Your ‘reporting slider’ reveals:
An interesting contest of contrasting strategies. The fact that it was a struggle from the outset to achieve seven ends within the session said it all. It meant the wider game management was increasingly telling. Rink ‘A’ ‘s strategy was a carefully measured rate for each stone, while Rink ‘C’ adopted a noticeably quicker and wider strategy.
Rink ‘C’ quickly built what felt like a confident and solid lead of four points in the first two ends. As ever the expectation of a Rink ‘A’ counter remained. However, by mid-session there was a sense that ‘C’ had managed to contain ‘A’. Increasingly during the second half the slow rate of play gave a sense that time was running out (possibly three ends) for a robust challenge. So ‘C’s strategy became one of increasing containment, protecting their lead and ensuring there were insufficient stones for a winning score at each end. While in the last end ‘C’ preferred not to risk a challenge to Rink ‘A’ ‘s two counting stones, instead containing Rink ‘A’ ‘s last end and total score to less than ‘C’s overall lead, there-by ensuring the win.
George Morrison
Holyrood Curling Club 