Message Board

Members' Opinion Polls

Message board > Members' Opinion Polls > Members' poll: Which club will do best in the Clare Novice Regatta?

Which club will do best in the Clare Novice Regatta?

Based on
Rounds Won divided by Crews Entered

First and Third Trinity BC		51%

Caius BC		0%

Christ's College BC		3%

Churchill College BC		0%

Clare BC		0%

Clare Hall BC		0%

Corpus Christi College BC		0%

Darwin College BC		0%

Downing College BC		0%

Emmanuel College BC		0%

Fitzwilliam College BC		3%

Girton College BC		0%

Homerton College BC		0%

Hughes Hall BC		3%

Jesus College BC		3%

King's College BC		0%

LMBC		15%

Lucy Cavendish BC		0%

Magdalene BC		0%

New Hall BC		3%

Newnham College BC		0%

Pembroke College BC		0%

Peterhouse BC		3%

Queens' College BC		0%

Robinson College BC		0%

St Catharine's College BC		0%

St Edmund's College BC		0%

Selwyn College BC		0%

Sidney Sussex College BC		0%

Trinity Hall BC		0%

Wolfson College BC		0%

CULRC		18%

Total: 39 members' votes

by Bryn - Thu 17th Nov 2005, 5:50pm

Fitzwilliam College BC: 3%
...
Hughes Hall BC: 3%
...
New Hall BC: 3%
...
Peterhouse BC: 3%

Who voted for these? Surely CULRC was meant to be the joke option...

by Richard - Thu 17th Nov 2005, 9:03pm

Bryn said: Who voted for these? Surely CULRC was meant to be the joke option...

Maybe, but in defence of anyone who did vote for them, 3 of the 4 have been Head of the Lents, and 2 of the 4 have been Head of the Mays.

by Dubya - Thu 17th Nov 2005, 10:30pm

Richard said: Maybe, but in defence of anyone who did vote for them, 3 of the 4 have been Head of the Lents, and 2 of the 4 have been Head of the Mays.

sorry, but what possible relevance can this have to the novice regatta?

by Richard - Thu 17th Nov 2005, 11:01pm

Well, it means at some stage they had some very strong boats, relative to other colleges. I'd say it's likely that former novice rowers made up some of the strength of these crews.

I'd have probably said that clubs with previous headships to their name are more likely in the future to put out strong crews (novice or senior), than clubs with little history of strength.

by Lilie - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 9:23am

Richard said: Maybe, but in defence of anyone who did vote for them, 3 of the 4 have been Head of the Lents, and 2 of the 4 have been Head of the Mays.

Out of interest [and because you're by far more likely to look it up than me!] how many colleges HAVEN'T ever been head of lents and/or mays? There can't be that many..? Especially out of the older colleges.
And surely the perception of a club's strength at the moment is a better guide to how they will do than very lents or mays results - you can't go head after one [or even two] strong novice intake without any history of a strong club - that's one thing that the nature of bumps does reward.
For example, Hughes Hall, which i'm *guessing* his the one that hasn't been head of either lents or mays is currently on the up [as witnessed by their number of recent blades] so surely they are in fact more likely to be doing something right in terms of getting novices keen, and teaching them to row than, say, New Hall, who have been going down for quite a while.
Well, that's my procrastination done for the morning.

by Correcting myself before someone else does. - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 9:24am

When i said results I meant headship results for the pedants reading this.. (shurely not..)

by Andy - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 11:58am

Richard said: I'd have probably said that clubs with previous headships to their name are more likely in the future to put out strong crews (novice or senior), than clubs with little history of strength.

Past performance is not an indication of future performance...

Though Hughes Hall novices are pretty... interesting.

by Richard - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 12:42pm

Lilie said: Out of interest [and because you're by far more likely to look it up than me!] how many colleges HAVEN'T ever been head of lents and/or mays? There can't be that many..? Especially out of the older colleges.

OK, here goes.

Men's Lents & Mays (with the addition of Peterhouse and Corpus Christi in the Mays):
CCAT, Christ's, Churchill, Clare Hall, Darwin, Girton, Homerton, Hughes Hall, King's, Magdalene, Robinson, Selwyn, Sidney Sussex, St. Catharine's, St. Edmund's, Wolfson

Women's Lents & Mays (with the addition of Pembroke for the Lents and with the addition of Downing & Girton for the Mays):
1st & 3rd, CCAT, Christ's, Clare Hall, Corpus Christi, Darwin, Fitzwilliam, Homerton, Hughes Hall, King's, Lucy Cavendish, Magdalene, Peterhouse, Queens', Robinson, Selwyn, Sidney Sussex, St. Catharine's, St. Edmund's, Wolfson

by Martin - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:25pm

Richard said: OK, here goes...

Good work. Knew it was a good idea to present you with that bumps book last Mays... :-)

by Martin - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:40pm

Richard said: Men's Lents & Mays - Christ's, Girton, King's, Robinson, Selwyn, Sidney Sussex, St. Catharine's

To my mind these are the interesting ones. It is not just based on relatively recent form that Kings, Selwyn, Sidney etc are generally thought of as poor crews - these really are long term trends. Quite why is a really interesting question and one I've never been able to answer.

The one exception that springs to mind is Downing - traditionally, i.e. through the 18 and early 19 00s, Downing were really consistently bad. Think Corpus but worse. But somehow gradually turned this round and I beleive can now be seen as a college that is consistently decent (at rowing).

And the other comment to make is to remark on the performance of FaT men over the last 10 years. Consistently good in the grand scheme of things. Is it the sense of tradition and an expectation to do well that continues this long term (170 year) trend? After all, there is no reason to expect such consistent performance given that there's a complete turnover of people every 3 - 4 years.

by Simon - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:45pm

Martin said: It is not just based on relatively recent form that Kings, Selwyn, Sidney etc are generally thought of as poor crews

Didn't Selwyn get to 2nd in the Lents in the 1970s? And does anyone know why the history of Selwyn BC is in the Library?

by Simon - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:50pm

Lilie said: Hughes Hall ... are ... more likely to be doing something right in terms of getting novices keen, and teaching them to row than, say, New Hall, who have been going down for quite a while.

Or is bumps performance due to the number of blues/experienced rowers that they are now getting and not getting as the case may be? Presumably New Hall must have had a fairly hefty proportion of CUW at one stage?

And, thinking out loud here, does having/developing blues rowers act as an inspiration to other members of College or potential applicants (both school age rowers who think "they must be good at rowing if they have blues" and non-rowers who see the name of the College when it's on tv for the Boat Race? (It had no effect on me, who chose Trinity for the money.)

by Martin - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:55pm

Well, yes, there's always going to be blips in these things. For example I recall somebody telling me how at one time Sidney were exceptional - demolishing everyone in sight. They didn't go Head because they were in the 2nd division at the time! And on the other side of the coin, even FaT men plummet with spoons every now and again..... (It's not pleasant.)

However, there is a big difference between colleges that have never been lower than 10th / 11th (e.g. FaT, Jesus, LMBC...) and all the colleges we can all think of that are familiar with the 2nd division and have been so, on and off, for years....

by Martin - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 2:57pm

(Obviously that comment applied to Simon's previous post.)

by Simon - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 4:00pm

Martin said: the colleges we can all think of that are familiar with the 2nd division and have been so, on and off, for years....

Am I right in thinking that Caius are familiar with the second division back in the day but have turned a blip into success?

by Richard - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 4:45pm

Martin said: To my mind these are the interesting ones. It is not just based on relatively recent form that Kings, Selwyn, Sidney etc are generally thought of as poor crews - these really are long term trends. Quite why is a really interesting question and one I've never been able to answer.

The one that really gets me is why King's have hardly ever featured in the 1st division - even going into the 3rd, particularly as it's not exactly the smallest college.

As Simon said, Selwyn have been 2nd in the Lents.

Christ's also have been 2nd in the Lents - in 1996, and apparently had overlap on the Head crew on the last day when they were bumped by Caius just shy of the Railway Bridge. Must have been agonising.

Sidney have apparently never been higher than about 6th in the Lents, and 11th in the Mays.....

by Hughes who? - Fri 18th Nov 2005, 4:54pm

Andy said:
Though Hughes Hall novices are pretty... interesting.

I met some of what we thought was their 'novice' crew the other day. Turned out it was their first men.. And they found it neccessary to slow-clap us [and their coach swore at us] as we overtook them the other day..
In their defence they were actually quite nice out of a rowing context!

by Andy - Sat 19th Nov 2005, 9:59am

Reminds me of when I asked a Jesus crew if they were their 3rd Men (as they were near us in Bumps) and they turned out to be their 1st VIII...

by smug - Mon 28th Nov 2005, 11:52am

I guess Jesus did best then...