On this occasion, unlike the most widely noted instance of a dead heat in rowing, the 1877 Boat Race, there was no demur from either of the crews involved.

You have to have some sympathy with the dissatisfaction of the Oxford University crew on that occasion, given that, according to contemporaneous accounts, the race was called as a “Dead-heat to Oxford  by 5 feet” by “Honest John Phelps”, the professional waterman who had judged the finish for some years.

In those days there were no finishing posts and therefore no clear finishing line. And Phelps was in a small skiff which it appears had drifted off the reputed finishing line.

As the BNY Mellon official site speculates: “With the swarm of steamers and other boats surrounding him there is a probability that his view was partly obscured…."

Subsequently, representatives of the two Universities and “Honest John” met with the Umpire Mr Chitty Q.C. at the Law Courts where Mr Chitty confirmed that the official record should read Dead Heat.”

As a result of these contentious circumstances, two changes were made to future Boat Races. No longer would a professional waterman act as judge - this function was given over to a member of one of either Oxford or Cambridge University.

And secondly, posts were placed at Mortlake to there could be no doubt over the exact location of the finish line.

Dead heats in rowing are rare, but not unknown.

At the 2007 World Championships, for instance, Germany and Denmark shared bronze in the lightweight women’s double sculls after judges were unable to separate them.

Last year’s racing at the Henley Royal Regatta saw another dead heat, this time between the Seeclub Zurich and Molesey fours, who were thus obliged to undertake a re-row the next day.

When athletics proposed the same system to work its way out of the highest profile incident of a dead heat in recent years - at the United States Olympic Trials ahead of London 2012 - the procedure was kyboshed by, essentially, human fallibility.

As with rowing, athletics has its own celebrated examples of those whom the judges have been unable to separate.

In the first London Marathon, run in 1981, the two front runners, Inge Simonsen of Norway and Dick Beardsley of the United States, inspired by the spiritual aspect to this first mass race in the British capital, deliberately came through the line together.

A year later, at the Commonwealth Games in Brisbane, England’s Mike McFarlane and Allan Wells of Scotland were both awarded a gold medal in the 200 metres after they had clocked 20.43sec.

At last year’s Sochi Winter Olympic Games, after  Slovenia's Tina Maze and Switzerland's Dominique Gisin each earned gold in the women’s downhill skiing after being timed at 1:41.57 -  the only first-place tie in Alpine skiing - Picabo Street, who won Alpine Olympic skiing gold and silver for the US during the 1990s, commented: “I'd love to see [Alpine skiing] go to the thousandth. I'd love to know. Me and everybody else. We'd all love to know. If it's gauge-able, let us have it."

Among other winter Olympic sports, speed skating has recourse to thousandths of a second in the event of a tie, as does luge, which switched to thousandths in 1976 following a dead-head for Olympic gold in the doubles four years earlier.

Since that tied 200m in 1982, athletics has complied with Street’s request.

In the course of her long sprinting career, Merlene Ottey of Jamaica - and latterly Slovenia - won nine Olympic medals, none of them gold. The closest she came was in the 100m final at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics where she and US runner Gail Devers recorded 10.94, but she lost out on gold by five thousandths of a second.

Three years earlier, there had been an even more narrow margin of defeat for Ottey by the same opponent in the 100m final at the IAAF World Championships in Stuttgart – one thousandth of a second.

As for swimming - well, that sport has taken a step backwards after taking a step forwards.

Electronic timing was in its infancy at the 1960 Rome Olympics, where John Devitt of Australia and Lance Larson of the United States finished apparently level in the 100m freestyle final.

Touch pads were not in the sport at that point – the result was determined by judges, three of whom would determine the winner, another three of whom would decide on the minor medals.

Two of the three judges assigned to call the winner had Devitt in front. But two of the three judges assigned to call second place had Devitt behind Larson.

The electronic timing system, used as a back-up at the time, had Larson in front, 55.10-55.16.

However, chief judge Hans Runstromer declared Devitt the winner. The US appealed, as there was no provision for the chief judge to break a tie. The appeal was denied.

Twelve years later at the Munich Olympics the electronic timing system could determine results in swimming to three decimal points, and Sweden’s Karl Gunnar Larsson secured gold ahead of  Tim McKee in the 400m individual medley by dint of just two thousandths of a second.

But there was a widespread reaction against such minute scrutiny which caused the sport to change its rules to the system still operating today, whereby events are judged in hundredths of a second.

Three Olympics later, in Los Angeles, home swimmers  Carrie Steinseifer and Nancy Hogshead  would share the 100m freestyle title after being timed at 55.92.

At the last US Olympic trials in 2012, Allyson Felix and Jeneba Tarmoh tied in their quest for the third individual place in the 100m, each - almost incredibly - clocking 11.068.

Both athletes were sponsored by Nike, and coached by Bobby Kersee. Awkward.

At first, the timer ruled Tarmoh had taken third place by a thousandth of a second, and, brandishing a mini American flag, she had gone on the the post-event press conference in happy mood while Felix, in an emotional interview, insisted: “fourth is the worst”.

But then track officials revised the results and discovered there had been a tie. Also awkward.

United States Track & Field decided the matter would have to be settled by a run-off. But Tarmoh subsequently announced that she would not take part. And that was that.

Even when the most advanced technology is employed, human quirks and emotions can skew the calculations…