The American teams have done so-so, but good enough to remain in the round robin contention.
Curling has a seductive quality. Some people call it "chess on ice". It also has the geometry of billiards but requires more strategy than billiards. And some of the shot-making is really amazing, particularly from the Canadian teams.
Unlike chess or billiards, there is the uncertainty of the playing surface. It is not sheet ice like hockey or ice skating. There is a complicated preparation that results in many little pimples in the ice, so the players have to learn how the ice is behaving, much like bowling with its different oil patterns.
When one understands these things, the game becomes really interesting. Without that understanding, it just looks like shuffleboard. Kevin Martin does a terrific job explaining all these nuances without coming across as nerdy.
I understand it isn't for everybody, but a lot of people really do watch it. I think part of the attraction is that these are not super-human athletes (although very skilled), and the generally are not famous like Lebron James or Simone Biles. These people are never going to get rich on big curling contracts or endorsement deals. It truly is a "love of the game" thing. I really tire of hearing about the big star athletes.
I once went to the 5-gaited horse championships in Louisville. To the inexperienced eye, all the horses look about the same. but there came a moment when one of the favored horses broke his gait only for a second, and a gasp was heard throughout the arena. They know their horses.
= new reply since forum marked as read
