Sweep Hand Spacing

[John E]

I've searched the group's archives to find an answer, but for once
can't locate one...

Can someone please explain why sweep hand spacings are now so much
greater than they used to be ? When I learnt to row in the late 60s
'one hand width apart' was more or less the norm.

The change from needle/macons to big blades ? A better biomechanical
understanding of how rowing works ? Fashion ?

[wmar...@gmail.com]

Well... way back when I rowed (early 80s) it was "thumb-tips apart" which is about 1.5 hand widths (my hands, anyway). For leverage - hands together at the end of the oar. Limits turn-out to the catch, limits length at the catch, may strain lower back. From what I understand we're rowing longer catches now, slightly shorter finishes, which means that we need to turn towards the oar with the outside hand reaching across, and to avoid getting all cramped up on the inside arm/shoulder.

From a "how we're put together" perspective - an objective (acc to some, anyway) is to pull towards the axilla/armpit. Not necessarily the height of the armpit, but the vertical plane of the armpit, and what seems to be "best" for the body from a structural perspective seems to be aiming somewhere near the xiphoid process (that little extension of the sternum/breastbone that extends below where the ribs attach) or slightly below as a "pulling target". That means that the hands will beabout 2.5-3 handwidths apart.

I think.

[sully]

John, before your time it was even narrower, hands were nearly
touching
in some shells. The reasoning was to gain more leverage on the
drive.

I don't have a good answer, but do have a couple observations.

1. Until tulip blades, finishes were taught to be very flat with no
vertical motion. The blades were very narrow and one could
maintain blade depth without burying as much shaft. With narrow
grip, the inside hand has less room for vertical movement and feather,
the sternum is right there.
2. related to 1, we used less track and a lot more layback in
general, something like 26" tracks I think I recall. With more
extreme layback, the outside hand comes to the sternum and
there is thus more room for the inside hand.
3. feathering was more passive than active. Talking to my friends
who rowed for Oly teams in the 50s, they talk about stopping the
hands briefly at the finish to let the bent oar/blade uncoil and
release
the rest of it's energy as you began the feather, and that the
oar would 'feather itself'. Claim: much more relaxing.

I've watched film of Olys/colleges previous to 1960. There was a
wide variety of hand spreads, some grips as wide as now, but
these days I never see narrow grips.

I went for a row in a pair with one of these guys many years
ago. I frankly expected to feel something really magical and
smooth, I was all prepared to try to row their style, see what
it felt like.

It felt like a tug-a-war contest in a phone booth. i was
disappointed,
could have done that with a novice knucklehead!

[Steve]

Hi John,

I began to row back in 1979 - 80 and now that you mention it, I believe I
was taught to hold the handle spaced such that the tips of my thumbs could
touch when pointed toward each other. Back then, I learned to row using what
we called "spade" blades or perhaps more commonly known as needles.

By 1982 I had progressed to using Macon's, but it wasn't until late 82 or
early 83 when we began being coached by an international coach that we were
taught to place the hands approximately shoulder width apart.

So, back in the early 80's it seemed, was when (if not earlier depending on
coaches and blades used) was when I recall the wider hand position being
adopted.

In fact, even earlier. I seem to recall seeing the sinking of the Cambridge
crew in 1978 and I think they were rowing as we do now with regards to hand
positions, so it would appear to have pretty much been doctrine for over 30
years.
--

Regards

Steve
"John E" <jo...@john-ewans-design.co.uk> wrote in message
news:81cd2b81-79e5-4eee...@h1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com...