In order to directly address some of the comments I received on my first couple of posts, I have decided that I will occasionally put up a response specifically to them. I have tried to address the same issues, at least briefly, in other posts as well. A detailed discussion is too cumbersome for inclusion in a regular post, but certainly warranted. Thus, this post.
Reader Caustic brings up some excellent points. First: “…It is definitely possible, and directly observable, to see the oar feather just slightly while still fully buried. The reason is because as the oar face turns in the water, less force is applied to keep it square (since both the rower cannot pull as hard with just the arms, and because the face of the blade is now at an angle to the direction of intended motion). As a result, since the hands are pulling the handle in while resting on the top of the hangle, a slight torque is now proportionately larger than before (due to reduced force of water keeping the blade square). End result, a slight tilt of the blade while still buried. Advantage? A smoother and cleaner release than a purely square "drop & go" finish.”
I have seen what Caustic describes, but do not agree that it is universally an advantage. That is, allowing the blade to “feather” while still buried and while you are still pulling on the handle does allow for a smoother release. However, I think it also reduces your speed. An Olympian friend of mine (who preferred anonymity) told me: “I consulted the Blue Book ("The Sculler At Ease", by Frank Cunningham). Frank advocates a finish that is initiated solely by downward forearm pressure, in which the velocity of the water beneath the bottom of the blade feathers it for you. In deciding whether this is the most efficient finish, however, you need to ask: is the amount of speed you will gain by saving that energy of feathering greater than that you will lose by allowing the boat to slow down when the bottom lip of the blade catches the water rushing beneath it? For most people, the answer to that is... No. And I believe that, for everyone in rough water, the answer is Always No. So although I agree with Frank on many things, the finish is not one of them. That said.... when I really think about it, I admit that at the very moment when I'm extracting the blade, it's probably not coming out completely square. However, I instinctively DON'T do this in rough water... So, I'd say, teaching people to do that might be doing them a disservice, at least until they understand when and how to do it properly. If they learn to do it on their own, it's not the end of the world, provided they alter their finish in rough water.”
My own feeling is that keeping the blades fully square until you run out of room gives you the best propulsion. Allowing them to feather after you have begun to release the water gives you a cleaner finish, generally (though does render you vulnerable to slicing into a wave with your feathered blade). Exactly when to initiate the feathering action is not only a consideration of conditions, as my friend says, but also a personal preference. Yesterday when I was on the water, I carefully watched my blades at the release. I do start feathering as I am releasing the water. I am one of those scullers who tends to flip up a little jet of water as she feathers, so I continually have to make sure I extract more before initiating the feather. BUT: my blade does not show above the top of the water until my hands are at my body and until I decide to put a little more weight on the handles. That’s a big part of what I mean to communicate.
To address the issue of variations in rowing technique: I am a firm advocate of rowing in a way which makes you happy, unless I feel that you are putting yourself at risk of injury. And even then, all I can do as a coach is recommend that you change technique. I can’t change it for you. I work with many scullers who have some physical difficulty that interferes with their ability to row “perfectly” – from the top masters sculler who has two fused disks in his back, to the returning masters sculler who has such bad arthritis in one hip that he has to row with his knee outside of his elbows at the catch. In these cases, I let the sculler tell me what’s possible or feasible for him, and work at increased efficiency from there.
Caustic’s second point is that what happens at the handles is about 1/3 of what happens at the blade. If the blade is 8” deep, then we ought to need to lower the handles almost 4” in order to get them enough out of the water to start feathering. But if you watch video of elite scullers, you won’t see a motion anywhere near this large. Norm Graf, esteemed director of Craftsbury Sculling Center, likes to call the release a “non-motion” and underscore that it shouldn’t feel large and square.
I think both gentlemen are right. I think that the “magic” of the release happens in that flexing of the hands. That gives you about an inch of downward handle motion without actually moving any other part of the hands. (There’s three inches at the blade right there). The other few inches on the blade come from that quick downward bobbing motion of your handles.
Next, reader Mark brings up an excellent point, supported by information from Dr. Volker Nolte in the pdf to which Mark has kindly given us a link. Mark says: “There is no "tap down" in the sense of keeping the blades completely buried until they reach the end of the arc and then removing them from the water. It's mostly a coach's white lie used in teaching and not really what happens. It's a physical impossibility - the handle must still be moving around the arc while the oar lifts out.”
I have seen Dr. Nolte present this very information at a conference and was quite interested in his methods. Watching the video associated with the handle track he showed there, it was clear that that particular sculler did wash out before the release. That is why the handles he showed at the conference traced out a different path around the finish than around the catch. The handle-track in the pdf looks similar, so with no video evidence I would predict that the pdf sculler, too, is washing out. I have not had the opportunity to video other elite scullers to determine to what extent, if any, they are washing out; so I don’t know how common washing out really is, even among elite scullers. I do know that some elite scullers don’t appear to wash out, while others do. For the non-elite sculler, it is more common than not that I see blades washing out.
Mark’s point that the handles continue to move around in an arc as the blade is releasing the water is also correct. I don’t usually bring this point up to scullers I coach because I’ve found that it confuses people, but the handles really trace out a complex three-dimensional curve through the stroke. Imagine drawing a flattened oval on the surface of a balloon. That’s more like what the handles do in reality. However, it is also useful to think of the handles’ trajectories as they would appear if you only looked at, say, the X-Y plane, or the X-Z plane. In other words, you can imagine the handles’ traces on a horizontal plane, or a vertical one parallel to the long axis of the boat, or a vertical plan perpendicular to the long axis of the boat. Understanding the ideal and actual paths of the handles in all of these projections is useful.
Mark continues: “Coaches use the these sort of ideal images all the time, but they should also understand that they are simplifications or distortions, and in a written piece that will be read and used by coaches as well as athletes, you should indicate that you have that understanding too.”
Indeed, Mark’s advice is well taken. This is not an issue I would lead with – pedagogically speaking, it’s just too confusing. But when a sculler brings it up (and Mark is certainly not the first to do so), it is important to acknowledge and discuss.
In that spirit, then, when I refer to the “tap down” at the end of the drive, I mean to speak about how the motion feels to me. I also want to communicate how the motion, when performed more efficiently, may feel to someone who is used to letting his or her blades wash out. Coaches, including me, also refer to trying to maintain a constant handle speed on the drive – though this, too, is not possible. Of course the handles must decelerate and achieve zero velocity in one direction in order to change direction.
Realize that when I coach scullers to correct inefficiencies, I often present an exaggerated version of the stroke because I know they will settle somewhere between what they are currently doing and what I am describing. I adjust my description so that they will settle on the right place – which means sometimes even describing something that’s physically impossible. (You think the finish is magic? Wait till we talk about the catch). When you change from washing out at the finish to keeping the blade buried all the way through, you probably will feel like the finish is a huge square movement for a while in comparison. As you begin to be more facile at the movement, it will begin to be and to feel more smooth.
Coaching language is a large-enough topic for its own post, at some future point.
Keep those questions and comments coming. We all learn from them.
