IRA Dam Opening: The Final Word
As I reported earlier, the Camden County Parks Director informed me that the Cooper River Parkway Dam was, in fact, open during the afternoon of June 3rd - the most important afternoon in college rowing. During the championship races that afternoon, including the women's lightweight eight, the dam opening created seriously unfair conditions for lane 1 and most likely lane 2 as well. Since lanes one and two were given to those qualifiers with the fastest times, the championship finals were seriously flawed. I gave this information to the ECAC which, to its credit, conducted its own investigation. The ECAC has determined that THE COOPER RIVER DAM WAS OPEN that afternoon.
It is difficult to imagine a more serious error in rowing than racing when there are drastically different conditions for different lanes. This was made all the worse by the fact that the affected races determined the national championship for the men's heavy eight, the men's light eight, and the women's light eight.
This is no small matter. While no one can say what the outcome would have been of fair races, we do know that fabulous crews had their hopes dashed against the shoals of miscommunication. While pride and lasting memories hung in the balance, so too did alumni donations and coaches' jobs. Wouldn't it have been great to see Princeton v Cal from lanes 5 and 6? What would a resurgent Princeton women's light eight have done from lane 5? What would a highly touted Navy men's light eight have done from lane 6? What's done is done, but it was done unfairly and it should not be allowed to happen again.
Gothard Lane, Director of Championships for the ECAC, did the research for the regatta committee. Gothard explained to me that "Without notifying us, the dam was opened on Saturday. From what we understand, the water got so high that they had no choice but to open the dam. If they had not released the water when they did then some of the local neighborhoods might have experienced some flooding later on that day during high tide." It seems then, that this was a tragic case of miscommunication. It's more difficult to understand, however, how spectators and coaches alike knew of the dam opening but the regatta committee did not. As Gothard goes on to say, "If we had been notified by the dam operator, then we could have gathered the coaches together to decide about what to do with regard to the schedule." If I were a coach, I would want to know what the regatta committee's plan is to ensure that this does not happen again. I would expect a letter acknowledging the problem and the plan.
Here is a short chronology of how this all came to light:
- As the women's light eight grand final is crossing the line on June 3rd, spectators mention to Fight in the Dog that the dam has been opened
- FITD analyzes race results after the rumored dam opening and finds obvious abnormalities
- row2k publishes a post-race report stating that the dam was closed all afternoon and was incapable of being opened because of the force of the current
- FITD reads the row2k report but decides that the facts still suggest a serious problem and publishes a post-race report noting the rumored dam opening and its affect on the races
- After taking some criticism from readers for publishing the rumored opening, FITD decides to research the issue and is told by the Camden County Parks Director that the dam was open from 1pm until 3:30pm.
- FITD informs the ECAC of the dam opening; the ECAC launches its own investigation
- The ECAC confirms that the dam was open during the IRA championship races
Sometimes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
[Update: The most recent issue of Rowing News repeats the false story about the dam not being opened and unable to be opened for the championship races. No doubt the truth came out after they went to press. It's particularly unfortunate that they led the IRA article with the false story. The article also says that the Cornell light men were in lane one while they were actually in lane two and Navy (sixth place) was in lane one.]
14 comments:
i feel bad for princeton. so much for a great heat race to be knocked to the worst lane. same goes for radcliffe. sorry guys, you were both capable of winning.
You whine too much. Unfair lanes and inconsistent conditions are exactly why the double at Sprints and IRA's is so difficult (especially for men's sprints... worcester is notoriously unfair). You can't be just ordinary to do it... you have to be head and shoulders above your competition. Like Harvard for three years, and Navy in 2004. Completely. Dominant.
No, sorry, I think you're wrong on this one. The thing that makes this so different is that it wasn't a condition caused by nature or the quirks of a course. It was a man made condition that could have been controlled (as it was the previous day). This is more like a starter consistently starting a lane 5 seconds after the rest of the field. People caused it and people could have stopped it. This was a series of blown races, not a freak of nature.
Enough already with this dam stuff! It's great that you've talked to so and so about when it was opened or closed, but don't go writing off the National Championship as entirely unfair! I feel bad for Wisconsin and Georgetown because you're essentially stealing the glory away from them while giving sympathy to Princeton and Radcliffe. You wonder what Princeton would have done from a more protected lane, and I say, probably the same thing that UCF did from lane 4 - beat Wisconsin and Georgetown in the heats only to lose to both in the final. Give credit where it is due.
Ok, ok. I've had my say. I realize that right now I'm the most hated person in rowing because I've made a lot of people look silly. I had one purpose for this whole thing - to make the reagatta committee, which proclaimed it wouldn't be bullied into switching the lane seedings on Saturday, think twice about assuming the dam is closed if there are heavy rains next year.
Now I just need to get another post up so this isn't the last one!
i know people are complaining, but i wanted to thank you for doing an excellent job clarifying the lane conditions. though the lane conditions didn't really affect our team, we had speculated that something was off with the lanes and our suspicions were confirmed through your research into the matter. this is a serious problem that deserves the attention you gave it and shouldn't be so easily dismissed; when teams spend hours and weeks and months training for one championship race, the regatta committee should do their part in ensuring a fair race.
in response to the previous comments about your posts taking the glory away from wisconsin and georgetown...if the regatta committee had done their part, there wouldn't be any of this questioning of the victors' win, nor would there be any bitterness from those who were screwed over.
I second that!
i third it... and i still don't see why this has to be your last postings. I don't understand why you can't continue since people obviously read this and enjoy it. it's always nice to see people acknowledge lightweight rowing since we never get any credit.
word!
It wasn't a series of blown races. The stewards weren't sitting at the damn letting water out when they deemed it was the appropriate time. It was controled by a totally sepearate entity. Its one of the inherent features of the course; one of the implicit risks taken when it was selected as the venue: The damn might be opened for flood control. Get over it. Yea, it sucks, train harder.. row better (i've seen the IRA tape, there was room for everyone to do this) and then you go faster.
If it was a fair race on Saturday then why did they change the lanes on friday under the same conditions? It was the hard training that made for tight racing on friday. It was not hard training that made the unfair conditions on saturday. It was supposted to be the tightest race in IRA history, but that got washed away with the current. There was proof that there were the same conditions as friday, they cancelled races and redid all the lanes. Just like in '04, because of the conditions (wind), the lanes were changed from (preferred lanes) 3-4-2-5-1-6 to 1-2-3-4-5-6. So, just like in '04 when the faster crews got the better lanes because of wind, it should have been the same way for this race, but it wasn't fair and obviously people are pissed off about it, but there isn't anything we can do about it except change the venue or never let anything let this happen again. one, so there is fair racing and for the winners not to catch crap for winning.
What makes you think that it was supposed to be the "tightest race in IRA history"? The only consistent feature of the season was that everyone was horribly inconsistent. And if you're using the heats as guidlines for "the tightest race in history" you might want to think about your argument. Unfair lanes because of current would have affected the results in the heats as much as the finals... so do any of the results really mean anything?
affected results in the heats? um no the dam was no open in the heats.
I would say that the heats were one of the best comparisons of how fast the crews became by IRAS. There were no current conditions or weather conditions on that day. It was all down to who was going to grit their teeth, take the race seriously, show who means business, and kick some ass. The day of the final, the dam was open and the lanes were unfair. The weather didn't make any of it easier either. But it's over. There's nothing to do about it now. Next year is a whole new year for the teams to go out and show their stuff.
Post a Comment