
jimivey is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jimivey Click here to Send jimivey a Private Message Find more posts by jimivey Add jimivey to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jimivey
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Oct 2007
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 14

quote:
Originally posted by jimivey
More likely version: Maybe the HPP plucked Dr. Double to undermine any potential challenge Team Birr would make about their exclusion from the Olympic trials.


While I originally said this half-jokingly, in retrospect it seems pretty clear. By making that move it puts both Team Birr and Rich in an ugly position. And while I think Rich's experience/demeanor is a good addition to the McCormick rink, I'm not sure why it happened around the time of the Trials announcement. Doesn't the USCA/HPP usually want the flexibility to add a fifth _after_ a team is selected for the Olympics?

None of this feels right. There's no outcome that isn't going to create bad blood, and my sense is that this has been manipulated to make Team Birr look like the bad guys for challenging the process. I feel terrible for all the athletes involved, and hope they find some way forward that rewards Team Birr's hard work and competitive success over the past couple of years with a chance to prove themselves in the Trials.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-17 10:32PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 298

From Curling Canada's press release May 26 about adding 2 more teams each for men and women at their Roar of the Rings plus another 2 teams for each gender in a last minute on-ice qualifier since our Northern Neighbors didn't want to force off-ice tiebrakers for their Trial slots:

“I’m very pleased that more teams will get this kind of experience,” said Gerry Peckham, Curling Canada’s Director, High Performance. “It’s important that teams get a chance to perform under these circumstances — not just for this Olympic cycle, for the future as well, and I think this was the most equitable solution, not to mention the most beneficial as we look beyond 2018. This event is as much about getting teams ready for 2022 and 2026 as it is about 2018, and it’s yet another reminder that the Olympic qualification process truly is the engine that drives competitive curling in our country.”

16 x 2 teams plus alternates means 160 elite Canuck curlers will be infected with Olympics Fever, versus in the USA.... so sad, I can't do the math.

So much for Right to Compete federal law and any aspiration to gender equality one day in the USCA.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-17 08:08AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 928

I'll give you that it is a fail on "right to compete", Alice...but gender equity isn't a starter here...

The last several Nationals have been all but sign up and go on the Women's side, and the round robin games have not been all that competitive.

There isn't a team outside of the three selected who has shown anything remotely resembling "The Right Stuff" to be the Olympic team. On that one, I (regretfully) have to agree with the selections (assuming you believe "selections" to trials based on subjective criteria are at all valid, which I don't, but them's the rules in place).

On the Men's side, however, Team Birr does seem to have a legitimate grievance...the Eye Test seems to say they're certainly close enough to deserve a shot to play for it...and since HPP set up the rules so that the Eye Test is the criteria...well...Luuuuucy...you gots some 'spalinin to doooo.....

Hopefully a lesson learned and the USCA will ditch this format for Beijing 2022 and return to a sensible and objective qualification method, based on on-ice criteria at reasonable competitive levels.

(smacktalk)....it doesn't matter anyhow...it's not like Shuster isn't going to go undefeated in Omaha no matter who you put up against him (/smacktalk) (I can say that without being biased, since I am not going to be able to attend the trials)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 06:07PM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 298

Not enough USA women have the "Right Stuff" to be allowed to go to our Olympic Trials?

Our strategy has been to sandbag self-formed women's teams and older curlers in favor of ever younger HP teams created in a warm room.

Why can't we have some of the Canadian strategy of using the trials to give experience to competitive curlers we realize are likely competing for the 2022 and 2026 Olympics, and thus, the vital opportunity to see and be seen at that level of elite play which is the engine to create self-formed teams.

We've all watched the US regional signups plummet since HPP started. More women than men have said, "Why bother?" if not already selected for HP cash handouts when nationals' signup deadlines appoach. Fewer and fewer each year signed up until now our women's nationals is signup and go.

Who wants to compete when USCA is sandbagging a meaningful right to compete for anyone "too old" for HP? The message now sent to our women thanks to a Trials with just 3 women's teams, all HP selectees, is don't bother with an Olympic dream unless you are picked for HP as a junior, no one on your team must ever take a year off so forget any hope of having a child before your eggs rot as long as you dream of Olympics. Put your life on hold and move near the Minn. National Training Center. Yes, metaphorically, enter a convent run by people who want the women's Team USA to be on average ten years younger than the men's team: a weird strategy to get Olympic curling gold if one looks at the average age of men and women who've won it.

Get a stopwatch and track how long the T.V. cameras lingered on the younger and prettier female faces full of makeup on the "Curling Night in America" 2017 T.V. show instead of showing the great shots that are "a joy to behold" thanks to the Spirit of Curling.

Gender equality and right to compete means there must be some reasonable accomodation for the biological differences between men and women. The USCA wants our women elite competitors in a convent to have the "Right Stuff" for our Olympic Trials. The men don't have to go to a monastery to get to the Olympics.

Team Potter should be in our 2017 Trials. I just checked their Facebook page. Didn't know until now how many of them are mothers.

Last edited by Alice on 07-13-17 at 01:10AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 08:59PM
jimivey is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jimivey Click here to Send jimivey a Private Message Find more posts by jimivey Add jimivey to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jimivey
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Oct 2007
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 14

quote:
Originally posted by Alice
Our strategy has been to sandbag self-formed women's teams and older curlers in favor of ever younger HP teams created in a warm room.
...
Team Potter should be in our 2017 Trials.



Ditto what Alice said. Similar to Team Birr's performance against the field, Team Potter actually had winning records this year against two of the three teams selected for the Olympic Trials. And that's including a slow start at the beginning of the year when they were first hitting the ice as a team. They obviously have extensive experience at the world level and have dedicated years to our sport.

As Alice points out, it feels like they were eliminated based on subjective choices rather than objective measures, and it definitely didn't take into account their world-level experience or their end-of-year performance at Mesabi and Nationals.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 09:52PM
SkipsWhoSayNi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SkipsWhoSayNi Find more posts by SkipsWhoSayNi Add SkipsWhoSayNi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SkipsWhoSayNi
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: May 2015
Location:
Posts: 30

Except that Potter finished 110 in last years OOM. By comparison Madison Bear, a junior team finished 95th. Bear also beat Potter at the Women's challenge round.

Bear's team, less Bear finished 4th at Women's Nationals.

Where is the outcry for Bear. Bear doesn't belong at the trials and neither does Potter.

Last edited by SkipsWhoSayNi on 07-12-17 at 09:59PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 10:42PM
jimivey is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jimivey Click here to Send jimivey a Private Message Find more posts by jimivey Add jimivey to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jimivey
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Oct 2007
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 14

quote:
Originally posted by SkipsWhoSayNi
Except that Potter finished 110 in last years OOM. By comparison Madison Bear, a junior team finished 95th.


I'm not going to argue against Bear, because I think the Women's side could have handled five teams instead of three. But I want to respond to the way you pitched their case in comparison with Potter:

1) You're comparing apples to oranges on OOM. Team Potter only has points for last season, and you included two years for Bear. If you just compare last year, Potter finished 82 (40 pts) and Bear finished 89 (33 pts).
2) Team Bear only had a single win all season against the three teams selected to Trials. They went 0-4 against Sinclair and 0-2 against Roth. In contrast, Team Potter had winning records against two of the teams, and that includes their slow start when their team was re-forming at the beginning of the season. Their experience and skill quickly overcame that, and they rolled off a ton of wins at the end of the season and in the Challenge round and Nationals.

Team Potter's experience and performance, especially without the USCA/HPP support given to other teams, should have earned them an entry to the trials. If nothing else it would significantly raise the level of competition for the other three teams, and ensure that the team we send in 2018 will be fully tested and prepared for the challenge.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 10:50PM
SkipsWhoSayNi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SkipsWhoSayNi Find more posts by SkipsWhoSayNi Add SkipsWhoSayNi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SkipsWhoSayNi
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: May 2015
Location:
Posts: 30

I believe last year was Bears first year together. They beat Potter head to head. Neither are elite teams at the world level.

If you want to argue about teams that have world experience, bring back Somerville, and Lank.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 11:09PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

Well, well, well...what a tangled web the USCA weaves.


After twenty years of Olympic Curling (post Nagano) the USA doesn't have much to show for it. Only one Bronze medal and a heaping mound of bupkis. Even the worlds have been rather spartan with a lone gold, a pair of silvers and a pair of bronzes....but most of those medals were in the past decade.

Throw in a pair of 2010/2014 Olympic ooopsies and no doubt the USCA had a "come to Jesus" moment with the USOC. Either fix the problems or WE FIX YOU (my speculation). With their proverbial backs against the wall, the old "win and go" method got tossed for "practical" measures. Now, you're either in the clique or you're not. Heck, Nationals are nothing more than a HPP scrimmage with non HPP window dressing teams to keep up the illusion.

The USCA can't "hand pick" the two Olympic teams but they can decide who can go to the Trials. Set the conditions just right and you'll pretty much get the teams they want.

What really grinds me about Nationals is that in the first two years of the Olympic cycle there are no qualification points to acquire. If a non HPP wins it, why not send them to worlds to gain experience? What about the Continental Cup or CNia????

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Last edited by AK267 on 07-13-17 at 12:08AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-17 11:28PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

Alice,

Reasons why the USCA has so tightly controlled the national/Trials process is that....

(A) Afraid of flopping in the worlds which could relegate them into the "last chance tournament" (and run the prospect of NOT going to the Olympics...hey, stranger things have happened).

(B) Flopping in the Olympics (world stage) which could make the USOC rethink their level of support. Hmmmm....don't wanna rock those sponsorships.

(C) It's no longer an amateur system and "one hit wonders" are not acceptable.

(D) Much akin to the CCA's "red coats" it's getting a little elite.


Just my two cents....

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-17 12:51AM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 298

Yes, we've all heard the HPP staff panic words of OMG! we must cherry pick to avoid relegation. But, given how much more intense competition has become since the Nagano Olympics, only Canada thanks to its depth of field in many provinces, can safely avoid relegation until the USA taps into our larger population of potential curlers.

Just 3 womens and 4 mens teams is patent HPP staffers' job protectionism, not "the best" our country has to offer unless we also make room for Teams Birr, Potter and yes, if not for this Olympic cycle then next time have Trial slots for some "new" teams which may peak in an Olympic year and thus win ...when ...it ...counts.

FWIW, noticed the HPP coaching staff had a recent shakeup with an open slot for a new womens' coach. Maybe whoever is the new womens' coach can find a way to fill all the slots allowed under the current HPP rules for our 2017 Trials. A challenge round or early cashing at tough spiel(s) to qualify more Trial's teams?

Tough break or a good thing the 3 HPP women's teams just lost their national staff coach over the weekend?

Last edited by Alice on 07-13-17 at 04:52PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-17 06:04PM
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: 368

quote:
Originally posted by Alice
until the USA taps into our larger population of potential curlers.


And those are the magic words. The US, with the 2nd largest pool of curlers in the world (after Canada), and a growing base of new curlers as the sport expands into non-traditional markets, should be able to develop a major competitive advantage in this sport.

That potential advantage is squandered if exposure to high-level competition is limited to a few favored teams. (Why would a young athlete invest the time to develop excellence in curling if it is perceived there is no objective way to access the opportunity to compete at the highest level?) By all means the USCA should focus its limited support on the most competitive teams in each competitive cycle, but I don't understand the reluctance to embrace a larger pool of competition for that favored status. If the "chosen" teams are so much better than the rest of the field, then the "uncompetitive" teams will be dispatched in short order in any kind of more open competition...but they will gain valuable experience for the future. Then again, one might occasionally discover an "uncompetitive" team that is pretty competitive. Broadening the base of competition is a long-term winner, and serves many levels of equity, access, and fairness we value in sports. Restricting high-level competition chokes off your future for the unproven hope of a better present. There is very little to lose by broadening competition, other than the potential that doing so might expose the weaknesses of the current system.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-17 09:00PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

Rockdoc,


One more thing to consider is this....


If the current HPP system falls flat in 2018 what next? Will the USCA double down and make things tighter (aka: F**K it, lets go for broke and make no apologies. We'll worry about the rules and ramifications later. And our lawyers are bigger than yours).

Or Perhaps the USOC will step in like Darth Vader and take over?

In either scenario, there should be consequences. Heads would roll even if it's ceremonial...well...maybe.


BUT, if their HPP system works in 2018, you can kiss any hopes of change goodbye. The USCA would crow with glee and say, "SEE, SEE...our system works. Now shut the pie holes and pay your USCA dues!"

Olympic medals have an incredible way of "smoothing things over". It would give them the justification to continue.

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-14-17 02:10AM
Alice is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Alice Click here to Send Alice a Private Message Find more posts by Alice Add Alice to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Alice
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 298

AK267,

"... a heaping mound of bupkis"..." Loved that expression.

Meanwhile, I don't worry much about USA's all self-formed teams facing relegation soon at Senior Worlds which is growing fast enough there will be a "B" division soon as Mixed Doubles will have, too and sooner.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wor...g_Championships

Enjoyed watching our most recent Senior medalists in the last 3 years run savy campaigns to peak when it counts.

Last edited by Alice on 07-14-17 at 02:03PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-17 08:37PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

USCA rejects Team Birr's appeal in typical bureaucratic double-speak:



From the Team Birr FaceBook Page

https://www.facebook.com/Team-T-Birr-847772695318741/


Team Birr Update: Thank you all for the support you have shown! With the work of our attorney and your support we were able to get USA Curling to reconvene the 2018 Olympic Trials Selection Committee to reconsider Team Birr for selection to the trials. The selection committee was as follows:

Rick Patzke – USA Curling CEO
Derek Brown – USA Curling High Performance Director
Phill Drobnick – National Team Coach
Ann Swisshelm – National Team Coach
Dean Gemmell – USOC AAC Representative
Bill Stopera – Athlete Representative
Leland Rich – USA Curling Board Member

After considering our request, the committee turned us down. After seeking clarification from the committee on their initial letter, the following was returned to us in response:

(quote) Dear Mr. Beyer,

Thank you for confirming receipt of my letter from July 11. I thought that I had responded to your request when saying that the committee reviewed the points in your letter and all of the data previously gathered when considering discretionary selections for the Trials, and applying this to the selection criteria as stated in the 2018 U.S. Olympic Team Selection Procedures. I can be more specific by directing you to Sections 1.2.2 and 1.3.2 in the Procedures, and also calling your attention to this paragraph in Section 1.3.2 (4):

“The Olympic Team Selection Committee reserves the right not to add any discretionary selections if they feel it is in the best interests of international competitive excellence, but there must be a minimum participation of at least three (3) Men’s & three (3) Women’s teams at the Trials.”

Sincerely,
Rick Patzke
Chief Executive Officer
U.S. Curling Association (end quote)

One note: We do find it interesting that you could have the coaches of teams to be potentially selected on the selection committee. In addition there are athletes on the committee who are very recent, long time, teammates of one of the Skips who ended up being selected to the trials. While we respect all of these people and their intentions and judgment, these instances certainly appear to be clear conflicts of interest.

Based on the USA Curling bylaws, our next step is to file a formal Section 15 complaint. This complaint will go directly to the USA Curling Judiciary Committee who, if they accept the complaint, will appoint a 3 person hearing panel for the case. The appointees can be just about anyone. This panel would make a binding decision about our fate that could then only be appealed at the USOC level.

So we will continue to follow this process until there is no further action to take.

Again, thank you all so much for the support thus far. Keep it coming as we are not done yet!

PLEASE SHARE LIKE AND SHARE! And if you have feedback about this for USA Curling out just want to show your support. Please email USA Curling CEO Rick Patzke at Rick.patzke@usacurl.org

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Last edited by AK267 on 07-15-17 at 11:35PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-19-17 10:46AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 928

Fortunately, I speak fluent bureaucrat...allow me to translate:

"We don't gotta let you into our cool kids club, because we set the rules so you we don't gotta, so there, nyah!"

I forsee expensive lawyers....which we need like a hole in the head....

Just Let Them In. If you're right and they aren't Good Enough<tm>, then they will get roundly spanked by the Good Enough teams, go home with their tails between their legs and that'll be the end of that. If, however, you are wrong, you are hurting our Olympic Prospects by not making the Crucible of Selection as challenging as it can be.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-02-17 11:12AM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 502

I am shocked at how this topic is not getting more conversation. I suppose it is due to it being the offseason… But maybe people aren’t up in arms about what the HPP does as much as some might think.

Either way, the situation is weird for me personally. On one hand, I find litigation to get what you want somewhat appalling, and find it hard to root for people who go that route (and yes there are exceptions to this broad generalization and this instance could be one of them). On the other hand, while I’m OK with the fact that the HPP exists, I do wish it was a more open concept. So this is a weird situation where I am finding it very hard to find a side to root for.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-02-17 09:14PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

To quote a divorce lawyer...


"There is no winning, only degrees of losing."

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-02-17 09:24PM
AK267 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AK267 Click here to Send AK267 a Private Message Visit AK267's homepage! Find more posts by AK267 Add AK267 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AK267
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 1656

Update on Team Birr Situation

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7...U4VEt4N1Bz/view

__________________
Visit The AKCA Website!!!
http://www.curlaksarben.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-03-17 08:58AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 928

Ahh, the Running of the Lawyers...

I can't believe anyone thinks this is a good thing.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-03-17 10:22AM
IMWright is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IMWright Click here to Send IMWright a Private Message Find more posts by IMWright Add IMWright to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IMWright
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 186

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
I am shocked at how this topic is not getting more conversation. I suppose it is due to it being the offseason… But maybe people aren’t up in arms about what the HPP does as much as some might think.

Either way, the situation is weird for me personally. On one hand, I find litigation to get what you want somewhat appalling, and find it hard to root for people who go that route (and yes there are exceptions to this broad generalization and this instance could be one of them). On the other hand, while I’m OK with the fact that the HPP exists, I do wish it was a more open concept. So this is a weird situation where I am finding it very hard to find a side to root for.



I think people are up in arms. It's just that people have given up trying to do anything. The HPP will do what they want, there isn't really a way to fix it, they control the whole system. It is completely laughable that those who make up the rules for the system have a vested interest (coaching, etc.) in specific teams in that system, as opposed to having a completely independent group/committee. If HPP wants to have their own teams, fine, but then the HPP should not be making the rules.

Last edited by IMWright on 08-03-17 at 10:25AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-03-17 01:41PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 928

Yep, IMWright hit the nail on the head, and folks are voting with their feet.

Nationals has to fight to fill the field. Club nationals, however, has strong playdowns in multiple regions to earn the right to be the Champion and represent your region at Nationals.

The Game has sacrificed a lot at the altar of Olympic Success...and it's a sad thing to see.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 2 of 4 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Recent News

Recent
Brad Jacobs wins AMJ Campbell Shorty Jenkins Classic

Brad Jacobs wins AMJ Campbell Shorty Jenkins Classic

Brad Jacobs (Sault Ste Marie, ON) wins the AMJ Campbell Shorty Jenkins Classic, defeating Mike McEwen (Winnipeg, MB) 3-1 at the Cornwall Curling Club in Cornwall, Ontario.

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

To top ↑