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.
10-01-22 08:33AM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote: Originally posted by curlingclips
If we want to adopt my solid bumper proposal
We don't.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 12:10PM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
The game is not imbalanced, I don't understand why you don't get that, well actually I do, but anyways. The team with hammer in the extra end should win since they have an uncontested attempt to win with their final rock. If a team doesn't like being in the position of not having hammer in the extra end, do something about it in the 8/10 ends that preceded the extra end. No gimmicks, no complaints, just play better.
Last edited by dugless_zone 13 on 10-01-22 at 12:52PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 03:18PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
imbalanced
For the record, the imbalance I'm referring to is the 60-40 between having and not having LSFE when the game starts. I'm not talking about the winning percentage in extra end, which is irrelevant concern because we're eliminating extra ends altogether.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 05:19PM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
One team will always have last stone in the first end and the other always won't have it. Theoretically both teams will have an equal number of hammers. As for getting rid of extra ends, probably only in the curling leagues you play in.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 05:27PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
One obvious option that hasn't been proposed is to award instant win to the team that would've had the hammer if there is to be an extra end. Statistically they're winning, and some people believe that's it's karmic justice that they should win anyway, so we can just eliminate extra ends by giving them instant win.
This is such an obvious option, and yet I'm not aware if it has ever been done. Does anyone know if it has ever been done? If not, why not? Is there a strong argument against this proposal?
Last edited by curlingclips on 10-01-22 at 05:32PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 07:21PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
If you're going to do that, then you might as well award the game to the team with the hammer going into the final end tied or leading. They are going to win anyway, so no need to prolong the inevitable.
(By the way, I was being sarcastic. )
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 07:35PM |
|
guido
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1418 |
quote: Originally posted by curlingclips
One obvious option that hasn't been proposed is to award instant win to the team that would've had the hammer if there is to be an extra end. Statistically they're winning, and some people believe that's it's karmic justice that they should win anyway, so we can just eliminate extra ends by giving them instant win.
This is such an obvious option, and yet I'm not aware if it has ever been done. Does anyone know if it has ever been done? If not, why not? Is there a strong argument against this proposal?
Give it a rest!!
__________________
It’s me!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 08:55PM |
|
IN-OFF-FOR-2
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Mar 2013
Location:
Posts: 1875 |
#clipmandu just stop
Last edited by IN-OFF-FOR-2 on 10-02-22 at 08:51AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-01-22 10:45PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
All of the stats that say that the team with the hammer almost always wins the extra end were compiled before the No Tick Zone rule became a thing. Now that teams are able to set up a double center guard that cannot be removed until the sixth stone, won't their chances of pulling off an extra end steal improve greatly?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-02-22 01:22AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by hailstone
All of the stats that say that the team with the hammer almost always wins the extra end were compiled before the No Tick Zone rule became a thing. Now that teams are able to set up a double center guard that cannot be removed until the sixth stone, won't their chances of pulling off an extra end steal improve greatly?
That's a valid point, but keep in mind that NTZ applies all throughout the game.
When it was first introduced in the grand slams, the rule only applied to end game/extra ends. WCF decided to go all-in and applied NTZ right from the first end.
So, yes, while NTZ may make extra ends more exciting and less predictable, that's not the only reason NTZ was introduced to the game, and it doesn't preclude the possibility of eliminating extra ends.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-02-22 04:06PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by hailstone
We don't [want to adopt solid bumpers proposal]
Could you explain your rationale?
Solid bumpers actually simplify the rules. Currently, how many times have we seen "dead" rocks that hit the bumper remain in play because no one saw it? Van Amsterdam got a deuce on Bottcher using such a "dead" rock. Was that fair? Why not just change the rules so that it's not even a question?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42uYKDqZ2pM
Sarah Anderson tried to do the same in-off from a "dead rock" for 5 at the World. Unfortunately she failed, but it would've been interesting/controversial if she was successful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPbl7tVyooo
How many times have we seen curlers asking "Did that hit?" when they're not sure if a rock hit the bumper? This happens a lot more often in mixed doubles. Magnus Nedregotten famously asked the question to the audience at 2018 Olympics. Kirk Muyres and Laura Walker were asked to remove "dead" rocks numerous times by the game umpire at 2018 World, sometimes one delivery too late!
People often bring up the 2016 World Men's Shuster-Morozumi bumper controversy, usually as an attack on Shuster, which makes no sense because WCF literally changed the rules so that it precisely defended what Shuster did. Wouldn't it be better if the rules are changed with solid bumpers so we eliminate such controversies to begin with?
With solid bumpers, not only is the game more interesting with more rocks in play, but the rules are also simpler. Rocks only go out of play when they cross the backline, so unless they cross the backline, just leave the rocks where they stop, period. No uncertainty, no need to question whether a rock hit the bumper or not, no interference by the game umpire, no additional responsibility by the delivering team to prevent anything from happening that is otherwise natural by the laws of physics. Just let the moving rocks go wherever they may and leave them be wherever they stop.
Last edited by curlingclips on 10-02-22 at 04:39PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-03-22 06:36PM |
|
hogged again
Drawmaster
Registered: Mar 2019
Location:
Posts: 659 |
If I win the hammer in the first and it theoretically gives me a better than 50/50 chance of winning the game then good for me, I have earned that edge.
And if I am tied after 10 and again theoretically have a better than 50/50 chance then good for me I have earned that edge.
And the eliminating extra ends for TV I don't buy either. In the 10 end games still out there (Brier, Scotties, Worlds) TSN is happy when they run long as the audience for that is larger than the audience that watches sportscentre or whatever they have after curling games end at around noon, 5:00 and 10pm. And the cashspiels are 8 end games so an extra end still brings it in under 3 hours.
I like extras. It's a lot of pressure on both teams who have been out there 3 hours and hammer or not they still have to execute and sometimes there are astonishing steals and drama.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-03-22 08:02PM |
|
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990 |
I go to the Brier every year, go to every draw and have no problem with extra end games.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-03-22 08:11PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
1927 first Brier and 1924 first Olympics, curling was 14 ends. Now it's 10 ends, although all signs point to 8 sooner or later. It's just reality of the world we live in.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-04-22 05:43AM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote: Originally posted by curlingclips
Could you explain your rationale?
For the same reason you don't use bumpers on the gutters in the PBA.
You would be creating a completely different sport with a completely different skill set. If you would actually spend a couple of hours on a curling sheet doing actual curling, you would realize that, and realize why nobody with a serious interest in curling has ever proposed such a thing.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-04-22 06:15AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by hailstone
You would be creating a completely different sport with a completely different skill set.
That's not a good argument against progress. Mixed doubles created a completely different skill set, e.g. sweeping your own stones. Heck, even traditional 4-person curling created a completely different skill set with the invention of the slide delivery. Sliding is an essential skill now, but there was a time when people revolted against it who believed that curlers are supposed to toss the rock from the crampit, not kick out of a hack and slide with the hand holding on to the rock. Yes, sliding was once upon a time controversial, and sliders were once accused as cheaters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AimG8xzchfI&t=1m14s
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-04-22 07:44AM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
IN-OFF-FOR-2, I owe you an apology. I got on your case in the past for going off on that guy, but now...I get it. I get it.
And I apologize to everyone else for engaging and dragging this on. I won't make that mistake again.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-04-22 10:58AM |
|
Gerry
CZ Founder
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002 |
quote: Originally posted by curlingclips
Could you explain your rationale?
Solid bumpers actually simplify the rules. Currently, how many times have we seen "dead" rocks that hit the bumper remain in play because no one saw it? Van Amsterdam got a deuce on Bottcher using such a "dead" rock. Was that fair? Why not just change the rules so that it's not even a question?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42uYKDqZ2pM
Sarah Anderson tried to do the same in-off from a "dead rock" for 5 at the World. Unfortunately she failed, but it would've been interesting/controversial if she was successful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPbl7tVyooo
How many times have we seen curlers asking "Did that hit?" when they're not sure if a rock hit the bumper? This happens a lot more often in mixed doubles. Magnus Nedregotten famously asked the question to the audience at 2018 Olympics. Kirk Muyres and Laura Walker were asked to remove "dead" rocks numerous times by the game umpire at 2018 World, sometimes one delivery too late!
People often bring up the 2016 World Men's Shuster-Morozumi bumper controversy, usually as an attack on Shuster, which makes no sense because WCF literally changed the rules so that it precisely defended what Shuster did. Wouldn't it be better if the rules are changed with solid bumpers so we eliminate such controversies to begin with?
With solid bumpers, not only is the game more interesting with more rocks in play, but the rules are also simpler. Rocks only go out of play when they cross the backline, so unless they cross the backline, just leave the rocks where they stop, period. No uncertainty, no need to question whether a rock hit the bumper or not, no interference by the game umpire, no additional responsibility by the delivering team to prevent anything from happening that is otherwise natural by the laws of physics. Just let the moving rocks go wherever they may and leave them be wherever they stop.
While you see bumpers in some TV events, they're not in every curling facility and changing the rules would require many facilities to have to change. Bumpers would also have to be standardized since many are foam and the rock just goes through the bumper or stops on it.
It's not a valid option. Doesn't hurt to think outside the box but this one doesn't work for all things you'd have to do and the expenses in implementing it.
Any rules adopted need to work from elite to club play, since they'd be adopted by the official rules of curling to be put into place.
__________________
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
|
|
10-04-22 03:40PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by Gerry
Any rules adopted need to work from elite to club play, since they'd be adopted by the official rules of curling to be put into place.
I disagree, and I'll go back to thinking time clocks as a counterpoint.
Now, I admit that I'm just making this number up, but my guess is that 90% of curling games are untimed, yet thinking time is in the official rules of curling. Also made up, but probably 90% of men's & women's games are 8-end games, yet the official rules of curling is 10-ends for World Men's & Women's championships.
From what I hear (I could very well be wrong), the situation is even worse than what I just wrote above, because league plays often only play 7 ends because of (i) limited total ice time for each game with hard deadlines, (ii) untimed play with no thinking time clocks, (iii) strategical advantage if you have hammer in 7th to stall to prevent 8th from being played so opposition couldn't retaliate with hammer.
So, no, I don't think any rules of curling need to be practical for 90% of all curling from all levels.
I also don't think bumpers need to be standardized. It's part of the "reading" game, just like ice and rocks aren't exactly standardized, and must be "read". I've seen foam and wood, and both are fine in my opinion. The idea is NOT to make bumpers predictable. It's supposed to be unpredictable, to complicate things.
People have said the same thing about ice condition. Some people argue that the ice is TOO good now and TOO consistent, etc. They wanted to go back to the days when ice were unpredictable, inconsistent, and must be "read". I disagree with that principle for the ice, but we can bring some of that back with bumpers.
The primary idea is NOT to make curlers throw their rocks at the bumpers to make crazy in-offs, etc. The bumpers should be too unreliable for that kind of shots. If they can make such crazy shots, so be it, let the rocks go wherever they may, but the primary idea is to encourage offense by making rocks that currently go out of play, remain in play.
So, a half rock peel of a high center guard becomes very dangerous now, because those rocks would bounce back in and remain in play.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-05-22 11:38AM |
|
Gerry
CZ Founder
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002 |
Many places don't have bumpers, so again, it's not viable.
As for lack of clock, there's a rule on the books for non-clock play. It's rarely enforced, but it's there for the sake of it being needed when things get out of hand.
__________________
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
|
|
10-05-22 12:22PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by Gerry
As for lack of clock, there's a rule on the books for non-clock play.
No, there isn't. The official rules of curling per WCF says:
"C6. GAME TIMING
(a) Each team shall receive 38 minutes of thinking time for a 10-end game and 30 minutes of thinking time for an 8-end game (38 minutes in wheelchair curling, 30 minutes in wheelchair mixed doubles curling and 22 minutes in mixed doubles curling). This time is recorded, and visible to the teams and coaches, throughout the game."
https://s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...ing19092022.pdf
My guess is that 90% of all curling games violate that rule, and yet it's in the official WCF rule book.
I'm not demanding that every curling club must now install clocks or be burned to the ground. I'm saying that WCF can and does put rules in place in the books that maybe 90% of curling clubs can't/don't comply with, and that's perfectly fine.
The same thing can be said for bumpers. WCF can write that into the rule book, and it's perfectly fine if 90% of curling clubs can't/won't comply with that rule.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-05-22 01:39PM |
|
hogged again
Drawmaster
Registered: Mar 2019
Location:
Posts: 659 |
There was a bonspiel in Wpg at the end of the season where they froze tires into the ice and hung drapes midway so when you threw you couldn't see the other end and they allowed caroms and all sorts of other silly things. Maybe we should use that format for the Olympics eh Mr. Facebook?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-05-22 01:50PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote: Originally posted by hogged again
froze tires into the ice and hung drapes midway
Those are not natural.
The whole point about the bumper proposal is that it's perfectly natural for curling as seen already at Olympics and World championship level.
Let the rocks go wherever they may, leave the rocks be wherever they stop. It's not such a crazy idea, so Gushue scores 3 vs Koe fair and square.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/curling/gu...l-bumper-touch/
Another example from way back, 2005 Canadian Olympic Trial.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBNdxxYrxXM&t=2h51m21s
What would've happened if Jamie Korab/Russ Howard couldn't interfere and they must let the rock bounce off the bumper and go wherever it goes? Would it bump the red rock in or or out of the rings? I guess we'll never know, but what an intriguing possibility either way!
This is what the solid bumper proposal means at this level:
* We're NOT adding things onto the playing surface that isn't already there.
* We're NOT adding human interference. To the opposite, in fact we're SUBTRACTING human interference.
* We ARE relying more on the natural laws of physics instead of human interference, which makes perfect sense for the sport of curling.
So, no, please don't retort against this proposal by suggesting hanging drapes or freezing tires into the ice, neither of which satisfy the above key principles.
Last edited by curlingclips on 10-05-22 at 03:16PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
10-05-22 04:10PM |
|
decade
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Jan 2011
Location:
Posts: 1962 |
quote: Originally posted by curlingclips
No, there isn't. The official rules of curling per WCF says:
"
From CC Rule book for General Play . "(1) A game shall be of such length or duration as is stated in the rules governing the competition or league play"
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
|
|
|
|
|
|