I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
for no other reason than consistency.

The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.

ooooOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!!

How dare they? C'mon, Sully where is the outrage? My god if this were
USC committing such an outrageous act where would we be? Well,
cheering on there No. 1 ranked Football team for one. How's Stanford
looking this year?

<sillytree@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8e9caaa1-40e8-4827-aff9-4654a826a3b1@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
> for no other reason than consistency.
>
> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.

http://gohuskies.cstv.com/sports/c-crew/wash-c-crew-body.html

Amazingly that's what their website says too.

UW alumni racing in Russia.

try again Trojan boy!


>
> ooooOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!!
>
> How dare they? C'mon, Sully where is the outrage? My god if this were
> USC committing such an outrageous act where would we be? Well,
> cheering on there No. 1 ranked Football team for one. How's Stanford
> looking this year?

I don't think you want to bring up football as a USC fan after
the humiliating pasting they took from the lowly Cardinal last year.

For those not familiar, USC has had the top college football team
in the country for the last few years, except when they choked
big time against Texas in the BCS bowl. Last year, Stanford
had a very bad football team. Stanford beat USC, who at the time
was ranked #1 in the country. I don't think Stanford beat anybody
else the rest of the year, unless it was Cal in the Big Game.

On Sep 5, 6:44 am, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> For those not familiar,  USC has had the top college football team
> in the country for the last few years,  except when they choked
> big time against Texas in the BCS bowl.    Last year,  Stanford
> had a very bad football team.   Stanford beat USC, who at the time
> was ranked #1 in the country.   I don't think Stanford beat anybody
> else the rest of the year,  unless it was Cal in the Big Game.

Stirring of marginally relevant memory here - AIRITT Stanford
[representing USA] are the reigning Olympic Rugby champs - from Paris
1924? ..... and that their team included one or two of the US
"Chariots of Fire" sprinters?

I'm sure I'm right about some of this; in my college days you could
always start some fun in a UK pub by asking brightly "Do you know who
the Olympic Rugby Champions are?"

Back on thread, well not really, just watched last night's National
Football. Nice one Giants!

Richard

sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
> for no other reason than consistency.
>
> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.

"Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at
one http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi,
indeed; well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond
doubt, as is the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their
length rating 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.

Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!

--

Henry Law Manchester, England

<rduparcq@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b405ebb2-3b24-49a7-b0d4-5e51d0e869aa@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 5, 6:44 am, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
>

>> was ranked #1 in the country. I don't think Stanford beat anybody
>> else the rest of the year, unless it was Cal in the Big Game.

snip
> Stirring of marginally relevant memory here - AIRITT Stanford
> [representing USA] are the reigning Olympic Rugby champs - from Paris
> 1924? ..... and that their team included one or two of the US
> "Chariots of Fire" sprinters?

ohh, good one. Stanford/Cal is a very lively and intense rivalry here
in the bay area. In some sports, you can have an awful season and lose
most of your competitions, but if you beat the rival that year, you can
redeem yourself.

Cal has had a dominant rugby program nationally. Stanford's has been
mediocre to poor, indeed one year caused big controversy (coverage in the
nat'l press) because they refused to play a match with Cal. Cal was too
good.

This would be a tasty bit of info. BTW, my loyalties run toward Stanford
because I've worked here for a couple decades, and I grew up
right here in town, I'm a "townie", but I didn't go to school here.

Wait, yes I have. I've taken about a dozen extension classes over the
years
here, mostly programming classes, I guess that makes me eligible to
compete
for the rowing team!!!!

I'll call up Craig and see if he wants me.

"Henry Law" <news@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
>> for no other reason than consistency.
>>
>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
>
> "Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at one
> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi, indeed;
> well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond doubt, as is
> the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their length rating
> 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.
>
> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
> of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!

The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is competing
there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cup at
Henley. Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out on that,
and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.

I hope SC pulls out of it quick. They have wealthy influential alums,
just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map legitimately.

Mike Sullivan wrote:
> "Henry Law" <news@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
> news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
>>> for no other reason than consistency.
>>>
>>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
>>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
>>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
>> "Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at one
>> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi, indeed;
>> well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond doubt, as is
>> the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their length rating
>> 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.
>>
>> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
>> of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
>> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!
>
> The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is competing
> there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cup at
> Henley. Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out on that,
> and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
> weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
> maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
> but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.
>
> I hope SC pulls out of it quick. They have wealthy influential alums,
> just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map legitimately.

"Back on"??? When was USC men's rowing ever legitimately competitive on
the national scale? Maybe a handful of seasons many many decades ago?
I don't know the answer, I'm asking, not quizzing...

-KC

Mike Sullivan wrote:
> "Henry Law" <news@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
> news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
>>> for no other reason than consistency.
>>>
>>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
>>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
>>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
>> "Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at one
>> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi, indeed;
>> well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond doubt, as is
>> the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their length rating
>> 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.
>>
>> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
>> of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
>> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!
>
> The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is competing
> there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cup at
> Henley. Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out on that,
> and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
> weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
> maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
> but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.
>
> I hope SC pulls out of it quick. They have wealthy influential alums,
> just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map legitimately.

http://gohuskies.cstv.com/sports/c-crew/spec-rel/090308aaa.html

So was this 2007 boat that won by several lengths a true varsity boat,
or another hybrid alumni boat?

-KC

"kc" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:48c16606$0$17179$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Mike Sullivan wrote:
>> "Henry Law" <news@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
>> news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
>>>> for no other reason than consistency.
>>>>
>>>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
>>>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
>>>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
>>> "Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at
>>> one http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi,
>>> indeed; well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond
>>> doubt, as is the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their
>>> length rating 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.
>>>
>>> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
>>> of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
>>> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!
>>
>> The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is
>> competing
>> there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cup at
>> Henley. Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out on that,
>> and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
>> weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
>> maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
>> but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.
>>
>> I hope SC pulls out of it quick. They have wealthy influential alums,
>> just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map
>> legitimately.
>
> "Back on"??? When was USC men's rowing ever legitimately competitive on
> the national scale? Maybe a handful of seasons many many decades ago? I
> don't know the answer, I'm asking, not quizzing...

The men never were, but a few years ago alums were pulling things
together after getting kicked out of the boathouse they built, they
funded, they alone among west coast crews willingly and eagerly
made equal room/resources for women in. the '70s.

The momentum took a hard downturn after this fiasco.

As to the Husky question, the 2007 crew was represented as the V-8,
but I don't know the players.

The salient point is that this year's crew is represented as UW alums
and not as the UW v-8.

Sully, some consistency pleeeease...

You went on a rant about how the USC crew at Henley should have raced
as Trojan Rowing Club or SoCal crew or some such name and not
represented themselves with the word 'university' because they were
not eligible under American rules, even though such rules do not apply
to Henley Royal Regatta.

I really want to hear you launch into this Huskies crew and show you
never did have an personal issue with the Trojans (I'm guessing you've
lost a lot of money betting against their football team over the
years).

sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> Sully, some consistency pleeeease...
>
> You went on a rant about how the USC crew at Henley should have raced
> as Trojan Rowing Club or SoCal crew or some such name and not
> represented themselves with the word 'university' because they were
> not eligible under American rules, even though such rules do not apply
> to Henley Royal Regatta.
>
> I really want to hear you launch into this Huskies crew and show you
> never did have an personal issue with the Trojans (I'm guessing you've
> lost a lot of money betting against their football team over the
> years).

Take it from someone who knows Sully personally, and who couldn't care
less about college football - He has been perfectly consistent.

USC's men's crew, aka "The Trojan Navy" made no note of the fact that
their crew that went to Henley was not a normal university crew by IRA
standards. Their website that announced their pending race at Henley
made it seem as if that crew was an IRA-eligible university crew. They
were not. This is what many would call "false advertising." Anyone who
didn't know better, who went to the Trojan Navy website, would have to
assume that USC is able to field a *varsity* mens crew capable of racing
in the Grand Challenge at Henley. USC is not capable of this.

UW on the other hand, has stated outright that the crew racing in Russia
is an "alumni" crew, and thus not to be confused with UW's normal
varsity crew. So, if this alumni crew does well in Russia, that
performance should not reflect on how good/fast the UW varsity is.

There's a big difference there. If you don't see it, that's your problem.

-KC

<sillytree@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a8302668-d048-41d3-9da8-afbedf7abae7@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Sully, some consistency pleeeease...
>
> You went on a rant about how the USC crew at Henley should have raced
> as Trojan Rowing Club or SoCal crew or some such name and not
> represented themselves with the word 'university' because they were
> not eligible under American rules, even though such rules do not apply
> to Henley Royal Regatta.

I would bet there are hundreds of examples of misrepresentations
of competitions by many crews in the name of promoting themselves.

What USC did was beyond this, intentionally representing this crew
as a collegiate crew.

If UW represented their crew going to Moscow as their UW varsity
crew, then they would also be guilty of the same thing. But, clearly,
they do no such thing, they call it the UW Alumni crew,. and even
name names and grad dates.

So I can hardly launch into the Huskies for doing what the
Trojans did, when they did no such thing.

USC clearly represented that crew as their varsity crew, and compared
them to similar varsity crews who were legendary in winning
the Grand at Henley as true collegiate crews.

>
> I really want to hear you launch into this Huskies crew and show you
> never did have an personal issue with the Trojans (I'm guessing you've
> lost a lot of money betting against their football team over the
> years).

The Trojans have done two things that have warranted a Sully
rant in the history of RSR. The first was far far far more
egregious than the more recent one, which only seemed to
be a bigger rant because of the entertaining stir it caused.

Bob Hillen, somebody I really liked and admired and considered
a good friend, founded the USC crew in the late 40s. Bob coxed at UCLA
I believe. I think he was working at SC at the time. Bob
raised the money, built the boathouse, coached the
rowers, and founded WICCA to have a West Coast rowing
championship of all the west coast collegiate crews.

When the teams I rowed on and coached rowed in our
summer programs and raced at nationals, USC rowers were
always there. Our summer club was open to anybody, we
had Long Beach ppl, Coasties, the more the merrier. Programs
sending ppl would often chip in a boat or two to increase our
inventory for the summer - and I had a blast racing around in the
brand new USC Pairs/with one summer that I think Butler/Weyend
went up to Pocock and brought down.

In about 1974 or '75, women all over the country attempted
to start rowing programs at various boathouses, club and
collegiate, as Women's Rowing would be included in the 1976 Olys
for the first time. At nearly every boathouse including ours,
the women were met with reluctant assent at best, or downright
refusal. Women who ended up finding old 350 lb battalion boats
to row in, and dock space to row were likely to be treated with
derision and hostility by many of the people who we consider
to be some of the Rowing greats in our country, and by many
who now coach women's rowing professionally.

In the regions of the US that I rowed, I saw two exceptions
and they were remarkable. One was Long Beach RA and
University, and the other was USC. In 1975, Bob Hillen
at USC bought a couple quality used shells, rented a couple
more from Conn Findlay, then moved things around in his boathouse
to give the women a rowing bay. He then raised the money and
hired Jim Willis, an old Vesper beast, to coach them. He
worked things out so both the men and the women could use
the boathouse showers without conflict.

When Title IX was enforced, USC women got an infusion
of money, scholarships in the 90s, the men's program was
demoted to "club status". The head coach at the
time bought new boats, recruited more heavily, then disbanded
the men's program, kicking them out of the boathouse they built,
and got rid of their boats. The men moved to Playa Del Rey
outside of the Cal Yacht club

I railed against this travesty years ago, not just here.

I wrote SC alum friends I know asking how I could help,
though I was not then and am not now a person of any
influence in the rowing world.

So, yes, you're right, I have a very personal issue with the
Trojans. I deeply admire the memory and legacy of Bob
Hillen who was one of the finest gentlemen I've ever met in
the sport. I was a teammate and won races at nationals
with SC guys, and coached some others.

I take it personally when someone tries to kill the
program or dishonor the legacy through dishonesty.

I should think you would also be loyal to USC crew.

"KC" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message news:g9s4bo$ktp$1@gist.usc.edu...
> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>> Sully, some consistency pleeeease...
>>
>> You went on a rant about how the USC crew at Henley should have raced
>> as Trojan Rowing Club or SoCal crew or some such name and not
>> represented themselves with the word 'university' because they were
>> not eligible under American rules, even though such rules do not apply
>> to Henley Royal Regatta.
>>
>> I really want to hear you launch into this Huskies crew and show you
>> never did have an personal issue with the Trojans (I'm guessing you've
>> lost a lot of money betting against their football team over the
>> years).
>
> Take it from someone who knows Sully personally, and who couldn't care
> less about college football - He has been perfectly consistent.

Not true! I watched 1/2 of Stanford/OSU the other day, and the
UCLA/Tenn game Monday was a classic! If my bike hadn't been
busted up, I would have gone to the Stanford game as it wasn't being
played on weekend when I was home.

I was never stupid enough to bet on college football games. I learned my
lesson when all the money I won betting pro football games one year I lost
in
NCAA basketball.

I root for USC football when they play anybody outside of California,
and usually get calls from a cousin in Chicago who I haven't seen in
30 years to talk trash at the annual SC/ND game.

What do you guys do at your place, do you and L have
an SC/UCLA rivalry?

I love playing football too. when I lived in Newport, we
had a game every Sun morning at the beach, caught
some waves after the game, it was a great way to burn
up the Saturday night party effects. Soft sand touch
football was awesome, great workout, and we
played with people who had other places to be ultra
competitive, rowers, water polo players, baseball etc, so the
games were sane and nobody ever got hurt - it was
all about running, throwing and catching.

Mike Sullivan wrote:
> "KC" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message news:g9s4bo$ktp$1@gist.usc.edu...
>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>> Sully, some consistency pleeeease...
>>>
>>> You went on a rant about how the USC crew at Henley should have raced
>>> as Trojan Rowing Club or SoCal crew or some such name and not
>>> represented themselves with the word 'university' because they were
>>> not eligible under American rules, even though such rules do not apply
>>> to Henley Royal Regatta.
>>>
>>> I really want to hear you launch into this Huskies crew and show you
>>> never did have an personal issue with the Trojans (I'm guessing you've
>>> lost a lot of money betting against their football team over the
>>> years).
>> Take it from someone who knows Sully personally, and who couldn't care
>> less about college football - He has been perfectly consistent.
>
> Not true! I watched 1/2 of Stanford/OSU the other day, and the
> UCLA/Tenn game Monday was a classic! If my bike hadn't been
> busted up, I would have gone to the Stanford game as it wasn't being
> played on weekend when I was home.
>
> I was never stupid enough to bet on college football games. I learned my
> lesson when all the money I won betting pro football games one year I lost
> in
> NCAA basketball.
>
> I root for USC football when they play anybody outside of California,
> and usually get calls from a cousin in Chicago who I haven't seen in
> 30 years to talk trash at the annual SC/ND game.
>
> What do you guys do at your place, do you and L have
> an SC/UCLA rivalry?
>
> I love playing football too. when I lived in Newport, we
> had a game every Sun morning at the beach, caught
> some waves after the game, it was a great way to burn
> up the Saturday night party effects. Soft sand touch
> football was awesome, great workout, and we
> played with people who had other places to be ultra
> competitive, rowers, water polo players, baseball etc, so the
> games were sane and nobody ever got hurt - it was
> all about running, throwing and catching.

Sul, read what I wrote again -

"Take it from someone *who* knows Sully personally *and who* couldn't
care less..."

Meaning *I* know you personally, and *I* couldn't care less about NCAA
football.

I *know* _you_ are a football nut.

;^)

-KC

"KC" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message news:g9s6rd$lbl$1@gist.usc.edu...
> Mike Sullivan wrote:
>> "KC" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message
>> news:g9s4bo$ktp$1@gist.usc.edu...
>>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>>> Sully, some consistency pleeeease...

snip

> Meaning *I* know you personally, and *I* couldn't care less about NCAA
> football.

(in my emile latelle voice):

Oh, oh, that's diffrint then.... never mind..

> UW on the other hand, has stated outright that the crew racing in
Russia
> is an "alumni" crew, and thus not to be confused with UW's normal
> varsity crew.  So, if this alumni crew does well in Russia, that
> performance should not reflect on how good/fast the UW varsity is.

Except that the Moscow International Regatta, aims "to pit some of the
world's best collegiate crews against one another." It is a race for
colleges to compete against one another, not alumni assigned full-time
to national team training duties.

The PAC-10 has a rule forbidding its members from traveling overseas
to race more than once every four years (HRR is exempt from the rule).
This rule is in place to bring some financial responsibility to the
sport. UW is now flagrantly skirting this rule by offering a "reward
trip" as often as it like to its alums or how about we just call them
ineligible rowers. If this is not a UW sanctioned trip then why does
the UW website say "Fifty years after its historic victory over the
Soviets, the University of Washington crew is back in Russia."

As soon as these guys set foot on the plane the University of
Washington is breaking established PAC-10 rules...something the
Trojans did not.

For those still reading this thread who wonder what it refers to,
USC appeared at the Henley Grand Challenge cup this summer
and raced pretty well, losing to the Canadian U-23 crew in the
final. All is well and good, except USC represented itself at home
and to it's alums as the USC intercollegiate team. The problem was
only a couple guys were really USC students, the rest were from
the Estonian Nat'l eight, taking extension classes (or not) from USC.

This crew was never eligible for any collegiate event this year.

The Grand Challenge is a prestigious event that has no requirements of
collegiate eligiblity to race in it. That the Estonians raced under the
USC
banner somehow is no big deal, except that they were marketed as the
varsity crew - something they were not. Where I'm offended is that there
have been some intercollegiate crews that have done well at the Grand
over the years, very few and far between. I think that USC tried to
elevate
the prestige of their program on the backs of these programs, mentioning
them by name in their promotions. This is a dishonest shortcut to
program recognition, and doesn't befit the fine tradition and class that
the USC men's program has exhibited until this time.


<sillytree@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:55706f8d-9a93-4341-92e4-923336a4ba95@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > UW on the other hand, has stated outright that the crew racing in
Russia
> > is an "alumni" crew, and thus not to be confused with UW's normal
> > varsity crew. So, if this alumni crew does well in Russia, that
> > performance should not reflect on how good/fast the UW varsity is.
>
> Except that the Moscow International Regatta, aims "to pit some of the
> world's best collegiate crews against one another." It is a race for
> colleges to compete against one another, not alumni assigned full-time
> to national team training duties.

So said the promo article on the Pac 10 site:
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/c-rowing/spec-rel/090308aaa.html

So if we take the Pac10 promo at its' word and say that the MIR is
for colleges to race each other (they have sprint kayak races at this
regatta too, and there are no such collegiate teams anywhere), then
what do you suppose the MIR eligibility rules are?

> The PAC-10 has a rule forbidding its members from traveling overseas
> to race more than once every four years (HRR is exempt from the rule).
> This rule is in place to bring some financial responsibility to the
> sport. UW is now flagrantly skirting this rule by offering a "reward
> trip" as often as it like to its alums or how about we just call them
> ineligible rowers. If this is not a UW sanctioned trip then why does
> the UW website say "Fifty years after its historic victory over the
> Soviets, the University of Washington crew is back in Russia."
>
> As soon as these guys set foot on the plane the University of
> Washington is breaking established PAC-10 rules...something the
> Trojans did not.

There is no breaking Pac 10 rules since this is clearly an alumni boat,
and I find it hilarious that the event was advertised on a Pac10 site.

It's also instructive to read the promo from the regatta's sponsor:

http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/project/regata.html

They clearly are so wrapped up in collegiate eligibility that they
declared UW the nat'l high school champion!

I found it interesting that the Moscow crew had a cox who's
name I recognized - Alexander Lukyanov, who coxed the
Soviet eights pretty much from 1974 on..... So this is a
celebratory regatta to promote the City of Moscow, it is not
billed as any sort of championship race, it is not limited to collegiate
crews, or even crews for that matter. Bury that dead horse.

As far as Trojans not breaking Pac10 rules, why was it UCLA
refused to race them this spring in their annual dual?

Sillyyou, from your tone here you are clearly disturbed by the
reactions to the dishonesty your past Trojan crew participated in.

You should send a letter to that USC crew and tell them how
proud you are of them for their Henley showing. I'm sure those
guys are all back in L.A. in class right now.... (guffaw).

As soon as the Henley was over, the Estonians got rid of however
many USC students were in the boat, one? and raced as Estonia
in some Euro regattas.

That's cool, nothing wrong with that but it illustrates the complete
lack of pretext of this being a USC rowing team vs how it was promoted
here, on their site, and to their alums.

Thank you for keeping the issue alive, as it gives us in the rowing world
a solid reminder that the sport of rowing is not exempt from dishonesty.

Mike Sullivan wrote:

>
> It's also instructive to read the promo from the regatta's sponsor:
>
> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/project/regata.html
>
> They clearly are so wrapped up in collegiate eligibility that they
> declared UW the nat'l high school champion!
>

This could well be a mistranslation. I don't know any Russian beyond that
which I learnt from a schoolfriend's very amusing impression of "Bruce the
Australian outback cattle-rancher learns Russian" ("Straaztvoy, Mate" and
so on), but a lot of universities in continental European countries have
names which literally mean "high school" (e.g. the H of ETH Zurich stands
for Hochschule).

"Christopher Kerr" <cjk34@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ga3u83$tbr$1@aioe.org...
> Mike Sullivan wrote:
>
>>
>> It's also instructive to read the promo from the regatta's sponsor:
>>
>> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/project/regata.html
>>
>> They clearly are so wrapped up in collegiate eligibility that they
>> declared UW the nat'l high school champion!
>>
>
> This could well be a mistranslation. I don't know any Russian beyond that
> which I learnt from a schoolfriend's very amusing impression of "Bruce the
> Australian outback cattle-rancher learns Russian" ("Straaztvoy, Mate" and
> so on), but a lot of universities in continental European countries have
> names which literally mean "high school" (e.g. the H of ETH Zurich stands
> for Hochschule).

Right, it's definitely a mis-translation, but my point is that the
organizers of
this regatta hardly care about eligibility of collegiate teams in their
regatta, they
want teams with recognizeable names to race each other.

> There is no breaking Pac 10 rules since this is clearly an alumni
boat,
> and I find it hilarious that the event was advertised on a Pac10 site.
>
> It's also instructive to read the promo from the regatta's sponsor:
>
> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/project/regata.html
>
> They clearly are so wrapped up in collegiate eligibility that they
> declared UW the nat'l high school champion!
>
> I found it interesting that the Moscow crew had a cox who's
> name I recognized - Alexander Lukyanov,  who coxed the
> Soviet eights pretty much from 1974 on.....   So this is a
> celebratory regatta to promote the City of Moscow, it is not
> billed as any sort of championship race, it is not limited to collegiate
> crews, or even crews for that matter.    Bury that dead horse.
>
> As far as Trojans not breaking Pac10 rules,  why was it UCLA
> refused to race them this spring in their annual dual?

The UCLA coach cancelled the dual when the PAC-10 ruled the Estonians
ELIGIBLE to race in the dual. Feel free to check your facts with the
row2k related story. Again, you continue with the cheap shots at the
Trojans with unfounded and untrue allegations. The dishonesty resides
in your remarks.

Your other claims that the Moscow regatta is not billed as college
race is also just as ridiculous. The link that YOU provided to the
regatta cites it as such, the UW website cites it as such, and the
fact that the invited teams are the UNIVERSITIES of Oxford, Cambridge,
The Russian State UNIVERSITY of Physical Education and Sports and UW
makes it plainly obviously so. The race is called the " International
University Regatta "Golden Boat"," according to the website that you
reference. Check your sources before you cite them next time.

Again, the level of hypocrisy found in your doublespeak is just
amazing.

Because they mistranslate a few words you automatically deduce they do
not care about the eligibility of the collegiate teams racing for the
event?

I'm sure at the very least they would start with: how about the
athletes are actually in college.

<sillytree@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d0d6ec57-f213-4688-8fda-2c60d1d7fd19@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> There is no breaking Pac 10 rules since this is clearly an alumni
boat,
> and I find it hilarious that the event was advertised on a Pac10 site.
>
> It's also instructive to read the promo from the regatta's sponsor:
>
> http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/project/regata.html

snip

> The UCLA coach cancelled the dual when the PAC-10 ruled the Estonians
> ELIGIBLE to race in the dual. Feel free to check your facts with the
> row2k related story. Again, you continue with the cheap shots at the
> Trojans with unfounded and untrue allegations. The dishonesty resides
> in your remarks.

fer cryin out loud, Sillyyou.

http://www.uclamensrowing.org/articles/2008-6.tpl

"On Friday evening UCLA received notification from the PAC-10 conference
that USC's Estonian rowers were NOT eligible for the PAC-10 Championship to
be held May 18th on Lake Natoma. "When I got the notification from the
conference," said Coach Mokha. "I tried reaching the USC coach by phone to
decide how we would proceed on Saturday with this ruling in mind. By 7:30pm
I had not heard back from him and told my team we would not be racing."

"NOT ELIGIBLE" = "ELIGIBLE" according to USCspeak?

> Your other claims that the Moscow regatta is not billed as college
> race is also just as ridiculous. The link that YOU provided to the
> regatta cites it as such, the UW website cites it as such, and the
> fact that the invited teams are the UNIVERSITIES of Oxford, Cambridge,
> The Russian State UNIVERSITY of Physical Education and Sports and UW
> makes it plainly obviously so. The race is called the " International
> University Regatta "Golden Boat"," according to the website that you
> reference. Check your sources before you cite them next time.

Take it up with the regatta organizers who wanted to promote their
regatta as a university competition from well known university names
but could care less (nor could anybody else) about eligibility.

Do you have a problem with crews going to Master's races or
to Crew Classic representing themselves as "MY University
Alums"?

I don't.

> Again, the level of hypocrisy found in your doublespeak is just
> amazing.

chuckle. "NOT ELIGIBLE" suddenly eq "ELIGIBLE" and
you're telling me to fact check. I think you need to check a dictionary
as well, "hypocrisy" doesn't seem to be in your vocabulary yet.

It's really interesting. In your "defense" of USC, you have made USC
look much worse than I ever did by criticizing them. Indeed, in
this thread I've demonstrated a great deal of respect for the people
and the legacy at the university, pointing out some things that the
program should be forever proud of, and I've made clear that
my criticism of the team was limited to the incidents in question.
You have been wrong on nearly everything, your defense and
your subsequent accusations, and the wronger you get the more
stubbornly you hold to your POV.

From the tenacity and tone of your posts, you make it seem as
though you are a USC rowing graduate yourself, and couldn't make
a worse case for the educational level, critical thinking, or moral
compass of a USC grad. Thank goodness I know a lot of SC
grads or I would jump to a wrong conclusion.

"moral compass" is way too strong a word, granted, but can't
think of a lighter weight term. This is a rowing regatta, after all.

Thnx for the entertainment, though.

On Sep 8, 4:43 pm, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> "NOT ELIGIBLE" = "ELIGIBLE" according to USCspeak?
>
>
> chuckle.   "NOT ELIGIBLE" suddenly eq "ELIGIBLE" and
> you're telling me to fact check.    I think you need to check a dictionary
> as well,  "hypocrisy" doesn't seem to be in your vocabulary yet..

From the PAC-10 statement released the day before the forfeited dual
between USC and UCLA: "We have no eligibility rules for regular-season
competition for club rowers. Thus, failure to meet Pac-10 SPR 9-2-b-
(3) would not prevent these students from participating in a regatta
with a club team at any other non-Conference Championship event."
--- Mike Matthews, Pac-10 Associate Commissioner, Compliance

I'd say this guy is a little more credible than the UCLA coach who
took his bat and ball and went home.

Regardless, you brought up the UCLA dual as some attempt of dishonesty
on behalf of the USC program. Nothing could be further from the
truth.

UW has certainly identified their crew as alumni but
1.) I wonder how that translates into Russian.
2.) They are violating the four year foreign tour rule by supporting a
UW crew going overseas.
3.) I'd be pretty pissed if I was in an Oxford or Cambridge student
crew going across a continent for a university race and find myself up
against half the guys that won the Grand Challenge Cup at this year's
Henley and half the guys that beat those same guys to win the U23
World Championships (ie a world all-star U23 crew) -- none of whom are
subjected to the rigors of an academic schedule right now.

<sillytree@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:77589a79-1422-48cd-a5a6-76eccb7b03c5@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 8, 4:43 pm, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> "NOT ELIGIBLE" = "ELIGIBLE" according to USCspeak?
>
>
> > chuckle. "NOT ELIGIBLE" suddenly eq "ELIGIBLE" and
> > you're telling me to fact check. I think you need to check a dictionary
>> as well, "hypocrisy" doesn't seem to be in your vocabulary yet..

> From the PAC-10 statement released the day before the forfeited dual
> between USC and UCLA: "We have no eligibility rules for regular-season
> competition for club rowers. Thus, failure to meet Pac-10 SPR 9-2-b-
> (3) would not prevent these students from participating in a regatta
> with a club team at any other non-Conference Championship event."
> --- Mike Matthews, Pac-10 Associate Commissioner, Compliance

That rule applies to the Conference championship only and the Pac10
doesn't assert authority over club teams racing in non-conference events.

They were ineligible, according to that rule above, can't you see that?

As to the dual, there have been mixes of clubs and varsity teams
racing each other for decades on the West Coast. The assumption by
gentlemen coaches is that the athletes are eligible during these duals with
the club teams, but the club teams only produce eligibility rosters for
championship
events like Pac10 or WIRA.

If you read the UCLA coach's statement, he was willing to race them
but not "officially". Can you understand why, or should I explain it to
you? -
it has a lot to do with the same reasons USC lied about the Grand Challenge,
but that UCLA's actions were ethical and USC's was not.

This wasn't an eligible crew for anybody with ethics.


> I'd say this guy is a little more credible than the UCLA coach who
> took his bat and ball and went home.

Here, you can read more about it from Ed who got more
extensive quotes:

http://www.row2k.com/news/news.cfm?ID=37015


>

>
> Regardless, you brought up the UCLA dual as some attempt of dishonesty
> on behalf of the USC program. Nothing could be further from the
> truth.

Certainly trying to race an ineligible varsity crew as a varsity
crew is dishonest. Why wouldn't SC race them unofficially?

> UW has certainly identified their crew as alumni but
> 1.) I wonder how that translates into Russian.
> 2.) They are violating the four year foreign tour rule by supporting a
> UW crew going overseas.

Call Mike Mathews at the Pac 10, you seem to trust him.


> 3.) I'd be pretty pissed if I was in an Oxford or Cambridge student
> crew going across a continent for a university race and find myself up
> against half the guys that won the Grand Challenge Cup at this year's
> Henley and half the guys that beat those same guys to win the U23
> World Championships (ie a world all-star U23 crew) -- none of whom are
> subjected to the rigors of an academic schedule right now.


I already pointed out that there's no way the Moscow University cox was
a student but was riding along as a crowd pleaser.

So a quick look up of the Cambridge boat from 2007

http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/news/dp/2007082902

Sam Pearson is in there, was a blue in 2006, NOT in 2007.
This was 2007, not 2008. I would venture to guess that
all the crews were more lax on who went this year because it was Oly
year.

So I doubt that they cared, looks like a promotion spectacle, a big
party and I bet they had a blast racing and being part of it, but
it's not any sort of championship event.

You got any eligibility left? I bet SC could use some of that
tenaciousness in spite of the fact that you've clearly been hammered.

I think there are seven seats available in next year's "varsity" eight.

> I think there are seven seats available in next year's "varsity" eight.

Why only 7? Do you think you earned one somewhere in this thread?

Don't waste your time trying to have a discussion with Sullivan based
on logic or facts. He likes to play the bitch and just rely on 13 year
old logic when he realizes he has contradicted himself and lost an
argument.

Who won this bloody race anyway?

On Sep 8, 6:44 pm, crewh...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Don't waste your time trying to have a discussion with Sullivan based
> on logic or facts. He likes to play the bitch and just rely on 13 year
> old logic when he realizes he has contradicted himself and lost an
> argument.
>
> Who won this bloody race anyway?

excellent. you two bludgeons are trying to force me to change my
very positive understanding of USC rowing.

Maybe you could bring in an Estonian to try, just like you imported
an Estonian to row for you.

sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

> 3.) I'd be pretty pissed if I was in an Oxford or Cambridge student
> crew going across a continent for a university race and find myself up
> against half the guys that won the Grand Challenge Cup at this year's
> Henley and half the guys that beat those same guys to win the U23
> World Championships (ie a world all-star U23 crew) -- none of whom are
> subjected to the rigors of an academic schedule right now.

Speaking as someone who has represented Cambridge at a couple of similar
events when the heavyweights decided they didn't want to go (probably too
busy catching up on their degrees and/or social lives after the Boat
Race)...

If I'd won the Stewards' Cup then I'd probably see the chance to race
against some of the Grand-winning crew from the same year as a worthy
challenge. In any case, these events are basically seen as a free holiday -
a payback for all the months of unacknowledged training that go in before
the Boat Race - and, although the competitive instinct inevitably kicks in
when you get there, if the people paying the bill want to put together a
boatload of ringers so they can say "we beat Oxford/Cambridge/both" then
that's their prerogative.

Chris

In article <g9rq29$uc9$2@news.stanford.edu>, Mike Sullivan
<sul@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:

> "kc" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:48c16606$0$17179$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> > Mike Sullivan wrote:
> >> "Henry Law" <news@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
> >> news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> >>> sillytree@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> >>>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
> >>>> for no other reason than consistency.
> >>>>
> >>>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
> >>>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...but it
> >>>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
> >>> "Moscow International Regatta". 180 Google hits, hmm. Let's look at
> >>> one http://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/ ... varied programme. Bolshoi,
> >>> indeed; well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond
> >>> doubt, as is the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their
> >>> length rating 42? And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers.
> >>>
> >>> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder what sort
> >>> of crews they're putting out. If it's last year's rowers then they're
> >>> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!
> >>
> >> The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is
> >> competing
> >> there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cup at
> >> Henley. Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out on that,
> >> and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
> >> weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
> >> maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
> >> but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.
> >>
> >> I hope SC pulls out of it quick. They have wealthy influential alums,
> >> just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map
> >> legitimately.
> >
> > "Back on"??? When was USC men's rowing ever legitimately competitive on
> > the national scale? Maybe a handful of seasons many many decades ago? I
> > don't know the answer, I'm asking, not quizzing...
>
> The men never were, but a few years ago alums were pulling things
> together after getting kicked out of the boathouse they built, they
> funded, they alone among west coast crews willingly and eagerly
> made equal room/resources for women in. the '70s.

Bullshit. I was there and experienced it. Washington elevated women's
rowing to a full sport in 1974 for the 1975 rowing season. Dick
Erickson willingly made the decision that there would be *one*
Washington rowing program and that program would have both men's and
women's rowing.

I don't know what was going on at SC but Washington *was* offering
equality for women's rowing in the 70's.

On Sep 13, 9:34 pm, raoul <gr8ra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <g9rq29$uc...@news.stanford.edu>, Mike Sullivan
>
>
>
>
>
> <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > "kc" <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> >news:48c16606$0$17179$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> > > Mike Sullivan wrote:
> > >> "Henry Law" <n...@lawshouse.org> wrote in message
> > >>news:1220627534.7617.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> > >>> sillyt...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> > >>>> I am really surprised Mike Sullivan hasn't been all over this -- if
> > >>>> for no other reason than consistency.
>
> > >>>> The University of Washington men's rowing program is being represented
> > >>>> in Russia to race Oxford, Cambridge, some Ruskies and others...butit
> > >>>> is really a bunch of alumni in the boat.
> > >>> "Moscow International Regatta".  180 Google hits, hmm.  Let's look at
> > >>> onehttp://www.jsamarket.ru/eng/news/... varied programme.  Bolshoi,
> > >>> indeed; well their cardio-vascular fitness and endurance is beyond
> > >>> doubt, as is the strength of the male dancers, but can they keep their
> > >>> length rating 42?  And a marathon rowing race too: 35 hectometers..
>
> > >>> Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has started term yet, so I wonder whatsort
> > >>> of crews they're putting out.  If it's last year's rowers then they're
> > >>> alumni too, but this year's are still on holiday!
>
> > >> The salient point is that UW is not representing the team that is
> > >> competing
> > >> there as their collegiate team as USC did at the Grand Challenge Cupat
> > >> Henley.   Trojan Boy was offended at USC having been called out onthat,
> > >> and indeed I spoke to a west coach coaching friend of mine a few
> > >> weeks ago who decided against taking the job there because of the
> > >> maelstrom surrounding this event last year, not only the Henley thing,
> > >> but the whole attempt to buy a national team to compete for them.
>
> > >> I hope SC pulls out of it quick.    They have wealthy influential alums,
> > >> just a few of them could put USC back on the competitive map
> > >> legitimately.
>
> > > "Back on"??? When was USC men's rowing ever legitimately competitive on
> > > the national scale?  Maybe a handful of seasons many many decades ago? I
> > > don't know the answer, I'm asking, not quizzing...
>
> > The men never were, but a few years ago alums were pulling things
> > together after getting kicked out of the boathouse they built,  they
> > funded, they alone among west coast crews willingly and eagerly
> > made equal room/resources  for women in. the '70s.
>
> Bullshit. I was there and experienced it. Washington elevated women's
> rowing to a full sport in 1974 for the 1975 rowing season. Dick
> Erickson willingly made the decision that there would be *one*
> Washington rowing program and that program would have both men's and
> women's rowing.
>
> I don't know what was going on at SC but Washington *was* offering
> equality for women's rowing in the 70's.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I was there in '76. Erickson brought in a coach (John Lind) and got
equipment, and for that Erickson should be commended. The VBC
treated the women like s***, and Erickson contributed to the
attitude. That was not equality, and I didn't observe same at Long
Beach or SC.

This treatment wasn't like the way Grunts were treated where it was
accepted that you endure some hazing until you moved up, but the
outward derogatory terms for them made it a tough place for them to
row from year to year.

Women got boats and coaches at Cal, at Stanford, at Vesper, and many
other places, but this didn't mean equality.

UW fixed it in a few years by having Ernst take the program, give them
full funding and equal quality equipment and put the screws down on
the VBC bs.

See how full of crap Sullivan is. USC was the ONLY PAC-10 university
that was sued under Title IX by the National Organization of Women for
its gender discrimination against female rowers. It cost the
University a bunch of money and the men's crew were cut as a result.

But please do not expect the facts to lead Sullivan to change his
position when he's on a rant.

<crewhead@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b4ca372f-fbc1-46b4-a8a3-9f2394ff4685@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> See how full of crap Sullivan is. USC was the ONLY PAC-10 university
> that was sued under Title IX by the National Organization of Women for
> its gender discrimination against female rowers. It cost the
> University a bunch of money and the men's crew were cut as a result.
>
> But please do not expect the facts to lead Sullivan to change his
> position when he's on a rant.

USC Men's crew was cut in 1994.

The Title IX lawsuit was 1999 from NOW, and they also sued UCLA.
http://www.canow.org/canoworg/title-ix-athletic-equity.html

clueless little bitch. curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.

On Sep 15, 12:48 am, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> <crewh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b4ca372f-fbc1-46b4-a8a3-9f2394ff4685@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > See how full of crap Sullivan is. USC was the ONLY PAC-10 university
> > that was sued under Title IX by the National Organization of Women for
> > its gender discrimination against female rowers. It cost the
> > University a bunch of money and the men's crew were cut as a result.
>
> > But please do not expect the facts to lead Sullivan to change his
> > position when he's on a rant.
>
> USC Men's crew was cut in 1994.
>
> The Title IX lawsuit was 1999 from NOW, and they also sued UCLA.http://www.canow.org/canoworg/title-ix-athletic-equity.html
>
> clueless little bitch.    curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.

Hahahahahahaha!

You just posted another link that destroys your position that USC is
some kind of advocate for equality when it comes to women:

"In 1999, California NOW filed Title IX complaints against the
University of Southern California, UCLA and St. Mary’s College. UCLA
added women’s crew. St. Mary’s added lacrosse. USC has refused to
add another women’s sport "

Well rowed, sully.

Did you learn you keen ability to discuss issues at Irvine or does
just hanging out at Stanford fine tune your skills as such?

>
> > clueless little bitch.    curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.
>
> Did you learn you keen ability to discuss issues at Irvine or does
> just hanging out at Stanford fine tune your skills as such?

Ladies! Not in front of the servants!

rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> clueless little bitch. curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.
>> Did you learn you keen ability to discuss issues at Irvine or does
>> just hanging out at Stanford fine tune your skills as such?
>
> Ladies! Not in front of the servants!

No! Leave them at it, watch & enjoy. It's an art form. Don't you just
love these flame wars, & don't you do have to admit that the Americans
do them rather well & with splendid lack of inhibition?

Now, if we could also weave into this thread Sarah Palin's foreign
trips, in particular her visits to Ireland & Iraq, then the fires might
burn for a long, long time yet.

;)
Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

"Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
news:gam2t6$j97$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> clueless little bitch. curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.
>>> Did you learn you keen ability to discuss issues at Irvine or does
>>> just hanging out at Stanford fine tune your skills as such?
>>
>> Ladies! Not in front of the servants!
>
> No! Leave them at it, watch & enjoy. It's an art form. Don't you just
> love these flame wars, & don't you do have to admit that the Americans do
> them rather well & with splendid lack of inhibition?

Please stick a dollar bill into crewhead's panties, he doesn't
do this bump and grind for free, you know.

<crewhead@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:119041a8-5112-45cf-a72c-fd024b372aa0@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 15, 12:48 am, "Mike Sullivan" <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> <crewh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b4ca372f-fbc1-46b4-a8a3-9f2394ff4685@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
snip

> You just posted another link that destroys your position that USC is
> some kind of advocate for equality when it comes to women:

Please let me know if you'd like me to help you try to
follow the discussion, or if I should just clean up your
drool.

I can do both, you know.

Mike Sullivan wrote:
> "Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:gam2t6$j97$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>> rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>> clueless little bitch. curl up in a corner and go lick yourself.
>>>> Did you learn you keen ability to discuss issues at Irvine or does
>>>> just hanging out at Stanford fine tune your skills as such?
>>> Ladies! Not in front of the servants!
>> No! Leave them at it, watch & enjoy. It's an art form. Don't you just
>> love these flame wars, & don't you do have to admit that the Americans do
>> them rather well & with splendid lack of inhibition?
>
> Please stick a dollar bill into crewhead's panties, he doesn't
> do this bump and grind for free, you know.
>
>

I'll just go get another gallon of gasoline. What flavour?
;)
C

"Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
news:gam5im$l8h$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> Mike Sullivan wrote:
>> "Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:gam2t6$j97$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>>> rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:

snip

> I'll just go get another gallon of gasoline. What flavour?

that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
this is an american forum!

:^)

Mike Sullivan wrote:
> "Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:gam5im$l8h$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>> Mike Sullivan wrote:
>>> "Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:gam2t6$j97$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>>>> rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> snip
>
>> I'll just go get another gallon of gasoline. What flavour?
>
> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
> this is an american forum!
>
> :^)
>
>
Strewth! I do you the great favour (not favor) of calling petrol
"gasoline". You don't even notice that, but you get all picky over my
spelling. No more flavour choices for you!

BTW, you say "American" (note the capital A), but aren't there some
other Americas? What about those further south?

And, while we're at it, what about our overdue tea consignment??

I say tomahto & you say tomayto, I say aluminium & you say aluminum.

Pah!
Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:

> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
> this is an american forum!

Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
Union Flag over it in about 1997? At one stage I thought the Merkins had
completely moved out, they went so inexplicably quiet. Empty the house
and you risk bolshy squatters, methinks.

I'll grant you (collective) founding father status, though. Weirdly, the
whole reason I ended up starting the Rowing Service website was indirectly
related to the fact that at one stage in about 1993 I was apparently the
only Briton who dared to brave the many opinionated and flame-throwing US
college students to post on RSR. (There were half a dozen other Brits but
they lurked persistently except when we beat the Aussies at cricket, for
some bizarre reason).

(is this ringing any bells for the real old-timers?)

Oh the good old days....

<sigh>

RQ.

Rachel Quarrell wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:
>
>> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
>> this is an american forum!
>
> Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
> Union Flag over it in about 1997? At one stage I thought the Merkins

Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to
Ol' Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will. "Union Jack"
would, to most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.

> had completely moved out, they went so inexplicably quiet. Empty the
> house and you risk bolshy squatters, methinks.

Indeed.

> I'll grant you (collective) founding father status, though. Weirdly,
> the whole reason I ended up starting the Rowing Service website was
> indirectly related to the fact that at one stage in about 1993 I was
> apparently the only Briton who dared to brave the many opinionated and
> flame-throwing US college students to post on RSR. (There were half a
> dozen other Brits but they lurked persistently except when we beat the
> Aussies at cricket, for some bizarre reason).
>
> (is this ringing any bells for the real old-timers?)

The flame-throwing US college students part rings plenty of bells. I
was one (college student) at the time, 'tho I don't think I threw too
many flames in those days.

I recall more the US high school students flaming each other, especially
the various Philly prep schools and the like, debating who would win
"Stotes" or "Cinci".

Don't forget US-centric debates about "open trials" and whether the camp
or club system was more effective at producing internationally fast crews.

> Oh the good old days....

Right, back when I never thought using USENET for actual discussions (as
opposed to binary downloads - the purpose du jour for USENET) would make
me feel OLD.

> <sigh>
>
> RQ.

At least Sul is still around quoting rowing current events of the 1970's
to make me feel young again! ;-)

-KC

"Rachel Quarrell" <quarrell@raven.linux.ox.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.0809160040250.6818@raven.linux.ox.ac.uk...
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:
>
>> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
>> this is an american forum!
>
> Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
> Union Flag over it in about 1997? At one stage I thought the Merkins had
> completely moved out, they went so inexplicably quiet. Empty the house
> and you risk bolshy squatters, methinks.
>
> I'll grant you (collective) founding father status, though. Weirdly, the
> whole reason I ended up starting the Rowing Service website was indirectly
> related to the fact that at one stage in about 1993 I was apparently the
> only Briton who dared to brave the many opinionated and flame-throwing US
> college students to post on RSR. (There were half a dozen other Brits but
> they lurked persistently except when we beat the Aussies at cricket, for
> some bizarre reason).
>
> (is this ringing any bells for the real old-timers?)
>
> Oh the good old days....
>
> <sigh>
>
> RQ.

Rachel,

Merkins!

What are Merkins? What are you calling us anyway?

I had a cat I named Merkin. He was suppose to be a Siamese but didn't very
much act like one. A friend of mine, who had a real Siamese named Poet,
insisted that my cat was a fake. And that's how he got his name. Can you
think of a better name for a fake pussy than Merkin?

Cordially,

Charles

On Sep 16, 1:38 am, KC <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote:
> Rachel Quarrell wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:
>
> >> that's "flavor"!!!   Can't you brits learn to spell?   After all
> >> this is an american forum!
>
> > Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
> > Union Flag over it in about 1997?  At one stage I thought the Merkins
>
> Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to
> Ol' Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will.  "Union Jack"
> would, to most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.
>

This one will run and run! 'Fraid it seems there are at least two
Union Flags ..... two Americas ..... two very different meanings of
"Merkin" [except in "Dr Strangelove"]

If Dr Quarrell and her raiding party hoisted it OVER anything it was a
flag. If she'd had it with characteristic modesty on her jackstaff for
identification only .......... but you knew all that .......... pity
the UK gutter press doesn't .......... nor do our local racists
["there ain't no black in the union jack"]

Yes, sorry to keep you, I'll go back to bed

PS - Head of the River [Thames] Fours should open for entries in a few
hours. Flags of all nations most welcome.

xxx Richard

On 16 Sep, 07:42, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> If Dr Quarrell and her raiding party hoisted it OVER anything it was a
> flag. If she'd had it with characteristic modesty on her jackstaff for
> identification only .......... but you knew all that .......... pity
> the UK gutter press doesn't .......... nor do our local racists
> ["there ain't no black in the union jack"]
>
> xxx Richard

I had this discussion with several people during the Olys. Apparently,
the official line is that either Flag or Jack is acceptable in any
circumstance, bows of ship or not.
http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=7.1

Kit

On Sep 16, 8:41 am, kdav...@kidare.com wrote:
> On 16 Sep, 07:42, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > If Dr Quarrell and her raiding party hoisted it OVER anything it was a
> > flag. If she'd had it with characteristic modesty on her jackstaff for
> > identification only .......... but you knew all that .......... pity
> > the UK gutter press doesn't .......... nor do our local racists
> > ["there ain't no black in the union jack"]
>
> > xxx Richard
>
> I had this discussion with several people during the Olys. Apparently,
> the official line is that either Flag or Jack is acceptable in any
> circumstance, bows of ship or not.http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=7.1
>
> Kit

[comes out with hands up, looking forward to seeing it on "QI", on
BBC]

R

Rachel Quarrell wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:
>
>> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
>> this is an american forum!
>
> Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
> Union Flag over it in about 1997? At one stage I thought the Merkins
> had completely moved out, they went so inexplicably quiet. Empty the
> house and you risk bolshy squatters, methinks.
>
> I'll grant you (collective) founding father status, though.

The original vote on the newsgroup creation contains a fair number of
voters with email addresses from uk, fr, de, no & nz.

On 16 Sep, 01:38, KC <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote:

> Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to
> Ol' Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will.  "Union Jack"
> would, to most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.

I thought that the Stars and Bars (as opposed to Stars and Stripes)
was the first Confederate flag: not the famous one (i.e. the one on
the roof of the General Lee in the Dukes of Hazzard) but the one they
used originally and then abandoned because it was too easily confused
with the Stars and Stripes through the smoke of battle.

"mruscoe" <usenet@mruscoe.org> wrote in message
news:6j999eF232rmU1@mid.individual.net...
> Rachel Quarrell wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:
>>
>>> that's "flavor"!!! Can't you brits learn to spell? After all
>>> this is an american forum!
>>
>> Hang on, didn't we (la grande bretagne) conquer RSR and hoist a defiant
>> Union Flag over it in about 1997? At one stage I thought the Merkins had
>> completely moved out, they went so inexplicably quiet. Empty the house
>> and you risk bolshy squatters, methinks.
>>
>> I'll grant you (collective) founding father status, though.
>
> The original vote on the newsgroup creation contains a fair number of
> voters with email addresses from uk, fr, de, no & nz.

Yes, but you guys all cowered and whinged against the onslaught of
the vicious Philly group, the lightweight debate, racing shirts,
and camp vs club.

All the other 'merkins (yes, RQ, that was a good reminiscence!), graduated
high school and moved on to better things. I'm still sitting in the
corner of the bar with my high school letterman jacket picking fights with
tourists.

James Elder wrote:
> On 16 Sep, 01:38, KC <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to
>> Ol' Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will. "Union Jack"
>> would, to most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.
>
> I thought that the Stars and Bars (as opposed to Stars and Stripes)
> was the first Confederate flag: not the famous one (i.e. the one on
> the roof of the General Lee in the Dukes of Hazzard) but the one they
> used originally and then abandoned because it was too easily confused
> with the Stars and Stripes through the smoke of battle.

Hmmm... could be true. I'll have to defer to someone else with time to
look it up. ;-)

-KC

"KC" <kc_news@sonic.net> wrote in message news:gamuuk$eo$1@gist.usc.edu...
> Rachel Quarrell wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Mike Sullivan wrote:

snip

> At least Sul is still around quoting rowing current events of the 1970's
> to make me feel young again! ;-)

last week I sent an email to a venerable rowing
icon with a world-wide recognized name and Oly gold in his belt
to please keep his crews on the right side of the course.
I'm sure it pissed him off. He was on this course when I
was in diapers.

By the same token, I was biking thru downtown Menlo
Park and cut some turns, ran some stop signs and another
bike rider scolded me. He was absolutely right, of course,
but the rules don't apply to me, this is MY hometown, so
I was pissed at him.

such is my oddly ridiculous way of thinking.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, KC wrote:

> Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to Ol'
> Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will. "Union Jack" would, to
> most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.
hey, never knew that. Interesting. In answer to other comments
the Telegraph sub-editors (and therefore their poor hacks) still work to
the conceit that it's only a Union Jack when on a flagpole, and preferably
on a boat. Unless RSR has a virtual flagpole I haven't spotted, I reckon
that's fair. If the newsgroup has got a flagpole, where the hell has it
been stuck? (I can't see it from here.)

> The flame-throwing US college students part rings plenty of bells. I was one
> (college student) at the time, 'tho I don't think I threw too many flames in
> those days.
> I recall more the US high school students flaming each other, especially the
> various Philly prep schools and the like, debating who would win "Stotes" or
> "Cinci".
Oh, absolutely. What scared timid Brits off from 1993-1997ish was
that when they innocently enquired what 'Stotes' meant, they were flamed
to bits by the NG-happy teenagers for not knowing. (Which is why I'm so
got a flag
uncomfortable nowadays when UK tweens get snippy with those of other
countries who dare to wonder what some of our arcane English rowing
terminology refers to).
It did lead to glorious teen-'merkin-baiting opportunities for
those of us of a more fearless nature though.

On Mon, Sep 15 2008, Charles Carroll wrote:

> What are Merkins? What are you calling us anyway?
Oho, I know you know. However, for those who may not, or for a
laugh, do an archive search for the term combined with this specific
newsgroup (I particularly recommend David S's 'FAQ: The Merkin Problem"
and Sully's high-quality follow-up 'Rowing and Fine Merkins'). Then
engage "perhaps-she-did-it-deliberately" mode. I think that will give you
all the information you desire. http://www.answers.com/topic/merkin is
also intriguing (see Usenet usage definition about halfway down, and
related footnote 5).
My apologies for omitting the RSR regulation pre-postrophe,
though.

> I had a cat I named Merkin. He was suppose to be a Siamese but didn't
> very much act like one. A friend of mine, who had a real Siamese named
> Poet, insisted that my cat was a fake. And that's how he got his name.
> Can you think of a better name for a fake pussy than Merkin?
Snigger. Nope, I can't. So how often did you have to stand
outside the back door calling him in with neighbours listening?!
(Alternative mental image - Charles asking 'where's my Merkin gone, has
anyone seen my Merkin?')

Ok, I'll stop now.

RQ.

ps is it true that NYC has an actual building called Merkin Hall? Cool.

"Rachel Quarrell" <quarrell@raven.linux.ox.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.0809162317020.23233@raven.linux.ox.ac.uk...
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, KC wrote:
>
>> Careful what you call a "Union Flag." 'round these parts, that refers to
>> Ol' Glory herself... The Stars 'n' Bars, if you will. "Union Jack"
>> would, to most Americans indicate something of a British flavOR.

snip

>> What are Merkins? What are you calling us anyway?
> Oho, I know you know. However, for those who may not, or for a laugh, do
> an archive search for the term combined with this specific newsgroup (I
> particularly recommend David S's 'FAQ: The Merkin Problem" and Sully's
> high-quality follow-up 'Rowing and Fine Merkins'). Then

chuckle. I'd quite forgotten. twelve years ago. RQ, does this
qualify us as old friends? We've never met.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.rowing/browse_frm/thread/ad138460743a8462/7171ef50d4c18073?lnk=st&q=%22rowing+and+fine+merkins%22#7171ef50d4c18073