ADVERTISEMENT

The OLYMPICS Have Already Started!

Again: not sure it works the way you think it does...
Then enlighten me. If the first team shoots a rock anywhere. The second team can hit it in a way that both stones will go out of play leaving the ice clear of stones. The first team then shoots their second rock. Again, the second team can clear both stones. Repeat 79 times.

I'm not sure if it works that way like you say. That's why I'm asking.
 
Watch a few curling matches, and you'll figure it out.

Hint: They don't ALWAYS toss one with the intent of it sitting in the scoring circle.
Dude. I've been watching curling for 20 ****ing years! Lol I know what they do and how they play. My question is theoretical. IN THEORY the team with the hammer could clear every stone for 10 ends and win 1 to 0 unless there is a RULE that I am unaware of. I'm asking if there is such a rule. Lol. Thanks in advance. Lol
 
My apologies for the confusion. I love watching curling and have for a long time.
 
Dude. I've been watching curling for 20 ****ing years!
Really? Doesn't seem like you've paid attention much then.

Because teams push blocking stones out to prevent the "strategy" you're proposing, and you cannot always clear them when they end up in front. That's one reason teams do that.
 
Really? Doesn't seem like you've paid attention much then.

Because teams push blocking stones out to prevent the "strategy" you're proposing, and you cannot always clear them when they end up in front. That's one reason teams do that.
Ok man I give up. You don't seem to understand what a theoretical question is. Sigh.

What would happen if a football team only ran qb sneaks the whole game.

Joe: they wouldn't ever do that.

No shiiiiiiiiiiiit!
 
Ok man I give up. You don't seem to understand what a theoretical question is. Sigh.

What would happen if a football team only ran qb sneaks the whole game.

Joe: they wouldn't ever do that.

No shiiiiiiiiiiiit!
Why doesn’t the team with the hammer just knock out all the other team’s stones every end and then score one in the 10th?
Ah, now you’re thinking like they did in the 1980s. That was the strategy employed back in the day and made for some uninteresting and predictable curling games.

Things changed in the 1990s with the free-guard zone and the four-rock rule. The free-guard zone is the arena outside the house from the tee line (the horizontal line cutting through the middle of the house) up to the nearest hog line (the horizontal line where rocks must cross in order to stay in play).

Stones sitting in this area are called guards and cannot be removed from play until four stones have been thrown (aka the four-rock rule). This allows teams to place guards and then draw around them with their following stones so that they’re harder to eliminate.

The fifth rock of play is the first one that can eliminate guards.

There are still ways around it as teams can tick guards — but not eliminate them — so that they’re less troublesome.

Additionally, teams with the rock are generally looking to score more than a single point.
 
Why doesn’t the team with the hammer just knock out all the other team’s stones every end and then score one in the 10th?
Ah, now you’re thinking like they did in the 1980s. That was the strategy employed back in the day and made for some uninteresting and predictable curling games.

Things changed in the 1990s with the free-guard zone and the four-rock rule. The free-guard zone is the arena outside the house from the tee line (the horizontal line cutting through the middle of the house) up to the nearest hog line (the horizontal line where rocks must cross in order to stay in play).

Stones sitting in this area are called guards and cannot be removed from play until four stones have been thrown (aka the four-rock rule). This allows teams to place guards and then draw around them with their following stones so that they’re harder to eliminate.

The fifth rock of play is the first one that can eliminate guards.

There are still ways around it as teams can tick guards — but not eliminate them — so that they’re less troublesome.

Additionally, teams with the rock are generally looking to score more than a single point.

Thank you.
 
Yes. It is a question that doesn't apply to the way the game is played.

Which means there's a REASON no player has come up with this "master strategy".

It won't work.

Ergo: It ain't the Master Strategy you think it is.
 
Yes. It is a question that doesn't apply to the way the game is played. That is the definition in this case.

Seems like you quit watching the game 20 years ago, and simply don't know the modern rules.🙄
 
Why doesn’t the team with the hammer just knock out all the other team’s stones every end and then score one in the 10th?
Ah, now you’re thinking like they did in the 1980s. That was the strategy employed back in the day and made for some uninteresting and predictable curling games.

Things changed in the 1990s with the free-guard zone and the four-rock rule. The free-guard zone is the arena outside the house from the tee line (the horizontal line cutting through the middle of the house) up to the nearest hog line (the horizontal line where rocks must cross in order to stay in play).

Stones sitting in this area are called guards and cannot be removed from play until four stones have been thrown (aka the four-rock rule). This allows teams to place guards and then draw around them with their following stones so that they’re harder to eliminate.

The fifth rock of play is the first one that can eliminate guards.

There are still ways around it as teams can tick guards — but not eliminate them — so that they’re less troublesome.

Additionally, teams with the rock are generally looking to score more than a single point.
Thank you. I appreciate a non-dipshit-jackass answer.
 
Dude. I've been watching curling for 20 ****ing years! Lol I know what they do and how they play. My question is theoretical. IN THEORY the team with the hammer could clear every stone for 10 ends and win 1 to 0 unless there is a RULE that I am unaware of. I'm asking if there is such a rule. Lol. Thanks in advance. Lol

Was it?

Narrator: It was not.
Sigh. I don't know why I keep answering you, but as the bolded portion of an earlier post shows, it was in fact the exact question I asked.
 
Sigh. I don't know why I keep answering you, but as the bolded portion of an earlier post shows, it was in fact the exact question I asked.

Which, if you actually followed Curling "for the past 20 years", you'd probably have already known the answer to.

That was what I was fishing for here, and now it's answered....
 
Which, if you actually followed Curling "for the past 20 years", you'd probably have already known the answer to.

That was what I was fishing for here, and now it's answered....
Yeah. A rule changed 40 years ago and probably doesn't really get mentioned slipped by me. Wow. Glad you are here to be a jackass about it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT