Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

That would be a great idea!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 72.38.120.70

Registered: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 2418

quote:

---

Originally posted by RyanRowe


Ya I was really close! I wish I was right on Region 1. I play on on the Rowe team and would have really loved another win. Rajala played well and deserved it. The only team that got through that I didnt predict was Prebble. Pretty happy for Darryl and the boys on their first tankard! What a difficult region to win in as well.

---

Darryl played for Corner last year. (unless I am misinterpreting your sentence and you mean first as a team) I am really happy for this team as well!

JH

__________________
"Good Sliding"!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location: Cardinal
Posts: 34

I like the idea of getting rid of zones , I play in zone 2 arguably the hardest zone in region 1 and personally i'm alil tired of seeing teams make it to regionals who if they'd played in a different zone probably wouldn't have advanced.
Now I have heard the proposals for all kinds of changes ,using the o.c.t. list isn't fair there are very good teams who just don't have the time and resources to make that kind of commitment, maybe the top team from this years list gets a entry into provincials ( like that idea better then giving last years winner a auto entry !!!!!!)
but the system needs to be fair for all and it seems to me that Couch Brewers idea is the fairest i've heard so i hope the oca looks at it seriously and gives it a try next year maybe not for tankards but why not try it out for colts or intermediates events that have a notoriously poor attendance
The current system of alloting qualifiers based on entry numbers would work if all zones had equally gd teams but that isn't the case
I vote for 3ko regionals!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Well last year epping was the team that missed provincials that no one saw coming and this year its kean...WOW

I had them as the number 3 favorites to come out of ontario after howard and epping

Misty1

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 24.77.253.19

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

I don't like the idea of giving spots based on ctrs. Those are just bonspiels, 8 ends not 10 and not everyone plays. Teams had regions and CR to make it. That's enough.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 184.151.61.161

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

1)Give more byes to Provincials. Defending champ, #1OCT, #1CTRS, #2CTRS.

2) Keep 8 regional qualifiers plus 2 challenge round qualifiers. Consider 3KO format for regionals.

3) 14 team, 2 pool round robin provincial.

4) Abolish requirement of all players to be from the same club. As long as each player individually pays membership to a club. I don't care what anyone says about this requirement - playdowns are ultimately to decide a National champion, and I can't even think back to the last time a Brier/Scotties winner all played at the same club. Those days are done, and we have a separate National championship for the Club level (Dominion). (It's restricting enough that our National Champion all have to live/play out of the same province, although this does maintain the history and integrity of the Brier.)

This is the way to go people.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 216.81.54.22

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

I think alberta has a good system

the top crts ranked team and defennding champions get an automatic birth and then the top 2 teams on the laberta curling tour also get in automatically.

I think that thats a really good system that ontario could follow.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 24.77.253.19

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Big-time rant coming here. Consider yourself forewarned...

You know how teams get upset when they don't make it to the Tankard? That's because it's important to get there. It's a big deal. It's fun as all hell, and it's HARD to get there. This is why it's rewarding and exciting.

I just don't understand why people want to take that away. Why stop at 14? That '15th best team' is gonna be so pissed about 'the system', that they'll campaign for a manitoba-style 32 team triple. (Straw man, yadda yadda... You get my point)

By making it easier to get there, you are by definition lessening the meaning/distinction of doing so.

As for the argument about how doing well in some spiels should pre-qualify you through (CTRS, OCT, etc. etc.)? Well what if I go on a good playdowns run, qualify and do well at the tankard. Do I then get to pre-qualify into the quarters at a few spiels? Wait, it doesn't work both ways? Hmm...

I understand the argument of how allowing teams to pre-qualify would strengthen the Tour because teams will run around trying to play spiels every weekend. I get that angle. But please explain to me why this would make the Tankard better? And while you're at it, would you mind showing me your reasoning that teams will play more than they already do? I don't understand this assumption that teams are just begging for a reason to play more. Everyone I know is already playing precisely as much as they care to.

Regarding format changes (2 pools, 3KO, etc.), Howard wants a shorter Tankard because he wants a quicker route through to the Brier. That is understandable and from his point of view, defensible, when they're blowing a week of holidays every year and just want to hurry up and get to the bigger show at the Brier. But for pretty much every single other team in the province, the Tankard is THE show. Don't ruin it ladies and gentlemen. Should the OCA do what's right for the most visible minority, or the vast majority? (hint: it's the latter)

The only change that makes any sense to me is doing away with Zones. Having 16 clubs donate ice (honestly, I don't know how the OCA finds 16 clubs to do this every year - they should be applauded) for many zone playdowns where there are 5-8 teams competing....it just doesn't make any sense. Ditch the zones, run 4 regionals @ 32-capped team 3KO. Qualify 8 teams (2 per region), and everything else stays the same... Now you need only 4 clubs to donate their ice, and with more teams consolidated together they might even have a chance to make a few bucks off the bar while they're at it. Which of course means clubs might actually WANT to do this, which means the OCA can be a little pickier with regard to ice conditions. Seems like a win all around to me.

With that, I am out. Thanks for reading and presumably following with several posts telling me that I'm an idiot and know nothing aboutz da curlingz.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 199.198.251.106

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

I think your comment about doing away with the zones for the tankard is interesting. How would you go about capping the entries? Who decides who is in or out?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 24.235.244.213

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

That is the only part I disagree with. Although 32 entries per Region will probably be more than enough, I don't think anyone should be prevented from entering playdowns. Part of the appeal of the Brier is theoreticly anyone can make it if you enter.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 64.229.230.37

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Aurora, ON
Posts: 117

When we talk about doing a 32-team TKO as part of the playdowns, I assume we're talking about a true TKO where you actually have to lose 3 games to be eliminated, not a WCT-style TKO where 8 teams make the playoffs and then do a single KO playoff. To run a 32-team TKO with proper ice maintenance between draws would likely require 6 days (Tues-Sun or Wed-Mon) at a large club (6+ sheets).

That's a significant ask for both a curling club and curlers, who would need to take 3-4 weekdays off work to compete (unlike the current zones/regionals, which require no weekdays off to compete). This would likely result in a big drop in participation from the B/C level teams. I do like the idea of regional TKO, but practically it seems difficult make it work.

__________________
Keon

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Unregistered
That is the only part I disagree with. Although 32 entries per Region will probably be more than enough, I don't think anyone should be prevented from entering playdowns. Part of the appeal of the Brier is theoreticly anyone can make it if you enter.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 199.198.251.106

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

I'm curious but before you change anything you have to think about what the OCA's goal is for the Men's playdowns and what the best way to achieve that is?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keon
When we talk about doing a 32-team TKO as part of the playdowns, I assume we're talking about a true TKO where you actually have to lose 3 games to be eliminated, not a WCT-style TKO where 8 teams make the playoffs and then do a single KO playoff. To run a 32-team TKO with proper ice maintenance between draws would likely require 6 days (Tues-Sun or Wed-Mon) at a large club (6+ sheets).

That's a significant ask for both a curling club and curlers, who would need to take 3-4 weekdays off work to compete (unlike the current zones/regionals, which require no weekdays off to compete). This would likely result in a big drop in participation from the B/C level teams. I do like the idea of regional TKO, but practically it seems difficult make it work.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 199.198.223.106

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

So you are actually playing single knock out play downs then. No ones going to agree to that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Unregistered


Come on now, you're smarter than that. OBVIOUSLY 6 days is a non-starter. I'm talking spiel-style 3KO.

You go from needing 20 facilities (16 zones + 4 regions) to 4. And you're done in a single weekend. That seems like the beginnings of something positive anyways.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 129.42.208.179

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Unregistered
So you are actually playing single knock out play downs then. No ones going to agree to that.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 199.198.251.106

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Unregistered


Wasn't that long ago that club playdowns were needed to cap zone entries. This is no different.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 64.229.230.37

Registered: Feb 2012
Location: Cardinal
Posts: 34

think the original proposal was to do the 32team 3k0 over 2 weekends 1st weekend would be to take the number down to as low as possible then finish it off the next date

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2011
Location:
Posts: 1962

quote:

---

Originally posted by Prescott_Ian
think the original proposal was to do the 32team 3k0 over 2 weekends 1st weekend would be to take the number down to as low as possible then finish it off the next date

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Now before you pass judgement please read my whole proposal.

Firstly if the idea of having triple knockout regionals over two weekends is appealing...then one would have to admit that a quadruple knockout would be even more fair.

So then I propose that everyone be entered into one quadruple knockout which will end with 10 teams in the provincials.

Obviously such an event cannot be held in 1 club thus, split the teams into say 4 locations, arbitrarily we'll do this by geographic location.

Now the first weekend of playdown will conclude once there is one team that has no losses and one team that only has one loss at each of the locations. Both these team will qualify for the provincials, we have just qualified 8 teams.

Then on weekend 2 the remaining teams, if they so choose, can conitinue their pursuit for the final 2 spots. Theses teams will converge to one club to complete the quadruple knockout. The second weekend will conclude once there is only 1 team that has 2 losses and 1 team that has 3 losses. Both these teams make the provincial and the remaining teams with 4 losses will have to try again next season.

Please take my propsal into consideration for future years.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: 192.26.212.203