“Private schools make all the difference, even in rowing.”

This was just one of a string of comments posted on the Facebook page for college rowers at Cambridge “Rowbridge” looking at the link between club racing success and the previous rowing experience of club members. 

While the clean sweep for the Light Blues at this year’s Boat Race certainly proves the programme’s pedigree, it is worth examining exactly who makes up the winning crews. Looking at both the men’s and women’s sides, a striking pattern can be seen: most trialists who are selected for the Blue and Reserve boats have rowed before arriving at Cambridge.

Using announced first and reserve crews from the past four years at Cambridge University Boat Club (CUBC), I conducted statistical analysis to assess whether it is true that the club is dominated by “school rowers”. The results were stark.

Of the 45 different women who had made up the Blue and Blondie crews in the past 4 years, 34 had rowed before (76%).

On the men’s side, of the 46 different men who had made up the Blue and Goldie crews in the past 4 years, 39 had rowed before Cambridge (85%).

For both men and women, these represent statistically significant correlations.

Given this correlation, I wanted to understand where the issue lay: was it that not enough people who learnt to row at Cambridge were trialling? Or was it that they were part of the CUBC programme but were not being selected for the top boats?

• Breaking down the women’s side to “Blue” boat and “Blondie” boat, there was a statistically significant correlation identified. There was a much higher proportion of experienced rowers who made the “Blue” boat, while those who learnt to row at Cambridge had a higher chance of making the “Blondie” boat.
  • 88% of female athletes who made at least one Blue boat between 2020 and 2023 had rowed before Cambridge, compared to 62% in Blondie.
• On the men’s side, 90% of athletes who made at least one Blue boat (2020-23) had rowed before Cambridge, compared to 75% of those who made Blondie.

CUBC Women’s Head Coach Paddy Ryan told Cambridge Independent leading up to the Boat Race, “We have got fewer returners than we have had for a number of years so the numbers we have added is pretty good, but in terms of the experience it’s a bit different.” However, while lacking the greats of Grace Prendergast and Ruby Tew, from last year it is still the case that most squad members had rowed before Cambridge.

So why does this matter? 

Cambridge and rowing both have a reputation for elitism and this data seems to reaffirm that unless you’ve rowed before Cambridge, there is little chance of competing at the highest level here.

It also raises the question of elite athletes (e.g. James Cracknell, Blue Boat 2019) being “parachuted in” to boost the reputation of Cambridge and CUBC, with home-grown talent neglected.

The structure of Cambridge rowing is unlike many other universities. College-based clubs offer the chance to learn to row as well as the chance to compete, in races mainly between colleges. Only once someone can row at a high level can they then “trial” for the university squad. Theoretically, this means that CUBC can offer elite level training. In reality, it perpetuates a system of inequalities between the opportunities available at a college level. 

Take a recent interview by Carys Earl as part of CUBC’s “Pulling Together” campaign. She praised Caius College Boat Club, where she noviced. No doubt her achievements are impressive. It remains the fact, however, that Caius is one of the richest college boat clubs, with a £4.5 million boat house and the highest quality boats and equipment. In contrast, many college boat clubs lack the money for paid coaches or have no boat house at all. With no central funding from the university, there is no mechanisms to ensure equal opportunities in rowing between colleges. The result is that certain colleges provide more opportunities for progression into CUBC trialling.

CUBC’s “Development Squad” aims to give college-trained rowers the chance to develop their technique with the eventual aim of encouraging them to trial. Initially based on ergs, before moving to water training and wider education sessions on nutrition and physiology, the programme seeks to strengthen the pathway into trialling. What the Development Squad doesn’t do, however, is strengthen progression through the squad into selection for the “Blue” boat.

It is certainly difficult within a three-year undergraduate degree to start from scratch and reach an elite level of rowing. Likewise, I am not advocating for an “all or nothing” approach regarding those who have rowed before Cambridge. But, it is disappointing that so few college-trained rowers are selected for Boat Race crews.

CUBC did not respond to request for comment.

About The Author

Becca Sproston

See author's posts