The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-07-21
OBJECT TO NAVY CREW COURSE
Coach GLENDON SAYS ACADEMY
EIGHT "a FFERED.

"Army N Navy Journal" Too. Declares
tho Eight Would Have Won by Stx
I Lengths Unde Other conditions IN
Foughk eeDsIe ReEatta Last Month.
The college rowing coaches agree with
out a dissenting voice that the courses
for the intercollegiate regatta on the Hud-
son are not equally fair to all under certain
conditions for the varsity eight cared crews.
The men who know the water say that
given a rough day one crew or another
is bound to profit by il. II may be said
that there was nc uncertainty on the part
OF some Of the crew coaches in saying that
the conditions which prevailed on regatta
day this ear hurt one CREW and helped
another. For instance Richard Glendon Of
the Navy crews old several men before
the race that he had sent his crews over
the course one day against the wind and
that there was q difference Of ten lengths
In holding the inside course and keeping
on the seventh lane.
The significance OF a statement like this
Ia great. In effect Coach Glendon says
that a crew fortunate enough to draw
course I, as did Columbia. is presented
with ten lengths thereby at the start Of the
race over a crew 80 uDlucbS as TO be drawn
In course Z. held by the Navy. There
was no ~equivocation in this statement by
the Navy coach. and az Columbia beat the
Navy perhaps three lengths all told the
idea 10 that under fair conditions the New
Workers. would have finished seven lengths
in the rear Of Glendon's crew. II that il
the case every one is likely to be willing
to admit hat the race should be held only
on the smoothest days. Most Of the coaches
are agreed that with a south wind against
the tide at h time Of the varsity race the
crews inshore are helped considerably. Few
Of them. however, believe that the differ
ence 10 a. much az ten lengths.
Edward II. Ten Eyck. the coach Of the
Wisconsin crews. had something OF the same
idea the morning OF the regatta. He said
that il the wind held from the south
the crews inshore. Columbia and Cornell.
would beat the others four blocks. He
did not say anything about actua lengths
difference. His father, James A. Ten
Eyck. did not say anything about advan-
tages in courses. as his crew was drawn In
course No. 8. probably not prolting az
much as Columbia and Cornell, but at the
same time far from being at an actual dis
advantage. He did say. however. that
TOuKu WhteT hlitu iuc CudnCtb Oh uib crew.
Ward Of Pennsylvania and Russell Of George
town did not say anything about courses.
but did object to the roughness.
The decided objection to the courses
comes from the Navy. In addition to what
Coach Glendon had to say the Army and
Now Journal in q recent number pub
lishsd a statement which IL not inspired
by the Navy rowing coach sounds very
much like his ~utterances. In it's article
the following 10 set forth:
1T is now learned that the eight cared
crew Of midshipmen who represented the
United States Naval Academy in the uni
versity rowing contest on the Hudson
River on June 20 labored under a greater
disadvantage as regards wind and water
than any other VI the contestants. and their
work under the circumstances in getting
third position out Of the seven crews wss a
remarkably good record.
THE following facts concerning the race
will show clearly the great handicap ex-
periencsd by the midsbipmen: The race
waspostponed for nearly an hour on account
VI the rough water (much to the surprise
Of the people Oh the observation train
due to u sUuth wind blowing up the river
against u strong ebb tide. The further
effect VI this wind would be to hold back
the water in midriver. Where the wind
was strongest and permit it TO ran stronger
In toward shore. The rough water had
not been noticeable la the first two races.
varsity four and freshman eight. because
az there were only four and five boats Ia
those races they did not extend out ~
far into midriver aud at thet two mile mark.
where these races started. the course 10
much nearer the west shore. The rough
water was not appreciated on the train
because where they looked down on the
water close inshOre It was smooth and In
the approaching darkness and dist
the rough water was not noticed.
When the wind dropped ware 7 o'clock
the water closest inshore soon became
smoother. but the swell In midriver caused
by contrary wind aud tide, augmented by
the swelis from stea mers on the sid Of the
course. continued very bad. We do not
this was appreciated on the referees
boat until that vessel sheered inshors Of the
Georgetown crew as that crew fell behind,
and then the great difference between
courses No. l and No. 4 was apparent. and
No. 7 WAC much worse than No. Z. as was
shown by the bow Of the boat p%lunging
through the swell. With seven crews pull
ing il is quite d distance from the first to
the seventh course. and the Navy had the
outside course.
For the first mile. while the course was
nearer midriver. and water more equal,
the Navy crew was leading. pulling thirty
six and then dropping to thirty-four as they
had intended. Then. with courses No. 1and2
Columbia Ind CornelD near the shore. and
water unequal. they lost to the two and
a half mile mark. but as tho course drew
away from the shore again and the water
less unequal. they gained from there to the
finish, pulling the entire last mile at IS to 40
when they had only intended to use that
stroke as a squirt for the last one-quarter
mile at the finish. thus proving their stroke
against heavy odds.
1"If the Navy crew had used the ordinary
wood washboards instead OF their canvas
washboard, which is continuous around
the bow, they would undoubtedly not nave
lone 30 we'll as they did
I'm short, the difference in water CON-
ditions between courses l and 7 was enough
to make more than half a minute in time !
over the course (which would only require
unequal water one mile. as rough water
always makes more than "A minute difference
in tins over n two mile course), and IN the