The Greatest Curling Shot Ever
March 1, 2006 10:37 AM   Subscribe

I will never mock curling again. This shot was from the winter games that just passed.
posted by chunking express (98 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 


Curling is snooker writ large.
posted by 327.ca at 10:40 AM on March 1, 2006


That was a great shot.

I grew up in Canada and so I grew up doing curling in gym class during the winter. It is a lot of fun to play. I couldn't make that shot in pool, much less on ice.
posted by bove at 10:41 AM on March 1, 2006


I will continue to mock curling. But that was pretty cool.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:41 AM on March 1, 2006


Wow! So that's how it's supposed to be done as opposed to our attempts in grade 12 physical education.
posted by substrate at 10:42 AM on March 1, 2006


oh yea that was mindblowing. i watched that game it was the men's finals Canada vs. Finland. Mark Nichol played that spectacular shot near the end of 6th end. with his last stone the captain Brad Gushue could have placed an easy stone for 7th point but missed and Canada scored 6 heading for an easy 10-4 victory.
posted by zenzizi at 10:43 AM on March 1, 2006


I didn't mock it before and be would less inclined to do so now. Pretty amazing stuff.

Curling is big kid marbles, on ice.
posted by fenriq at 10:44 AM on March 1, 2006


I love the Japanese call on that shot. The Canadian announcers seem to be just chatting, while the Japanese guys get all into it.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:44 AM on March 1, 2006


Curling requires stones.
posted by isopraxis at 10:45 AM on March 1, 2006


A 5 second video of something that is barely a sport. Truly, this is the best of the web.
posted by Orange Goblin at 10:46 AM on March 1, 2006


Oh, that shot is just hypnotizing. Even moreso than the bouncing sports bra animation.
posted by Spatch at 10:46 AM on March 1, 2006


Why was this worth the risk? It only got them from 1 point to 3, right? They already had a stone for a point, and it seems pretty likely they would have screwed that up 9 out of 10 times and left themselves down 1 or 2.
posted by smackfu at 10:47 AM on March 1, 2006


A 5 second video of something that is barely a sport. Truly, this is the best of the web.

Ever tried it?
posted by kosem at 10:48 AM on March 1, 2006


To be fair, the Canadian clip was a replay of the shot; the actual call was more impressive. Here, they're talking about the Scott Tournament of Hearts for some reason.
posted by chrominance at 10:49 AM on March 1, 2006


The guy that made that shot shot with an overall 98% accuracy in that game. Not so much of a risk.
posted by GuyZero at 10:50 AM on March 1, 2006


Wow, that was absolutely incredible. Sure, curling doesn't require running or jumping or smacking your teammates on the ass, but it relies on almost inhuman accuracy.
posted by arcticwoman at 10:53 AM on March 1, 2006


The best part is how blasé they are after the shot. Not hyper, not cocky, just workmanlike.

But I'm just not getting all the hype over Canada winning gold in men's curling, for the FIRST TIME EVAAAAR! Sheesh, it's only been a medal sport since '98, and Canada has the most curlers per capita in the world. Why the surprise?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 10:53 AM on March 1, 2006


I was watching that live. I won't say I'm a huge curling fan, but I have watched a fair bit and I've never seen such a complex shot work so perfectly. Most shots like that don't work at all.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 10:55 AM on March 1, 2006


Wow! I'm interested in curling and this is just just solidified that interest. The husband of my wife's boss took off at least on day from work to be sure and see olympic curling on TV. At first I didn't really understand why. This shot and a few others I've seen on the web have helped me understand. Next time around I think I might head over to his place for the curling events.
posted by horseblind at 10:56 AM on March 1, 2006


Oh yeah, thanks chunking express.
posted by horseblind at 10:56 AM on March 1, 2006


Why in the mens gold medal game did the Finns concede before the tenth end was played? It was not mathmatically impossible for them to win at that point, was it?
posted by Keith Talent at 10:57 AM on March 1, 2006


I was also watching that live (or as live as you can get on US TV), and it was boring then, too.
posted by rxrfrx at 10:57 AM on March 1, 2006


Also, watching the shot, I'm not sure a miss would've been all that tragic. Remember that Canada had hammer and at least two more shots to play. If the shot hadn't curled enough, the red stone entering the house would've sailed through, or else the high red guard would've smacked the yellow guard into the house; too much curl and the high guard goes into the house to take out the stones on the button, or else sail through.

In any case, a lot of skips will actually kill their own stone with their last rock if they're only going to score 1 off the end; retaining the hammer can often be more of an advantage late in the game than the single point. The other option, of course, is to play aggressively and hope the other team makes a mistake—which they did, leaving Canada with an open shot for 7 points.
posted by chrominance at 10:58 AM on March 1, 2006


Curling is shuffleboard on ice. Yawn.
posted by xmutex at 10:58 AM on March 1, 2006


Yeah that was an amazing shot. Not that Canada needed it, really. Our team was having a really bad day.
posted by insomnus at 10:58 AM on March 1, 2006


Yeah, but it's more impressive when you consider it was done while smashed out of his brain on Rye and Gingers. Drinking is as much a part of curling as standing around on a sheet of ice hucking rocks at each other.
posted by Keith Talent at 10:59 AM on March 1, 2006


Watched it live. Tivo'd it to share with da wife. Da kids wanted to see it. Watched it two or three more times.

Just... .dayum.
posted by dwivian at 11:00 AM on March 1, 2006


Finally, for Keith Talent: I don't recall if the four-rock rule was in place or not, but even then it doesn't matter; Canada would've had to eliminate just two stones on the last end to win. Theoretically it was possible for Finland to pull off a seven-point end, but if Gushue couldn't do it after that massive shot and a couple of Finnish mistakes, what chance did the Finns themselves have? They conceded because they didn't see much point in continuing, mathematically possible or no.
posted by chrominance at 11:01 AM on March 1, 2006


Sure, curling doesn't require running or jumping or smacking your teammates on the ass

But surely ass-smacking could be incorporated? Especially since so many players are holding brooms.
posted by oneirodynia at 11:03 AM on March 1, 2006


I watched that live as welll, in a public place, and a roar akin to a hockey goal at a bar erupted after it.
posted by Adam_S at 11:04 AM on March 1, 2006


Hurry Hard!
posted by blue_beetle at 11:06 AM on March 1, 2006


Well that's how it worked out. I wonder what shot he was trying to make.
posted by mazola at 11:09 AM on March 1, 2006


Finland has 550 registered players against Canada's 1.3 million, so I suppose we did okay. However, practically everyone in Finland is a bit of a curling fan after the good performance in the olympics, so the sport should gain some popularity here in the near future.
posted by ikalliom at 11:10 AM on March 1, 2006


Incredible.
posted by OmieWise at 11:13 AM on March 1, 2006


I don't curl or follow it anymore, but that was great to watch, thanks!

And a big thank you to the yawners: Now I finally know who all the cool people are! You rock!

Gettit, rock? Eh? Eh?
Whatever.

posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:13 AM on March 1, 2006


Rye and Gingers? Are you kidding? Those boys (well, 3 of 4) are Newfoundlanders. R&G's an Ontario drink. More like Gin & Limes. You could have at least guessed Screech, or been somewhat close (but still completely wrong) with the Maritimes and Rum & Cokes.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 11:14 AM on March 1, 2006


Fuck curling. It's all about the caber toss.
posted by keswick at 11:15 AM on March 1, 2006


Curling is one of those sports I don't go out of my way to watch, but when it's on TV I'll sit down and watch it since it is strangely compelling.
posted by chunking express at 11:17 AM on March 1, 2006


Fuck the caber. The sheaf toss is the best. Fat guys using pitchforks to throw bags of hay up into the second floor of a barn. (But the barn is simulated by a pole and a couple of ladders.)
posted by smackfu at 11:19 AM on March 1, 2006


I thought the greatest curling shot ever was at the end of this movie?
posted by stinkycheese at 11:22 AM on March 1, 2006


Fuck the sheaf toss. How about Cookie Tossing!
posted by Shfishp at 11:22 AM on March 1, 2006


That was the best whatever that was I've ever seen!
posted by notmydesk at 11:23 AM on March 1, 2006


That was a great shot, I'm glad there was a link to a longer video to see the replays and the closeups of the Canadian's stone alone, untouched, triumphant! Go Canada!
posted by mk1gti at 11:27 AM on March 1, 2006


It's kind of like Bocci but on ice with brooms. If this is a sport, than billards should be next.
posted by inthe80s at 11:30 AM on March 1, 2006


The schools in Newfoundland shut down the day of that gold medal game so that all the Newfie kids could watch their rink play.
posted by raedyn at 11:31 AM on March 1, 2006


Why in the mens gold medal game did the Finns concede before the tenth end was played? It was not mathmatically impossible for them to win at that point, was it?

Not impossible, but practically so. When there's that much of a lead the Canadians would essentially just keep knocking the Finnish stones out of the house, and so even with last rock the Finns could only get one. If the Canadians had last rock that's just more opportunities for them to score.

Curling is much more easy and straightforward when you only have to worry about keeping the house clear.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 11:34 AM on March 1, 2006


Still mockable.
posted by mammary16 at 11:37 AM on March 1, 2006


I've never really understood the importance of the sweeping guys. If they didn't sweep, wouldn't the puck thing still go where the guy aimed it?

To me, it's those guys that give the sport its silly factor.
posted by gfrobe at 11:50 AM on March 1, 2006


gfrobe, well they can steer it quite a bit, and effect the speed by how hard they brush (smooth) the ice.
posted by tiamat at 11:57 AM on March 1, 2006


The sweepers are there to make sure the rock follows the desired line. They can sweep to make it curl more or less, depending on the line they want.

They can also brush harder to make the rock go farther if it hasn't been thrown with enough "weight," or momentum. That's why they yell "Hurry!"
posted by j0hnnyb at 12:00 PM on March 1, 2006




WoW! Chrominence, two paragraphs of Curling specific jargon. I'm just as impressed with your verbal acumen as I am with the curling shot.
posted by Gungho at 12:03 PM on March 1, 2006


gfrobe: "I've never really understood the importance of the sweeping guys. If they didn't sweep, wouldn't the puck thing still go where the guy aimed it?

To me, it's those guys that give the sport its silly factor.
"


From what I hear you are able to control the length of your shot by up to 10 percent by sweeping. There's 40 metres from one end to the other so that's 4 metres give or take. You also control the curl by sweeping but I don't know exactly how much.

Here in Denmark we are mostly into women's curling but our team sucked this year, unfortunately.
posted by sveskemus at 12:08 PM on March 1, 2006


On non-preview: What tiamat and j0hnnyb said... :-/
posted by sveskemus at 12:10 PM on March 1, 2006


It's forty-two pounds of polished granite, bevelled on the belly and a handle a human being can hold. And it may have no practical purpose in itself but it is a repository of human possibility and if it's handled just right, it will exact the kind of poetry... for ten years, I've drilled for oil in 93 coutnries, five different continents, and not once have I done anything to equal the grace of a well thrown rock sliding down a sheet. Not once.
posted by Simon! at 12:24 PM on March 1, 2006


Has anyone tried to develop a curling robot? Because it looks like the sort of game in which a robot would do well: look at a a stable configuration of stones, calculate the speed and angle required to get the best score, and fling the bastard. Send out little Honda sweeper robots just for fun.
posted by pracowity at 12:49 PM on March 1, 2006


Has anyone tried to develop a curling robot? Because it looks like the sort of game in which a robot would do well: look at a a stable configuration of stones, calculate the speed and angle required to get the best score, and fling the bastard. Send out little Honda sweeper robots just for fun.

This is why it's a freakin' crime I'm not a billionare. The minute this idea crossed my desk, I'd allocate several million dollars and hire the best kinetic robot people around. I'd spin the R&D into something like swarming teams of street sweeper bots and make a few hundred million from that. Meanwhile, after several years of development, my cur-obots would challenge the grandmaster Canuckleheads to a man vs. machine promotional match. I'd brand the thing to hell and back, sell the promotional rights to McDonalds (McPoutine! Little rock happy meal toys), and come out in the black.

Damn shame I'm so poor.
posted by unixrat at 12:59 PM on March 1, 2006 [1 favorite]


Sure, curling doesn't require running or jumping or smacking your teammates on the ass, but it relies on almost inhuman accuracy.

I dunno... I see the Olympics as more "sport" (athleticism) and less "game" (skill). I mean, throwing darts takes skill and accuracy. (Well, sometimes.)

I'll let curling slide (haha), however, as it seems like the "sport" would disappear without the Olympic tie-in, and it is kinda fun to watch for the first 18 hours...
posted by LordSludge at 1:00 PM on March 1, 2006


Because it looks like the sort of game in which a robot would do well

I think the issues are that:

1) The ice is not as uniform as you would hope. It actually has a pebbled texture to it that gets worn down by the sweepers. So the skip (captain) has to observe the speed after the throw and tell the sweepers whether to try to speed it up or whether to leave it alone. It's not a purely deterministic system.

2) Off-axis sweeping lets you get a more intricate curve on the shot than you can with just an initial rotation. This is important when you have to get around blocking stones.
posted by smackfu at 1:09 PM on March 1, 2006


Has anyone tried to develop a curling robot? Because it looks like the sort of game in which a robot would do well:

I doubt it could be done. Competitive curling teams go out on the ice sheet before every game with a stopwatch and a notebook to study the conditions of that sheet on that day at that time. They figure out how much weight* it takes to draw to the back 12-foot, to the tee-line, to guard positions. They determine how much curl there is in the ice, that is, how much deviation from a straight line they can expect.

And succesful teams are in constant communication with their sweepers. They aren't there just for fun.

As I said in the previous Olympic thread, it looks like a two-dimensional game on TV, but it's acutally more like five or six.

*They measure weight by the number of seconds it takes for the stone to slide from one hog line to the other. That's why you'll sometimes hear them yelling out numbers - "Nine! Eight! Eight-na-half" - as the rock is sliding down the sheet.
posted by j0hnnyb at 1:19 PM on March 1, 2006




Olympic athletes or barroom heroes??
posted by mountainmambo at 1:24 PM on March 1, 2006


it seems like the "sport" would disappear without the Olympic tie-in

That's kinda backwards. Sports don't make it to the Olympics until they reach a certain global popularity. Baseball and softball are being removed from the games because it's basically a regional game. Cricket is a popular sport in the UK and Indian subcontinent, but it'll never make it into the Olympics (...again. The 1900 Olympic cricket tournament only awarded gold and silver because only two teams competed). Modern pentathlon is on the bubble because only Europeans participate.

Curling, on the other hand, is growing in popularity. It was a ratings hit in Italy and, judging by the above link, some interest in Japan, too. (Actually, I think the Japanese women beat Canada's rink these Olympics. Cheeky.)
posted by j0hnnyb at 1:28 PM on March 1, 2006


They measure weight by the number of seconds it takes for the stone to slide from one hog line to the other. That's why you'll sometimes hear them yelling out numbers - "Nine! Eight! Eight-na-half" - as the rock is sliding down the sheet.

The sweepers do time the rock as it travels down the sheet, but if they're calling "eight, eight and a half," it's more likely they're using the zone system as a shorthand for communicating what they think the weight is. Unless you're firing a takeout shot, most rocks take longer than eight seconds (I'm watching the Scott women's tournament in Canada right now, and draw shots are taking about 14 seconds). Also, often you can't afford to wait until the hogline to start calling out weight; you need to sweep for weight much sooner if it's light.

Man, I obviously need to start curling again...
posted by chrominance at 1:30 PM on March 1, 2006


it seems like the "sport" would disappear without the Olympic tie-in, and it is kinda fun to watch for the first 18 hours... - LordSludge

Curling only became an official Olympic event in 1998 (when another Canadian team - from Saskatchewan, where curling is the official Provincial sport - won the women's gold medal). The game managed to survive four centuries or so before that without the Olympic stamp of approval, and it's very popular in countires with colder climes (especially Canada), so I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that.
posted by raedyn at 1:34 PM on March 1, 2006


it's more likely they're using the zone system

I stand corrected. I'm watching the Hearts, too.
posted by j0hnnyb at 1:36 PM on March 1, 2006


Happily standing corrected here, so I'll revise my previous position:

Fuck curling. It's not an athletic sport, and as such has no business being in the Olympics.

(FWIW, I feel the same about chess in the Olympics, and I was the undisputed chess champ at my *cough* public high school.)
posted by LordSludge at 1:48 PM on March 1, 2006


How about shooting? That's an Olympic sport that only requires precision. You start creating criteria, you have to start eliminating a lot of sports.
posted by smackfu at 1:56 PM on March 1, 2006


I don't really think you can appreciate how easy the pros make it look until you see how hard the beginners make it look. (YouTube video)
posted by j0hnnyb at 1:57 PM on March 1, 2006


curling rocks (YouTube)
posted by WhipSmart at 3:08 PM on March 1, 2006


I was watching this live when it happened. Pretty amazing!

For everyone bashing curling.. it's far less ridiculous then some of the other olympic sports. It's also surprisingly fun, and almost anyone can at least play for fun with no training. The basic rules for just playing with friends are dead simple and skill isn't dependant on physical strength or agility.
posted by The Wig at 3:15 PM on March 1, 2006


oh... and then there's the Nude Curlers Calendar (mildly nsfw)
posted by WhipSmart at 3:15 PM on March 1, 2006


Olympic curling is, IMO, stupid. IMO the Olympics needs to be cut down to the bare essentials: fastest, strongest, furthest.

And that was one helluva shot. Amazing, simply amazing. I love watching curling highlights: it takes one helluva lot of skill to throw a forty-odd pound rock forty meters down pebbly ice accurately for both end location and end position.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:19 PM on March 1, 2006


I think I spotted a little.
posted by The Deej at 3:40 PM on March 1, 2006


Wow. Makes me almost want to be able to tolerate curling. Almost.
posted by Ricky_gr10 at 3:41 PM on March 1, 2006


rxrfrx:
I was also watching that live (or as live as you can get on US TV), and it was boring then, too.


How live do you want it? The daytime coverage on CNBC (via satellite TV) lagged the CBC broadcast by about 5 seconds (oddly enough, that's about how long it takes a signal to get bounced off a satellite, downlinked to a receiver, and decoded). The show that ran at 5 pm EST was a "tape"-delay (although I don't think they use tape anymore) of the earlier live broadcast.

That was a seriously great shot. It'd have been a good shot in any situation, but to do it in the gold-medal match at the Olympics.... There was really nothing to lose by trying that shot. If it works, Canada's got a pile of points and a great honking lead. If it doesn't work, they get a point on the next shot, and still have a lead.
posted by jlkr at 3:59 PM on March 1, 2006


I'm pretty sure you could build an effective throwing robot, with enough design effort (read money). It just doesn't take that much accuracy - about 8-bits of directional precision and 8-bits of weight precision, all evenly spaced and calibrated to land on the relevant ranges. You might be able to make judging weight algorithmic too, although it would be much much harder. Sweeping would be interesting - much more expensive to make than a throwing machine due to the motion, but you could easily make it as effective as humans (I assume it is possible to sweep too hard at some point, but I have no idea how close humans get to optimal sweeping, a robot could sweep arbitrarily hard).
posted by Chuckles at 6:21 PM on March 1, 2006


After all, they've been able to get missiles to shoot down missiles. Simple trignometry, no problem!

Oh, wait. They haven't, not very well.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:10 PM on March 1, 2006


this is the greatest shot ever, best sound as well, too bad its a real media.
posted by stilgar at 7:16 PM on March 1, 2006


LordSludge: Fuck curling. It's not an athletic sport, and as such has no business being in the Olympics.

You mean because it's something a fat old one-armed chain-smoker could play as well as the next guy?

fff: Oh, wait. They haven't, not very well.

Missiles are a different problem. Curling requires the analysis of a two-dimensional fixed arrangement of predictable round rocks on a predictable flat surface. Modeling it wouldn't be very difficult. Building a robot to fling a rock or sweep the ice wouldn't be very difficult. Getting engineers and backers interested in the project would be the problem, because after you've done it you've only got... curling.
posted by pracowity at 8:50 PM on March 1, 2006


Can robots go for gin and tonic afterwards? No. Thus, this would not be curling.

Loved that shot, stilgar. I usually cringe around shrieky women, but that was cool.
posted by rosemere at 9:15 PM on March 1, 2006


Stilgar, that was great. I am sold on curling now. I never thought I'd live to type those words.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:35 PM on March 1, 2006


pracowity: Curling requires the analysis of a two-dimensional fixed arrangement of predictable round rocks on a predictable flat surface.

Not exactly... The thrower does weight and direction, you could do this artificially very effectively. Path prediction and strategy are an entirely different story.

Apparently there are some fairly good curling simulators, but probably only in the sense that Doom 3 is a good life simulator. On top of that, making strategy algorithmic would take a truly astonishing effort - look at what they have to do for chess, and that isn't continuous.


stilgar, awesome! The world needs a great curling shot archive.
posted by Chuckles at 10:23 PM on March 1, 2006


I went curling for the first time last Sunday. Sweeping kicked my ass, and I never did get my rock more than halfway down the ice.

But, I didn't drop my knee onto the ice or fall over when coming out of the hack, so there is hope.

Curling belongs in the Olympics. It may be the only Olympic sport that stresses good sportsmanship anymore. Plus the winners buy the drinks.
posted by QIbHom at 10:47 PM on March 1, 2006


robotic pool.

Still, the ice is not flat, the surface is not equal-speed along its length and breadth, the targets are 40x further away, and so on and so forth. I think it would be far more challenging than pool, and it took five years to get that right.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:50 PM on March 1, 2006


It's weight, direction, and curl. That's what makes it curling.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:52 PM on March 1, 2006


Good link stilgar, but still not sure it was as good as the OP shot- from a pure physics standpoint, the linked shot was better, and even when considering the context....

In that case, it was for the Canadian women's championship, and it was a really really good shot that flipped the score in the final end- took a 6-4 deficit to an 8-4 win in one shot and ended the game. In the Olympic gold medal game, that shot also effectively ended the match, because the Finns pretty much knew they couldn't win right after that shot- only Olympic rules that prevent conceding before the 8th end is completed kept the Finns from throwing in the towel. Curling is a great "prevent-defense" game, and the Canadians could hold their 10-3 lead for 4 ends quite easily by simply playing for 1 or 2 point ends and knocking everything out of the house. The Finns could only win after an incredible shot like that by posting a similar high-value end, but such an end is only possible if both teams are playing the end with the same heavy guarding strategy. Once they went up by that much, the Canadians would never even let such a scenario arise, and simply knock everything out so the Finns could never get more than 2 points in an end they had the hammer in.

Plus, I think there's still there's an order of magnitude of difference between a two ricochet shot like the SToH one and a 3 ricochet shot like the one in the Olympics. The amazing part of the OP shot was the way it hit one, then two, then three opposing rocks, leaving the Canadians in control of the house and all the Finn rocks outside. It was a stupendous shot...
posted by hincandenza at 10:53 PM on March 1, 2006


Re the curling robots: wouldn't robot have to be able to both shoot and sweep since the four players alternate?
posted by boogieboy at 2:28 AM on March 2, 2006


*MY* curling robot will have a laser scanning system to evaluate the ice surface prior to each shot. It won't even NEED sweepers because its shots will be perfect! :)
posted by antifuse at 4:08 AM on March 2, 2006


My curling robot would have extremely attractive human cheerleader/sweeper girls, maybe in sexy Cinderella outfits with fake dirt on their cheeks, maybe in witch costumes, but sweeping sweeping sweeping with their little brooms under the guidance of Mr Sebastian, my curling robot, who would command the sweepers in a voice like Cher singing through a vocoder. And he would also curl their hair. Sort of a biathlon thing.
posted by pracowity at 6:27 AM on March 2, 2006


sweeping doesn't just account for imperfect shots. You can accomplish shots with sweeping that are physically impossible without sweeping. A simple example, if you want to bury behind a guard, you sweep like hell at the end to keep the rock moving. This is because the rock has already changed path, you want to make it move as far as possible along the new path. You can not recreate that effect with line and weight alone.
posted by Chuckles at 6:44 AM on March 2, 2006


My curling robot would have extremely attractive human cheerleader/sweeper girls

Mine would have ED-209 throwing the rock and Robocop, Gort, Robot from Lost in Space, and C3PO sweeping. I don't care if that's too many robuts on the ice. The really critical one is Robot, so he can do the shouting as the rock goes down the ice.

I'd also enter Robocop and Threepio in the pairs figure skating, and Robot in the ski aerials with his arms a-flailin'. And ED-209 in the biathlon, duh.

Daleks would make good sweepers, but they're only mostly robot.

I've had three cups. Why?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:14 AM on March 2, 2006


I've got to think the Raston Warrior Robot would be better at biathalon... Also, how the hell do you tell if ED-209 made his second through fifth shot once the target board has been vaporized?
posted by Chuckles at 8:04 AM on March 2, 2006


I just wanna see ED-209 on skis, is all. Like the vending machine in A Grand Day Out.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:39 AM on March 2, 2006


Speed skiing is very ED-209, too bad that never made it as an olympic event.
posted by Chuckles at 9:47 AM on March 2, 2006


Any curling robot won't be worth its weight in aerogel if it doesn't have cup-holders.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:46 AM on March 2, 2006


All of the robots in my squad can hold cups in their hands. Except ED-209, but he can probably stand on one foot while holding a (sturdy) cup in the other.

I suppose I could replace ED-209 with a VF-1 Valkyrie, but those aren't technically robots since they're controlled by a human.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:40 AM on March 2, 2006


You robot geeks are ruining a perfectly good thread about curling!

Oh wait....
posted by RibaldOne at 1:15 PM on March 2, 2006


Curling is snooker shuffleboard writ large.
posted by mrgrimm at 7:42 PM on March 2, 2006


« Older 9dots   |   freedom fighters Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments