Technique is (almost)
everything
While good technique is
essential it is also individual; dependent on the physique of the
individual curler. It is therefore difficult and may even be
intimidating to coach. The temptation is to assume that the wheelchair
user understands how their body works, and that they will on their own
arrive at an efficient delivery. This is a very big, and often false,
assumption.
Not all wheelchair
users are comfortable in their wheelchairs. The job of the coach will be
to ensure that the wheelchair is a support and not an obstruction. To
do this the coach must understand the athlete's relationship to their
wheelchair, as well as understand what movements the athlete's physique
will allow.
A pendulum delivery,
while appearing to allow a smooth motion that maximises delivery weight,
has the huge disadvantage of making the curler triangulate between their
head, the rock, and the target. The negative effects of this
triangulation can be reduced by removing wheel rims, or using narrow
axles which have the effect of moving the rock closer to the head and
narrowing the angle. What tends to happen however, is the thrower leans
across the chair, the better to line up the shot, at the same time
destroying any chance of a balanced delivery.
Similarly unless the
curler has a full set of trunk muscles they will need to anchor their
body to the chair during delivery, typically by gripping the off wheel
with their non-throwing hand. This ensures that their shoulders are not
square when the rock is released, making it that much more difficult to
throw accurately.
Unless it is necessary
to use a pendulum delivery because sufficient weight is unobtainable any
other way, a push delivery would seem to be preferable.
There are two obvious
push deliveries: sitting square to the target pushing a stone placed in
front of the chair; and sitting at a 45° angle to the target and pushing
away from the side of the rear wheel. Both deliveries avoid the
triangulation of the pendulum delivery.
Maintaining the
stability of your body through the delivery is vital. Anchoring your
non-throwing arm in a way that twists your body at delivery cannot help
accuracy. Any delivery made sitting square to the target should allow
both shoulders to move forward at the same pace, remaining square at
release. Trunk muscles might allow this without the need to anchor the
off hand behind the rock. Absent trunk muscles, a way must be found to
allow both shoulders to move forward at the same pace without the
thrower falling out the chair. A forward extension support on the
offside may be an inexpensive and easily manufactured answer.
A better answer may be
an angled push away from the side wheel where target, rock, hand, head
and supporting off-arm, can all line up. Perhaps the only reason not to
use this would be if it didn't generate sufficient weight.
Throwers tend to
underestimate the negative effect that the chair moving at the time of
delivery, has on their accuracy, perhaps because they are not
necessarily even aware that the chair may have pivoted several inches
during the delivery motion. This tendency is exaggerated the harder the
rock is thrown. It’s surprising that so many throwers are allowed to
execute what is in effect an illegal as well as a less than optimal
delivery.
Most throwers cannot
make an up-weight pendulum delivery without their un-braced wheels
moving. That makes it very difficult to practice on your own, and makes
it very easy to fall into bad habits. One of the advantages of an angled
push delivery is that the off wheel is behind the stone and can be
braced by the off arm, making the chair less prone to movement.
In conclusion while it
might be sensible to have a default coached delivery, and I would
suggest the angle push is the best choice, deliveries are likely to
remain as individual as the musculatures of the athletes. It will be
interesting to see how proposed biometric analysis illuminates this
issue.
Beyond technique
Format:
If we were to start from scratch with wheelchair curling, four person
teams would probably not be the best way to go. They suggest a
relationship to the able-bodied game that doesn't really exist.
Wheelchair curling is not aerobic, not especially athletic, and not a
team enterprise in the same way as able-bodied curling.
It is difficult to
justify the presence on the ice of the lead and the second when they are
not throwing; and in major competition it can be easily 30 minutes
between throws.
Warm-up and hydration:
Every wheelchair curler I've known has been casual about warm up, but if
indeed that is important, it should be just as important to do a warm up
routine during those 20 or 30 minute intervals of inactivity between
ends, in the cold, on the ice. Hydration is also stressed by coaches,
but frequent drinks of water have implications and inconveniences in
wheelchair curling that often dissuade athletes from recommended fluid
intake. If hydration is as vital as is so often stressed at training
camps, then it needs to be built into on-ice routines,
Team roles:
There is no reason why traditional team roles should follow the order in
which the rocks are thrown. The person with the skills needed by a skip
could throw lead, second, or third. Likewise the traditional role of 3rd
need not be played by the person throwing 3rd rocks.
Rules of play:
WCF rules dictate mixed gender teams, a laudable goal. But statistically
there are far fewer paraplegic female wheelchair users than males, and
if we insist that at least 25% of participants are female, we
artificially limit our potential for grassroots growth.
Similarly, though WCF
rules guide international competition, they may not be best suited for
informal play in a country where appreciation and participation in
curling is as deep rooted as
Canada.
Our national team must take cognizance of them, but it is easy to
imagine rules for the sport that are far more congenial to a wider range
of wheelchair users than presently participate.
My feeling is we should
welcome anyone into wheelchair curling in Canada who cannot for whatever
reason participate in regular curling, bearing in mind that the national
team must reflect WCF criteria.
Tactics
My impression is the
effect of the absence of sweeping on the viability of shots called is
underestimated. There's not a lot of point calling for a freeze, for
example. Similarly delivering the rock from the centre line reduces the
range of available draws. This has obvious implications for game calling
At the nationals last
year it was obvious that Team Canada had decided they would be a hitting
team. That sounded plausible given how much able-bodied curlers rely on
sweeping for an accurate draw game. The problem with the hitting game,
as was fully exposed in the final end of the gold medal game into
Torino, was that you can't afford to miss if your opponents draw into
the rings. Additionally, and as it turned out almost catastrophically,
hitting without sticking is almost as bad as missing, and an unswept
“hit and stick” is just as difficult to execute as an unswept draw.
Drawing lead stones
into the rings and challenging your opponents to execute accurate hits
seems a winning tactic.
Though it is tempting
for skips to call the shot they would like to see made, successful skips
call shots that allow for a wide margin of error. If 50% or 60% is to
remain an excellent shooting percentage, and I think that it will, then
don't call a finesse game. Throw lots of stones in the house and take
your chances.
Eric Eales
December 3rd, 2006