Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Twin Snowbanks
Posts: 2068

This is the second news story I've seen quoting Morris. It feels like posturing. I would like to see an interview of Martin or Griffith. This team invested in this sport. If athletes invest, qualify, then get overlooked, the incentive is quashed. M/G will be scapegoats if chosen and fail. Anyone who has watched them or played them will know they are very smart and play fast and win most of their games. H/M are the golden pair (Homan not so much.) Morris is already going (Coach for Australia - irrelevant I guess.) If chosen and fail, it will be because of the stiff competition. I know those wanting a "famous" team have been tiptoeing around the CMDRS as if "well, it wasn't designed for this situation", but I call foul on that. This is exactly why ranking systems are created - to ensure objectivity. You know my choice. Earned.

__________________
Lots of major youth (<21) events. Nice for Murdoch... and us :-D.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2020
Location:
Posts: 8

Morris is the Olympic Champion in mixed doubles - so why wouldn't he be the go to for media comment?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlingclips
Mike Harris reported during one of the slam games commentary that he was told by Joe Polo that had Matt Hamilton made it to playoff at the mixed doubles tournament in 2018, Polo would've subbed for Hamilton during the early part of the men's tournament, to let Hamilton recover.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

Ben Hebert had a valuable perspective on this issue. He and John Morris talked about it in the 7th end of the Walker vs Rocque round robin game of 2022 AB provincial.

https://youtu.be/oeZvNYwlz4s

Key points (I'm paraphrasing into my own words, these aren't exact quotes):
* Peterman/Gallant is mentioned first
* From personal experience as 2x Olympian, he knows that he wouldn't want his 4-person teammate play in mixed doubles in the same Olympics prior to the "main event"
* He claims Gushue is also the type of person that wouldn't want Gallant to double duty
* In order, he then mentions Walker/Muyres, Sahaidak/Lott, Martin/Griffith, and Homan/Morris
* CMDR is only a tool to get into the Canadian trials and championships, and teams aren't chasing points
* Bias aside, he thinks Morris would be the pick that would put the most fear into other competitors. Lots of people are going to be upset, no matter who gets picked, so we might as well upset those people that matter, e.g. Mouat, Eriksson, etc.
* Being selected to represent Canada adds tremendous pressure, more pressure than actually winning the trial, and he believes Morris would be the rare person that can handle it.

It should be said that Morris claims that mixed doubles system in Canada has some (unspecified) loose ends that needs to be addressed.

------------------------------------

On Hebert's last point, I believe Walker/Muyres, Sahaidak/Lott, and Morris/Park are the only mixed doubles teams that has ever been selected to represent Canada, since mixed doubles has been declared as an Olympic discipline.

I believe previously mixed doubles teams were selected from the 4-person mixed champions, but that was from the pre-Olympic era.

Last edited by curlingclips on 01-07-22 at 07:37AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2021
Location:
Posts: 587

Good analysis by Hebert. Except I dont think Mouat/Dodds are intimidated by Morris/Homan any more than anyone else.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

I like that Hebert articulated the downside of double duty from the 4-person team member perspective. Through Mike Harris, Joe Polo gave us a glimpse of what could've happen, but obviously there's a lot more going on behind the curtains.

If Eriksson reaches medal game in mixed doubles, he would have no rest before playing men's the next day against CHN. CHN was dead last at 2021 WMCC, so maybe SWE can finish off CHN quick, or maybe even bench Eriksson entirely.

USA wouldn't be so lucky, because their first men's game is against ROC. Glukhov beat Shuster decisively and finished round robin 2nd at 2021 WMCC, so USA will probably need as much Plys as they can get.

Dodds/Mouat would be relatively lucky, because they would have a rest day between mixed doubles medal game and their first men's/women's game.

//edit: based on quick review of video footage, I think Eriksson is slightly disadvantaged by the fact that his partner rarely sweeps, so he sweeps his own stones. By contrast, Persinger sweeps for Plys plenty.

Last edited by curlingclips on 01-07-22 at 11:29AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2016
Location:
Posts: 471

The performance of Canada's best MD teams in the Qualico will be of crucial importance when the CC's 'high performance staff', the OtP and Canada's Olympic Committee get together to consider Canada's representative.

That's why, despite their top ranking, M/G's 9th place finish will most likely be their Waterloo and eliminate them from serious consideration early in the process.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2014
Location: Alberta
Posts: 131

Too many people sitting on the fence of whether someone can/should play both MD and 4 person for Canada.

My opinion is that an athlete (and yes, this means someone in very good physical condition) can medal in both MD and 4 person at an Olympics. But what could be done is different than what is ideal.

My opinion is that it’s not ideal for a 4 person team to have one of their members (a) playing a completely different format immediately prior to the 4 person Olympics, (b) physically and mentally exerting themselves in the week prior, and (c) effectively being away from the 4 person team in the 1-2 weeks prior to the biggest event of their lives.

You can’t on the one hand say how important practice and preparation and rest are, and on the other throw one athlete into 3 weeks straight of Olympic curling and expect optimal results.

So it’s a no-brainer decision to me why someone won’t be doing both for Canada.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

In my opinion, the team dynamics and how they see mixed doubles is very different in Canada compared to most other curling nations.

Curling Canada set up the rules early on that you are not to double duty, and that for the Olympics, you must commit and dedicate yourself to the 4-person team as the higher priority.

That further reinforced the notion that mixed doubles had always been seen as lower priority in Canada, especially before it was introduction as an Olympic discipline.

For a while, Canada just picked a man and a woman from the champion 4-person mixed team to play mixed doubles at World.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1hNa4IVrVU&t=1m7s (2010 interview with Mark & Heather-Smith Dacey)

Recall that Peterman/Gallant won the 2016 championship, against Crocker (Walker)/Walker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EtE6JymWMA

The team that ended up going to the World Championship that year was neither. The men, specifically, declined to become Team Canada, because they were committed to Team Gushue (a wise move at the time, because they did end up winning the Players' Championship).

I'm no expert in teamwork/sports psychology, but I would think that to suddenly push for double duty would be a surprise distraction that can wreak havoc into team dynamics, especially when Team Gushue involved.

The situation is quite different in, say USA. The final of the mixed doubles trial for 2018 was Hamilton/Hamilton vs Christensen/Shuster.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CODsufqoeEQ

Regardless of who won that game, someone from Team Shuster was going to double duty, so it was perhaps considered an honor/privilege rather than a distraction, and the team would've been a lot more supportive and prepared.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2008
Location:
Posts: 40

I think it's fairly obvious that athletes can successfully compete in multiple disciplines. It wouldn't be all that surprising, for example, to see Bruce Mouat go double gold in these Olympics. The negative impact on either event from someone playing both events has to be considered minimal.

But putting that argument aside for a second, let's remember that a decision was taken at the beginning of the qualifying cycle by Curling Canada to not allow this. And it should be noted that the cancellation of the trials event has absolutely zero impact on the logic they used in determining that rule.

How would the athletes who would otherwise have competed in the trials feel if Curling Canada decided to abandon that rule and choose Peterman/Gallant?

I personally don't care. However, it's a clear departure from a pre-determined qualification condition, and there isn't a reason that it has to happen. It would be a purposeful choice for Curling Canada to abandon one of their existing rules, and it would mean choosing a team that wouldn't have been eligible if the trials event had gone ahead.

Just as a matter of principle, I'm surprised this isn't coming up more in the various bits commentary we're hearing.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

quote:

---

Originally posted by bpm
(1) I think it's fairly obvious that athletes can successfully compete in multiple disciplines.
(2) It wouldn't be all that surprising, for example, to see Bruce Mouat go double gold in these Olympics.
(3) The negative impact on either event from someone playing both events has to be considered minimal.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2014
Location: Alberta
Posts: 131

quote:

---

Originally posted by bpm


But putting that argument aside for a second, let's remember that a decision was taken at the beginning of the qualifying cycle by Curling Canada to not allow this. And it should be noted that the cancellation of the trials event has absolutely zero impact on the logic they used in determining that rule.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

Whether we like it or not, the 'one discipline' rule is in place and isn't going to be changed for this.

Found Herbert's and Morris's comments total political pandering. First off; inappropriate and distracting during what was supposed to be play by play and commentary of a provincial championship (its not an event about you John). Alberta curling should rake both over the coals just for that.

Second; it was obvious posturing by Morris to abuse the airtime in order to sell himself and Homan when there are two better, and higher ranked, teams ahead of them on the MD CTRS.

Also disingenuous on his part, and disrespectful to his fellow curlers IMO, to try and insinuate that the process is so flawed that he and Homan should just be anointed as MD reps.

People forget that Homan tanked at the last Olympics and that a previous gold by Morris is not a guarantee that he will repeat.

Yes, the CTRS MD was not designed to select a team but it does, regardless of its flaws, point out objectively who is currently performing the best and THAT is who we should be sending. If the other 2 teams can't, or won't, go then he can have the spot. But not till then.

But this is all a moot argument that happens with any sport where athletes are chosen subjectively instead of objectively. Look at the endless number of arguments if so-and-so is not added to the roster and team Canada gets silver or, gasp! God forbid, misses the medals altogether!

Its just a game people. Relax, send Martin/Griffiths and cheer them on.

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2021
Location:
Posts: 587

I have no horse in this race but it strikes me that the idea the points tells you who is best in this circumstance is obviously wrong given about 75% of the teams dont prioritize the discipline and just chase the trials. Did the current national champs even play much this fall?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Twin Snowbanks
Posts: 2068

I have typed this elsewhere. Has anyone watched these team play? Usually there is banter, discussion, arguing?? (not really) in critical shot decisions. If you have watched Martin/Griffiths you will see that Martin sees everything. Is sharply succinct in making the calls and very fast. She is also a pistol shooter. This team plays at a rapid pace and wins most of their games. The game chemistry between these two is ideal. Both have tonnes of experience nationally (Griffith 6 Briers) and Martin, internationally and have been around the block - so the head games are less of a factor. It will be wrong if they are not selected to represent our country. I am very put off with the Morris posturing. gak

__________________
Lots of major youth (<21) events. Nice for Murdoch... and us :-D.

Last edited by nelski on 01-08-22 at 02:38PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

quote:

---

Originally posted by nelski
banter, discussion, arguing

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2668

quote:

---

Originally posted by nelski
I have typed this elsewhere. Has anyone watched these team play? Usually there is banter, discussion, arguing?? (not really) in critical shot decisions. If you have watched Martin/Griffiths you will see that Martin sees everything. Is sharply succinct in making the calls and very fast. She is also a pistol shooter. This team plays at a rapid pace and wins most of their games. The game chemistry between these two is ideal. Both have tonnes of experience nationally (Griffith 6 Briers) and Martin, internationally and have been around the block - so the head games are less of a factor. It will be wrong if they are not selected to represent our country. I am very put off with the Morris posturing. gak

---

__________________
Well Behaved Women Don't Make History.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2019
Location:
Posts: 659

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlerbroad


Morris openly lobbying while he was supposed to be commenting on the game.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523

quote:

---

Originally posted by hogged again
I didn't hear any lobbying from Morris at all

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlingclips

Thank you for accurately representing the facts!

Morris was not lobbying, and even if you think that he somehow conspired to lobby by proxy through Hebert, it doesn't make sense, because whoever makes the decision is not going to care what Hebert and Morris said for 6 buried minutes out of a 3+ hours of fun interactive chat live on YouTube.

---

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

An interesting question would be what would Curling Canada have done if they had run the Trials and the lowest rank team got hot and won. Would they be sending that team or choosing a team they deemed more likely to win a medal? If they ignore the CTRS points and the team they send doesn't medal they've pretty much destroyed any credibility they had.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2011
Location:
Posts: 1962

quote:

---

Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
An interesting question would be what would Curling Canada have done if they had run the Trials and the lowest rank team got hot and won. Would they be sending that team or choosing a team they deemed more likely to win a medal? If they ignore the CTRS points and the team they send doesn't medal they've pretty much destroyed any credibility they had.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2013
Location:
Posts: 1875

quote:

---

Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
An interesting question would be what would Curling Canada have done if they had run the Trials and the lowest rank team got hot and won. Would they be sending that team or choosing a team they deemed more likely to win a medal? If they ignore the CTRS points and the team they send doesn't medal they've pretty much destroyed any credibility they had.

---

Last edited by IN-OFF-FOR-2 on 01-08-22 at 07:35PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

So if we were in the same situation, no trials because it was cancelled, but Peterman Gallant were available would we be discussing who the representative would be.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2016
Location: BC
Posts: 28

Tough one. As to who are completely disrespectful of their female partners—Laing and Morris stand out like sore thumbs! Obviously Peterman/Gallant stand out, but likely won’t be picked due to crossover risk. Homan/Morris May seem an obvious choice, but her clear disgust at playing with him in the lead-up to 2018 Olympics, and her merciful 4-man team which meant she did not have to play with him—leading to the situation in which Kaitlyn did, but clearly hated everything about it except the medal—I truly believe if she were offered the choice of MD Olympics with Jonny Mo vs. Scottie’s with her team, she would punt Jonny Mo in a heartbeat. Too much risk associated with him in any event at any time. Martin/Griffiths? Why not? Einarson/Jacobs? Have never played together before. Martin’s/Griffiths looking a better choice the more I look at it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged