Some random venting…
Welcome to the World
Canada Grand Slam Tim Hortons’ Home Hardware Tankard Cup Scotties Championship
Classic
Okay – let me preface this by saying that I love curling. I
love playing in big tournaments, and I love watching the game on TV.
My question is – have we gone around the bend in terms of
the number of “big” event tournaments? Have we gotten to the point where we are
losing the impact by burning out both the fans and the players?
This weekend, there was the Canada Cup. At the same time,
there is World Cup of Curling. Next week – there is a Slam in Conception Bay
Newfoundland. As a curling fan, what am I supposed to care about? What does it
all mean? At what point do fans start to say: really? Another event? Why should
I care about this one?
Pros vs. Joes
Much of the answer lies in the fact that there are about a
dozen teams in the world right now that are Professional Curlers. Let’s call
them the Pros. There are 6 or 7 of these teams in Canada, the rest are Olympic-funded athletes from Europe, the US or Asia.
The life of a professional curler is not easy. While you do
not have to worry about such petty concerns as a day job, you spend your time
traveling from event to event. Yes you sometimes get a week off – but not
often. You find yourself on a flight from Esteban Saskatchewan or Omaha,
Nebraska to Conception Bay, Newfoundland. That can’t be a fun commute. You need to be at the gym and on the practice ice in your spare time. And the payout is not spectacular. If you
are one of the top few teams in the World, yes you likely are pulling down some
decent money – but definitely not “pro-sports” level money. And if you do not
win, the money dries up pretty quickly.
The Grand Slam events, of which there are now seven (!), are
catered to these teams. The schedule usually is set up to be pretty light and
run from Wednesday to Sunday– with a game or two per day for 3-4 days followed
by playoffs on the weekend. The Slams are a pretty restricted circle, because
only the top teams in the world are invited, and only the top teams in the World
make the big points and the big money that these Slams provide. Few new teams
can break into the invite list. Usually you see the one or two “non-Pro” teams
that have curled in EVERTHING and played really well get an invite somewhere (like Scott MacDonald this week).
But otherwise, the same teams will play in all the slams.
The Pros ultimately are aiming at the Olympics, which are the
new pinnacle of the sport. Since curling has been included in the winter Olympics,
the focus of the best curlers has been to bring home the Olympic Gold. The “system”
is set up to help the pros attain this goal. Teams are no longer set up to last one or two seasons - they talk about committing for the "quadrennial".
The Slams give them a platform so that they can curl full time, Curling Canada and the Canadian Olympic Program do their part by providing additional tax-free subsidies and training support to the top teams.
The Slams give them a platform so that they can curl full time, Curling Canada and the Canadian Olympic Program do their part by providing additional tax-free subsidies and training support to the top teams.
The other group of curlers are the Joes, of which I am a
member. You can call us the wannabees, or the dreamers, or the silent majority.
We are the teams that fill the spiels every other weekend. We have day jobs,
and are usually burning through precious vacation days to play in spiels. I do
not mean to ennoble us, or say that we are the true heart of curling or any
bullshit like that, but we are the base of the pyramid.
Joes grind it out. We drive to spiels. We fit practice time
into our days. Tournaments usually run Friday-Sunday, with a much more compressed schedule. In spiels, we often end up playing 3 games per day, including the last day
of a spiel where they usually fit quarters/semis and finals in the same 12
hours.
For us Joes, there is no financial incentive. Sponsorship is
haphazard and minimal, so travel costs often have to be funded by our winnings.
For most teams, break-even is a pretty good season. So why do we do it?
The Brier
The Brier is the likely the one remaining event that is attainable
for both Pros and Joes. If you are fortunate enough to live in a Province
without a “Pro” team, (like Quebec), then the best Joe team will go to the
Brier and compete on TV with the best of the best, like I was fortunate enough
to do last year. While the Joe teams rarely have a shot at winning (arguably no
Joe team has won since Ménard 13 years ago), the Brier is still enough to fuel
our passion for the game and to keep us curling. The Brier is the ultimate open.
If you have the $300 or so to sign up, you have a shot. Someone has to beat you
for you to not go.
This is what makes the Brier stand out. While literally
every single other big event is structured to favor the Pro teams, the Brier is
a democracy. It is the ultimate open bonspiel. I can win the Brier. I realize
that this is unlikely, but while I might have a 1 in 1000 shot at winning the
Brier, I have a zero in 1000 shot at winning a Slam, because I am not invited,
nor can I possibly hold down a job and a family and curl enough in Tier 2
events to make enough points to possibly, one day, squeak into a Slam.
This brings me to the Brier format. John Morris wrote an
excellent article in the Curling News this month about the Brier and suggested
formats, and surprisingly I find myself agreeing with a lot of what he said. Some
highlights:
- NO wildcard
- A full round robin
- Only 1 team from the “North”.
- Team Canada
- Better “perks” like a players/family lounge
He has some other thoughts that I am less sure about, like eliminating
Northern Ontario or dropping the last place team from the following year, but I
like the direction of his thinking.
The Brier needs to be different. The Brier is not a Slam. If there is one event that needs to cater
to the Joes more than the Pros – it’s the Brier. It needs to be an accessible
dream. I would argue that the very survival of the Brier depends on Curling
Canada realizing this.
Regular readers of my blog know that I see the death of “Joes”-level
curling as a bad thing. To me, a lot of the charm of curling was that it was a
game played by Joes. The guy who won the Brier often had a day job. Curling was
a game, not a job. I am now a relic in thinking that this was good thing. The Olympics
have moved the game into the realm of Pro Sports, with sponsorship and TV deals
and contracts (and even our own pro-sports bad behavior scandals - see Red Deer).
But has it made curling better? Of course it has. The quality of
play is not even comparable. (If you don’t believe me – go back and watch a
Brier final on Youtube from the late 90s. It looks nothing like the game today).
But is “Curling” better? Meh. Not so sure.
Don’t get me wrong here folks. Please do not say I am
against the Pro teams, or that I am anti-progress. I swear I am not. I am just trying to take a
step back and ask what progress really looks like. Where do we want to the game
to go?
I also hope I am not the only guy asking these questions!
exactly.
ReplyDeleteYou are not alone. There are small groups of us rebels hiding out in various corners of the curling world. The empire appears to want to snuff us out. One of the greatest things about curling is that it was always a "win your way there" sport and not a "chosen" sport. While the Olympics didn't end that, they have pushed the processes that way and the slams have now implemented it. Cities no longer desire to host the Olympics, why are we ruining our sport for it. This is a key time in the sport of curling...all voices need to speak.
ReplyDeletewell. I'm not so sure I agree with your comment that the play is better than the 90's. Give those players-who were in their heyday-the ice conditions and the 'juiced, thin-striking-band stones' we play with now and they'd be every bit as good as the Jacobs and Gushue's of this era. In fact, considering some of the conditions we used to have to play and win on, I think its fair to venture that those athletes were better as they could adapt and win. Unlike the crybabies we have at the Slams who (like in Cranbrook two years ago) whine the moment they don't have pristine, almost sterile, playing conditions. Good comments from Morris though on reigning in the silly format of the Brier.
ReplyDeleteWhere to start. Until it closed for reason(s) I do not know, I commented at great length, pretty frequently, on the Scottish Curling Forum, on matters very closely relating to the excellent post above. I had a Cassandra-like reputation for articulate irrelevance.
ReplyDeleteThe Olympic movement is sport’s antichrist. It pretends to be sympathetic to participation in sport, but it is in fact the guardian of elitist exclusivity, and the triumph of excellence over open access. This is a very long rap, and I shall spare the followers of this blog the detail. But the blame for the “Pros” owning the game of us “Joes” is, I feel, largely the fault of our Olympic participation. We swapped our sports integrity for money and television coverage. Shame on us.
I am retired from more than 40 years of Joe-level participation. I loved every minute of it, even though in my heart-of-hearts I knew I wouldn’t get to the World’s. But once upon a time I did stand a chance, and remember over a hundred teams entering the Scottish championships at a time when Winnipeg had more sheets than Scotland. Last year about ten teams entered. No-one will ever beat the Pros again, why sign up to be demolished by professional athletes? Nutritionists, a salary, trainers, psychologists, doctors…. This is the entertainment industry, not sport.
So, I am hugely sympathetic to our host’s cri de coeur. But we had the best of it. And my heartfelt sympathies for those participants in sports like orienteering, who have not been crushed in the blazeratti’s embrace. Enjoy it while you still own the sport you play.
"We swapped our sports integrity for money and television coverage. Shame on us." You win the prize for best comment!
DeleteI can understand your rationale and concur that part of the Brier's allure is the possibility that a new team could win. I've yet to watch the Brier without pulling for an underdog.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Slams and other events, my understanding is these came about when certain high level teams would not participate in the Brier ...due to rule changes they were seeking. My memory isn't that great. In any event, I enjoy watching these events as a fan and the Roar of the Rings pre-Olympics is the best curling I've ever seen. (Even better than the Olympics).
It's unfortunate that the Olympics have become the touchstone but I don't believe it will keep curlers from participating in the game. It is one that is open to all ages, my dad's last game was at the age of 93!
Good luck for the rest of the season. Perhaps we'll see you back at the Brier!
Great insights, Mike Fournier!
ReplyDeletelove to see some experimenting with
ReplyDeletea thrown rock touching or covering the pin for two points. Sure would make a force more interesting & ad more excitement to the game!
I have heard that too definitely a neat aspect. I liked the no tick zone..just too make last end good.
DeleteToo much time between blogs..love your articles and insight. Just want more!
ReplyDelete