also for the three pairs (W2-, M2-, LM2-). The only pairs category which effectively selected a top crew for the team was the women’s, in which Kerry Simmonds and Megan Kalmoe earned the right to be the US women’s pair at one of the World Cup regattas, and to prove whether or not they are fast enough to go to the World Championships in the boat. This is where it gets more complex,
since the women’s pair and eight are both funded boats, and also have overlap with the quad, the divide between sculling and sweep being more blurred on the women’s team. Kalmoe and Simmonds indeed went to the Aiguebelette World Cup in a pair, but also in the eight, and the rest of the eight competed in pairs too
since the eight is a straight final with five entries. “Tom [Terhaar, head coach] used the W2- trial to select a pair for the World Cup, and the rest of the results to select a larger group for the core of the eight and quad,” said Jordan. A big-boat camp for the women has now been running since the end of April, to allow Terhaar to run further selection tests and training towards creating a strong quad and eight. The surprise winner of the women’s singles at NSR 1, a self-confessedly under- fit Gevvie Stone, could have joined this camp, but is in the middle of medical school so it’s convenient that she can continue training alone between study sessions. “Her school has a break at just the right time for the World Cup and, if she qualifies, the World Championships, so it has all worked out well,” says Jordan. Qualification, for Stone as for all other crews, means getting into the top few places at the World Cup, which
gives them the right to go to the World Championships in August with full funding. Men’s sculling does not have a
supported boat, so the M1x trial winner at NSR 2, Stephen Whelpley, earned the right to be funded to a World Cup in the single, although he is not going to Aiguebelette – second-placed Kenneth Jurkowski is going instead. The rest of the ranking was used as a speed order to determine invitations to the three-month selection camp for the double and quad. On the lightweight side, the men’s
single was won by Nick Trojan, who subsequently was found to have failed to file the right paperwork for prescribed medical drugs, and so has been suspended from competition for nine months. The lightweight pairs gave a ranking which has subsequently created a lightweight four, but they are not supported by the national federation and there is no selection camp. “Once we create the [light] four we say goodbye,” said Jordan. “It happened this time that there were eight other guys who wanted to row as Oklahoma’s club eight, so we will have a LM8+ and it will support the pathway to the light four. But they are going to train outside USRowing.” A few weeks after the first selection
regatta, NSR 2 offered opportunities for all the doubles classes (M2x, W2x, LM2x, LW2x) and the men’s pair. Again, only one of these categories is actually funded to compete internationally: the LW2x, which was won by Michelle Sechser and Devery Karz, who had been first and third in singles at NSR 1. For the rest of the winners it was a chance to decide if they wanted to compete at a World Cup. Ellen Tomek and Meghan O’Leary, the W2x winners, did just that, making the trip to Aiguebelette, where their second place (narrowly missing out on a victory to the Australians) has earned them the right to go with funding to the world championships.
ROW360 // Issue 001
21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116