Procrastination and PEDs

It can be easy to delay starting something if you're feeling down.  Everyone needs time to feel a little depressed, savour and wallow in the sheer listlessness of a day or two (while binge watching Arrested Development, Breaking Bad or perhaps the Wire, because everyone has told you to), but if you can't recover after a week it's likely you are just lazy or should seek professional help.  I just survived 7 months of Edmonton winter so that I can enjoy 23 straight days of rain, and now a heat wave, and I've been feeling down.  Maybe that's why I have been procrastinating several things these past few months.

I still haven't written articles to analyze the finals of the Brier or the Worlds (much less the Grand Slam final from December).  I'd like to write an e-book before the Olympics, but haven't gotten much past the Table of Contents.  I started to clean out my garage (but haven't finished), which means it is so cluttered with things to throw out, things to sell (anyone want a Little Tikes Basketball Hoop?), and just plain things, that it cannot be inhabited by vehicles.  My office is still in a state of "nearly finished organzining". And my 2012 Taxes are at least piled together, and have managed not to spontaneously combust in this unusual Central Alberta heat.

There's likely a half dozen other things I'm putting off doing but it's been so long that their importance has worn off and the likelyhood of ever doing them is coming into question.

But I had been watching Sunday Night TV (Game of Thrones/Mad Men), Arrested Development, and the NBA and NHL Playoffs.  And now they are all done.  No more excuses.

At my age it seems unrealistic that I can use the devastating 6th game loss by my Bruins as an excuse (my father was a Habs fan, and we are both devils advocates, so it was natural).  The manner in which it took place, losing in the final 80+ seconds, was dumbfounding, but I'm still proud of the season, the team, and mostly disappointed we were deprived a seventh game, win or lose.  Of course, we did see over 7 games of hockey if you include the extra three periods of game 1.  Memories of Petr Klima in '91 and the famous play-off battle between the Capitals vs Islanders from 1987, which at 15 I stayed up to watch, caring little for which team won but knowing it would somehow matter.  And now I realize it doesn't.

The NBA playoffs treated us to a seventh game, and though it was hard fought and close to the end, it fell short of what may go down as one of the best finals games ever in game 6.  As I started to pull for different players and teams throughout each play-offs, I constantly remind myself, as a grown man who has reached the limits of his own disappointments, that the losers still make enough money to get by allright.

Curlers, on the other hand, are still working towards a higher level of fame and fortune.  For some, reaching the Olympic level can also mean being held to the same standards of other athletes when it comes to PEDs. Ask Jacobs fifth man Matt Dumontelle how it feels after being surprised with a 2 year suspension.  What a bunch of horse droppings.

Experts, from many sports, continually stay ahead of the system and those that get caught are most often either because of stupid mistakes or unaware of the correct application of the rules.  I only wonder what the outcome may have been at the World's if Matt had played.  In our Around The House podcast  with Stoughton third Jon Mead, we were told that most of their team was battling sickness during their provincial final weekend, but couldn't take many over the counter substances because they could be considered PEDs.  Once again, horse droppings.

If you read the article, you'll notice the rest of the Jacobs team "remain friends" with Matt but in "no way condone his actions".  I expect these comments fall in the category of, say what you are expected to say so the governing bodies don't get angry, rather than what you really think.

I certainly don't know anything further than the article states, and maybe I'm off base, but I doubt that anyone was trying to gain an edge on the ice.  The punishment also seems severe.  A 2 year ban within Canadian competition? I for one would like to think Canada could use a more minor punishment for a first time offender, especially if what was taken is legal (maybe in Matt's case it wasn't?).  For a sport that was built (and sponsored) by cigarettes, beer, and the occasional CC and coke, it seems a travesty that Joe Frans gets a 2 year ban for experimenting with coca plants and Matt gets the same for his actions.

Maybe the CCA had little choice, they are governed by larger entities, but regardless of how this penalty is determined, if you examine all the factors, and also admire the feats of other great athletes who actually benefit from PEDs, and don't get caught, it all appears ridiculous.

Now maybe I can find a PED to stop me from procrastinating...

April 24 2013 with Colin Hodgson

Colin Hodgson joins the crew for the end of year wrap up show. We discuss the HUGE news to start off the show as John Morres decideds to leave Kevin Martin just 7 months before the Olympic Trials in Winnipeg. As well we wrap up the Men's World Curling Championship, the Player's Championship & year end wrap-up.

Check out this episode!

A Curling Week Unlike Any Other

As I await yet another April snowfall in Central Alberta, I thought it was about time I refelected on the final chapter of the Curling Season.  No, not the Players Championship, the Men's World Championships.  The Players is, I suppose, the final event, much like the $10 million dollar Fed Ex Cup/Tour Championship is played after the PGA Championship.  One day the Fed Ex Cup (or perhaps the 2037 Nike Cup) might carry similar historic signifigance, but for now Major Golf ends in August and not September, and Major Curling ends at the World's.  And, with so many non-Canadian countries getting even better, this event will perhaps begin to gain acknowledgement that it does have some of the best teams in the world, even if there is only one competing team wearing a maple leaf.

Am I the only one that hears the name "Players" and thinks back to the old days of corporate sponsorship by tobacco companies?  You know, back (before 2000) when Canada still had an LPGA Major.  The Brad Jacobs rink would not fit the proper image for a poster from a "MacDonald (Tobacco) Brier.

William H. Macy enjoys a smoke while sweeping skip George C. Scott's final draw in the 1978 "Celebrities with Middle Initials" Bonspiel 

The Players will still be an interesting event, for a few reasons.  

Money: Team Rachel Homan is playing for $100,000 Bonus if they should capture the second of the Womens sponsored Grand Slams.   Kevin Koe's squad you might recall lost their chance at $1 million when they were unable to win the Canadian Open, the 2nd Grand Slam of the season.  They will have a chance to share in the $100,000 bonus split between the top 3 Mens teams, based on performance at all four Grand Slams. 

Fame: Team Brad Jacobs may have fallen short in their bid as World Champions in 2013, but their Brier victory and Silver medal performance puts them one single point ahead  (ok, 1.025) of John Epping for the final "auto" berth to the Olympic Trials.  The Players will provide the final opportunity for these two teams (or Gushue I suppose, if they both fail to show up) to capture that final spot and avoid playing in the Pre-Trials next November.  

Love: Played in the previous home of the once again mighty, lucky to sneak into the playoffs, Maple Leafs, this event is a test to see how much Torontonians love Curling.  Many fans have thought a Toronto Brier long overdue.  The Canadian National Championship (aka The Brier) was started in Toronto in 1927 and played there until 1940 when it started becoming "National" and moved to Winnipeg.  In 1941 it was returned to Toronto for one more show and hasn't been back since.  If this event can succeed, maybe our National Championship can return to Hogtown once again.

Can you spot the Curling Club in this picture?

While we anxiously await the Players, I'll take a look back at some interesting decisions made during the final weekend of the 2013 Mens Worlds.

Page Playoff (1 vs 2): Dave Murdoch, Scotland vs. Niklas Edin, Sweden 

Before I analyze this game, let me make a suggestion to those folks who manage curling in Scotland and suggest you don't continue with a rotating 5 man team.  

Some people have suggested it could be beneficial in curling to change things up to find the player who's "hot".  Others say you should not take this approach because it challenges the traditions of a 4 man team.  I don't subscribe to either and suggest that a team stay with four players for an event for these reasons:

1. You can't substitute during a game.  Just because Spike Albrecht was hitting three pointers in the NCAA basketball championship didn't stop their coach from bringing in Player of the Year Trey Burke (his two fouls did in the first half at least).  If Basketball had no substitution and the option was playing Albrecht instead of Burke, despite Spike's being 6 for 6 on 3 point shots heading into the game, he still rides the pine.  

2.  There aren't really substantial differences in specialized skills.  Again, looking at basketball, players have various skills which can be used in a game.  Some players are defensive specialists, strong rebounders, or good sinking baskets from outside the three point line.  Some have size, others quickness.  In curling, you need each player to make his shots and either sweep well or call line well.  That's about it.  Perhaps you could have a "tick" specialist or "heavy hitter" but these aren't significant enough to justify sitting a player over another for an entire game (see number 1 above).  

3. Small sample sizes can lead to incorrect analysis.  I know, it's easy to look at a player after the fact and determine that he or she was "losing it" or not at their peak.  Maybe the truth is that person just isn't as good as you thought they were. Or more likely it's just the result of randomness.  It's like a baseball manager "over" coaching during the play-offs and juggling the line-up in order to create more offence.  If it works, and the team suddenly hits, they look like a genius, when the truth is the line-up has very little bearing on a single game (and some research supports it even has minimal impact on a 162 game season).  If you are prepared to pull a player after the 5th game of an 11 game round robin, then you are assuming that their performance in the next game will be worse than your alternate, based on the outcome of 90-100 rocks thrown.  That might seem like a lot, but it's actually a very small sample size, especially in a game where most shots are similar (and usually successful) and the difference between a made shot and a terrible one can be an extra brush of the broom, and error in communication or even a mismatched stone.  I'd suggest you find your best four players before the event starts and play them unless someone is physically unable to perform at their peak due to injury (or excessive celebration).

In the 8th end, down 5-3 with hammer, Scotland has a mess of guards and keep attempting raises when they could have drawn to the four foot, especially on skips first shot. Murdoch attempts the runback on hist first (blue shot) when perhaps a draw (green) could have had led to better chance at a deuce.

Scotland is Red

Interesting that Sweden played the end very aggressive, perhaps because of the way the it developed or that was their original intent.  The raise is missed and Scotland eventually makes a tap-tap (tap?) for a single point.

In the 9th end, up 5-4 with hammer, Sweden gets into trouble. If not for a miss on Murdoch's first, they may have faced a possible a steal of two.  Edin is able to clear guards on his first and Murdoch is looking at this with his last shot:

Sweden is Yellow

Rather than throw a guard (green), Scotland choses to draw for second shot (blue), leaving Niklas a wide open  hit for 1 and a 2 point lead.  Not certain I agree with this call.  They likely felt if the guard is too long  the shot would be makeable by Niklas for 2 or 3 and if too short he would have a raise double for two.  I much prefer creating some chance, if even slight, to steal, rather than surrendering an automatic single point.  Two down playing the 10th and your chances are 11.7% but a steal will double your chances to roughly 24%.  Even if you leave Edin a chance at two or more 20% of the time, you would only need to steal 1 in 10 for the guard to be correct.  As it turned out, Edin actually missed his hit and stick and gave up a steal of one.  So much for my analysis, I guess they were right all along.

In the 10th end, Murdoch is unable to put his last shot in the perfect spot and Edin makes his draw to the four foot for the win.

Page Playoff (3 vs 4): Brad Jacobs, Canada vs Rasmus Stjerne, Denmark  

Canada and Team Jacobs finds themselves again in the 4th spot, without hammer, identical to their position at the Tim Horton's Brier.  (Spoiler Alert), they win this game and the subsequent semi-final against Scotland to make the finals, where they lose to Sweden.  It is still an incredible feat considering they played 6 playoff games, against the strongest teams at each event, without hammer, second choice of rocks, and managed to come up just a few shots short of being crowned World Champions.  If you consider teams to be of equal calibre, hammer should win roughly 60% of the time.  So, if we consider Jacobs equal with Howard and Stoughton (and I expect some people might at this point), and with Denmark and Scotland (debatable perhaps with one of those non-English speaking teams) then their chance of even getting to the World finals following the Brier Round Robin was about 1%.  

Yes kids, 1% or +990.

Rasmus keeps Canada close with a couple of misses.  In the 3rd end Denmark scores 2 rather than 3 and a possible steal in the 5th end is turned into a blank when he is unable to get an inside roll with his last.  

Rasmus makes a nice freeze in the 6th end after Jacobs comes deep with his first, but an angle double allows Canada to take two points and regain the lead, 4-3.

I liked the force Canada played in the 7th end.  They could have thrown a guard, attempting a steal but would have left two different angle raises for two.  They instead chose to hit an open Denmark rock and ensure no worse than a single, and the final shot by Stjerne had some amount of difficulty.  

In the 8th end, Rasmus attempted two raises with his final shots, both times removing shot stone but unable to keep their promoted guard in the rings for shot.  The result is a deuce by Canada and a 6-4 lead.  On his first, Rasmus attempted to remove a Canada stone biting the top four foot.  He could have attempted a draw around to the back four rather than the raise, but perhaps the spot did not curl enough or he was less comfortable with that shot.  

In the 9th end, Denmark chose to throw up another corner guard on third's last rock (blue).  They could have chosen to draw around the top two rocks at this stage (green).  I might have preferred this over the guard. 

Canada is Red

There is some danger in the come around leaving a chance for Canada to clear everything, but that could be avoided with proper placement of the rock.  This call also brings in the slight chance of a three point score (anyone see Howard versus Stoughton a few weeks ago?). They consider this shot on skips first stone but instead choose to hit their top yellow and attempt to roll away.  Good case can be made for both shots at this stage as either call can result in a deuce, much depends on the skip's comfort with the shot.  Brad has a good chance at a double but throws his final shot a little wide and Denmark is able to draw for a deuce.

Not much strategy to discuss in the 10th end, but Canada third Ryan Fry makes a cool shot that we should draw just for fun.  Needless to say, fans were very loud after this shot...

Denmark is Yellow

Even Ryan's usually stoic dad, 1979 Brier champ Barry Fry was seen on camera sharing a Wiser's clap.  

On Denmark's first skip rock, they choose to tap back Canada to sit two behind the tee and their shooter stays top twelve foot.  Brad chooses to draw top button and Jacob's final shot isn't needed to secure the win.

Semi-Final: Canada vs Scotland

Scotland third Tom Brewster sits on the bench this game (see my comments above on that one).  Canada is 1 down with hammer in the third end and time for another highlight shot by Ryan Fry:

Canada is Red

Jacobs makes a mistake two shots later however.  Choosing to come around the corner guard at an attempt for a possible three, he leaves Murdoch a double and the result is a blank.  I didn't like Brad's call for a come around here because his shot stone was nearly wide open (perhaps 1/8 buried).  I wrote about a similar call during the 7th end of the 2012 Manitoba Provincial Semi-Finals.  Jacobs is trying to make a teaser shot, but he can't make a shot where Murdoch won't have a high percentage chance to pick him out anyway.  In other words, the chance for three is very slim. Better to play to the open side and ensure the deuce.

In the 5th end, after a peel by Canada second EJ Harnden, Scotland is looking at this, down 2-1 with hammer:

Scotland is Yellow

Murdoch choses to try a hit and roll and ends up sitting on the nose.  An alternate shot might have been to play a split on the top yellow rock.  I rarely see this type of call but when used at the right itme it can create difficulty for the opponent.  It may have been too early in the end in this example, but after Ryan Fry hits on the nose, Scotland calls the same shot on thirds first. They end up making the hit and roll and Canada is unable to make a runback double with the tight guard.  Jacobs avoids a deuce primarily because of a miss on David Murdoch's first stone.  On his last, David could have chose to double off the top two Canada stones for a blank, but instead elects to draw for his single.  With 5 ends remaining, taking one or blanking is nearly identical (39 to 40%) so he should call the shot he expects to make more often.

Lots of discussion in the 6th end before Ryan Fry's last shot.  Tied 2-2, Canada is sitting first and third:

Canada is Red

They consider a draw, a tap and roll off the yellow in the rings and peeling either guard.  Peeling the corner is a dangerous decision that leaves an opportunity for Scotland to make a hit and roll to sit two and turn  around the end.  You can make a case for the draw but peeling the centre, with an attempt to tick the yellow out if thrown perfectly, does appear to be the best choice.  Ryan manages the peel but is unable to remove the yellow stone sitting second.  Murdoch makes a soft hit and roll off his yellow in the rings, but is unable to remove the Canada rock.  Scotland sits first and second, Canada third and fourth.  Jacobs makes a freeze with his first and Scotland faces this with their last:

Scotland is Yellow

They choose to try a double on the two red Canada stones, hoping they will stick to sit two (green lines).  A difficult shot that David ends up missing by a fraction of an inch.  The result is a soft inturn hit for three and a 5-2 lead by Canada.  Scotland would have been much better choosing to freeze on top of the Canada stone or attempt a nose hit to sit shot stone in front of Canada.  Even if the angles didn't align well, a 3 would not have been possible.  One of these shots also gives them a small chance at a steal.  This is a case where one poor call shifted the game and a mistake in strategy played as large a role in the outcome as execution.  

A steal in the 8th and Canada ends up with a win after 9 ends.

Canada and Sweden in the World Mens Finals, coming shortly....

 

Brier Final Weekend (Part II)

This is a (my sincerest apologies) delayed Part II to my Brier final weekend recap/analysis.  You'll have to go back a couple of articles to find Part I.  

Can someone tell me why the Semi-final has to be played during an early morning draw when most of us are recuperating from our hangover after winning an award for this article?  That's my name below the list of Brier All-stars.  Yup, I was as surprised as you are.

The Bronze medal game.  Previous arguments I heard on this was "don't complain, you don't have to watch it" and also "it got great TV ratings".  Well, now it puts the Semi-final in the morning and pushes the finals to later in the evening.  I don't mind the late start to the finals but it meant I couldn't take my kids.  I couldn't chance the sugar-induced-zombie-transformation that happens to my son around 9 pm, especially on a school night. It wouldn't be safe for me or other spectators in the arena.  

The TV excuse didn't hold this year as the game WASN'T TELEVISED.  Note, it was the ONLY Brier draw which was not shown on TSN.  If Toronto Sports Network  Canada's Sports Leader and their sponsors don't even care, why should we?

Semi-Finals: Brad Jacobs - Northern Ontario vs. Glenn Howard - Ontario

Team Howard opens with a skip+cornerguard generated deuce, and team Jacobs rebounds in the second end to tie it up. 

NO has the pressure on in the 3rd end but Brad makes an error on his final draw, leaving a double for a possible (if difficult) three but the shooter rolls out and Howard is back up two.

In the 4th end, holding hammer and down 4-2, Jacobs third Ryan Fry makes a routine triple and roll behind the corner guard on his first.  Ontario third Wayne Middaugh manages to hit and roll to the centre and Jacobs decides to come around the corner to sit second shot, rather than hit (and roll).  This is a call I don't believe we would have seen from Brad 2 years ago.  Announcer Russ (older brother of Glenn) Howard comments it may be late to try this shot. Glenn faces this with his first shot:

Howard is Yellow

They discuss throwing up a guard or running the corner guard back (green line).  Russ comments that it's difficult to draw for second shot (blue line) and not leave a double.  Up two points at this stage, they also don't want to risk giving up three.  What seemed to be an overly agressive strategy by Jacobs has in fact  worked to his advantage. Even if Glenn makes the runback, Brad will still have a chance at a deuce with a hit and roll.  Glenn in fact misses the runback and Jacobs is able to score two points.  

Looking at this with rough numbers, let's estimate a centre guard attempt produces a deuce 40%, a force 50%, a steal 5% and a three 5%. We'll assume a runback will always result in a blank if made and a deuce if missed (granted, there's some small chance of a force, a steal or even a deuce, but humour me).  Using those numbers, Howard needs to make the runback 55% of the time for the call to be correct.  If we think 40% for the deuce is high (I do) Glenn has to be even more accurate for the runback to be correct.  If we believe the chance for a runback is 70% (which I believe falls somewhere in the low end of the statistical range) appears to be close with either call.

5th end is what Northern Ontario may look back to as the turning point for their Brier.  After placing a tight centre, Howard chooses a corner guard rather than come around. Then, on both of second Brent Laing's shots, Glenn chooses run backs (in an attempt to knock his frozen stone into the NO shot stone), rather than double peeling.  He is succesful on his second shot, but there are now 4 guards in play.  After a missed runback by Wayne and a missed hit by Glenn on his first, Jacobs is able to draw and sit 3.  Glenn could draw on his last but its a wide path and with backing, chooses instead to throw hack weight.  Wide and heavy and with a roll away NO is able to steal 2 points and take a 6-4 lead at the break.

Unlike Jacobs earlier, Howard is unable to rebound with a deuce.  Glenn has an opportunity, drawing around a centre guard to sit two. Jacobs comes up and taps the Howard stone, sitting second:

 

Howard is Yellow

Ontario chooses a very difficult thin hit off their own, attempting to carom into the red and catch their top yellow on the red at the side to score 3 points (green lines).  The rock curls a hair too much and the blue lines are the result, a single point.  

This is a very difficult shot with no margin for error.  I wondered if a peel of the red rock top four foot for two was simple, but they never really discussed or looked at it.  

Let's estimate this IF the peel/pick was makeable 80% of the time.  We expect the shot for three is most often either for 1 or three, ie. two would not occur often (which, based on results, appeared to be the case).  Glenn has to make this shot   35% of the time in order for it to be the correct call.

With a single, Ontario is now down 6-5 without hammer in a game that had seemed to be under control only 20 minutes ago.  

In the 7th end, Jacobs makes an angle raise hit to score two and take a commanding 3 point lead with 3 ends to play.  

In the 8th end, everyone, including Glenn, seems convinced Jacobs will continue to peel corner guards until he gives up a deuce.  NO instead throws a guard on Brad's first shot, covering his two rocks in top eight and four foot.  I prefer the runback attempt (at which Brad is very capable) but in reality the call isn't much of a mistake.  The chance of giving up a three is very small and given the scoreboard, NO is highly likely to win regardless of their decision.

With a steal in 8, the outcome is not really in doubt and NO upsets the team that was undefeated up until 9:30 PM on Friday night.

...ok, let's save the Brier Final until Part III

Lessons from Latvia

I'm going to attack recent curling finals non-chronologically in honour of Quentin Tarantino.  "How could Vincent Vega get shot, then show up later in the movie?  That made no sense" my linear thinking friends said.  "Why would Tarantino hire Travolta and resurrect his career?" To this question, I have no answer.

When I first heard the Womens World Curling Championship would be held in Latvia, I immediately thought "why would they go to the homeland of Dr. Doom?"  Then I realized I was mistaken and Latvia doesn't exist in the Marvel Universe, and barely exists in the WCF.  The host team did manage one victory over Switzerland on the final day of competition.  

Part II of Brier Final Weekend will be coming soon.  Honest.

Gold Medal Game - Sigfridsson - Sweden vs. Muirhead - Scotland

The dominant young Rachel Homan rink was unable to carry on their performance from the Scotties to the Worlds, though they were very close.  If not for a fraction of an inch, it could have been Canada in this game.  An 8-3 record and Bronze Medal was perhaps disappointing for this team but a fine showing given their age and their experience.  They will know what to expect next time and everyone, fans and players, all are betting on the Homan squad to showcase at the International stage again very soon.

Sweden was held to a repeat Silver, unable to better their performance from last year.  Scotland and their skip, the previously young phenom Eve Muirhead came away with Gold.  Thank you to Sportsinteraction.com for having them at +450 at the beginning of the week.  

1st End

Scotand draws into rings.  Sweden hits.  Blank.  Yawn.  Maybe teams should just play 9 ends?

Back from commercial: Is that the best wide cityscape shot of Riga they could get?  Reminds me of Fort McMurray.  

2nd End

Following a miss by Scotland third Anna Sloan, Sweden third Christina Bertrup draws around a corner guard to sit two on her first shot (green line).  Scotland chooses to play a freeze rather than a runback on their tight guard (blue line):

Sweden is Yellow

The danger of the runback is, if missed or even if made but the promoted red stone leaves the rings, Sweden can draw around the corner again and set up a possible three with center of the house open.  

Eventually, Eve faces this with her last shot:

They are in danger of Sweden taking an early lead with two, three or even four if this shot isn't made correctly.  They could chose to guard and leave Sweden a draw for two.  Danger if the guard isn't made correctly that they might be able to pick out the red with an out-turn, but looked very difficult and would likely not gain additional point(s).  They instead chose to play a hit on the top yellow, in an attempt to sit two and hope the top yellow spins out and perhaps doubles the other yellow currently behind the corner.  This is poor decision and much more dangerous call that could result in leaving a double for three points.  As it turned out, the yellow jammed on the far yellow, leaving it second shot and Sweden had a hit for two.  2-0

3rd end.                       

Scotland has a difficult shot for two (which may not have been makeable) and is held to one.  2-1 Sweden with hammer. 

4th end.

Sweden stays aggressive, choosing to come around for second shot behidn a center guard on second Maria Wennerstroem's first and they look to be in good shape.  Scotland then misses a run back, and Sweden is licking their chops. Unfortunately they make a foolish call and chose to draw to the open side, actually ending up fourth shot:

Sweden is Yellow

There was very little room for error with this shot as anything above the tee leaves a hit and roll and a foot past the tee and they sit fourth rather than third.  I would have preferred they hit the open rock if this is their call, but frankly a draw around centre, either with the inturn or a tap on their own with the out turn, will put the most pressue on Scotland and leave less chance for them to escape.  Eventually, Sweden has a chance at a difficult double to score three or possibly four, but Maria Prytz rubs the guard and surrenders a steal of two.  Huge swing of possibly 6 points.

5th end.

Sweden could have chosen to come around on skips (sorry, fourth's) first but instead chose a difficult double peel (green line), trying to catch their top yellow AND push it back into the shot stone AND keep it in the rings (all looked unlikely and very difficult).  Sweden would have had a better chance to score two by drawing (blue line). 

Sweden is Yellow

Scotland then chooses to draw open side (green line) rather than around the centre (blue line) on their last stone, leaving Sweden an open shot to the four foot for one point.  An opportunity missed by Scotland I believe that had little risk (ok, maybe leaving a raise double, plus roll into the rings for two, but really?). They now have hammer and are tied at the break.

Break  

6th end.  Scotland held to one.

7th end. Sweden held to one after missing a difficult hit for two.

8th end. Sweden keeps hitting (and trying a long roll) on Scotland's second shot in wings when they could have chosen to come around their centre guard, including on (fourth) Maria's first.  She actually makes a great roll but Eve is able to hit and stick to sit two.  Sweden attempts a freeze but comes short and leaves Scotland this:

Scotland is Red

They could chose a draw for two (83% odds) or a delicate hit for possible 3 (93% odds). Vic asks and both Russ and Linda suggest they would play the shot for 3.  They would be playing a difficult shot that could result in a steal or single to gain only a 10% advantage.  Doesn't appear to be a smart risk to me, but Eve in fact misses the draw and their odds drop to roughly 63%.                                      

9th end.  No real trouble for Scotland and Sweden is forced to one.  Tied coming home.

10th end.  Sweden has a chance but Maria is heavy and her final shot doesn't curl up enough, leaving enough of shot stone open for a hit by Eve to win her first and Scotland's second World Womens Championship.

 

A Brier Final Weekend without the "Old Bear"

There was only one Bear near the ice during the final weekend of the 2013 Tim Horton's Brier, and it wasn't Kevin Martin (it was this forest creature).  

The wild roars of Friday night gave way to the subtle ahems, occasional sighs and pleasant claps of the play-offs.  No tie-breakers on Saturday morning, and play began with what many expected to be a preliminary bout for the eventual finalists.  Ontario's Glenn Howard rink had 1st place and hammer by way of their 10-1 record. Jeff Stoughton of Manitoba, by virtue (not Virtue) of leading in draws to the button throughout the week, received the 2nd spot.  With Newfoundland, Northern Ontario and Manitoba all at 8-3 and having each been 1-1 against each other, a tiebreaker needs to be made.  I'm not exactly sure how this had been done in the past (though I recall a Scotties tiebreaker where teams removed a number from the buttocks of a stuffed toy, but that was many years ago...).  Ranking based on the cumulative results from draws to the button over 11 games seems a very fair approach.  

Glenn suggested he could have had a bye for his team into the final (such as was the old Labatt Brier format, pre-Page), but this type of comment falls on deaf ears these days.  If the event was purely measuring the finest team of the week, then the format would go back to pre-1980 and the best record would be awarded the trophy.  We all know that doesn't work in today's sporting world (how many baseball teams make the play-offs now?).  I agree that a bye would be well deserved, but hammer and choice of rocks is a considerable advantage in the 1-2 game.  

Based on the modern format, the best team of the weekend wins the Brier and this year it was Team Jacobs of Northern Ontario.

Rather than give a full recap, I'm going to dive in chronologically on key situations that involved interesting decisions.  

Page 1-2: Jeff Stoughton - MB vs Glenn Howard - ON

Tied 4-4 starting the 8th end.  TSN was late getting back but it appeared that Stoughton, without hammer, called for a centre guard and Howard then called for a corner guard.  I wrote about this specific end situation back in 2009 in this article.  Possibly Jeff was not aware of this analysis (or disagrees with it).  I'd like to think he was actually thinking at the second level, placing a centre, tempting Glenn to come around and divert Howard from putting up an early corner, getting the play into the middle of the sheet.  Glenn, perhaps thinking on the third (or even fourth level), doesn't bite and throws up a corner guard.  

A "weagle" would have been a another option for Glenn to play.  I've decided that the tick shot, when played as an offensive weapon rather than played defensively during the final end, should be named after Rachel Homan's lead (and Scotties MVP, yet not All-star), Lisa Weagle.  

In the 10th end, Howard leads 6-4 without hammer.Wayne Middaugh has an uncharacteristic flash on his final shot (in the same exact path Jeff had missed against BC the night before), leaving Stoughton an opportunity to hit and lie three.  Glenn nearly makes the triple with his first shot, but does manage a double and Manitoba is looking at this;

Howard is Yellow

Howard is sitting one.  Stoughton could choose to hit and roll to the other side of the house, but it would be very difficult to not leave a double.  They discuss placing a rock tucked in behind the yellow, and contemplate where best to put it (higher, depper, etc).  Jeff actually calls the hit, starts towards the other end, and then returns to change the call to the come around.  The danger here is they could also set-up a double either by showing too much of their rock or by coming deep and leaving a runback double.  They actually are disappointed when Jeff's rock comes up lighter than they had planned:

Glenn's first comment is "I don't like this" as he motions with his broom at the slash double.  They could choose to hit the open rock or attempt the angle run back of their own onto the Manitoba shot stone. They discuss the double again and the possibility of playing it as a hit to sit two, still in good position to win, even if they jam and leave Manitoba sitting third shot (my picture is slightly off and there was some chance of the stone out of the rings catching one of the Stoughton rocks).  They attempt the double and Glenn ticks the front yellow, giving Jeff a draw for three and the win.

I don't mind the call, though it appeared from his comments Glenn wasn't comfortable with it initially.  Stats indicate that top teams win at nearly 80% when tied in the final or extra end.  Glenn is in fact 83-11 since 2003, or roughly 88%.  Many of those wins came against weaker competition, so we have to expect that his chances against Stoughton are below 88% and closer to the average.  

Let's use 80% as the chance of winning in the extra end, and guess that the double is made only 20% of the time. Glenn needs to be certain he won't tick the guard 87.5% of the time in order for it to be the correct call.  If he expects the double to be made 40% of the time, this lowers to 75%.  Glenn likely expects to miss that guard more than 9 of 10 times, making it mathematically a good call as long as the double occurs 1 in 5 attempts.  Hmmm, still not sure myself either.

Page 3-4: Brad Jacobs - NO vs Brad Gushue NL

Battle of the Brads.  Gushue early strategy appears to include hitting rocks in the rings with down weight on front end shots, rather than attempting freezes.  In a few cases, this backfires as they leave Jacobs rocks in play and lose their shooter.  

3rd end, up 1-0, Gushue makes what appears to be a perfect freeze on his last shot. His shooter comes to the face of the rock when a little high side would have been better.  He's heard on air say "it's still not going anywhere" but he must have been talking about the Northern Ontario stone that he frooze against, which was nestled against another rock. As predicted, after Jacobs hit a sliver of the Gushue rock, slashing it out of the four foot, his other stone did not go anywhere. NO scores a deuce and we get a brand new Vic Rauter phrase "Calling Doctor Jacobs for surgery".  

In the 4th end, Gushue has hammer down 2-1 and faces this with third Brett gallant's last shot:

Gushue is Red

They discuss whether to hit with hack weight but Brad decides to play the freeze.  The problem with this call is he will likely need to make a more difficult shot later to remove the back yellow in order to score multiple points.  The call leaves open the opportunity for 3, but reduces the chances for a deuce.  I prefer the hit but either call can be argued competently. 

5th end, tied 2-2 without hammer, NL second Adam Casey's last rock.  Brad G. elects to hit this top yellow rather than the back one:

Gushue is Red

Gushue could have chosen to hit the back yellow and roll behind centre.  This alternate call brings play back behind the centre.  I understand what Gushue is hoping for.  If he rolls open and NO misses the hit and roll, he may be left with a double.  A case could be made for either call.  If it is later in the end I expect Gushue would have called to hit the back stone. 

8th end, Gushue is now down 4-3 without hammer and calls a time out on third's first stone.  The decsion is whether to come around to the back four with several rocks in the house, or to throw up another centre guard.  

Gushue is Red

I preferred the center guard.  Coming in this early reduces the chance for a steal. There was a comment that Jacobs might not peel the centre.  This isn't likely but they would prefer NO to be aggressive and draw.  At this stage, a blank or force has little difference, NL chances will be roughly 15% to win.  The center guard increases the chance of a steal and I prefer attempting a steal at all costs with a force as the other result, even if you increase the risk of a deuce.  

Gushue is held to one in the 9th and trails by 1 without hammer in the final end. Following an unfortunate tick on a Ryan Fry peel, Gushue is left on the pin and ends up with a steal, sending the game into an extra end.  

Despite being outplayed for most of the game, there still is a glimmer of hope for Newfoundland.  Anotherexample  of why starting with hammer is such an advantage.  If similar scores were put up but in an alternate universe Brier with NO starting with hammer, the game would have gone as follows:

NO 2 up, then 1 up with hammer, then 3 up, then 2 up with hammer, then up 3, then up 2 with hammer.

Starting with hammer for NL allowed them to stay within two points and ultimately scrap back in the last end to force an extra.  Unfortunately, a pick on Adam Casey's first rock and then a hog on his second and the game went to Jacobs.

Sunday games coming up in Part II...

March 14, 2013 with Rick Lang

3-time Brier Champion Rick Lang joins Jordan & Kevin on the show following Brad Jacobs win at the Brier. We touch up on the importance of Jacobs win in the area, the Women's World Championship and the most famous shot in Brier history from the eyes Rick Lang himself.

Check out this episode!