Note 14 — Front matter (continued 4)

This agrees closely with my own description written later, but independently, and flatly contradicted by more than one Oxford oarsman at the time: 'In the case of Oxford,' I said, after describing the lightning feather following the long sweeping stroke of Cambridge, 'we observe a style which at first sight seems less excellent. As soon as the oars are dashed down and catch their first hold of the water, the arms as well as the shoulders of each oarsman are at work. The result is that when the back has reached an upright position the hands have already reached the chest, and the stroke is finished. Thus the Oxford stroke takes a perceptibly shorter time than the Cambridge stroke; it is also necessarily somewhat shorter in the water. One would therefore say it must be less effective. Especially would an unpractised observer form this opinion, because the Oxford stroke seems to be much shorter in range than it is in reality. There we have the secret of its efficiency. It is actually as long as the Cambridge stroke, but is taken in a perceptibly shorter time. What does this mean but that the oar is taken more sharply, and therefore much more effectively, through the water? Much more effectively, I proceeded, 'so far as the actual conditions of the contest are concerned,' going on to consider the difference between the modern and the old fashioned racing boats.—Light Science for Leisure Hours: Essay on Oxford and Cambridge Rowing Styles.