If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

•       •       •

256 clicks; posted to Sports » on 06 Mar 2019 at 8:20 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:    more»

 Paginated (50/page) Single page, reversed Normal view Change images to links Show raw HTML
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Easy.  Just study Team Muirhead.  As far back as the Vancouver Olympics, the average curler had an accuracy rating of 80%, the GB women had an average of 90%, and Eve Muirhead was at 95%.

That, and I get turgid just thinking about her yelling "HARD!" while pushing those stones.

Can someone explain curling statistics like I'm a four-year-old?  I get the actual rules of the game, but I'm clueless on all of the stats that show up when they're ready to throw.

unconventional Moneyball theories

The book has been out since '03, the theory was in practice prior. Pretty sure it's conventional by now, if not an actual job title, on any capped sports team.

buckeyebrain: Can someone explain curling statistics like I'm a four-year-old?  I get the actual rules of the game, but I'm clueless on all of the stats that show up when they're ready to throw.

you can hear the teams talking before a shot, and you can see the sighting target the person at the other end of the ice puts down (their broom), so observers can get a pretty good idea of what someone's trying to do with a given shot. The stats are just some tallying those up and comparing them with what actually happened.

For example, if they tried to just tap a stone, but ended up missing it entirely? That stat's going down. They tried to tap it and did, but maybe a little harder than they wanted? Partial credit.

buckeyebrain: Can someone explain curling statistics like I'm a four-year-old?  I get the actual rules of the game, but I'm clueless on all of the stats that show up when they're ready to throw.

The only player stats I recall seeing much is their accuracy. Basically each shot is given a rating of 0 through 4 based on how close they came to making the intended shot and this is averaged. This is usually broken down between draws (where you don't try to hit other stones) and hits (where you are trying to hit other stones).

The team stats is generally how many ends they steal points or score two or more with the hammer.

In strategy there are four outcomes of a curling end:
Steal
No points
One point
Two plus points

A successful end with the hammer is considered to be scoring two plus points. A successful end without the hammer is forcing the other team to score one point. So the percentage of ends you score two plus points with the hammer is a good indicator of success.

gunsmack: unconventional Moneyball theories

The book has been out since '03, the theory was in practice prior. Pretty sure it's conventional by now, if not an actual job title, on any capped sports team.

Did you miss the word "curling" in the title?

Also to the "allowing lighter weighted teams to compete" that will apply for a couple years, then the heavy weights will adopt the process and you end up back at square one.

Moneyball worked great for Oakland to compete effectively, but once Boston etc adopted such in depth statistical analysis, they lost any edge it provided.

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.