UK/USA Rowing Technique Differences
J.H.T-E. Law
As an American rowing in the UK, I've come across some differences
in rowing technique. In particular, in the US I was taught to separate
the three different parts of the drive (first legs, then back, then
arms, with a little bit of overlap in between) more so than
in the UK, where I've been told to combine them more--so much so that
the back begins to open at the same time the legs drive. I just want
to 1) confirm that these are the accepted techniques on either side
of the Atlantic, and 2) get some input on the advantages/disadvantages
to either, which one is "better," etc.
Thanks,
John
Shepton Mallet
: As an American rowing in the UK, I've come across some differences
My coach teaches this style (he learnt at OUBC) :
Start the drive, as the blade passes 90 degrees to the side of the boat,
drive the hardest, and open the body up as you do so. This means you get
most power through when the blade is in its most efficient position to
propel the boat forwards, and you also get a strong back. As the hands
come over the knees, begin the draw with the arms, and finish the arm
draw and leg drive together. This means that you get a finish that
doesn't jerk you back (try rowing feet out to see what I mean).
If only have a bit of overlap between leg drive, back lean and arm draw,
then you a) get a weak back position when you want to drive the hardest
(ie. past the pin), b) you get a finish that throws you backwards and c)
you get a stroke where you began to accelerate hard with the legs, and
you then leave yourself with just your arms to continue this
acceleration, making for a comparitively weaker and slower finish than a
coordinated one.
Does this make sense?
Hope it helps.
Cheers,
Jon
** Jonathan Anderson **
jonathan...@dur.ac.uk
===========================
rodl...@aol.com
In article <5d5qoe$h...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, jht...@cus.cam.ac.uk (J.H.T-E.
Law) writes:
>in the US I was taught to separate
>the three different parts of the drive (first legs, then back, then
>arms, with a little bit of overlap in between) more so than
>in the UK, where I've been told to combine them more--so much so that
>the back begins to open at the same time the legs drive. I just want
>to 1) confirm that these are the accepted techniques on either side
>of the Atlantic, and 2) get some input on the advantages/disadvantages
>to either, which one is "better," etc.
I think back opening at the same time as the legs start to drive would now
be regarded as somewhat old-fashioned. That's the way I learnt to row 18
years ago, but now the teaching (at least here in Scotland) is all legs
first, back later and then arms (of course, the movemants flowing
together).
I was told that crews rowing with lots of compression and a big sit up at
the catch (as I was taught) tend to produce splits showing lots of
fatigue, whereas the 'legs only at the catch' technique can produce very
even splits. Certainly as the major power comes from the legs, it makes
general sense to brace everything else and let them get on with it as
meuch as possible. Also, a sit-up on the catch will tend to produce a lot
of vertical movement with a rather slapped catch, as opposed to the placed
catch of the other technique. This may be particularly important with
cleavers/big blades.
Rod.
Disclaimer; the opinions expressed are not nescessarily yours.
ehr...@widomaker.com
The last time a thread on this subject appeared it was in the middle of
summer (1995) and I wasn't half as busy as I am now. It stimulated a good
discussion. Right now, I am a bit overloaded - I'll try to dig up some of
those old articles if I can find them - but that was also three e-mail
accounts ago, so who knows.
The bottom line of the discussion was simply that it does not really
matter what style a crew rows so long as the style is well
thought-through, internally consistent, and the whole crew does it.
Obviously, most coaches will say that their general style is "best," or
they wouldn't coach it. There is a lot of disagreement on this front. I
personally have a general style which I coach, but I tailor that style to
the specific needs of the crew, and even to the time of year and the
level. Coaching is not a proscriptive art - it is always important to
remember that the bottom line is boatspeed, and small - sometimes
surprising - adjustments will often be needed to maximize boatspeed.
More specific to your question: yes, there is a difference between the
generic American technique and the traditional British one. part of this
is as you describe the pull-through. Part of it is the emphasis: the
traditional British technique is finish-based as opposed to the
catch-based American technique. American crews also use more legs and
less back than British ones, on the whole. When I get a spare minute, I
will break all this down in more detail.
It is interesting to note, however, that the traditional British style is
beginning to give way in some areas to a newer style with a completely
different logic much closer to the (generic) American. This was pioneered
in Britain by Nottinghamshire County Rowing Association (which had both an
indirect and a direct influence on my own style), and spread to the
Cambridge men's heavyweights, and onward from there. Britain is not a
place to give up on its traditions lightly, and it was not really until
the invention of the hatchet blade - to which the traditional British
style is ill-suited and the Notts County technique is well-suited - that
it began to spread. The most notable traditionally-trained British
coaches to adopt an upright, long-legged, and catch-based style last year
were Bruce Grainger of Eton College and - to a certain extent - Bill Mason
(of Imperial College, but coaching the British heavyweight women).
Neither of them used the Notts County technique or an American technique
_per_se_ but they did use styles which diverged from the traditional
British norm in that direction.
Charles Ehrlich
Men's Coach
William & Mary Rowing
(who formerly coached on the other side of the pond and got used to having
my crews stared at for "rowing like Americans.")
rodl...@aol.com
In article <5d7si9$o...@mercury.dur.ac.uk>, Shepton Mallet
<Jonathan...@durham.ac.uk> writes:
>My coach teaches this style (he learnt at OUBC) :
>Start the drive, as the blade passes 90 degrees to the side of the boat,
>drive the hardest, and open the body up as you do so. This means you get
>most power through when the blade is in its most efficient position to
>propel the boat forwards, and you also get a strong back. As the hands
>come over the knees, begin the draw with the arms, and finish the arm
>draw and leg drive together. This means that you get a finish that
>doesn't jerk you back (try rowing feet out to see what I mean).
A couple of comments on the above; there is quite a long latency between
telling your quads to maximally contract, and them developing maximum
force, so if you wait untill the blade is at 90 degrees to tell your quads
to contract maximally, they won't do so untill sometime later. If you want
to develop maximumforce at 90 degrees (which seems generally reasonable)
you will have to start your concious maximal effort prior to this. If you
start the drive as soon as you are locked on, maximal force will probably
be generated around 90 degrees to the boat.
Also, if I sit legs straight and arms out so my hands are over my knees,
ny torso is leaning back a little. I don't think my proportions are too
extraordinary, so I suspect others will find the same.Thus, even on your
description a good deal of the leg drive and body swing will be complete
by the times the arms come into play, so you are following the
legs/back/arms pricnciple to a large extent; but obviously there has to be
flow from one phase to the next, not a fragmented stroke.
Cynthia S Donnell
About style -
The year that the USRA convention was in Washington, DC,
(1990?) There was a company which was demonstrating an interesting
rowing product. It was a machine with 2 rowing stations, (sweep -
port and starboard) and everything possible was connected to a
computer.
It was possible to track blade depth, height,the track of
the oar handle through the drive and recovery, heart rate,
acceleration and velocity of the boat and the force exerted by the
rower against the foot stretcher, etc., etc. At some point
two brawny lads climbed aboard and went for a row. The styles of the
two couldn't have been more different.
The 1st rowed legs, arms, back - minimal overlap of the stages and
clearly finishing with leg drive completely exhausted before the arms
did much at all. The finish was arms only.
The 2nd rowed with the back opening with the leg drive and
the arms clearly finishing with the last bit of the leg drive.
The computer clearly showed that the 2nd was the
boat mover. The power curve of his leg drive showed a much longer,
steadier acceleration and the velocity curve (of the boat) fell off
less sharply than that of the first rower.
The power curve of the first rower fell off at the end of the
leg drive - which ended before the end of the rowing stroke. The
velocity curve fell off earlier in the recovery than with the 2nd
rower.
On a personal note, I pull lower splits on the erg when my
legs and arms finish together.
Cindy Donnell
VBC, Richmond, VA
Sullys Maze
In article <5dduhn$n...@saturn.vcu.edu>,
cdon...@saturn.vcu.edu (Cynthia S Donnell) writes:
>About style -
> The year that the USRA convention was in Washington, DC,
>(1990?) There was a company which was demonstrating an interesting
>rowing product. It was a machine with 2 rowing stations, (sweep -
>port and starboard) and everything possible was connected to a
>computer.
this would be fun.
> It was possible to track blade depth, height,the track of
>the oar handle through the drive and recovery, heart rate,
>acceleration and velocity of the boat and the force exerted by the
>rower against the foot stretcher, etc., etc. At some point
>two brawny lads climbed aboard and went for a row. The styles of the
>two couldn't have been more different.
> The 1st rowed legs, arms, back - minimal overlap of the stages and
>clearly finishing with leg drive completely exhausted before the arms
>did much at all. The finish was arms only.
> The 2nd rowed with the back opening with the leg drive and
>the arms clearly finishing with the last bit of the leg drive.
> The computer clearly showed that the 2nd was the
>boat mover. The power curve of his leg drive showed a much longer,
>steadier acceleration and the velocity curve (of the boat) fell off
>less sharply than that of the first rower.
> The power curve of the first rower fell off at the end of the
>leg drive - which ended before the end of the rowing stroke. The
>velocity curve fell off earlier in the recovery than with the 2nd
>rower.
Of course, what is more significant is the application of technique
and the quality of performance of it than the sort of technique that
is being applied. What you describe of rower 1 could be an effect
of not applying the technique correctly (IE shooting slide).
So much of technique has a lot to do with also rigging your boat for
it - length of slide, work through, span, load, oar stiffness. Not
every technique is ideal for every body either. I always had a
devil of a time adapting rowers with long long legs and short trunks
to swinging and finishing in the same manner of the rest of a crew.
I always thought for them, a longer track, more vertical body angle
would be a more effective use of their body mechanics than the
classic Eastern European longer body reach and swing.
Mike
Shepton Mallet
What has ehr...@widomaker.com been taking? I mean, look:
: different logic much closer to the (generic) American. This was pioneered
: in Britain by Nottinghamshire County Rowing Association (which had both an
: indirect and a direct influence on my own style), and spread to the
: Cambridge men's heavyweights, and onward from there. Britain is not a
: place to give up on its traditions lightly, and it was not really until
: the invention of the hatchet blade - to which the traditional British
: style is ill-suited and the Notts County technique is well-suited - that
: it began to spread.
At Durham the chief coach (ex-Notts County rower) has decided that the
'Cambridge 1994' style is the one for his squad. I have to say it is
pretty effective, although there are many in Durham who still stick to the
more traditional style, including one coach who teaches slow catches, no
body lean at the finish, and encourages novices to look at their blades.
Apparently (or should I say allegedly), the former East German team rowed
in this style, and so do Oxford. At least he said they do. Hmm...
Marky Mark
opening up the back to get the blade in and on, then followed with a big
leg drive. I think this was definitely a hang-over from wooden blade
days with lots of flex in the loom and smaller spoons.
Has anyone had a chance to look at the Dutch squad and what they do?
The Italians in the early 90s also did a lot for modern carbon-fibre
blade technique so perhaps this could go a bit more international.
Stephen K. Bohler
Marky Mark <mark.h...@bbc.co.uk> wrote in article
<32FB52...@bbc.co.uk>...
> When our present coach first turned up, he was very keen on really
> opening up the back to get the blade in and on, then followed with a big
> leg drive. I think this was definitely a hang-over from wooden blade
> days with lots of flex in the loom and smaller spoons.
>
> Has anyone had a chance to look at the Dutch squad and what they do?
> The Italians in the early 90s also did a lot for modern carbon-fibre
> blade technique so perhaps this could go a bit more international.
>
The Dutch, under Rene Meijnders, pry with the back simultaneously as they
drive the legs. With their strength, this obviously worked quite well for
them in Atlanta. Now that he's here at Oxford, the heavyweights are rowing
a bit more like that.
Steve
Roger J. Carter
J.H.T-E. Law wrote:
>
> As an American rowing in the UK, I've come across some differences
> the three different parts of the drive (first legs, then back, then
> arms, with a little bit of overlap in between) more so than
> in the UK, where I've been told to combine them more--so much so that
> the back begins to open at the same time the legs drive. I just want
> to 1) confirm that these are the accepted techniques on either side
> of the Atlantic, and 2) get some input on the advantages/disadvantages
> to either, which one is "better," etc.
>
> John
It would be interesting if someone did a comparitive breakdown of the
two
styles. I'm sure there must be some catch/release techniques, blade
control,
etc. that may not be obvious. Roger
Thomas Dean
I come from the school of the predominantly self taught. A little camp
instruction at "Northeast Sculling...",and a coaching clinic. I have
studied whatever information was availabe and spent ten years improving
technique. I may be getting older but I'm still getting faser. I'm now
rowing a Kaschper with hatchet blades.
A lot of my feedback that I use to judge my technique is from boat "feel
and "sound". My conclusion for what its worth.... In short races it is
desirable to get to the finish line with tanks empty. Overlapping the
three segments of the stroke makes sense in this case. But in longer
head races (3+ mi.) it makes more sense to use one's energy as
efficiently as possibly. To be pulling with the arms during the leg
drive drive uses more energy. I have noticed the boat moves quite well
with an unobstructed finish of the arms. The right time to execute the
finish can be felt by holding a small degree of tension on the oar
during the leg drive and thenpulling through as soon as the degree of
difficulty begins to let up.
If Henry Hamilton has been following this I would be interested to know
his opinion. There is a technique that bares watching.
Slinging It
Tom
--
Earth Way Inc.
Thomas Dean<eart...@agate.net> 207-562-7569
also in association with
Earth Way Landscaping & Mystic Valley Stable
Check Out Our Web Site: http://www.scozone.com/earthway/
Charles Day
> As an American rowing in the UK, I've come across some differences
> in rowing technique. In particular, in the US I was taught to separate
> the three different parts of the drive (first legs, then back, then
> arms, with a little bit of overlap in between) more so than
> in the UK, where I've been told to combine them more--so much so that
> the back begins to open at the same time the legs drive.
I remember being told the same thing about opening up the back at
the same time as the leg drive when I learnt to row in Cambridge.
Of course, it's actually quite hard to open your back much before your
legs, since legs are considerably stronger. With this in mind, I tended
to regard this piece of advice as a sort of Platonic ideal to be aimed at
but not achieved. Certainly, _thinking_ about opening your back, whether
it actually happens or not, is a good way of correcting bum-shoving.
But rather than speculate on the merits of either technique, can't we
just look at people like Redgrave and Pinsent to see how they do it?
Charles
rodl...@aol.com
In article <5dfieh$2...@mercury.dur.ac.uk>, Shepton Mallet
<Jonathan...@durham.ac.uk> writes:
>Apparently (or should I say allegedly), the former East German team rowed
>in this style, and so do Oxford. At least he said they do. Hmm...
Hang around the Cherwell in Oxford before Torpids or Summer Eights and
you'll see most styles..........
Adam Gray
I would think the coaches here would be less than pleased if they
thought CUBC rowed like Americans. My impressions are that Americans
(collegiate) row with a heavy reliance on the upper body and the legs
are not focussed on enough at the catch- their connection is presumed.
CUBC rows more with their feet and then backs and just lets the finish
happen. I can't say if this is the same for the rest of England.
ehr...@widomaker.com
In article <33003D...@post.drexel.edu>,
thebat <sg96...@post.drexel.edu> wrote:
>Gainseville. Also,how does one "presume" connection? You are either
>conected, or you are not (and do not go so fast). Please elaborate...is
>it like theoretical conection, or is it more of a virtual thing?
>
>By the way, your opening statement was typically--and
>*tactfully*--British ;-)
Adam is a 'Merkin. But he must be learning fast. ;^)
Well, I don't know what they taught Adam at Yale, but I would disagree
completely with his characterization of American rowing technique. There
is no specifically American style, but some generic elements are pretty
common. The main element of most American techniques is the emphasis on
the legs going down hard from the catch, with a very upright body. While
Cambridge did not get its technique from the US (it came from
Nottinghamshire County RA, which in turn had adapted some Australian
sculling techniques for sweep rowing), it does share a lot of logic with
the (generic) American style, and it has more in common with American tech
than it does with traditional British tech.
There is, of course, no absolute "standard" British technique. However,
there are some peculiarities I noticed very quickly when I first moved
over to that side of the pond and observed other crews (the first boat
club I was associated with in the UK was Notts County, so I did not have a
typical introduction and had to learn traditional British technique
through observing other crews). Some basic points I noticed a lot of crews
doing to some degree, and which I broke down on this newsgroup once
before, are:
1 - setting off backstops, which produces two corrolaries:
a - emphasizing the finish
b - putting the rower further behind the pin
2 - lots of forward body rock (result of 1b, actually)
3 - weak catches (result of 1a, partially)
4 - saving the legs to finish together with the arms (helps with 1a)
5 - lifting early with the back (see 1a and 3)
6 - breaking the arms early (more in line with 4)
7 - holding the legs flat longer on the recovery (to achieve 2, partly)
There are lots of variations on this style, of course, but those are the
main elements. I found this about as odd as the Brits found what my crews
did. My technique - very American, heavily influenced by coaches like
Harvard's lightweight coach Charlie Butt, and with a distinct Notts County
influence (both a direct influence from my experience there and previously
an indirect one through Charlie who worked some Notts County elements into
his own style) - is very catch-oriented and upright. While I vary the way
I coach depending on the needs of the crew (and when I was working with
other coaches in England I sometimes even found myself trying to apply
some of my methods to convey more traditional British tech), my style has
been evolving noticeably more upright and uses what Charlie Butt always
used to call "long-legged recoveries." It makes for a more powerful
leg-drive, and if there is a good catch (taken in the feet, not in the
back, accompanied by sharp bladework) gives the boat a very powerful
lift-off, placing a lot of work on the oar right away which can be
accelerated through the middle of the drive so that the finish does indeed
take care of itself, as Adam has described.
In a nutshell -
Drive: legs go down hard with outside lat connected and drawing around the
pin, body surges open, arms draw all the way in to allow the bend in the
oar to snap out, hands spin.
Recovery: Outside arm leads body and slide away, swinging body to knees,
sitting it up to ankles, and twisting it around to the catch; legs start
when hands are clear of knees, glide until ass virtually touches ankles.
I would in no way call what I just described a "standard" American
technique. It's a bit of a mixture of things, not all of them American,
even. However, the generic American technique is marked by being on the
whole rather upright at the catch, and having a very fast leg-drive.
Also, proportionally more crews over here set off front-stops than off
back-stops, where in Britain setting off front-stops is virtually unheard
of because the traditional British technique by definition emphasizes
power at the finish where general American techniques emphasize getting
the load on the oar early in the drive.
The tech employed by Cambridge is slightly more subtle, especially with
the leg drive from the catch. There's also not quite as much body-twist
in Cambridge. But I would say that the Cambridge technique shares more
logic with what gets taught on this side of the pond than it does with
traditional British styles.
I arrived in England before the invention of the hatchet blade. It was
interesting to note how British coaches adapted to hatchet blades since
their invention. On one hand I saw a switch to a more upright style, on
the other I saw attempts to rethink the traditional British tech while
keeping its basic concepts intact.
ehr...@widomaker.com
In article <charles.day-09...@cday.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
Charles Day <charl...@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>But rather than speculate on the merits of either technique, can't we
>just look at people like Redgrave and Pinsent to see how they do it?
I don't think this is a good idea, actually. R+P are two amazing men. If
everybody weighed 16-1/2 stones and had the muscles, lungs, and body
structure as those guys, then maybe - maybe - we could imitate them. But
they are so strong that they can do things that most people could not do
(unless people wanted to hurt themselves). R+P do not have "perfect"
technique, by any style. But they row as well as they need to and have
enormous strength and will to back themselves up. For one, they have
muscles in their backs that allow them to apply far more weight there than
most people's backs could handle. And they row well together as a pair -
and a pair is a tricky boat.
They are proven boat-movers. But the importance is that they do whatever
it is they do well _together_. And, when they row in the 4- for the next
four years, that they blend sufficiently well with the two new members of
the crew.
They are amazing, and how they row is worth watching. I do not believe,
however, that most people (including successful international elite
rowers) would do well by imitating them.
ehr...@widomaker.com
In article <19970210080...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
<rodl...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <5dfieh$2...@mercury.dur.ac.uk>, Shepton Mallet
><Jonathan...@durham.ac.uk> writes:
>
>>Apparently (or should I say allegedly), the former East German team rowed
>>in this style, and so do Oxford. At least he said they do. Hmm...
>
>Hang around the Cherwell in Oxford before Torpids or Summer Eights and
>you'll see most styles..........
But you wouldn't want to do most of those styles in a racing shell of any
description. The only boats on the Cherwell are punts, and yes they do
demonstrate all levels of proficiency (mostly bad). If only they'd stay
on the Cherwell...
I've never tried punting in an eight before, but I'm sure someone's tried
it.
CEE
rodl...@aol.com
>>Hang around the Cherwell in Oxford before Torpids or Summer Eights and
>>you'll see most styles..........
>
>But you wouldn't want to do most of those styles in a racing shell of any
>description. The only boats on the Cherwell are punts, and yes they do
>demonstrate all levels of proficiency (mostly bad). If only they'd stay
>on the Cherwell...
>
>I've never tried punting in an eight before, but I'm sure someone's tried
>it.
I know it's a long time since I was at Oxford, but I didn't realise my memory was getting so bad.
Can't you just get to the tail end of the Cherwell in a single scull by meandering a little off the Isis? I'm sure I did that sometime.... Or is that another bit of water again? You are of course quite correct in suspecting that I meant the Isis in terms of admiring the full and creative breadth of rowing styles Oxford has to offer.
Simon Kenyon
rodl...@aol.com wrote:
>
> I know it's a long time since I was at Oxford, but I didn't realise my
memory was getting so bad.
> Can't you just get to the tail end of the Cherwell in a single scull
by meandering a little off the Isis? I'm sure I did that sometime....
Or is that another bit of water again? You are of course quite correct
in suspecting that I meant the Isis in terms of admiring the full and
creative breadth of rowing styles Oxford has to offer.
>
> Rod.
> Disclaimer; the opinions expressed are not nescessarily yours.
When I was at Oxford ('87-'91) you could certainly row all the
way up to Magdalen Bridge, but punt traffic made this near-impossible
in the Summer. Magdalen College School used to boat a Coxed
Four on the Cherwell, and I once sculled from the boathouse
to college (Magd.) and back: albeit very carefully.
If you're really into exotic rowing styles, the London Hospital
crews are a must-see. There are also some pretty scary erg
techniques in the gym here at the office ...
--
Simon
simon_...@studio.disney.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tradesmen
--
Message content does not reflect the position of
The Walt Disney Company.
Chris Webb
In article <33044E...@studio.disney.com>, Simon Kenyon
<URL:mailto:simon_...@studio.disney.com> wrote:
> If you're really into exotic rowing styles, the London Hospital
> crews are a must-see. There are also some pretty scary erg
> techniques in the gym here at the office ...
Another college shares our boathouse with us, and we occasionally see what
I presume must be rowers from one of their novice/lower boats on the ergos.
Really quite frightening things are going on with their slide and lean: I'm
amazed that no one has pointed this out to them. (I wouldn't presume to do
this, but I'm sure people who coach them must have noticed.) If nothing
else, one of them is bound to do themselves damage sooner or later. Maybe we
should fix intruction manuals to the ergs in the hope they take the hint!
Chris Webb.
[1st & 3rd Trinity BC]
--
Chris Webb <cd...@cam.ac.uk>
Trinity College, Cambridge
Telephone +44 1223 506929
rodl...@aol.com
In article <33044E...@studio.disney.com>, Simon Kenyon <simon_...@studio.disney.com> writes:
>If you're really into exotic rowing styles, the London Hospital
>crews are a must-see. There are also some pretty scary erg
>techniques in the gym here at the office ...
Ah..... Now my rowing past is coming home to roost. Now you know why I row as I do....... Straight from Oxford to the London Hospital (as in 'the' rather than 'a').
We did mange top 70 in Tideway, beating all the Oxford colleges, and 3 secs. off the best Cambridge one though.
I must admit the nether regions of hospital bumps do have to be rowed with the tide in order to avoid inordinate delays for the last few crews.
To be fair, it is tricky. From the East End to UL boathouse is 17 miles each way through the heart of London, so most of the time even the first crew only bothered going on the water twice per week (remember we were busy students too....), and did some vigourous running and circuits the rest of the time (it was in the PC era....pre-Concept II ). The rugby eight were rumoured to go and practice once a twice before the race, but I don't actuallly recall them doing so, so some stylistic creativity was inevitable.
Charles Day
> In article <charles.day-09...@cday.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
> Charles Day <charl...@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
> >
> >But rather than speculate on the merits of either technique, can't we
> >just look at people like Redgrave and Pinsent to see how they do it?
>
> I don't think this is a good idea, actually. R+P are two amazing men. If
> everybody weighed 16-1/2 stones and had the muscles, lungs, and body
> structure as those guys, then maybe - maybe - we could imitate them.
Good point, Charles. Would you recommend, then, that we "normals" emulate
the best lightweights?
Meanwhile, it might be worth injecting some non-US/non-UK technique into
this thread. Of all the races I saw on TV from the Atlanta Games, the crew
that impressed me the most from the technical point of view was the German
men's quad.
Charles
thebat
Of all the races I saw on TV from the Atlanta Games, the crew
> that impressed me the most from the technical point of view was the German
> men's quad.
>
> Charles
YES! YES! YES! And the F4X, too (w/ red-hair chick). They made it
look easy.