Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Official Cambridge October 2004 Thread

Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BazTheMoney)
    No, no, no. I'm quite prepared to support Cambridge when it comes to the Varsity Match, because lets face it, rugby's just a game of brutes running into each other. But when it comes to rowing, my loyalties will ALWAYS lie on the Isis.
    And rowing is just a bunch of men acting as nothing more than a machine working their way downstream.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    And rowing is just a bunch of men acting as nothing more than a machine working their way downstream.
    Oh, but it's so much more than that! :rolleyes:
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    And rowing is just a bunch of men acting as nothing more than a machine working their way downstream.
    Why don't you try it? It's harder than it looks. Plus a machine would probably have trouble sitting the boat unless all of the oars were well synchronised and there were absolutely no waves!
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by androidkiller)
    Why don't you try it? It's harder than it looks. Plus a machine would probably have trouble sitting the boat unless all of the oars were well synchronised and there were absolutely no waves!
    Oh I have tried it, I've also tried rugby and it's no doubt as skillful a sport as rowing. I also don't like the tediousness of rowing, no offence, but I mean, all you're trying to do is go as fast down a river as you can, in almost perfect synchronisation. I'm not particularly fond of this type of 'perfectionist' exercise, like athletics really, just trying to get it as perfect as possible. I'd rather play a sport that in my opinion demands a lot more individual skill and is full of natural brilliance more. Not to take anything away from the best rowers, they are of course brilliant athletes, but their brilliance is limited to just rowing, whereas other players possess many different skills and individual talents etc, and they can be brilliant to watch.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Is it actually possible to take up a brand new sport in Cambridge? I've always wanted to try fencing and thought of university as a perfect time to do it. But I've got these nagging doubts about the inevitable legion of public school boys who've been doing it for more than a decade and make newbies look like complete no-hopers.

    Have you ever heard of people taking up eclectic sports and achieving even marginal respectibility? What about rowing? Any previously non-rowing rowers in any of the college teams.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Faboba)
    Is it actually possible to take up a brand new sport in Cambridge? I've always wanted to try fencing and thought of university as a perfect time to do it. But I've got these nagging doubts about the inevitable legion of public school boys who've been doing it for more than a decade and make newbies look like complete no-hopers.

    Have you ever heard of people taking up eclectic sports and achieving even marginal respectibility? What about rowing? Any previously non-rowing rowers in any of the college teams.
    Again, I can only speak from my experiences at Oxford, but yes, many college rower start when they get to university. For example, Pembroke, which is one of the strongest rowing colleges in Oxford, had four of their summer VIII start rowing when they got to Oxford. Even schoolboy rowers (me for example) in the most part have only been rowing 5 years before we got there.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    Oh I have tried it, I've also tried rugby and it's no doubt as skillful a sport as rowing. I also don't like the tediousness of rowing, no offence, but I mean, all you're trying to do is go as fast down a river as you can, in almost perfect synchronisation. I'm not particularly fond of this type of 'perfectionist' exercise, like athletics really, just trying to get it as perfect as possible. I'd rather play a sport that in my opinion demands a lot more individual skill and is full of natural brilliance more. Not to take anything away from the best rowers, they are of course brilliant athletes, but their brilliance is limited to just rowing, whereas other players possess many different skills and individual talents etc, and they can be brilliant to watch.
    Ah, the good old rugby vs rowing debate. I've done both, and I definitely agree that rugby provides much more scope for individuality (or brilliance, as call it). However, I don't think you've understood rowing fully; if it was only about going quickly they'd just hire a speedboat and not bother with all the effort. The magic of rowing, in my view, is the challenge of pushing yourself, and your team-mates, to your limits and beyond; of willingly accepting a huge amount of pain and going further and further into it. in order to achieve a goal. I think that's what drives rowers; moving a boat fast is a means to an end really.

    As for multi-talented: rugby is a ball game, and therefore many rugby players are good at other ball games or racquet sports (which rely on hand-to-eye co-ordination). Rowers do excel in some sports, such as running or cycling, but this is less easily manifested. In addition, rowers who are also ball players tend to be very good rugby players because they're usually a) very fit and b) tough as nails.

    In my mind there's little doubt that rowing is the "harder" sport; though I played 1st XV rugby without much difficulty, I never got a sniff of my school's 1st VIII. A friend of mine who did manage to represent both was considered one of the hardmen of the 1st XV; yet he struggled to cope with the toughness expected in the 1st VIII.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    Ah, the good old rugby vs rowing debate. I've done both, and I definitely agree that rugby provides much more scope for individuality (or brilliance, as call it). However, I don't think you've understood rowing fully; if it was only about going quickly they'd just hire a speedboat and not bother with all the effort. The magic of rowing, in my view, is the challenge of pushing yourself, and your team-mates, to your limits and beyond; of willingly accepting a huge amount of pain and going further and further into it. in order to achieve a goal. I think that's what drives rowers; moving a boat fast is a means to an end really.

    As for multi-talented: rugby is a ball game, and therefore many rugby players are good at other ball games or racquet sports (which rely on hand-to-eye co-ordination). Rowers do excel in some sports, such as running or cycling, but this is less easily manifested. In addition, rowers who are also ball players tend to be very good rugby players because they're usually a) very fit and b) tough as nails.

    In my mind there's little doubt that rowing is the "harder" sport; though I played 1st XV rugby without much difficulty, I never got a sniff of my school's 1st VIII. A friend of mine who did manage to represent both was considered one of the hardmen of the 1st XV; yet he struggled to cope with the toughness expected in the 1st VIII.
    Without getting into a big debate over the strenghts of both sports I would say that at the top level of rugby union it is 'tougher' than that of top level rowing. The game now is so intense, physical and organised, it is a mile away from that of the rugby your friend would have played. Of course, rugby league on the other hand has always been tougher than both by quite a long distance. It is sad that people in this country have never watched Australian State of Origin (rugby league), which is quite frankly organised GBH with the best ball handling skills and organisation on show on the planet.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joey_Johns)
    Without getting into a big debate over the strenghts of both sports I would say that at the top level of rugby union it is 'tougher' than that of top level rowing. The game now is so intense, physical and organised, it is a mile away from that of the rugby your friend would have played. Of course, rugby league on the other hand has always been tougher than both by quite a long distance. It is sad that people in this country have never watched Australian State of Origin (rugby league), which is quite frankly organised GBH with the best ball handling skills and organisation on show on the planet.
    Thought I'd see you reply to that post...
    I'm afraid you'll never convince me that rugby's tougher (be it union or league) - and this is despite the fact that I enjoy rugby much more than rowing (which I've not done competitively for a long time).
    At the top level, in terms of fitness there's no question rowing is the toughest, it's unbelievable what rowers put their bodies through. League also requires a high level of fitness, as does Union more and more. Obviously rugby has an added element because it's a contact sport, but that doesn't really require mental toughness, just bravery (aka stupidity).
    The two sports actually share quite a lot in terms of requiring you to want to be in pain in order to succeed. Pulling an oar really hard when you're knackered is quite similar to flankers diving over a ball in the knowledge their backs will soon become floormats - their body will (rightly) point out it's a crazy thing to do, but their mind has to overcome this and do it anyway in order to ensure their team succeeds.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    Thought I'd see you reply to that post...
    I'm afraid you'll never convince me that rugby's tougher (be it union or league) - and this is despite the fact that I enjoy rugby much more than rowing (which I've not done competitively for a long time).
    At the top level, in terms of fitness there's no question rowing is the toughest, it's unbelievable what rowers put their bodies through. League also requires a high level of fitness, as does Union more and more. Obviously rugby has an added element because it's a contact sport, but that doesn't really require mental toughness, just bravery (aka stupidity).
    The two sports actually share quite a lot in terms of requiring you to want to be in pain in order to succeed. Pulling an oar really hard when you're knackered is quite similar to flankers diving over a ball in the knowledge their backs will soon become floormats - their body will (rightly) point out it's a crazy thing to do, but their mind has to overcome this and do it anyway in order to ensure their team succeeds.

    I suggest you watch State of Origin on the 26th of this month and I promise you will change your mind...

    I do not think any body can comment on which is tougher until they have seen State of Origin.

    That is all I will say on the matter.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    Ah, the good old rugby vs rowing debate. I've done both, and I definitely agree that rugby provides much more scope for individuality (or brilliance, as call it). However, I don't think you've understood rowing fully; if it was only about going quickly they'd just hire a speedboat and not bother with all the effort. The magic of rowing, in my view, is the challenge of pushing yourself, and your team-mates, to your limits and beyond; of willingly accepting a huge amount of pain and going further and further into it. in order to achieve a goal. I think that's what drives rowers; moving a boat fast is a means to an end really.

    As for multi-talented: rugby is a ball game, and therefore many rugby players are good at other ball games or racquet sports (which rely on hand-to-eye co-ordination). Rowers do excel in some sports, such as running or cycling, but this is less easily manifested. In addition, rowers who are also ball players tend to be very good rugby players because they're usually a) very fit and b) tough as nails.

    In my mind there's little doubt that rowing is the "harder" sport; though I played 1st XV rugby without much difficulty, I never got a sniff of my school's 1st VIII. A friend of mine who did manage to represent both was considered one of the hardmen of the 1st XV; yet he struggled to cope with the toughness expected in the 1st VIII.
    H&E, perhaps you missed my point, or I didn't put it accross The fact is that I don't like sports like rowing because that is all they are, pushing yourself to unprecedented amounts of pain, and really all becomes a contest of who is prepared to take the most pain, when the two teams are fairly even. In this case, it seems a bit of a worthless cause, oh one team can take more pain than the other, well done. I mean in rugby it is not about pain, or not just, it's about many different things, only one of which is fitness, and usually the most important thing is individual skill. And of course, as you say, rugby players find themselves able at many other games, so you try out loads of different things, just for fun.

    Incidentally, perhaps your friend ought to have tried playing 7s.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    H&E, perhaps you missed my point, or I didn't put it accross The fact is that I don't like sports like rowing because that is all they are, pushing yourself to unprecedented amounts of pain, and really all becomes a contest of who is prepared to take the most pain, when the two teams are fairly even. In this case, it seems a bit of a worthless cause, oh one team can take more pain than the other, well done. I mean in rugby it is not about pain, or not just, it's about many different things, only one of which is fitness, and usually the most important thing is individual skill. And of course, as you say, rugby players find themselves able at many other games, so you try out loads of different things, just for fun.

    Incidentally, perhaps your friend ought to have tried playing 7s.
    exactly. sport is meaningless
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bathsheba)
    exactly. sport is meaningless
    Bah! Taking sport too seriously is meaningless. Sport can simply be a kick around in the park - a fun, healthy way to spend an afternoon engaging in a structured activity with friends.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Faboba)
    Bah! Taking sport too seriously is meaningless. Sport can simply be a kick around in the park - a fun, healthy way to spend an afternoon engaging in a structured activity with friends.
    hmmph. parks? fun? healthy? structured activity? FRIENDS? = all meaningless.

    we all know the only meaningful thing is uk-learning.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joey_Johns)
    I suggest you watch State of Origin on the 26th of this month and I promise you will change your mind...

    I do not think any body can comment on which is tougher until they have seen State of Origin.

    That is all I will say on the matter.
    The other question is, does anyone apart from you even care any more?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Name/Current Location: Christian/Boulder, Colorado (home)/Groton Massachusetts (school)
    Subject: Oriental Studies
    College: Peterhouse
    Offer: ?? I was accepted unconditionally (I got 4 5's on AP's and did well on SAT's and SAT II's)
    Insurance: I got into Cornell but turned them down. i'll definitely be going to Cambridge
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chermitron)
    Insurance: I got into Cornell but turned them down. i'll definitely be going to Cambridge
    Good choice, Cornell enjoys working you to death.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chermitron)
    Name/Current Location: Christian/Boulder, Colorado (home)/Groton Massachusetts (school)
    Subject: Oriental Studies
    College: Peterhouse
    Offer: ?? I was accepted unconditionally (I got 4 5's on AP's and did well on SAT's and SAT II's)
    Insurance: I got into Cornell but turned them down. i'll definitely be going to Cambridge
    ok b smart: u didnt get accepted unconditionally, u already had your grades and they met their standards. You had already satisfied the 'condition'.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    oh sorry, i'm not used to UK terminology, they call it an unconditional offer here if you don't have to fulfill any requirements after being offered a place. Do most people get conditional offers? And when do British students get their A-level results? before or after an offer?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Helenia)
    The other question is, does anyone apart from you even care any more?
    I don't care. Hence 'that is all I will say on the matter'.
Updated: July 17, 2004
New on TSR

Naughtiest thing you did at school

Did you get away with it or were you punished?

Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.