DANKOCHIK’S DRAFTINGS: Grand Slam curling shootout a cautious win for me

Watching the Tahoe Grand Slam of Curling this weekend, I got a chance to watch my first-ever curling shootout.

After the men’s final ended in a 6-6 tie, the two skips had a one-off shot to the button to decide a winner, with Bruce Mouat coming ahead of Matt Dunstone by just 0.3 cm.

I was doubtful about the format, thinking it wasn’t pure curling, but the way the men’s final played out immediately changed my mind.

Dunstone had a relatively easy shot to win late in the eighth end, choosing to attack a covered Mouat stone by coming in off his own over splitting the rings and leaving a tough double.

All he needed to do was force Mouat to a single point by eliminating that single yellow stone to claim the title, but he completely missed, nosing his own rock and actually rolling away from the Mouat stone.

The Scots had a simple hit-and-stick for two to tie the game.

In other formats, this massive error would mean basically nothing. As curling has evolved, the chances of scoring without the hammer in extras has gone down and down, meaning if it were a traditional extra end scenario, Dunstone would be rewarded with a massive advantage heading into extras despite the error.

As someone who was rooting for Dunstone, it hurt to see, but I am happy that final ends have a bit more drama. Instead of a hail Mary into a hail Mary if you’re down two points, all you need to do is tie the game to give yourself a fighting chance.

I’m not sure this exact format is what I’d prefer in the long run, but I like that teams can’t coast to victory in the final ends, especially in an 8-end game. It also provides a massive incentive for teams to set themselves up for normal wins.

It was a reminder for me as a sports fan to not reflexively hate rule changes because it messes with my preconceived opinions.