|
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.
| 11-26-22 10:00AM |
|
Martym
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2018
Location:
Posts: 84 |
So Denmark will the gold in the women's and Scotland win a close final in the men's with a Bruce Mouat final end special by 5-4.
So happy for Madeleine Dupont - her last European final was 20 years ago when she won silver. Shows that perseverance eventually pays off.
Last edited by Martym on 11-26-22 at 10:16AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 10:17AM |
|
skwerl
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2018
Location:
Posts: 49 |
Men's final was good, almost ruined by Recast's stream quality. My connection is fine and it was stuttering and stopping all through the second half.
I was looking back through results over the years and this seems to be the first time ever that Sweden have come away with nothing.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 11:45AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by misty1
But you will never, ever convince me that DSC is a fair ay to eliminate teams from a major event.
As others have explained, DSC was not involved in SCO women making playoff.
A lot of people, still to this day, have misconception about DSC, which actually is the last resort lowest priority tiebreaker in WCF. It's so low priority that it may not even give you hammer even if it gave you higher rank.
Case in point, at 2022 Alberta provincial final, there was 3-way rock-paper-scissors tie for playoff spots, and Casey Scheidegger got #1 spot and bye to the final via DSC. Laura Walker had to win semifinal to reach the final, but she got hammer/LSFE when she rematched Scheideger because Walker beat Scheidegger in round robin.
People went crazy, "How can you be ranked #1 and got a bye to the final but not start the game with hammer??? This is insane!!!", etc, but that's the way it's supposed to be, in my opinion, because believe it or not, winning games is still more important than DSC.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 12:31PM |
|
Alvin
Knee-Slider
Registered: Mar 2022
Location:
Posts: 8 |
In the B group the LIthuanian ladies won the first medal ever for that country. There is no curling rink in Lithuania. So well done to them.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 12:58PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
I think I was wrong that Sophie Jackson is "Soph" and Sophie Sinclair is "Sinc", because I just heard Sophie Jackson calling Sophie Sinclair "Soph".
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 01:31PM |
|
misty1
Supreme Champion!
Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 6002 |
Alright, look. I really don't care how Scotland got the 4th spot. You will never convince me that any way other than playing an actual tiebreaker a fair to decide how gets the final spot. Let me just make that clear
If cashspiels can find time in the schedule for tiebreakers than major international competitions should be able to
Not trying to takeaway from Scotland. They earned their bronze but I would have preferred tiebreakers be played rather than DSC or h2h deciding it
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 02:52PM |
|
oliviertoisel
Drawmaster
Registered: Feb 2021
Location:
Posts: 587 |
Scotland flopped their way into an Olympic gold, too. That's just women's curling. Other than Tirinzoni at the Worlds there is no such thing as "best", just "winner".
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 03:37PM |
|
old david
Knee-Slider
Registered: Feb 2022
Location:
Posts: 9 |
Just the two double run backs then
Best Scottish team in my lifetime. And I go back to Willie Young. Two double run backs in a row in the tenth. They sure shoot their way out of a lot of stupid.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 10:21PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote:
Originally posted by misty1
Alright, look. I really don't care how Scotland got the 4th spot. You will never convince me that any way other than playing an actual tiebreaker a fair to decide how gets the final spot. Let me just make that clear
In the real world, practicality needs to be taken into account. What you can do easily in a specialized curling center may not be the same as what can be reasonably done in an arena repurposed for a major curling event.
Nobody is forcing any of the teams to participate. If any of them feel strongly enough about the use of tiebreaking criteria over tiebraking games, they can choose not to go, and let another team that will agree to the rules go in their place.
And what makes a tiebreaker the ultimate in fairness anyway? If Team A beats Team B in the round-robin, then why is it fair that Team A should be forced to beat them again to prove their superiority in said round-robin?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 10:44PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by hailstone
In the real world, practicality needs to be taken into account.
A lot of Canadians believe curling is more important than real world.
In WCF, if you run out of time, you lose. The real world clock on the wall decides the result of the game of curling.
In Curling Canada, if you run out of time, you can still win, depending on what's happening on the ice, where the rocks are, what the scoreboard says, how many rocks are left, etc. In other words, in Canada, curling is more important than real world.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 10:45PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
One thing that I think would help reduce the usage of tiebreakers is eliminating the extra end in round robin play. If you're tied after 10 ends, the game ends in a draw. The introduction of ties would decrease the odds of two or more teams finishing with identical records. Though in this case, none of the four tied teams had an extra end game, so it sadly undermines my own argument.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 10:52PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by hailstone
One thing that I think would help reduce the usage of tiebreakers
I think bidding on thinking time can help reduce the role of DSC.
Instead of giving each team 38 minutes of thinking time to play 10 ends of curling, each team make their own bids on what their thinking time should be on a game-by-game basis, maximum 38 minutes, but can be lower.
So if head-to-head can't decide, like in a rock-paper-scissors 3-way tie, they can sum their total thinking time bids and rank them from which team had the lowest bid total to most.
I think you can even eliminate extra ends this way. If score is tied after 10 ends, the team that bid for less thinking time wins.
This might also reduce instances of both teams cooperating to blank a few ends to bank time. Because one team starts with less time on the clock, that team has higher risk of running out of time, so the opposition may not be so cooperative in blanking a few early ends.
If all teams find this system is stupid, they can all basically opt out of it by always bidding maximum 38 minutes for every game, and everything would be exactly the same as before, no harm done.
If, as I suspect, some teams can really benefit from this system, then that's where the fun begins.
Last edited by curlingclips on 11-26-22 at 11:13PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-26-22 11:50PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote:
Originally posted by curlingclips
I think bidding on thinking time can help reduce the role of DSC.
I don't like that idea, because nobody can predict how the flow of a game will go (i.e. how much thinking time is appropriate) in advance. This is gambling, not skill.
Like Blitz Chess, Blitz Curling is another option that could be pursued, but should be classified as a different type of the sport altogether.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 12:28AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by hailstone
This is gambling, not skill.
I disagree.
We can implement this bidding system, then let teams opt out by bidding maximum 38m until they're comfortable bidding less. The highly motivated teams would improve their skill of thinking and playing faster, maybe requiring only 37m30s (-30s) next season.
I agree blitz is very different than classical chess, but that also involves magnitudes of difference in time (90 minutes vs 3 minutes). It's not blitz curling if you just shave off 30 seconds here and there. I don't expect any team to bid something outrageously low like only 10 minutes of thinking time, that would be dumb, but I can see some teams going down to 35 minutes for some games, for example.
We can reduce the consequence of running out of time if instant loss is too much. We can say that if you run out of time, you must deliver each of your rock within 5 seconds, otherwise the rock is burned. At that point, yeah, it's essentially blitz curling, but that's a separate thing from the bidding system. Personally I think we can still stick to the current WCF consequence of instant loss, and just expect teams to make smart informed bid according to their skill level of time management and fast thinking.
Keep in mind also that this is just for tiebreaker (lower priority than head-to-head but higher priority than DSC). It shouldn't drastically change the game, unless we also use it to eliminate extra end, which is a separate topic.
Consider that WCF has shown its hand that it wants to speed up the game, as evidenced by their thinking-time-per-end proposal, which they withdrew after backlash. The beauty of this bidding system is that teams can opt out (by always bidding maximum), it's not forced upon them, but I think eventually teams will get better and better and play faster and faster, and at that point WCF may no longer have concerns with pace of play. The team themselves will voluntarily improve their pace of play by putting lower bids, and that's a much better solution than WCF imposing something unto the teams that they have no choice but to accept.
Last edited by curlingclips on 11-27-22 at 01:23AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 01:31AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by hailstone
nobody can predict how the flow of a game will go (i.e. how much thinking time is appropriate) in advance
Correct, but the self-correcting nature of the system means that it will eventually find its equilibrium.
Currently WCF gives 38 minutes for 10 ends. Do we know for sure that this is the correct/ideal number? Not really. It's just a number that someone in WCF decided, hopefully informed by data, but it's WCF's decision nonetheless.
If we instead let teams decide by bidding their own thinking time, maybe we will see a gradual decrease. Maybe by 2026, 37 minutes is more than enough for the most competitive teams! Maybe by 2030, it goes down to 35 minutes on average, but then some brainiac skip will figure out that they can beat those teams if they have 38 minutes!
The system is self-correcting. Let the teams figure it out on their own.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 08:16AM |
|
Observer
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2016
Location: River Falls, WI, USA
Posts: 445 |
No, that sounds like gambling to me too. I’d vote against it, if I had a vote.
I like head to head as the first tiebreaker. DSC is fine for determining 1st hammer in a single game, but it makes for a lousy standings tiebreaker because it feels so unlike the main game of curling. I would prefer there be another step or two be inserted between head to head and DSC to make DSC a true last resort. Second resort isn’t last enough for me.
What could those be? Well, in my baseball league, after head-to-head we look at total runs allowed next, and then total runs scored. In curling you’d have to use average per end values rather than absolute values to account for games that end early or games that run long, but that’s easy enough.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 10:59AM |
|
oliviertoisel
Drawmaster
Registered: Feb 2021
Location:
Posts: 587 |
What if we tried to design rules that were focused on letting the players play the game instead of making the game about the rules? Soccer is the most popular sport in the world and it has about the simplest rule set of any major sport. Baseball is probably the most complex and they are forever trying to invent rules that emphasize play time over everything else. Curlingclips' suggestions tend to be designed to be of interest to curlingclips and not an actual sport played by people. It's for a robotic world. May I suggest a new hobby involving Minecraft or Stardew Valley? The "people" there will welcome endless attempts to create efficiency.
Last edited by oliviertoisel on 11-27-22 at 11:02AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 12:38PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
WCF will lower the 38 minutes thinking time limit for 10 end games, mark my words. It's either that, or the 4 minutes per end that they proposed earlier. They will do something to speed up the pace of play and force it upon everyone.
My self bid proposal is just my fantasy dream scenario where curlers take matters into their own hands instead of the officials/sanctioning bodies telling them what to do.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 12:50PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by Observer
In curling you’d have to use average per end values
You can't do that for curling in my opinion. In curling, it's not an absolute goal to maximize per end values. You have to use something that is an absolute goal.
Head-to-head makes sense, because winning every game is an absolute goal, no exception.
DSC makes sense, because making those LSDs as good as possible to win LSFE is an absolute goal, at least for the first team. You could argue that the second team doesn't have to try their best, e.g. they can win the LSFE just by hitting the 8-ft if the first team only got to 12-ft, etc., but that's nitpicky.
Maximizing the average points scored in an end is not an absolute goal. Sometimes it's strategically better to blank or to just play for 1 or even give up a steal.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-27-22 01:07PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by Observer
I would prefer there be another step or two be inserted between head to head and DSC to make DSC a true last resort. Second resort isn’t last enough for me.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I do wonder what that intermediary step should be.
I don't like average points scored per end, but what about sum of total points scored in the first end? That would encourage teams to score a deuce with hammer in the first end.
I acknowledge that some teams like to blank the first end (even though statistically it's not significantly winning if you do blank the first end), but that's not exciting for the fans. We should encourage teams to slug it out from the word GO!.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-29-22 01:15AM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
I finally watched the men's semifinal and bronze medal games, and I must say that, since I brought up Anna Hasselborg uncharacteristically missing easy shots, so did Oskar Eriksson.
It's truly mindboggling to watch. Even the commentators were speechless, because you'd never expect Eriksson to completely miss an open hit.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 12-04-22 10:02PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote:
Originally posted by Observer
What could those be? Well, in my baseball league, after head-to-head we look at total runs allowed next, and then total runs scored. In curling you’d have to use average per end values rather than absolute values to account for games that end early or games that run long, but that’s easy enough.
That would take a collegial sport like curling and force players to run up scores as much as possible on inferior teams. You might also have to prevent teams from resigning to avoid skewing the averages with less ends played.
There's no perfect answer when head-to-head results fails, but I would try to pick something that wouldn't alter how the games are played, like "most total ends with the lead" or such.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 12-05-22 02:54PM |
|
curlingclips
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Oct 2019
Location:
Posts: 1523 |
quote:
Originally posted by hailstone
There's no perfect answer when head-to-head results fails
One obvious intermediary step is to use game results against higher ranked teams with more wins.
So, at 2022 Olympics women's curling, we had GBR, JPN, and CAN in a rock-paper-scissors 3-way tie at 5W-4L, so they were ranked by DSC for 2 spots in playoff.
Instead of resorting to DSC, I propose we first examine their game results against higher ranked teams with more wins, which happened to be #1 SUI at 8W-1L and #2 SWE at 7W-2L.
None of GBR, JPN, nor CAN beat #1 SUI, but GBR did beat #2 SWE who beat JPN and CAN.
Based on that win, I propose GBR should be ranked higher than JPN and CAN, who are now in 2-way tie with each other, which can be easily resolved by head-to-head.
JPN beat CAN, thus we'd have #3 GBR, #4 JPN, and #5 CAN, ranked without using DSC.
Basically the idea is to reward teams for winning games. It doesn't really matter how those games were won, what the score was, etc., we simply reward teams for winning more games and/or against tougher opponents.
The potential downside is that this may be rarely applicable for something so complicated. We'd also need to address the question that can be rephrased as "Which is more valuable? 1 gold medal or 2 medals silver and bronze?" (i.e. is 1 win against #1 better or worse than 2 wins against #2 and #3?). I think for consistency we should always prioritize more wins, but that's open to debate.
There's also potential conflict with head-to-head. If two teams are tied with same number of wins, A beat B, but B beat all higher ranked teams with more wins, who should be ranked higher between the two?
Last edited by curlingclips on 12-05-22 at 03:46PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 12-05-22 06:27PM |
|
hailstone
Swing Artist
Registered: May 2018
Location:
Posts: 407 |
quote:
Originally posted by curlingclips
One obvious intermediary step is to use game results against higher ranked teams with more wins.
Once a tournament begins, ranking shouldn't matter. Every team in that tournament should be on equal terms from that point on, and only the results from said tournament should play a part in which teams advance.
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 > European championships 2022
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)