« | Home | »

Chess on Ice

Tags: | |

To file in the department of ‘Can this possibly be true?’ – a piece from the New York Times about Wall Street’s fascination with curling.  That’s right, curling, the mesmerically boring sport which is basically bowling on ice with heavy flat stones. After the closing bell in the markets, CNBC switches to showing the curling from Vancouver. Apparently the chilled-out boringness is why the moneymen like it. The guys on the Street say it is ‘like chess on ice’.

Comments on “Chess on Ice”

  1. Dunnock says:

    In view of the guys’ remarkable performance over the last few years I wonder which variant they like the best, hair curling or toe curling?

  2. Phil says:

    It’s not bowling on ice, it’s bowls on ice. Bowling is a quick hit, an instant win or lose with no judgment required. Bowls (like curling) is slow and careful, with results that only reveal themselves gradually. What do they know of bowls who only bowling know?

    (Can’t see the ‘chess’ analogy, mind.)

  3. Camus123 says:

    The curlers shout and scream as the stone glides over the ice – behaviour very similar to the brokers earning their living, yelling at somebody off-picture somewhere.

  4. bilejones says:

    Jeeze, you guys know nothing.
    Curling is the only sport in which men and women could compete on a level paying field: Size, strength and speed don’t matter here.
    We know how Wall St. loves a level playing field.

  5. Camus123 says:

    Thanks for the insight, Bilejones. That’s why the curlers (?) all look like brokers in mufti, is it?

  6. adam_burke says:

    The angelic visages of the successful Japanese women’s team do not seem irrelevant to this phenomenon …

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • wearytruth on Stoke and Copeland: "Corbyn’s stated mission in leading Labour is to offer a break with the past and create an economy for the many, not the few." That was MY stated...
    • Ouessante on Stoke and Copeland: Stoke: Cons+UKIP 49.1%, Lab 37.1%. Saved only by a split vote. Hardly cause for Lab rejoicing I think. They should be very worried.
    • streetsj on Stoke and Copeland: As in all votes there are a multitude of reasons why people vote as they do but it seems unlikely that Nuttall's contribution was anything other than ...
    • piffin on Stoke and Copeland: That Labour could beat off Ukip's anti-immigrant challenge in Stoke but lose to the Tories in Copeland suggests the latter result was informed by the ...
    • suetonius on Remembering Seymour Papert: Oh my, flashback inducing. I remember being an undergraduate right when the book came out, physics student at the time. Several of my professors wer...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

Advertisement Advertisement