Who will win the Boat Race? This is the all-engrossing topic in sporting
circles just now, for the _furore_ for the great “Water Derby” of the
year appears more pronounced than ever in 1906. From the beginning of
practice it has been obvious that Oxford would be quite as strong as
their winning 1905 crew, at least, while the Cambridge crew would be
faster than their last year’s combination. Exigencies of the press only
enable comment to be made during their intermediate stage of work on the
Upper Thames, and, so far, the Dark Blues are deservedly favourites.
They are better together than their rivals, and therein lies their
merit. Their greater uniformity consists not only in the rise and fall
of the blades, but also, even more, in the action of the slides. It may
sound heresy to say so, but the fact remains that of two crews—one with
blades entering the water in unison, but slides worked at irregular
times, and another crew with oars visibly irregular in some places, but
slides all driven with one simultaneous kick—the latter will be faster
in these days (_ceteris paribus_, as to physique and as to boats). The
irregular time of the Cantab oars, or some of them, is a handicap; but a
still greater drawback, so far as prolonged speed is concerned, is their
want of uniform action in sliding. When paddling they work better
together, and even when at full speed do not get ragged at once.
It is after some eight or ten minutes the uneven sliding tells most.
Their reach shortens, the swing fails, and pace falls off. Taken
individually, they are as good a set of men in a boat as the Oxonians.
It is “as a crew,” that is to say, collectively, that they fail to hit
it off so well. Were their throw back of the bodies for the first catch
backed by a more timely leg-drive, and by a more vertical drop of the
blades into the water, it would be much more effective. As it is, the
less ostentatious, but firmer and more vertical entry of the Oxford oars
in the water produces more lift on the boat, and more pace in the long
run. For these reasons Oxford ought to outstay Cambridge, and repeat
their 1905 victory. The complaint that the Dark Blues have nearly three
stone more weight on bow side than on stroke is futile. This does not
affect the trim of a racing ship if all catch together. Otherwise, such
crack pair-oars as Messrs. Warre and Arkell and Messrs. Edwards-Moss and
Ellison, &c., would not have immortalised themselves for pace and style
at Henley. Oftener than not, however, the last fortnight’s practice has
sufficed to upset the “voice of the prophets.” And it must be remembered
that up to the time of writing neither crew has yet done any tidal-water
work. Cambridge are just the crew to fall into shape at the right moment
after looking rough for a long while, and their stroke, a well-known
London R.C. man, is highly experienced over the historic reach. But the
Oxonians will also attain a good deal more polish at Putney, hence their
success appears the more probable. The crews will face the starter (Mr.
F. I. Pitman) thus:—
Oxford: (Bow), G. M. Graham (Eton and New College), C. H. Illingworth
(Radley and Pembroke), J. Dewar (Rugby and New College), L. E. Jones
(Eton and Balliol), A. G. Kirby (Eton and Magdalen), E. P. Evans (Radley
and University), A. C. Gladstone (Eton and Christ Church), H. C.
Bucknall (Eton and Merton) (Stroke); L. P. Stedall (Harrow and Merton),
(Cox).
Cambridge: (Bow), G. D. Cochrane (Eton and Third Trinity), J. H. F.
Benham (Fauconberge and Jesus), H. M. Goldsmith (Sherborne and Jesus),
M. Donaldson (Charterhouse and First Trinity), B. C. Johnstone (Eton and
Third Trinity), R. V. Powell (Eton and Third Trinity), E. W. Powell
(Eton and Third Trinity), D. C. R. Stuart (Cheltenham and Trinity Hall)
(Stroke); R. Allcard (Eton and Third Trinity), (Cox).
As Mr. Allcard is rapidly putting on flesh, however, another coxswain
may be necessitated for Cambridge this year.