Just one question: Why?
Unique twist on traditional sport a curious one
PYEONGCHANG, SOUTH KOREA— I have learned not to knock another person’s passions.
And some people are apparently quite passionate about mixed doubles curling, which is making its Olympic debut here. But I have to ask: Why? Curling has a 500-year history, appearing in paintings by the 16th century Flemish painter Pieter Bruegel (either the Elder or the Younger, pick one), with rosy-cheeked rock-heads playing on frozen ponds, an enjoyable pastime during harsh Northern European winters. It became codified and clubby in Scotland, of course, ’round 150 years ago, subsequently taken to Canadian breasts and introduced into the Winter Games at Nagano in 1998.
All fine and good. The sport has enjoyed viral appeal globally since then, purportedly the fastest growing sport on the planet, although don’t quote me. Canada is a curling colossus, most successful nation at the Olympics, racking up five gold medals, three silver and a brace of bronze.
Yet none of this explains the male- female rock combo as a thing, meriting Olympic inclusion, apart from the fact the International Olympic Committee is all the time trying to expand female participation. So women’s hockey, for example, which no way should be in the Games given that it’s basically a two-country competition, gets Olympic chops. With the way the IOC has rolled out the welcome carpet for “edgy” youth-hip sports — surfing and skateboarding on tap for Tokyo in 2020 — we might some day see, oh, mixed doubles parachuting.
Technically, luge doubles is a mixed sport, though hardly ever competed man-and-woman, maybe because it would be man-on-woman, or woman-on-man if females wish to be on top. Lords of the Rings would likely have a heart attack.
Once upon a time, I was the Star’s curling writer, through no fault of my own invested with the beat. Which goes a long way toward explaining why I was fired within a year. My curling memories are not pleasant. But mixed doubles strikes me as a quirky recreational activity, Wednesday night pastime at the club.
Which would make me, in the estimation of John Morris, a hidebound reactionary.
Well, as Canada’s entry in the mixed doubles event with partner Kaitlyn Lawes, he’s hardly neutral on the subject.
“At the end of the day, we want to see our sport really grow and I think this is one of the best ways, mixed doubles, to do that,” the 39-year-old Calgary firefighter told the Star on Tuesday, following a Q&A press conference.
Mixed doubles curling is already huge internationally, far more popular than the team variety in countries with no curling history. Perhaps weirdly, MDC has taken longer to find a niche in Canada.
“I think it’s because we’re so traditional,” suggests Morris. “We have a traditional curling culture and traditional curling fans so it takes time to change. For the rest of the world curling is pretty new. That’s why mixed doubles is easy to pick up. In Canada we’re so used to watching traditional curling on TV. But the feedback I got after the mixed doubles (Olympic) trials, from people that had never watched curling before was: ‘Hey, I really enjoyed that.’ ”
What makes mixed doubles distinct, apart from the obvious: A faster pace, scores that can swing sharply and rapidly, a 22-minute limit on “thinking time” per team (compared to 38 minutes in the four-person team event) — all that standing around and strategizing and taking a bead on stones, woohoo — and five stones per end with two stones (one per team) prepositioned, and we won’t get anymore technical than that for the purposes of this column because I know your eyes are rolling, reader.
Morris and Lawes — a 29-year-old waif from Winnipeg who looks like she barely weighs a stone — are each previous Olympic gold medallists in the team events. They yoked up when mixed double prospects qualified for the team competition and scarcely had time to train together ahead of the Olympic qualifier in early January.
When the “why?” question was posed at Tuesday’s presser, coach Jeff Stoughton jumped in to answer, rather defensively I must say. “I’m supposed to answer this one.” Huh? “Why backstroke in swimming? Why the front crawl? It’s just something different that we do on the same sheet of ice.”
A lousy analogy, actually. So Stoughton likened mixed doubles to Rugby 7s.
“It’s fast-paced, very athletic, a lot of scoring out there. Why they brought it into curling is to make it exciting, shorten the time frame, and bring the athleticism that these wonderful curlers have.”
Lawes answered the what’s-the-dif query from a thoroughly befuddled Japanese journalist more forthrightly.
“The biggest difference that you’ll notice watching is that there’s one male and one female. High energy, a lot of athleticism and a different dynamic on the ice.”
And quieter too “versus four people curling with a lot of yelling.”
In a way, what both Stoughton and Morris are saying is mixed doubles is popular precisely because it’s less like curling. No? Morris: “I think if you introduced curling to the world at the same time as a team sport and as mixed doubles, mixed doubles would have a more positive impact, getting more people involved. It’s easier because you only have two people. It’s more social, it’s more athletic and the games are shorter.” See? Less curling is better curling, sounds like.
“I think an hour-and-a-half game is more appealing than a three-hour game,” Morris continues.
Adding: “The thing about mixed doubles which is really appealing is that, in team curling, if you get up a few points, it can become a boring game. Because it’s very automatic strategy and it’s really hard to come from behind. Whereas in mixed doubles, if you lose your focus for one minute out there, all of a sudden you game can change like that.” Snaps his fingers. “Another real positive is that you’re never really out of the game in mixed doubles. That will create a lot more positive TV curling experience for the viewer.
“If I’m watching team curling and it’s 6-2, I’m turning the TV to Survivor or the hockey game.”
Oh, that’s cold.