Talk:Bumps race
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Merger proposal
Shouldn't Bump (rowing) be merged into this wiki? I can't think of any reason why it's separate. TrulyBlue (talk) 11:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Not Quite Right
"but an outright collision is neither necessary nor encouraged — the cox of the boat being bumped can concede as soon as slight physical contact occurs or even once it is inevitable."
Whilst this is true most of the time, once you get to a certain stage in Cambridge bumps (onto 'the reach' I think) you can't concede a bump before contact is made.
If no one objects I'll change it to something suggesting this is usually the case. TomGibb (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- At Oxford (at least in the late 1980s!) there's no such rule. However, a bump is awarded if the chasing boat rows clean past the boat ahead (how, in practice, this works without the bumped boat conceding I don't know). TrulyBlue (talk) 17:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Having done umpiring at Cambridge in recent times, I can definitely confirm that a cox can conceed at any point during the race, and that will count as a bump, even if there's clear water between the two crews. Most coxes do not conceed before contact once on the Long Reach, because it's usually entirely possible to escape, even if there is significant overlap of anything up to half a length. I have seen crews conceed 'early', even late on in the race, when a crew member has gotten into difficulty, e.g. caught a boat-stopping crab, with a chasing crew half a length away. In a couple of occasions, the cox of the crew has been publicly praised for avoiding a potentially dangerous situation, and sometimes given a monetary credit as well. Richard B (talk) 21:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I always thought it was as Richard B described it anyway until my cox told our crew that for the last set of bumps(2008 lents)he was told at the coxes' meeting he couldn't conceed on the reach. As no-one else has heard of it, and it always seemed a bit strange anyway he must have got it wrong. ThanksTomGibb (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)