Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
myths should be busted?

Charles Carroll wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> reasons why these myths should be busted?

Myth: "Coaching is hard." Should be busted because it's not true and
there never seem to be enough coaches.
Myth: "Coaching takes less time than rowing." Should NOT be busted
because it's not true and there never seem to be enough coaches.

On Sep 26, 5:57 pm, Ted van de Weteringe
<myfulln...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
> Charles Carroll wrote:
> > Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> > possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> > opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> > reasons why these myths should be busted?
>
> Myth: "Coaching is hard." Should be busted because it's not true and
> there never seem to be enough coaches.

It was hard for me. When I coached college crews I broke out in a
rash in a different spot each year that would itch like hell. It
would start in January, clear up a couple days after championships.

It was hard for JD as well, I remember.

We decided that it was easy for people that had no conscience.

On Sep 27, 12:12 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
> myths should be busted?

Kinematic study of elite rowers performing at different stroke rates.
Filmed without ANY coaching about why they're being filmed, preferably
during competitive situations when they're thinking about moving the
boat, rather than any other stuff.
Report focused on timing of all joint angular velocities. Preferably
in 3D studies.

Kinematic study of velocity of centre of mass of boat contrasted with
velocity of athlete/crew centre of mass contrasted with velocity of
"system" centre of mass. Preferably in 3D studies. Report effects on
"boat run" (boat velocity pattern) caused by different rowing styles -
without athletes being aware of the purpose of the study. Use
athletes who row with different styles, don't try to get athletes to
row different styles to compare.

See the results. Report the results - it will very likely be shown,
that a number of coaching conventions (in books published in the 20s
and in the 90s, and probably even today) just don't happen, and should
be binned. I won't list these in case the researcher allows his or
her biases to influence the research question or method. I'm biased
and would be hard pressed to do the research "fairly"
Walter

On Sep 26, 5:12 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
> myths should be busted?

1. " I hear rowing is good exercise. "

It takes too long to get to a point that you can get fit, takes WAY
too much overhead, time to travel, muck about with boats, and it's
expensive. Walk to work, that's good exercise.

2. "you have to have good balance"

Rowing is for people with very little balance. The center of gravity
is
lower than anything but swimming, and the consequences of poor
balance are minimal, basically you drag your oars along like most.

Charles Carroll wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> reasons why these myths should be busted?

Leander is an ordinary club just like any other and should be allowed to
compete for club shields in head races. :o)

David.

"Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iLGdncYJn_OU50DVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
> these myths should be busted?

That making a boat lighter makes it go faster.

"Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iLGdncYJn_OU50DVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
> these myths should be busted?

How about HRR is a great boon to British rowing. It certainly distorts the
whole UK competitive rowing scene, and that includes women as well.

How about:

The number of points a rower has reflects their past performance in
competitions.

Christopher Anton wrote:
> "Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:iLGdncYJn_OU50DVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
>> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
>> these myths should be busted?
>
> That making a boat lighter makes it go faster.
>
>
That painting a boat yellow makes it go faster.

Charles Carroll wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> reasons why these myths should be busted?

Oh yippee!! Here's just a few for you:-

1. That rowing is a very skilled activity?
(We perform ~30 identical sets of simple actions per minute, for hours a
week, we do them sitting down, & the least naturally athletic among us
seem to do OK?)
2. That rowers are experts about boats & water?
3. That pulling harder is the only way to win races?
4. That the legs create the catch?
5. That slide control is the key to a good stroke?
6. That the hands must go away fast?
7. That the hands come into the finish fast?
8. That erg rowing technique is the same as boat rowing technique.
9. That you need a square tap-down at the finish?
10. That sliding riggers made boats faster?
11. That carbon makes boats faster?
12. That you need feet as low as possible in the boat, so you can
compress more easily & get your weight over them?
13. That you compress at the catch by putting the weight on your feet as
you slow down on the slide?
14. That you should "gather" for the catch?
15. That the blades propel the boat by pushing water away?
16. That "looming" causes an immediate & large loss of oar efficiency?
17. That the physical principles of boat propulsion by rowing were fully
understood a century ago?
18. That the rowing stroke is incapable of proper physical analysis,
because rowing is an art, not a science?
19. That you'll go as fast as the other guy if only you copy his technique?
20. That good rowing is better than good sex?

Discuss.

:)
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 Sep 28, 11:27 am, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>
> 20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>
> Discuss.
>
Certainly can't quarrel with most of that, but can't discuss number
twenty - not yet done either, you understand

- but I'll keep the question in mind for when I do

R

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:27:41 +0100, Carl Douglas
<carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:

>20. That good rowing is better than good sex?

Single, pair, four or eight? ;-)

sully wrote:
> On Sep 26, 5:12 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
>> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
>> myths should be busted?
>
> 1. " I hear rowing is good exercise. "
>
> It takes too long to get to a point that you can get fit, takes WAY
> too much overhead, time to travel, muck about with boats, and it's
> expensive. Walk to work, that's good exercise.
>
> 2. "you have to have good balance"
>
> Rowing is for people with very little balance. The center of gravity
> is
> lower than anything but swimming, and the consequences of poor
> balance are minimal, basically you drag your oars along like most.
>
>
>
>

3. " I hear you have to get up at 5am "

You do have to get up at 5am, but not until you're good &/or hooked.
Bait'n'switch with afternoon/evening practices until they start talking
about rowing over lunch instead of girls... then change workout time to 6am.

4. " I'm not a morning person "
(voice = Yoda)
You will be. YOU WILL BE.......
(/voice)

Christopher Anton wrote:
> "Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:iLGdncYJn_OU50DVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
>> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
>> these myths should be busted?
>
> That making a boat lighter makes it go faster.
>
>

If all other things remain the same, it does. Of course, that never
happens.

wmartind@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 27, 12:12 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
>> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
>> myths should be busted?
>
> Kinematic study of elite rowers performing at different stroke rates.
> Filmed without ANY coaching about why they're being filmed, preferably
> during competitive situations when they're thinking about moving the
> boat, rather than any other stuff.
> Report focused on timing of all joint angular velocities. Preferably
> in 3D studies.
>
> Kinematic study of velocity of centre of mass of boat contrasted with
> velocity of athlete/crew centre of mass contrasted with velocity of
> "system" centre of mass. Preferably in 3D studies. Report effects on
> "boat run" (boat velocity pattern) caused by different rowing styles -
> without athletes being aware of the purpose of the study. Use
> athletes who row with different styles, don't try to get athletes to
> row different styles to compare.
>
> See the results. Report the results - it will very likely be shown,
> that a number of coaching conventions (in books published in the 20s
> and in the 90s, and probably even today) just don't happen, and should
> be binned. I won't list these in case the researcher allows his or
> her biases to influence the research question or method. I'm biased
> and would be hard pressed to do the research "fairly"
> Walter
>

Find me funding, and I'll get started ASAP. :-)

-KC

On Sep 27, 1:12 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
> myths should be busted?

that people who post on rec.sport.rowing always know what they are
talking about

> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
> these
> myths should be busted?

that people who post on rec.sport.rowing always know what they are
talking about

Bookie,

I was just about the froth a cup of tea. I am glad I didn't have it in my
hands when I clicked on your post. I have been laughing for five minutes. In
fact I am still chuckling.

Cordially,

Charles

On Sep 28, 11:27 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
> Charles Carroll wrote:
> > Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> > possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> > opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> > reasons why these myths should be busted?
>
> Oh yippee!!  Here's just a few for you:-
>
> 1. That rowing is a very skilled activity?
> (We perform ~30 identical sets of simple actions per minute, for hours a
> week, we do them sitting down, & the least naturally athletic among us
> seem to do OK?)
> 2. That rowers are experts about boats & water?
> 3. That pulling harder is the only way to win races?
> 4. That the legs create the catch?
> 5. That slide control is the key to a good stroke?
> 6. That the hands must go away fast?
> 7. That the hands come into the finish fast?
> 8. That erg rowing technique is the same as boat rowing technique.
> 9. That you need a square tap-down at the finish?
> 10. That sliding riggers made boats faster?
> 11. That carbon makes boats faster?
> 12. That you need feet as low as possible in the boat, so you can
> compress more easily & get your weight over them?
> 13. That you compress at the catch by putting the weight on your feet as
> you slow down on the slide?
> 14. That you should "gather" for the catch?
> 15. That the blades propel the boat by pushing water away?
> 16. That "looming" causes an immediate & large loss of oar efficiency?
> 17. That the physical principles of boat propulsion by rowing were fully
> understood a century ago?
> 18. That the rowing stroke is incapable of proper physical analysis,
> because rowing is an art, not a science?
> 19. That you'll go as fast as the other guy if only you copy his technique?
> 20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>
> Discuss.
>
> :)
> 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: c...@carldouglas.co.uk  Tel: +44(0)1932-570946  Fax: -563682
> URLs:  www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)

Awww.. Carl... Those are some of them...
The idea is to get descriptive kinematics and kinetics of what the
fastest people are doing, and learn from that, rather than say
"they'll never go fast because they (pick favourite myth)..."
The trouble with this kind of research is that if you tell people
you're observing them for technique, they try to do what they've been
coached to do, rather than what they've learned to do so that the boat
goes fastest.

Back to my judo days, the "textbook" description of ippon-seoi-nage
(one-arm-shoulder-throw) and the 7 or 8 different forms of the
technique done by Isao Okano bore no resemblance whatsoever to each
other. What moves boats is significantly different from what
"purists" go on about - but if I blab about which myths I think need
busting, the researchers will look for that and bias the study...

If a subject of a study knows he, she, or it (in the case of animal
studies) is being observed, the subject changes his/her/its behaviour
to suit what it thinks the observer is looking for... I seem to recall
that from my research design course back in 1979...
Carl.. Quit giving away the quest.. 8-)
W

On 29 Sep, 10:59, wmart...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 28, 11:27 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Charles Carroll wrote:
> > > Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> > > possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> > > opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> > > reasons why these myths should be busted?
>
> > Oh yippee!!  Here's just a few for you:-
>
> > 1. That rowing is a very skilled activity?
> > (We perform ~30 identical sets of simple actions per minute, for hours a
> > week, we do them sitting down, & the least naturally athletic among us
> > seem to do OK?)
> > 2. That rowers are experts about boats & water?
> > 3. That pulling harder is the only way to win races?
> > 4. That the legs create the catch?
> > 5. That slide control is the key to a good stroke?
> > 6. That the hands must go away fast?
> > 7. That the hands come into the finish fast?
> > 8. That erg rowing technique is the same as boat rowing technique.
> > 9. That you need a square tap-down at the finish?
> > 10. That sliding riggers made boats faster?
> > 11. That carbon makes boats faster?
> > 12. That you need feet as low as possible in the boat, so you can
> > compress more easily & get your weight over them?
> > 13. That you compress at the catch by putting the weight on your feet as
> > you slow down on the slide?
> > 14. That you should "gather" for the catch?
> > 15. That the blades propel the boat by pushing water away?
> > 16. That "looming" causes an immediate & large loss of oar efficiency?
> > 17. That the physical principles of boat propulsion by rowing were fully
> > understood a century ago?
> > 18. That the rowing stroke is incapable of proper physical analysis,
> > because rowing is an art, not a science?
> > 19. That you'll go as fast as the other guy if only you copy his technique?
> > 20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>
> > Discuss.
>
> > :)
> > 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: c...@carldouglas.co.uk  Tel: +44(0)1932-570946  Fax: -563682
> > URLs:  www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)
>
> Awww.. Carl... Those are some of them...
> The idea is to get descriptive kinematics and kinetics of what the
> fastest people are doing, and learn from that, rather than say
> "they'll never go fast because they (pick favourite myth)..."
> The trouble with this kind of research is that if you tell people
> you're observing them for technique, they try to do what they've been
> coached to do, rather than what they've learned to do so that the boat
> goes fastest.
>
> Back to my judo days, the "textbook" description of ippon-seoi-nage
> (one-arm-shoulder-throw) and the 7 or 8 different forms of the
> technique done by Isao Okano bore no resemblance whatsoever to each
> other.  What moves boats is significantly different from what
> "purists" go on about - but if I blab about which myths I think need
> busting, the researchers will look for that and bias the study...
>
> If a subject of a study knows he, she, or it (in the case of animal
> studies) is being observed, the subject changes his/her/its behaviour
> to suit what it thinks the observer is looking for... I seem to recall
> that from my research design course back in 1979...
> Carl.. Quit giving away the quest..  8-)
> W

aka "Hawthorn Effect", Elton Mayo.

wmartind@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 28, 11:27 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>> Charles Carroll wrote:
>>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
>>> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
>>> reasons why these myths should be busted?
>> Oh yippee!! Here's just a few for you:-
>>
>> 1. That rowing is a very skilled activity?
>> (We perform ~30 identical sets of simple actions per minute, for hours a
>> week, we do them sitting down, & the least naturally athletic among us
>> seem to do OK?)
>> 2. That rowers are experts about boats & water?
>> 3. That pulling harder is the only way to win races?
>> 4. That the legs create the catch?
>> 5. That slide control is the key to a good stroke?
>> 6. That the hands must go away fast?
>> 7. That the hands come into the finish fast?
>> 8. That erg rowing technique is the same as boat rowing technique.
>> 9. That you need a square tap-down at the finish?
>> 10. That sliding riggers made boats faster?
>> 11. That carbon makes boats faster?
>> 12. That you need feet as low as possible in the boat, so you can
>> compress more easily & get your weight over them?
>> 13. That you compress at the catch by putting the weight on your feet as
>> you slow down on the slide?
>> 14. That you should "gather" for the catch?
>> 15. That the blades propel the boat by pushing water away?
>> 16. That "looming" causes an immediate & large loss of oar efficiency?
>> 17. That the physical principles of boat propulsion by rowing were fully
>> understood a century ago?
>> 18. That the rowing stroke is incapable of proper physical analysis,
>> because rowing is an art, not a science?
>> 19. That you'll go as fast as the other guy if only you copy his technique?
>> 20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>>
>> Discuss.
>>
>> :)
>> Carl
>>


>
> Awww.. Carl... Those are some of them...
> The idea is to get descriptive kinematics and kinetics of what the
> fastest people are doing, and learn from that, rather than say
> "they'll never go fast because they (pick favourite myth)..."
> The trouble with this kind of research is that if you tell people
> you're observing them for technique, they try to do what they've been
> coached to do, rather than what they've learned to do so that the boat
> goes fastest.
>
> Back to my judo days, the "textbook" description of ippon-seoi-nage
> (one-arm-shoulder-throw) and the 7 or 8 different forms of the
> technique done by Isao Okano bore no resemblance whatsoever to each
> other. What moves boats is significantly different from what
> "purists" go on about - but if I blab about which myths I think need
> busting, the researchers will look for that and bias the study...
>
> If a subject of a study knows he, she, or it (in the case of animal
> studies) is being observed, the subject changes his/her/its behaviour
> to suit what it thinks the observer is looking for... I seem to recall
> that from my research design course back in 1979...
> Carl.. Quit giving away the quest.. 8-)
> W

I think, Walter, that you're addressing the little-known fact that
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle operates in a highly visible fashion
way beyond the quantum world, or that the supposedly minuscule workings
of quantum mechanics are plainly evident in massive systems.

In short, the more we try to measure one property of a system, the less
we can know about others of its properties.

Those involved in teaching here in the UK, which has loaded to the
gunwales by idiot politicians with all manner of tests, targets &
form-filling, will now exactly what I mean. The resulting statistics
are largely worthless, in many cases somewhat fudged so that norms are
met, & kids' education is impaired.

Coaching is just another branch of teaching, so it's no surprise to see
the Uncertainty Principle screwing up the best laid plans of rowing
coaches. Equally, it's no surprise that many coaches retain a blind
faith in the significance of the "results" & are unprepared to let
simple indicators, such as the relatively poor performances of their
crews, get in the way of their faith in their analyses - any failure to
win pots must've been due solely to the irredeemably crappy quality of
the basic material they were asked to coach.

;)
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)

kc wrote:
> Christopher Anton wrote:
>> "Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:iLGdncYJn_OU50DVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
>>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
>>> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
>>> reasons why these myths should be busted?
>>
>> That making a boat lighter makes it go faster.
>>
>
> If all other things remain the same, it does. Of course, that never
> happens.

Oh no it doesn't!

C

On Sep 27, 1:12 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
> myths should be busted?

That you need a quicker catch going downstream as the water's
travelling faster underneath you

> Those involved in teaching here in the UK, which has loaded to the
> gunwales by idiot politicians with all manner of tests, targets &
> form-filling, will now exactly what I mean.  The resulting statistics
> are largely worthless, in many cases somewhat fudged so that norms are
> met, & kids' education is impaired.

You mean to say that you can't make a pig fatter by weighing it?

Andrew

P.S. Not sure what form filling you think teachers do, am struggling
to remember the last form I had to fill in for work.

Andrew,

I can't tell.

Are you serious when you write that you are "not sure what form filling
teachers do" and that you are "struggling to remember the last form [you]
had to fill in for work?"

Do you teach? Where? In the UK?

I can tell you that in the States it is very different. You should see all
the forms that teachers here are required to fill out. For example, all the
"No Child Left Behind" forms. And that's just for starters.

Sometimes I think that we here on this side of the pond are fast becoming a
nation of record keepers. God help you if you have to spend a night in a
hospital in San Francisco. The nurses these days are so busy updating all
the required records that there is almost no time left for the patients.

Cordially,

Charles

On 28 Sep, 20:11, Richard Packer <use...@rjSURNAME.org.yookay> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:27:41 +0100, Carl Douglas
>
> <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
> >20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>
> Single, pair, four or eight? �;-)

In my case, Tub pair

"bookie" <emily_booker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2ecf4678-6e0c-4169-b058-f9d9ca1db224@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 27, 1:12 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why
> these
> myths should be busted?

that people who post on rec.sport.rowing always know what they are
talking about

....that the people who criticise those people who post on rec.sport.rowing
always know what they are
talking about!

--
John Mulholland

>>> What in your opinion are the most insufferable myths
>>> about rowing?

>> that people who post on rec.sport.rowing always know what they are
>> talking about
> >
> that the people who criticise those people who post on rec.sport.rowing
> always know what they are talking about

So, John, what do you think? Truth or Myth?

That rec.sport.rowing is a contentious little discussion group in which
everyone gets off telling everyone else that they don’t know what they are
talking about?

Or that rec.sport.rowing is something akin to one of Plato’s Dialogues in
which all know-it-alls must be immediately capsized?

Cordially,

Charles

On Sep 28, 4:30 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
>
> I was just about the froth a cup of tea. I am glad I didn't have it in my
> hands when I clicked on your post. I have been laughing for five minutes.In
> fact I am still chuckling.
>


Froth a cup of tea? Huh? What in tarnation are you doing to ruin this
fine beverage?

>> Froth a cup of tea? Huh? What in tarnation are you doing to ruin this
>> fine beverage?

I know! I know! When Carl and Jan served tea it was with milk.

But this is slightly different. It is green powdered tea, whisked, in a
black raku New Years style cup, the most beautiful cup I have ever seen.

No apologies. The green froth against this black is simply stunning. Or at
least it is to my eyes.

And the taste? Again no apologies. Some people like their whiskies from
Islay reeking of peat. Others like them smooth as cognac. And so it is with
teas. And who's to say?

Charles Carroll wrote:
>>> Froth a cup of tea? Huh? What in tarnation are you doing to ruin this
>>> fine beverage?
>
> I know! I know! When Carl and Jan served tea it was with milk.
>
> But this is slightly different. It is green powdered tea, whisked, in a
> black raku New Years style cup, the most beautiful cup I have ever seen.
>
> No apologies. The green froth against this black is simply stunning. Or
> at least it is to my eyes.
>
> And the taste? Again no apologies. Some people like their whiskies from
> Islay reeking of peat. Others like them smooth as cognac. And so it is
> with teas. And who's to say?
>

Typical Marin County new-age hippie. ;-)

-Sonoma County Black Kettle

On Sep 27, 2:12 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your opinion
> are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the reasons why these
> myths should be busted?

Most insufferable myth: rowing is an anglo-saxon thing
Reasons: evidence

:)

>
> No apologies. The green froth against this black is simply stunning. Or at
> least it is to my eyes.

Charles -

Surely if you're generating froth you are washing out at the
finish..

You should immediately invest in a FatWhisk-Vortex (tm), which will
grip the tea better and slip less at the mid-drive, while generating
more lift at the beginning of the stir cycle. Obviously, there will
be many that believe that the spoon has never been overtaken as an
ideal tea-stirring device, and as for the obvious oversight of a
dunked rich tea or gingernut in the cup, well - that is just asking
for trouble, on r.s.r of all fora.

> And the taste? Again no apologies. Some people like their whiskies from
> Islay reeking of peat. Others like them smooth as cognac. And so it is
> with teas. And who's to say?
>

British Standard BS6008 ;-P

Robin wrote:
>> No apologies. The green froth against this black is simply stunning. Or at
>> least it is to my eyes.
>
> Charles -
>
> Surely if you're generating froth you are washing out at the
> finish..
>
> You should immediately invest in a FatWhisk-Vortex (tm), which will
> grip the tea better and slip less at the mid-drive, while generating
> more lift at the beginning of the stir cycle. Obviously, there will
> be many that believe that the spoon has never been overtaken as an
> ideal tea-stirring device, and as for the obvious oversight of a
> dunked rich tea or gingernut in the cup, well - that is just asking
> for trouble, on r.s.r of all fora.
>
>

But, Robin, any fule kno that a teaspoon is an excellent hydrofoil &
that tea is stirred almost wholly by the magic intervention of
hydrodynamic lift. A teaspoon is also a fine tool, dangled in the flow
from tap (faucet to you guys over the pond, but please don't force it
upon us), for demonstrating the Coanda effect.

BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
RSR's sticklers for accuracy. Let everyone remember that data are
always plural - never "this data", always "these data". Latin again,
although it'll be Greek some.

Charles - if you're making that particular tea in that particular way,
then I am sure you're following the true guidance of a Zen master &
cannot be wrong, so ignore those who would carp. And, while discussing
fish, would you accept that is not trailing a red herring to suggest
that Lapsang Souchong tastes not a little kippery?

Cheers -
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 Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>
> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
> RSR's sticklers for accuracy.  Let everyone remember that data are
> always plural - never "this data", always "these data".  Latin again,
> although it'll be Greek some.
>
With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.

To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
Otherwise, what's the point of data?

Richard

rduparcq@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
>> RSR's sticklers for accuracy. Let everyone remember that data are
>> always plural - never "this data", always "these data". Latin again,
>> although it'll be Greek some.
>>
> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>
> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>
> Richard
>
>

OTOH, there is such a thing as "a datum". Poor lonely little chap.

;)
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 Oct 1, 9:24 am, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
> > RSR's sticklers for accuracy.  Let everyone remember that data are
> > always plural - never "this data", always "these data".  Latin again,
> > although it'll be Greek some.
>
> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>
> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>
> Richard

I suppose you could say "this set of data" but it is, in reality, a
plural.
(I'm an alumnus, she's an alumna, they are alumni, IIRC, but the last
time I suffered through latin was 1968, so the memory could be a touch
shaky)
Not at all off topic, are we?
W

wmartind@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 1, 9:24 am, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
>>> RSR's sticklers for accuracy. Let everyone remember that data are
>>> always plural - never "this data", always "these data". Latin again,
>>> although it'll be Greek some.
>> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
>> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
>> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
>> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>>
>> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
>> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
>> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>>
>> Richard
>
> I suppose you could say "this set of data" but it is, in reality, a
> plural.
> (I'm an alumnus, she's an alumna, they are alumni, IIRC, but the last
> time I suffered through latin was 1968, so the memory could be a touch
> shaky)
> Not at all off topic, are we?
> W

Non sequitur?

KC wrote:
> wmartind@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Oct 1, 9:24 am, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
>>>> RSR's sticklers for accuracy. Let everyone remember that data are
>>>> always plural - never "this data", always "these data". Latin again,
>>>> although it'll be Greek some.
>>> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
>>> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
>>> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
>>> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>>>
>>> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
>>> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
>>> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>>>
>>> Richard
>>
>> I suppose you could say "this set of data" but it is, in reality, a
>> plural.
>> (I'm an alumnus, she's an alumna, they are alumni, IIRC, but the last
>> time I suffered through latin was 1968, so the memory could be a touch
>> shaky)
>> Not at all off topic, are we?
>> W
>
> Non sequitur?

Not sure I quite follow you?

C

Carl Douglas wrote:
> KC wrote:
>> wmartind@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Oct 1, 9:24 am, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
>>>>> RSR's sticklers for accuracy. Let everyone remember that data are
>>>>> always plural - never "this data", always "these data". Latin again,
>>>>> although it'll be Greek some.
>>>> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
>>>> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
>>>> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
>>>> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>>>>
>>>> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
>>>> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
>>>> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>
>>> I suppose you could say "this set of data" but it is, in reality, a
>>> plural.
>>> (I'm an alumnus, she's an alumna, they are alumni, IIRC, but the last
>>> time I suffered through latin was 1968, so the memory could be a touch
>>> shaky)
>>> Not at all off topic, are we?
>>> W
>>
>> Non sequitur?
>
> Not sure I quite follow you?
>
> C
Yeah, me neither.

On 30 Sep, 20:13, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
> RSR's sticklers for accuracy.  Let everyone remember that data are
> always plural - never "this data", always "these data".  Latin again,
> although it'll be Greek some.

Going by the Oxford style manual, one would use 'forums' as the plural
of a modern 'forum', while 'fora' is the correct plural when the
object under discussion is a classical 'forum'. So - the Romans had
fora, the internet has forums.

As to data - certainly one has a datum, but in plural one has only
several (pieces of) data when it's commonly-countable. In that case -
if one is perhaps talking about world best times in singles, where
there are only a few pieces of data - one can say 'these data'. If the
data is not considered commonly-countable (and there is of course some
personal judgement involved) then it is treated as a continuum object
and 'this data' becomes appropriate.

Pete

>
> Going by the Oxford style manual, one would use 'forums' as the plural
> of a modern 'forum', while 'fora' is the correct plural when the
> object under discussion is a classical 'forum'.

You have the temerity to suggest that RSR is *not* a classical forum?
I wager that several of the regular posters still habitually don toga
and sandals before firing up the computer to make their post before
heading out to the Colosseum for some light entertainment...

On 30 Sep, 23:34, KC <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote:
> wmart...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Oct 1, 9:24 am, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> On Sep 30, 8:13 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >>> BTW, using that proper Latin plural marks Robin indelibly as one of
> >>> RSR's sticklers for accuracy.  Let everyone remember that data are
> >>> always plural - never "this data", always "these data".  Latin again,
> >>> although it'll be Greek some.
> >> With the greatest respect [ie as usual, none at all] I reckon "this
> >> data" is permissible from one of those chappies who run those new-
> >> fangled computing machines, and who weigh out data as a commodity by
> >> the mega-something, like kilos of flour or yards of gravel.
>
> >> To God's Own People [ie scientists] however, data must always be
> >> multiple, infinitely variable, and plural - like flora and fauna.
> >> Otherwise, what's the point of data?
>
> >> Richard
>
> > I suppose you could say "this set of data" but it is, in reality, a
> > plural.
> > (I'm an alumnus, she's an alumna, they are alumni, IIRC, but the last
> > time I suffered through latin was 1968, so the memory could be a touch
> > shaky)
> > Not at all off topic, are we?
> > W
>
> Non sequitur?

Good name for a boat, of course.
Kit

On Oct 1, 9:18 am, kdav...@kidare.com wrote:
>
> > Non sequitur?
>
> Good name for a boat, of course.
> Kit

Yes indeed. Cygnet RC [Tideway] used it for our last wooden double,
sadly now disposed of [possibly still with Dacre BC?] Since we have
the [to me unpronounceable] Gaelic names of two mountains sculling out
of our boathouse, I must press for a renaissance of classical
learning.
Charles, sorry, but this after all a "myths" thread ..... I think I
remember ..... or was that something else ..... ah, memory .....

Richard

Robin wrote:
>> Going by the Oxford style manual, one would use 'forums' as the plural
>> of a modern 'forum', while 'fora' is the correct plural when the
>> object under discussion is a classical 'forum'.
>
> You have the temerity to suggest that RSR is *not* a classical forum?
> I wager that several of the regular posters still habitually don toga
> and sandals before firing up the computer to make their post before
> heading out to the Colosseum for some light entertainment...

Have you seen the latest FISA regulations for Roman galley racing?

All rams to be fitted with quick-release tip protection. Crews to
comprise equal numbers of chained slaves & volunteer freemen. No
buoyancy. No women (until after the event). Minimum boat weight
3000kg. Minimum cox weight 100kg. No makers' logos on swords, arrows,
rowing benches, steering oars or Greek Fire cauldrons.

Mind you, if minimum weights had been set by FISA in 1829 we'd still be
racing (but not many of us) in boats you'd have to trolley down to the
water & riggers & sliding seats would have been banned.

Cheers -
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)

Ok! My own idea of an insufferable myth about rowing:

That working on technique helps you understand how to move a boat.

Almost every coach I have ever read or listened to begins with technique. It
is always hand/back/legs for the recovery and legs/back/arms for the drive.
I have taken part in, or eavesdropped on, endless discussions about proper
body angle at the entry, and proper body angle at the release, and at what
point in the recovery full body angle should be achieved, and how the oars
should be held, and whether the wrists should be broken at the release, or
kept flat, and whether the back should be straight, or slightly hunched
over, etc, ad infinitum, and perhaps ad nauseum.

But hardly anyone talks about how the blade should be put in the water and
once there what the sculler should do with it. (Note: the exception is
rec.sport.rowing where blade shape and bladework is under constant scrutiny.
I want to draw special attention to Carl's posts on this subject. In my
opinion Carl's patience is remarkable.)

My father told me that in 1930s, for the brief time that he went out for
crew, everything began in the tank. The first instruction and the first
practices always addressed a simple question: what is it a rower wants to do
with his blade? And the rower learned what he wanted to do with that blade
before he ever got in a boat.

Fairbairn wrote that his experience coaching taught him that you make a
better rower out of a man in a few days tubbing him, that is, getting him to
focus on what his blade was doing, than you could in two years trying to get
him to focus on what his body was doing, that is, teaching him technique.

For myself I know that my sculling improved immensely from a single post
from Carl, in which he replied to some nonsense I had cribbed from someone
else. In the main, all Carl said was that I did not want to move the blades,
and then went on to explain blade slip.

At first it was quite painful to have to read Carl's post and suffer
correction in public; however, once I did and had time to reflect on what
Carl had said, I couldn't argue against it. It became as clear as the light
of day that I knew a whole lot about "technique" and absolutely nothing
about what a blade does in the water. I had no idea what I was trying to do
with the blades, but I had lots of ideas, some quite contrary to others,
about what I wanted to do with my hands.

So I believe that we would do a lot better if we started off tubbing people,
which is teaching them to work a blade, than the way we currently do it,
which is teaching people how they should position their bodies at various
points in the stroke.

To paraphrase Anselm, Seekest not to perfect technique that thou mayest
learn to work a blade, but learn to work a blade well that thou mayest show
some technique. Or something like that!

Cordially,

Charles

.... that busting a myth here on r.s.r is going to make a difference & get
noticed at all.

--
Yours Virtually, Zibi from Oslo

On Oct 2, 8:43 am, "Zbigniew A." <zby...@bikerider.com> wrote:
> ... that busting a myth here on r.s.r is going to make a difference & get
> noticed at all.
>
> --
> Yours Virtually, Zibi from Oslo

ZING!!!
Good one!
W

"Carl Douglas" <carl@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6khvc1F82go8U1@mid.individual.net...
> Robin wrote:
>>> Going by the Oxford style manual, one would use 'forums' as the plural
>>> of a modern 'forum', while 'fora' is the correct plural when the
>>> object under discussion is a classical 'forum'.
>>
>> You have the temerity to suggest that RSR is *not* a classical forum?
>> I wager that several of the regular posters still habitually don toga
>> and sandals before firing up the computer to make their post before
>> heading out to the Colosseum for some light entertainment...
>
> Have you seen the latest FISA regulations for Roman galley racing?
>
> All rams to be fitted with quick-release tip protection. Crews to
> comprise equal numbers of chained slaves & volunteer freemen. No
> buoyancy. No women (until after the event). Minimum boat weight 3000kg.
> Minimum cox weight 100kg. No makers' logos on swords, arrows, rowing
> benches, steering oars or Greek Fire cauldrons.
>
> Mind you, if minimum weights had been set by FISA in 1829 we'd still be
> racing (but not many of us) in boats you'd have to trolley down to the
> water & riggers & sliding seats would have been banned.

Sounds good to me. :-)
http://www.skiffing.org.uk/SRA_RULES_REV_G_011006.pdf#page=74
--
David Biddulph
Rowing web pages at
http://www.biddulph.org.uk/

On Oct 1, 7:55 pm, rdupa...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 1, 9:18 am, kdav...@kidare.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Non sequitur?
>
> > Good name for a boat, of course.
> > Kit
>
> Yes indeed. Cygnet RC [Tideway] used it for our last wooden double,
> sadly now disposed of [possibly still with Dacre BC?] Since we have
> the [to me unpronounceable] Gaelic names of two mountains sculling out
> of our boathouse, I must press for a renaissance of classical
> learning.
> Charles, sorry, but this after all a "myths" thread ..... I think I
> remember ..... or was that something else ..... ah, memory .....
>
> Richard

Hey, nothing wrong with "unpronounceable" Gaelic names on boats.

Mine is named "Cruachan", after Ben Cruachan, which sits between
Macintyre (my crazed, and let's face it, probably slightly inbred
Scottish side) and Campbell lands in the Highlands. And it's also the
clan war-cry.

I reckoned that was pretty sweet.

Abraham Lincoln to a waitress: "If this is coffee, please bring me
some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee."

On Sep 29, 5:31 am, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
> wmart...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 11:27 pm, Carl Douglas <c...@carldouglas.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Charles Carroll wrote:
> >>> Given the generous rowing and sculling expertise on rsr, would it be
> >>> possible to persuade any of you to draw up a list of what in your
> >>> opinion are the most insufferable myths about rowing and state the
> >>> reasons why these myths should be busted?
> >> Oh yippee!!  Here's just a few for you:-
>
> >> 1. That rowing is a very skilled activity?
> >> (We perform ~30 identical sets of simple actions per minute, for hoursa
> >> week, we do them sitting down, & the least naturally athletic among us
> >> seem to do OK?)
> >> 2. That rowers are experts about boats & water?
> >> 3. That pulling harder is the only way to win races?
> >> 4. That the legs create the catch?
> >> 5. That slide control is the key to a good stroke?
> >> 6. That the hands must go away fast?
> >> 7. That the hands come into the finish fast?
> >> 8. That erg rowing technique is the same as boat rowing technique.
> >> 9. That you need a square tap-down at the finish?
> >> 10. That sliding riggers made boats faster?
> >> 11. That carbon makes boats faster?
> >> 12. That you need feet as low as possible in the boat, so you can
> >> compress more easily & get your weight over them?
> >> 13. That you compress at the catch by putting the weight on your feet as
> >> you slow down on the slide?
> >> 14. That you should "gather" for the catch?
> >> 15. That the blades propel the boat by pushing water away?
> >> 16. That "looming" causes an immediate & large loss of oar efficiency?
> >> 17. That the physical principles of boat propulsion by rowing were fully
> >> understood a century ago?
> >> 18. That the rowing stroke is incapable of proper physical analysis,
> >> because rowing is an art, not a science?
> >> 19. That you'll go as fast as the other guy if only you copy his technique?
> >> 20. That good rowing is better than good sex?
>
> >> Discuss.
>
> >> :)
> >> Carl
>
> > Awww.. Carl... Those are some of them...
> > The idea is to get descriptive kinematics and kinetics of what the
> > fastest people are doing, and learn from that, rather than say
> > "they'll never go fast because they (pick favourite myth)..."
> > The trouble with this kind of research is that if you tell people
> > you're observing them for technique, they try to do what they've been
> > coached to do, rather than what they've learned to do so that the boat
> > goes fastest.
>
> > Back to my judo days, the "textbook" description of ippon-seoi-nage
> > (one-arm-shoulder-throw) and the 7 or 8 different forms of the
> > technique done by Isao Okano bore no resemblance whatsoever to each
> > other.  What moves boats is significantly different from what
> > "purists" go on about - but if I blab about which myths I think need
> > busting, the researchers will look for that and bias the study...
>
> > If a subject of a study knows he, she, or it (in the case of animal
> > studies) is being observed, the subject changes his/her/its behaviour
> > to suit what it thinks the observer is looking for... I seem to recall
> > that from my research design course back in 1979...
> > Carl.. Quit giving away the quest..  8-)
> > W
>
> I think, Walter, that you're addressing the little-known fact that
> Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle operates in a highly visible fashion
> way beyond the quantum world, or that the supposedly minuscule workings
> of quantum mechanics are plainly evident in massive systems.
>
> In short, the more we try to measure one property of a system, the less
> we can know about others of its properties.
>
> Those involved in teaching here in the UK, which has loaded to the
> gunwales by idiot politicians with all manner of tests, targets &
> form-filling, will now exactly what I mean.  The resulting statistics
> are largely worthless, in many cases somewhat fudged so that norms are
> met, & kids' education is impaired.
>
> Coaching is just another branch of teaching, so it's no surprise to see
> the Uncertainty Principle screwing up the best laid plans of rowing
> coaches.  Equally, it's no surprise that many coaches retain a blind
> faith in the significance of the "results" & are unprepared to let
> simple indicators, such as the relatively poor performances of their
> crews, get in the way of their faith in their analyses - any failure to
> win pots must've been  due solely to the irredeemably crappy quality of
> the basic material they were asked to coach.
>
> ;)
> 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: c...@carldouglas.co.uk  Tel: +44(0)1932-570946  Fax: -563682
> URLs:  www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -