3 Comments
May 5Liked by John Cullen

Regarding blank ends, how much do you think strategy would change if teams were only allowed one blanked end per game (each team gets one) where they can keep hammer? What about if each team got 2 to "spend" per game? After a team has "spent" their blank(s), then either someone scores or they give up hammer.

I feel like a rule in that vein might push teams to be more aggressive with hammer, but the non-hammer team wouldn't have the same level of incentive to just get rid of all the rocks in play. Of course, once a blank *has* occurred, then the strategy shifts as you mentioned.

At the very least, this would probably get rid of the first end scenario where both teams pretty much agree to blank. And it would have likely zero impact whatsoever on lower level curling, for what that's worth.

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, not a bad idea for sure. I think it’s unlikely they go straight to alternating hammers for the reasons I stated above, but who knows.

Expand full comment
May 5Liked by John Cullen

I understand Mr. Sulsky does not have curling experience. He might not recognize how difficult it is now to blank an end with the 5 rock rule. Watching this year’s championships and GSOCs (the last one in person) made me appreciate how much skill it takes, usually a double or 2 or even a triple or quad takeout to clear enough rocks for a blank. Pretty exciting to watch!

Expand full comment