Curling,Advanced Strategy3

Forcing your opponent to take one point:
Risk vs. Reward permeates curling and LIFE.
Why even consider such an action? To win the "war/game" while "losing" the one end scrimmage!!
    There are several shot positions to force your opponent to take one -- the added bonus potential is to gain a small percentage chance for a steal in a "good" placed 2n'd rock in the house scenario.
    In the pictured scenario, there is the chance of a steal if the opponent cannot draw the 4' and/or cannot make the perfect runback. Risk vs. Reward or -- reward vs. risk depending on your leaning to offense or defense (your confidence in your teams shooting ability).
    The scene starts with an excellent bury shot or hit and roll to cover and a "split the house shot" that cannot be taken out with an easy double.
The opponent does have a couple of alternative shots:
1. Blue can hit the Red but will roll out leaving 1 Red in the house. Of course Red will again attempt to bury and/or split the house.
2. Depending on the score (Blue is down 3), Blue may gamble and try the "runback" of Blue onto Red and with the closeness to the top 12', Blue may roll in or remain at the top 12 for a chance at a score of 2.
    Of course, Blue may remain conservative in the early ends and simply "play along" and take 1, but will still be down 2. A gamble by Blue; however, could finish the game with a steal of 1 for Red.

    Did you review the 2000 Brier tapes several times yet? The Brier has been over for 8 days and you haven't studied the tapes? If you did, you know everyone had great difficulty figuring out the 4'- 4.5' of curl? The curl was uniform and the ice level (no runs) -- with, usually, not a major frost problem.
    There were several factors involved which caused trouble in figuring the exact draw or hit brush placement -- If the shooter hit the brush in the first place and used the same rock turn rotations?
    The main problem factor being the delivery weight vs. amount of curl/ brush placement for each shot. We discussed the fact that for many pro teams "NORMAL" hit weight varied from 7-10 seconds H-H (on the same team). The Hearts pros were just as bad with the "jiggle" the rock weight called for by one skip?
    This weight variable communication issue reveals some amount of curl problems for the "hit," but what about "draw" weight problems?
    Considering, again, the shooter hit the brush, what is a cause of draw weight curl DEVIATION?
    Proper cleaning of the rock is a major source of non-uniform curl problems. NO ONE in the Brier cleaned each and every delivered rock uniformly!
    We mentioned before that you will have up to 90% of your rocks with a "pick" on it whether you see it or not. Look under a magnifying glass. The "picks" are there as ice crystals or water hardness globs with ice crystals attached. Some are so small that you can not see them without a magnifying glass. These unseen picks will grab more ice or hard picks to make a rock deviation pick!
    Cleaning with the finger nails, I thought, was OK. NOT good enough. You must clean the running surface with a stiff brush and NOT finish wipe the surface with your oil and salt soaked glove or hand!
    The curling brush is too unwieldy to brush/clean a rock perfectly. You must use the fingernail type brush and scrub the running surface. Having removed the old ice and its contaminates, you MUST re-coat the rock's running surface with ice by:
YOU MUST SPIN THE ROCK BEFORE SHOOTING!! -- Like Jeff Stoughton and many other pros have learned from experience. The rock runs ice on ice and NOT granite on ice!
    Having studied curl with the precision milled tilesert rocks that curl precisely equally IF cleaned the same, I found a 3" curl deviation with identical rocks that were cleaned by my old method of fingernail scrape plus final bare hand wipe with salt and body oils vs. stiff nail brush clean and NO wipe with hand.
    As an aside, I threw rocks that had not been cleaned at all. The curl varied with up to 6"deviation in either direction. Several rocks actually made an "S" turn configuration even though they were turning to the right.
     Seniors that use the "pushstick" sometimes do not clean their rocks with wild curl patterns as a result.
    For a light tap backs or a precision "bury," you now can understand some causes of missed draw weight shots delivered at the Brier and Hearts AND with "pure luck" shots that curled to the right spot after missing the brush.

Profiling a rock:
What are the reasons for profiling a rock?
The ultimate reason is to understand the performance of this particular rock with its mate and or as compared to the other 7 rocks in the "set."
Mechanical method:
1. Measure running surface width and angle with horizontal plane -- sheet surface plane.
2. Measure cup relief angle.
3. Measure outer circle incidence angle.
4. Note imperfections in running surface i.e., blowouts, cuts/grooves and pits.
    A blowout is a1/16" or more channel or chip across the running surface.
    A cut is a noticeable "mark" across the running surface.
    Pits are holes in the running surface, and leading/cup edges where granite crystals have fallen out.
5. One of the most important mechanical features of a rock is the "running surface roughness/porosity."
The porosity governs the amount of running surface ice accumulated with excess crystals passed along to the "slow side" of the running surface to increase slow side friction/curl as it turns and slides longitudinally down the sheet. A smooth porcelain running surface rock will not curl as much as a granite porous running surface rock.
    These 5 mechanical qualities of a rock will determine its performance.
    The running surface width relates to the pressure per square inch the rock is imposing on the pebble. The important fact is that the rocks are matched in running surface width to contribute toward uniform curl. Many rocks have been sabotaged with improper grinding with poor quality and or type of surface milling tools. Rocks with a minimum of 3/16 and maximum of 6/16 width of running surface, IF they are all the same, will run the same. IF the other 3 above mentioned variables are the same and with no blowouts, each rock will run comparably to its mate.

Relief angle is the "roundness" angle into -- front and out of -- rear/cup or radius of the grind surface. A large radius means the approach incidence angle is very low and the rock will slide over uneven pebble making the rock travel H-H faster than a "sharp" edged rock with a small radius of relief.
    While you want the rock to "bounce" over pebble more easily, a higher radius angle (lower incidence angle) will result in less curl by reducing bounce/vibration and rear cleaning of the friction causing (on the slow side of the rock) frost at the "rear" momentary running surface which is what contributes to curl because the fast side now has less friction (rock biting ice crystals were dumped out the back). As well, a low incidence angle reduces frost shaving which when dragged to the slow side causes curl.
Two reasons for curl.
1.     The slower any object runs, rubbing one on one with a fluid or semi-fluid acting lubricant present, more friction is to be expected by nature of the smaller "lubrication wedge." The slower one object moves relative to another, the more bonding time is available to bond crystals to crystals and hence more curl.
2. The higher the area, usually, the more friction to be experienced even though the law of physics says friction force -- F=Normal load times f the friction factor with no regard to area. We, of course, know that wide drag racer tires (within limits) provide more traction. This apparent deviation in drag racing and the curling rock scenario rely on entirely different forces of imperfections in the surface of the tire/rock resisting movement of tire/rock over asphalt/ice to give more traction/friction.
    A lightly loaded sleigh on ice will slide with a force applied of F. A heavily loaded sleigh will slide with force F+ (a little bit more) AND not proportional to weight -- the Normal load.
   This apparent violation of the F=Normal Load x f-friction factor law is especially revealed in the curling rock on pebble scenario because: frost/dragged into the pebble gaps makes a larger area of running surface exposed to a higher friction factor and resultant higher moment arm friction in the direction of turn with resultant lateral displacement.
    NO WATER IS CREATED UNDER THE CURLING ROCK OR BRUSHES!!! Contrary to what that UNBC physics Asc. Prof. says.
    It takes 1,800psi. to raise the temperature of ice 1 degree F which is beyond the crushing strength of ice by up to 1,000psi.. And the ice is 22F-26F which must be raised to 32 F plus the heat of fusion (BTU required to melt ice to water) which must be overcome in addition with mechanical power/brushing or rock movement as well -- to melt the ice! Not with my power brushing, anyway!
The kinetic theory of "water generation under rock" that turn 1-3 revolutions from release to stop with melting of ice to water necessary to make curl friction is a hoax. Most energy is consumed in scraping the frost off the tops of pebble in the same scenario as an ice shaver shaves the sheet. And major energy is lost in the rock's up and down motion and side to side motion of the rock as it impacts pebble at different angles. A small fraction of the release energy imparted to the rock generates "rubbing" friction because the rock runs ice on ice and does not "grind" the ice by running granite on ice. The PhD's who have written erroneous "technical" papers for publishing in the Canadian Journal of Physics with magnanimous mathematical models to prove a wrong theory did not know this primary fact. The studies that were made concerned themselves with rapidly spinning cylinders over a short travel distance and HAS NO RELATIONSHIP to curling rocks.
    The physics instructor from Northern B.C. University that had the unfortunate experience of doing a totally false physics show for The Discovery Channel is VERY lacking in basic physics knowledge regarding curling rocks on ice (a polite way of putting it to say the least). I won't be sending my sons to UNBC for technical training.
    I now look somewhat askance at the shows aired by The Discovery Channel as it is very clear they do not have a knowledgeable technical editor to review programs before they are aired. Seeing may not be believing!