FOUR-OARS.
The fewer the number of performers in a boat the longer does it take
(with material of uniform quality) to acquire absolute evenness of
action. This may seem paradoxical, but none the less all practical
oarsmen will, from their own personal experiences, endorse the
statement. It has been said that it takes twice as long to perfect a
four as an eight, twice as long to perfect a pair as a four, and twice
as long to perfect a sculler as a pair. This scale may be fanciful, but
it is approximately truthful; it refers, of course, to the education of
oarsmen for work in the respective craft, from their earliest days of
instruction. It means that a higher standard of watermanship has to be
attained, in order to do justice to the style of craft rowed in,
according as the ship carries more or fewer performers. Many an oarsman
who by honest tugging can improve the go of an eight-oar will do more
harm than good in a light four, and will be simply helpless in a racing
pair.
Four-oar races, with the exception of some junior contests, are now
rowed in coxswainless craft. The first of these seen in Europe was that
of the St. John's Canadian crew (professional, but admitted for the
nonce as amateurs) at the Paris International Regatta 1867. All the
other crews carried steerers. The Canadians had the windward station in
a stiff wind, and won easily. Next year the B.N.C. Oxon Club produced a
four thus constructed at Henley. The rules did not forbid this; but the
novelty scared other competitors and threatened to spoil the racing in
that class. The stewards accordingly passed a resolution forbidding any
of the entries to dispense with a coxswain, and under cover of this
disqualified the B.N.C. four when it came in ahead.
Next year the resolution referred to remained in force (as regards the
Challenge Cups), but a presentation prize for fours without coxswains
was given, and was won by the Oxford Radleian Club. In 1871 the chief
professional matches were rowed without coxswains; but no more prizes
were given for this class of rowing at Henley until 1873, when the
Stewards' Cup was classed for 'no coxswains.' At Oxford college fours
were similarly altered, but the steering was so bad that it was
seriously proposed to revert to the old system. A similar proposal was
made with regard to Henley. Fortunately, wiser counsels prevailed, and
oarsmen realised that it was better to attempt to raise their own
talents to the standard required for the improved build than to detract
from the build to suit the failings of mediocrity. In 1875 the Visitors
and Wyfold Cups were emancipated from coxswains, and since then the
standard of amateur four-oar rowing has gradually risen to the
requirements of the improved class of build.
Steerage is of course the main difficulty in these pairs. Three
different sorts of apparatus have been used in them. Two of these are
much of the same sort. One, generally in use to this day, consists of
two bars projecting from the stretcher, and working horizontally in
slits cut in the board. The foot presses against one bar or other to
direct the rudder, Another process is to fix a shoe to the stretcher, in
which the oarsman places his foot. This shoe works laterally. The third
is one tried by the writer in 1868. Every inventor thinks his goose a
swan, and possibly the writer is over-sanguine as to the merits of his
own hobby. It consists of two bars laid on the stretcher, like a very
widely opened letter V, the arms of the V pointing in the direction of
the sitter. Each arm is hinged at the apex of the V. The stretcher is
grooved, so that either arm can be pressed into the groove, flush with
the surface of the stretcher. Behind each bar is a spring. The bars
cross the stretcher just about the ball of the foot. The hinge is sunk
deep in the wood, so that the arms of the levers do not begin to project
above the wood till some 5 inches on either side of the centre of the
stretcher. The feet are placed in ordinary rowing pose, in the middle of
the V, where the levers lie below the flush surface of the stretcher.
The strap, though tight, has a _wide_ loop, to admit of slight lateral
movement of the feet. To put on rudder either foot is slipped half an
inch or so outward. This brings it on to the lever of that side, and the
pressure of the foot drives the lever flush. This pressure and movement
of the lever, by means of another small lever and swivel outside the
gunwale, in connection with it, works the rudder line. When steerage
enough has been obtained, a half-inch return of the foot to its normal
pose releases the lever, and the spring behind it at once brings it to
_status quo ante_.
Now in the other two mechanisms above cited, the same foot has to steer
_both_ ways. Hence, for one of the two directions, the toe must turn in
like a pigeon's. This must, for the moment, cripple leg-work, especially
on slides. Again, with lateral movement in first and second machines, it
is difficult for the steerer to know to exactness when his rudder is
'off.' He may, in returning it after steerage, leave it a trifle on, or
carry it the other way too far. If so, he has to counter-steer a stroke
or two later, till he feels that his rudder is free and trailing. The
writer claims for his own invention that it never removes the feet from
the proper outward-turned pose against the stretcher, and that the
springs under the lever ensure the rudder swinging back and 'trailing'
so soon as a lever is released.
Whatever apparatus is used, _wires_, not strings, should lead the
rudder, and should not be too tight; they will pull enough, though
slightly loose.
Anyone may steer; the best waterman, if not too short-sighted, should do
so, but stroke should not take the task if anyone else is at all fit for
it.
[Illustration: FOUR-OAR.]
The steerer should not be repeatedly looking round, as regards his
course. If he is sure of no obstacles lying in his path, he can, when
once he has laid his boat straight for a reach, watch her stern-post,
and keep touch on it, to hold it to some landmark.
A coxswainless four really facilitates oarsmanship. It recovers from a
roll more freely than the old-fashioned build with a pilot. It is uneven
rowing which causes a roll, but when once equilibrium has been disturbed
the coxswain has more difficulty than the crew in regaining balance. The
oarsmen aid themselves with their oars, as with balancing poles. The
removal of the coxswain therefore tends to reduce the rolling, and
facilitates the speedy return of the ship to her keel when momentarily
thrown off it. Coxswainless fours at Henley travel now much more
steadily than did those with coxswains fifteen years ago. A runner on
the bank, to look out for obstructive craft, is useful in practice. It
enables the steerer to keep his eyes on his stern-post, and to guide his
course thereby in confidence, without repeated twists round to see if
any loafing duffer is going to smash his timbers. The pace of a
first-class coxswainless four, in smooth water, for half a mile is quite
as great as that of a second-class eight-oar with a coxswain. The
abolition of coxswain has improved the speed of fours some forty seconds
over the Henley course.
One good resulted from the attempt of B.N.C. in 1868 to row without a
coxswain. It opened the eyes of the regatta executive to the unfairness
of tolerating boy coxswains. The University clubs used to carry boys of
four or five stone. In that very year the 'Oscillators' had a four-stone
lad, while University College carried an eight-stone man. There was just
as much difference between these two fours in dead weight carried as
between B.N.C. (with no coxswain) and the Oscillators. University clubs
are _ex officio_ debarred from obtaining boys to steer. This inequality
had been complained of by college crews time after time. Old Mr. Lane,
the usual vice-chairman, used to sneer at the complaint, and say, 'If a
boy can do in one boat what it takes a man to do in another, it is not
fair to prohibit the boy.' If this were logical, then, _pari passu_,
there could be no unfairness for one man to do single-handed what in
other boats it took a man and a boy (or two men) to do, viz. both row
and steer. Mr. Lane's fallacy was exploded by this _reductio ad
absurdum_ of his tenets, and regulation weights for coxswains were
initiated for following years.
[Illustration: NEAR MEDMENHAM.]