it may be the case that the wealth and elitism of "growing up rowing", like "growing up sailing, horseback riding, and playing polo and squash" is sufficient to to keep out the riffraff and the highly athletic boats crewed with also academically gifted rowers; but humans both group identify and are athletically highly competitive, even as spectators, and there's no way you can have world class talent in a sport without either combing the hustings for talent, or keeping "those people" out altogether. Oxford and Cambridge are not magically different than every other place in the world, they are magically the same. If they are good at it, then there's an explanation for it, and it's not "being good at fluid dynamics turns out to make you a great rower".
For example, the Ivy League in American sports is not the elite level of sports in any sport that matters economically, but only because they're only willing to bend the academic rules so far and they restrict competition to other like minded opponents (but they do bend the rules because they care enough to do so).
So either: Oxford and Cambridge aren't world class at rowing; nobody rows outside Oxford Cambridge and some other similarly elitist schools; or they're bending some rules to obtain elite talent.
Rowing is certainly an elite sport dominated by the socioeconomically well-off. I was simply making the point to the GP that unlike US institutions where rowers (and other athletes) are specifically recruited for their athletic talent, athletic prowess plays literally no role in the admissions process at Oxford and Cambridge. Rowers are not admitted "quietly and unofficially."
it may be the case that the wealth and elitism of "growing up rowing", like "growing up sailing, horseback riding, and playing polo and squash" is sufficient to to keep out the riffraff and the highly athletic boats crewed with also academically gifted rowers; but humans both group identify and are athletically highly competitive, even as spectators, and there's no way you can have world class talent in a sport without either combing the hustings for talent, or keeping "those people" out altogether. Oxford and Cambridge are not magically different than every other place in the world, they are magically the same. If they are good at it, then there's an explanation for it, and it's not "being good at fluid dynamics turns out to make you a great rower".
For example, the Ivy League in American sports is not the elite level of sports in any sport that matters economically, but only because they're only willing to bend the academic rules so far and they restrict competition to other like minded opponents (but they do bend the rules because they care enough to do so).
So either: Oxford and Cambridge aren't world class at rowing; nobody rows outside Oxford Cambridge and some other similarly elitist schools; or they're bending some rules to obtain elite talent.