Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Ontario plan follow-up

So lots of comments about yesterday's post, most made directly to me via e-mail rather than being posted here.
OCA CEO Doug Bakes clarified that contrary to what I wrote and what I've been told, almost every Ontario championship makes money for the local committee. Glad to know that and know I understand why there are many communities that want to host this event. I was part of a committee (a very small part) that hosted one during the boycott years and I know that even though we drew flies, we had enough sponsorship backing that we turned a significant profit on the event. It all went back into fixing up the curling facility, which I suspect is what happens at most of these.
Second, was a note from my old pal Paul Boutilier, who, among other things, mentioned that another good way to save time is to move to eight ends. I think that's inevitable that will happen and it certainly makes it easier to play three games in a day with that length of match.
I know in conversations with the CCA folk that some are thinking eight ends is inevitable at national championships too. These big championships are just too costly and time consuming on so many fronts.
Drew Macklin's post on the site was also well thought out, and my only disagreement with it is that I don't think you can have independent bonspiels awarding provincial spots. My only reasoning is that these spiels don't always last. What if the XYZ Championship was designated as a provincial qualifier spiel and two years later the XYZ Corporation drops its sponsorhip and the host committee says, thanks but we're not running the event anymore. I suppose its simple to just designate another spiel, at the start of the year, but I think it's easier to have one big Challenge Round operated by the OCA.

No comments: