Spracklen/Fairbairnism
Jeremy Martin
row with the Fairbairn style. Steve Redgrave, for instance, rows his blade
into the water with a springing hit, and fires his body off the stretcher
with a piston-like leg-drive. It has already been reported on this newsgroup
that Spracklen coaches oarsmen to "row the blade in". Now I have come across
some evidence to back up the connection that I have observed.
I've just received my copy of "The History of the Jesus College Boat Club"
from Silent Books, Ltd. Cambridge - an excellent read. A very interesting
titbit of information is that Mike Spracklen was originally coached at
Marlow Rowing Club by Brian Coulton, who was a direct disciple of Steve
Fairbairn. This goes some way to explaining the similarity between Spracklen
crews and Fairbairn crews.
So those people who were recently poo-pooing Fairbairn style in this newsgroup,
such as the Cambridge cox, should perhaps bear in mind the racing record of
Steve Redgrave, the 1992 Canadian Olympic Eight, and the 1994 USA World
Champion Eight.
If you don't believe me, just try it. It's such a nice way to row.
Jeremy Martin
Trevor Chambers
If you can't do it easily, you can't do it at all...
Trev
Sudbury RC
A.J. Potts
: I can't argue with that. The top crews of today are significantly faster than
: those of the past. However, as far as I'm concerned, Redgrave is rowing pure
: Fairbairn style. He just happens to be doing so more effectively than the
: crews of the 1920's. If he had to row with fixed rowlocks, an eighteen inch
: slide, pencil blades and feet splayed apart at 45 degrees his rowing might
: resemble the rowing of that era.
...and this is the crux of the arguement. Redgrave doesn't row like that,
hence to my mind can't be rowing Fairbairnically. It's a question of
concept vs. reality, and also a question of semantics (which is quite
dull). I think, in fact, basically we agree.
Alistair James Potts.
PS Is that thing about feet right? I must say I'd never noticed that,
although I have to admit that I bicycle with my feet at forty-five
degrees... any ideas why?
Trevor Chambers
{Snip}
> ....and this is the crux of the arguement. Redgrave doesn't row like that,
> hence to my mind can't be rowing Fairbairnically.
But surely you can row a Fairbairn style with today's equipment? I mean,
Fairbairn concentrated on the spoon of the blade, rather than the rigid
body-form of Orthodoxy, so I can't see how today's longer slides mean
that you cannot row a la Fairbairn.
> It's a question of
> concept vs. reality, and also a question of semantics (which is quite
> dull). I think, in fact, basically we agree.
>
And as the great man himself said, "You cannot ever really row. You can
only illustrate what you think rowing really is"...
> PS Is that thing about feet right? I must say I'd never noticed that,
> although I have to admit that I bicycle with my feet at forty-five
> degrees... any ideas why?
Um...saddle wrong height? Balls of feet not over the pedal axle? Bad
knees from being crunched up in a cox's seat too much?
Trev
Sudbury RC
Bowball
Your defense of the Fairbairn style is admirable, but unfortunately
Spracklen does NOT coach this technique. You should check your sources.
Rowing the blade into the water would constitute missing water which would
ultimately slow the boat down. Redgrave can get away with it because he's
an animal.
M. Sean Hall
Jeremy Martin
which took place between me and Sean Hall, a member of the World Champion
Eight of 1994.
From jer...@sable.ox.ac.ukWed Nov 22 14:30:11 1995
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:28:07 +0000 (GMT)
From: Jeremy Martin <jer...@sable.ox.ac.uk>
To: bow...@aol.com
Subject: Re: Spracklen/Fairbairnism
Sean,
I don't know what Spracklen is coaching right now, perhaps you do.
But he certainly used to coach for rowing the blade in. And I am not the
first person on this newsgroup to mention this. He was apparently still
coaching this way last year, according to sources on R.S.R.
I don't agree that rowing the blade in is less efficient than
`placing' it. There are inefficiencies either way. I find that the former
is more efficient. I scull and row like that and there is virtually no
check on the boat. It's all a question of timing.
Jeremy
From Bow...@aol.comWed Nov 22 14:29:47 1995
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 22:17:20 -0500
From: Bow...@aol.com
To: jeremy...@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Spracklen/Fairbairnism
Jeremy-
As a matter of fact I do know what Spracklen is coaching, considering I've
been rowing bow in his 8+ for the past 2 years, and I can tell you for a fact
that he does not teach this technique. As for '94, the only time he did
coach rowing the blade in was to demonstrate a point, that being the blade
must not be travelling backwards into the water. He coaches a very explosive
front end which requires the slide not to stop moving at the top end. The
tendency for "blade placers" is to pause at the catch (on the slide), which
is the slowest point of the stroke, thereby slowing the boat even further.
As for your personal technique, I cannot tell you how to row. But after 5
National teams and (hopefully) my second Olympic team, my experience
disagrees with yours. You may have virtually no check rowing the blade in,
but if the length of stroke isn't there (which it won't be if you miss
water), the longer rowers will eventually row you down. But this is just my
opinion.
Thanks for the reply.
Sean
From jer...@sable.ox.ac.ukWed Nov 22 14:28:43 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 10:17:34 +0000 (GMT)
From: Jeremy Martin <jer...@sable.ox.ac.uk>
To: Bow...@aol.com
Subject: Re: Spracklen/Fairbairnism
Hi Sean,
It seems to me that the way you describe the catch is exactly what Steve
Fairbairn was aiming at. He said that as an oarsman improved he would
miss less and less water until the blade would enter the water virtually
"top dead center". One of the features of his coaching was to overemphasize
or exaggerate the correct way of doing something, rather than to go on
about faults. It seems that this is pretty much what Mike Spracklen was
doing with your World Champion crew when he asked you to row the blade in.
Do you agree?
When Fairbairn talks about rowing the blade in, this doesn't necessarily
mean missing a lot of water. It depends on the skill of the oarsman. Ideally
the oarsman should miss virtually no water, like you described. But only
the very best oarsmen will be capable of achieving that while still keeping
the life in the water.
I didn't realise, when I first received your mail, that you were a member
of the World Champion Eight of 1994. Congratulations on that, and good
luck at the next Olympics.
The problem with a lot of Fairbairnisms is that they are passed on by word
of mouth and modified at every turn. When I rowed at Jesus College,
Cambridge we ended up rowing a horrible bastardised version of Fairbairnism.
I only realised what it was all about once I had left, and got hold of a copy
of The Complete Steve Fairbairn.
All the best
Jeremy
From Bow...@aol.comWed Nov 22 14:30:30 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 16:02:17 -0500
From: Bow...@aol.com
To: jeremy...@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Spracklen/Fairbairnism
Jeremy-
I guess I was a little hasty to criticize. I am unfamiliar with that actual
Fairbairn techique, but very familiar with Spracklen's (and Kris
Korzeniowski's for that matter). Thanks for the briefing on Fairbairn. And
thanks for the encouragement.
Sean
Trevor Chambers
>
> When Fairbairn talks about rowing the blade in, this doesn't necessarily
> mean missing a lot of water. It depends on the skill of the oarsman.
> Ideally the oarsman should miss virtually no water, like you described.
> But only the very best oarsmen will be capable of achieving that while
> still keeping the life in the water.
>
Indeed. I read a thought by Fairbairn along the lines of he liked rowers
who caused a wet bow canvas, as long as they caused it because they had a
really fast catch. The argument was that it was the idiosyncratic eccentic
sign of a really fast catch.
Or, if completely misinterpreted and passed around by loads of people, a
wet canvas was good, and so lots of novices deliberately tried to wet
the canvas - not what he meant at all.
:-)))
Trev
Sudbury RC
A.J. Potts
: Indeed. I read a thought by Fairbairn along the lines of he liked rowers
: who caused a wet bow canvas, as long as they caused it because they had a
: really fast catch. The argument was that it was the idiosyncratic eccentic
: sign of a really fast catch.
Yeah, but Fairbairn pre-dated bow-loading boats. There is not much worse
than getting an ear-full of Ouse (ooze?) every stroke. Bastard, it's all
his fault.
You're quite right, of couse. When I'm teaching good oarsmen to enter the
water correctly (their blade, that is, we don't do much swimming), you
often get a bit of back-splash. It's just over-exaggerating the correct
movement (which counteracts their 'rowing-in'). Eventually you dry off,
but not before strange fungal growths have developed on the back of your
neck and ear.
Anyone going to the erg champs? I am!
Alistair James Potts.
PS If you've seen the book "Regatta", the one by B. Ivry with lots of
fancy photos, there's a double-page spread of an Oxford crew c.1987
training at Henley. From the look on their faces they look to be doing a
bit of work, which makes the extraordinary splashless entry of the
stroke-man's blade even more impressive. It has to be seen to be believed.
(NB It is open to debate whether this is a good or bad thing, but anyway
it's pretty amazing)
A.J. Potts
three months?
AJP
PS Do you get extra geek points for persuading your one house-mate who
doesn't row to take up rowing?
Keith Thomas
>
>How many Geek points to we get for keeping this thread running for about
>three months?
>
>AJP
Steve Fairbairn "flourished" in the first third of this century.
So, what is his appeal today? As far as I can gather
his books were written to be provocative demolition
jobs on the "orthodox" style and so were often extreme
statements. Spracklen quotes Fairbairn's "Mileage
makes champions", but this was his credo in an era when
crews covered far less distance in training than we do today.
"Mileage makes champions" seems, to me, to epitomize Fairbairn's
approach: he did not worry about the finer points of style
if he could see them detracting from the performance of his
crews (especially crews of only moderate ability) and if
fitness, enthusiasm and guts would achieve the
same end. He coached some winning crews, but not all his
crews were winners - not by a long shot.
It seems to me that we have come a long way since Fairbairn's
day; so, does he have anything to teach us in 1995 (1996)?
Is there a style that one can demonize as Fairbairn demonized
"orthodox"? Or, have our styles, boats, oars,
rigging, nutrition, training routines and crew selection
converged so that the immense variety that existed earlier
this century will never return. And so never throw up another
popular iconoclast of the stature of Steve Fairbairn?
Keith, Canberra, Australia
Jeremy Martin
> "Mileage makes champions" seems, to me, to epitomize Fairbairn's
> approach: he did not worry about the finer points of style
> if he could see them detracting from the performance of his
> crews (especially crews of only moderate ability) and if
> fitness, enthusiasm and guts would achieve the
> same end.
This seems to make very good sense to me. Why enforce these so-called
"finer points of style" if they make the crew go slower. Style tends
to be a very subjective issue anyway. There's nothing wrong with good
old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
on their own.
Steve Fairbairn believed in learning to row by thinking for oneself about how
best to move a boat, rather than being "spoon-fed" with somebody else's idea
of the perfect style. He said that the keenest coach was the one who said the
least - allowing the oarsmen to develop at their own pace, without becoming
entangled in the coach's ego. `Winning' was not the objective. The objective
was for the oarsmen to explore their potential. Rather than criticising
individual oarsmen, which he never did, he would get the whole crew to think
about the most effective way to do things both in and out of the boat. In this
way every crew that he coached became a fascinating and colourful living
experiment rather than a boatload of anonymous preprogrammed automata.
>
> It seems to me that we have come a long way since Fairbairn's
> day; so, does he have anything to teach us in 1995 (1996)?
>
It has often been said that many of the teachings in Steve's books go far
beyond rowing. They apply to everything in life.
Jeremy Martin
Jay M Beene-skuban
> In article <4a3ore$3...@casper.spirit.com.au>, ia...@spirit.com.au (Keith Thomas) writes:
(snip)
> to be a very subjective issue anyway. There's nothing wrong with good
> old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
> on their own.
(snip)
YES!!! This was exactly what I was saying about the set of the boat in
the other thread. Let the finer points develop on their own, just SLAM
DOWN THE LEGS!!
Jay
Jeremy Martin
>
> IMHO, this is the difference between the Oxford and Cambridge Mens' Blues
> at the moment. For the last few years, we have seen some powerful Oxford
> crews which have been panned by the Tabs with better technique. Remember
> Pinsent and the stars being beaten by a less favoured crew who were
> paying attention to the "finer points" of technical detail?
>
That's a good point. The year that Matthew Pinsent was Oxford president,
I believe that Oxford had a more powerful crew than Cambridge man for man, and
yet they lost by three and a half lengths.
The point that I really want to make is that Steve Fairbairn's idea of good
technique was based on effective boat moving, rather than body positions.
He argued that oarsmen come in different shapes and sizes and with varying
degrees of athleticism. It follows that there is no universal optimal
set of body positions for rowing. So in Steve Fairbairn's crews there was
likely to be a certain degree of variation in the body positions of the
individual oarsmen. What he sought was a uniform excellence of bladework.
As far as I can see the distinguishing feature of Harry Mahon's three
winning Cambridge crews has been excellence of bladework. Nobody could
argue that Strepplehoff was rowing with the same body positions as anybody
else in the crew that he stroked; but he was probably rowing in the optimal
style for his particular build. In that sense I think that these crews were
very close to Fairbairn's ideal.
Personally I am a round-backed shover. At school (St. Pauls) I was ridiculed
for this by the coaches, and referred to as "banana-back". At college
(Jesus, Cambridge), where I was sometimes coached by direct disciples of
Fairbairn, this was never mentioned. I personally became a much happier rower
as a result of this style of coaching.
Jeremy Martin
Paul Thomas
[snip]
>This seems to make very good sense to me. Why enforce these so-called
>"finer points of style" if they make the crew go slower. Style tends
>old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
>on their own.
IMHO, this is the difference between the Oxford and Cambridge Mens' Blues
at the moment. For the last few years, we have seen some powerful Oxford
crews which have been panned by the Tabs with better technique. Remember
Pinsent and the stars being beaten by a less favoured crew who were
paying attention to the "finer points" of technical detail?
Paul.
-
paul....@eng.ox.ac.uk
H Ainsley c o Wizar
>The point that I really want to make is that Steve Fairbairn's idea of
good
>technique was based on effective boat moving, rather than body positions.
>He argued that oarsmen come in different shapes and sizes and with
varying
>degrees of athleticism. It follows that there is no universal optimal
>set of body positions for rowing. So in Steve Fairbairn's crews there was
>likely to be a certain degree of variation in the body positions of the
>individual oarsmen. What he sought was a uniform excellence of bladework.
I agree with this Jeremy - thinking about how I coach, I've always aimed
to produce a crew that was overall coherent in timing, most importantly
in the water, but also in the recovery. So the actual body positions are
certain to vary since a group of athletes vary in height and build, but
the overall impression of a good crew is coherence and accuracy throught
the boat. I regard myself as a technical coach - I'm always looking for
ways to create greater energy conversion efficiency - and when i'm
coaching a single, what I ask my athlete to do varies significantly from
person to person - last year, when I was coaching an England junior girl,
I probably did more discussion of technique off the water studying video
and sitting on an erg working out slight muscle shifts than I ever did
talking to her on the water - but then coaching a high quality athlete is
easier than coaching a novice anyway in that respect, because they
already have a clear idea of what they are trying to achieve.
Thinking about what you were saying about how you learnt (just up the
river from me at Westminster) - when I was taught it was in the almost
undiluted "English Style of Rowing" - I was coached at school by
disciples of Jumbo Edwards and indeed by the great man himself on
occasions, and he had perhaps developed Fairburnism during the inter-war
years.
Certainly when I started rowing again after nearly 25 years of lay-off I
found that I'd missed all the exaggerated style changes and was really
back where I'd started - the difference was that while in 1956 we were
told to row in a certain way because it made boats go fast, now we know
*why* it makes boats go fast...
Hugh Ansley - hu...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Louise Calibo
>
>
> This seems to make very good sense to me. Why enforce these so-called
> "finer points of style" if they make the crew go slower. Style tends
> to be a very subjective issue anyway. There's nothing wrong with good
> old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
> on their own.
snip
Be careful here. Our club for years and years never had
any real coaching. It was always one of the rowers giving
up their rowing to coach us...many of whom had not rowed
anywhere else. This ment that what many of us learned had
nothing to do with the "finer points of style". We had
lots of "fitness, enthusiasm and guts", but couldn't row
worth beans.
One summer we got a couple of coaches (used our boats for
a summer rec. program through the parks & paid us by
coaching). They refered to our style (lack there of) as
"OH SHIT ROWING". And it was. Everyone was trying so
hard to do the best thing _they_ thought was right for the
boat that no one would actually think about what the boat
was actually doing. Once you get into that mindset...it's
really hard to start thinking any other way.
We went back to the basics....learned a little "style".
For a while, the rowing only got worse.....now it's much
better. Also, now that we know more of what we're doing,
our volunteer coaches have been much more affective.
Sure....rowing milage may make champions....but you have
to start with at least SOMETHING correct in
technique....not necessarily "spoon fed"...but something.
Otherwise, you're rowing all those miles for nothing.
I bet Fairbairn didn't throw eight people into a boat,
tell them to row and never say anything again.
Everything else you said....I agree.
Louise
Louise Calibo
>
> On 6 Dec 1995, Jeremy Martin wrote:
>
> > In article <4a3ore$3...@casper.spirit.com.au>, ia...@spirit.com.au (Keith Thomas) writes:
> (snip)
> > old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
> > on their own.
> YES!!! This was exactly what I was saying about the set of the boat in
> the other thread. Let the finer points develop on their own, just SLAM
> DOWN THE LEGS!!
>
> Jay
Have you ever REALLY been in an 8+ in which everyone did
as you suggest..."just SLAM DOWN THE LEGS!!"? Were you
thinking about anything else besides slamming those legs?
For some....it could bet gruesome. Ever seen a cox who's
crew didn't get their blades locked before that lovely
explosive drive? Yeah...the head does snap around a bit,
doesn't it?
I'm not necessarily arguing for the finer points being
drilled into a person incessantly....but a little finesse
goes a LONG way! And you can always use some pointers on
how to achieve said finesse.
This is one of the few sports in which skill can beat
brute (fencing is another). No...we don't all need to be
robots...doing the exact same thing at the exact same
moment as everyone else time after time after time ...each
miniscule movement being duplicated thoughout the
shell...but being a bunch mindless muscles doesn't make it
either.
Louise
Sullys Maze
pbul...@mustang.uwo.ca (PETER N PN BULATOVIC) writes:
>When all is said and done what matters the most is who is going the fastest.
I heartily disagree. This is simplistic nonsense that ignores the
value of discipline rowing offers.
>This is a question of boat moving ability. My university coach Dr.
>Volker Nolte wrote in an article "Top rowing athletes are also top on the
>ergometer", this is obvious, great fitness is an essential foundation for
>high performance on the water. But what is equaly important is the
>development of ones rowing technique. It is technique which is like a key
>used to unlock the physical potential of the athelete. Al Morrow (Canadian
>heavy womens coach) once spoke in an interview on the qualities required to
>make great acheivents in rowing; the message he relayed was that everything
>must be 100%. I agree with this idea. As long as an athelete continues to
>neglect any aspect of their sport ie: pysical, technical, psychological,
>they will never acheive near their true potential.
This latter paragraph contradicts your first line.
Overall speed can be achieved by a quantifiable, recruitable
athleticism. To define the pursuit of athletes as what matters most
is the realm of the NCAA, not Rowing, or athletics in general.
It's a trivial abomination, a perversion of amateur sport.
drop the first line, and listen to what Al Morrow had to say.
Mike
M.Rascher
Louise Calibo <louise...@itron.com> wrote:
>Have you ever REALLY been in an 8+ in which everyone did
>as you suggest..."just SLAM DOWN THE LEGS!!"? Were you
>thinking about anything else besides slamming those legs?
>
I have been in an eight where everyone was thinking about
just that and it went very fast. It is very easy to become
distracted and forget that it is the legs that are doing
most of the work.
>For some....it could bet gruesome. Ever seen a cox who's
>crew didn't get their blades locked before that lovely
>explosive drive? Yeah...the head does snap around a bit,
>doesn't it?
>
No, I would rather pity the cox of the crew that did lock
their blades. This is when the cox receives the greatest
jolt. Usually our cox would lean his head forward a bit
to avoid whiplash but that didn't prevent him from getting
a nice bruise in the small of his back.
>This is one of the few sports in which skill can beat
>brute (fencing is another). No...we don't all need to be
>robots...doing the exact same thing at the exact same
>moment as everyone else time after time after time ...each
>miniscule movement being duplicated thoughout the
>shell...but being a bunch mindless muscles doesn't make it
>either.
>
Doing the close to the same thing is very important. More
so in a pair than in an eight. But it is very difficult to
get everyone to do the exact same thing time after time
precisely because we are not robots. Why are there coxless
pairs and fours but not eights? Because even in the best
crews the bow of the boat will jump side to side during the
drive. This has to be corrected to go straight, which is
important in a race. This is easily corrected in a pair, but
not in an eight. The cox is a critical member of an eight
because of the steering. This allows the mindless muscles
to do their work without worrying about grabbing a bouy and
being ejected from the boat.
:.........................................................................:
: Michael Rascher :
: mras...@wimsey.com :
:.........................................................................:
Jan Laubjerg
technique versus meathead power. As someone who also rowed at Jesus
College, Cambridge, I as well have been coached in the Steve Fairbairn
style. However, more and more at collegiate level, rowing is becoming an
obsession with ergos. Unfortunately, Jesus rowing is suffering under
this as much as other colleges. I realised the folly of this when I left
University and began rowing in Vesta BC in London. The Vesta 4- crew I
stroked for the Fours Head of the River would never have matched
collegiate 1st boat erg scores man for man, but our final place was 4
seconds behind the winner of the University 4s at Cambridge. Not bad
considering we managed to crash into a quad and steer a rather wide
course. Now, how was that possible? What had been done differently at
Vesta than at collegiate rowing? Simply a far greater emphasis on
technique, proper blade work long distance waterwork. In effect, all the
things Fairbairn brought to rowing.
**unknown**
>On 6 Dec 1995, Jeremy Martin wrote:
>
>> In article <4a3ore$3...@casper.spirit.com.au>, ia...@spirit.com.au (Keith Thomas) writes:
>(snip)
>> to be a very subjective issue anyway. There's nothing wrong with good
>> old fitness, enthusiasm and guts. Given time the finer points will develop
>> on their own.
>(snip)
>YES!!! This was exactly what I was saying about the set of the boat in
>DOWN THE LEGS!!
>
>Jay
Dear All,
It is just not that simple,by all means slam the legs,but if you and your
buddies do it at different times the boat will go nowhere.Style,finer
points,and technique are all different descriptions of how and when to
apply the power.It is true to say power in the water is what moves the
boat but the crew must apply this power together if the movement is to be
in the forward direction.It is (too) often easy to spot national squad
oarsmen performing with 'bad' technique,in these cases it can usualy also
be seen that they are doing it together and that is why they are faster
than some other guys who all row along with personal technique,work just
as hard and go slower.
Another two cents for the colection,perhaps the money should go toward a
christmas party.
Dom Hill
Will Smith
I don't think that Jesus rowing is plagued by lack of technical
interest. In the run-up to our Quintcentenary (sp?)
celebrations, We've just hired a profesional (a profesional on
the Cam? Yes!) Coach (Ex-Anglia Poly) called Andy. Never have I
heard such languae on the river! But our technique, which has
been _Very_ good in the past few years is now getting even
better.
Also, the old style Fairbairn calls for all sorts of
jerkiness at the catch which is nolonger kosher, although I've
seen some other colleges still doing it ;^)
Sorry for the flame... I can't help it, I love rowing
for Jesus.
Louise Calibo
>
> It is just not that simple,by all means slam the legs,but if you and your
> buddies do it at different times the boat will go nowhere.Style,finer
> points,and technique are all different descriptions of how and when to
> apply the power.It is true to say power in the water is what moves the
> boat but the crew must apply this power together if the movement is to be
> in the forward direction.It is (too) often easy to spot national squad
> oarsmen performing with 'bad' technique,in these cases it can usualy also
> be seen that they are doing it together and that is why they are faster
> than some other guys who all row along with personal technique,work just
> as hard and go slower.
technique wasn't very good. But, they row this bad
technique very precisely. They'd obviously worked hard at
rowing TOGETHER, not individually. They were fast and
they won.
There's always more to think about than what we think we
should be thinking about, isn't there.
Louise