ADTF Academy wrote:Confused on your point speed development is an indication of quality of training both technically and physically. It doesn't answer my comment towards the people who say Bubka's raw talent didn't matter. Velocity wins if technical components are equal. When your talking about Bubka you're talking about elite athletes not high school kids. Elites are elites for a reason they have the raw talent and technique good enough to be jumping high enough to be called elite.
I'm trying to point out that it's all part of the formula. Of course his talent did make a difference, and he's probably bound to have some pretty significant of success regardless of what system he goes through. But if he had not had the best system backing him up I would argue that he would not have experienced the level of success that he has had. That's a difficult point to prove or disprove since it's all in hindsight but I think logically that optimal performance comes from the best system. And the best "system" is a collection of ideas certainly not limited to technique. Speed has a strong biological component, but to get the most out of somebody's natural speed the quality of training has to be good.
ADTF Academy wrote:I disagree..... I find it interesting the number of high school and club coaches who think they know the answers to solve elite vaulters issues yet they have never been able to work with or produce an athlete who can grip high enough. Technique is looked at in terms of how the vault looks. Technique is ability to get the hips above the grip and ability to rotate a grip. Not how it looks. Just because it looks good doesn't mean it's effective. I think its condescending the number of coaches who trash elite athletes and coaches when they have no idea what its like being in their shoes or producing an elite athlete. It's not as easy as go jump 19'......
I agree with what you say about technique and the look.
And sorry I think I misinterpreted your original remarks. I'm still trying to work out your specific intent. As I see it now you highlight the problem being that high school and club coaches actually imposing their ideas on elite coaches. I think that the club coaches should be able to ask questions out of curiosity, but when it becomes an ego thing of trying to bolster themselves up against a more experienced coach then the line has been crossed. This is actually along the lines of what I was talking about with regards to professionalism. I personally try to not interfere with anybody else's athletes and typically try to reserve my opinion unless it's asked for. But unfortunately there is a lot of unprofessional conduct in this sport.
ADTF Academy wrote: If you read my comment it was meant towards the people who criticize other athletes but say their athletes are a work in progress.
Sorry, my mistake.
ADTF Academy wrote: I agree all athletes are a work in program even your own and another coaches. The key point that was made is in a professional manner. It's the issue our sport is lacking from the top down. Is there really a professional manner at which our sport operates? Can you ship a kid off to a camp like a factory and spit out 200 athletes that look the same? Will all 200 athletes succeed the same or will certain athletes come out on top and others left behind?
Is there one way to coach or hundreds of ways to say the same thing. If you coach one way and you can't mold a wide variety of kids are you really a good coach or a system coach? I could be wrong, but we have too many jumping for magic height if they reach perfection and not enough trying to learn to jump high. Good luck to those on the lower levels. You get 4 years with an athlete. Than a college coach gets 4 years with them. Than they have 2 years after college to learn how to jump high or they quit and get a job. There is no money for a vaulter who can't jump high.
I'm not sure if you took the way I expressed "professional manner" but you make a good point there. I was talking about the conduct of how the coaches interact with each other and other athletes. As you've described, the hypocrisy is not good.
And there are training groups that exist where they do spit out athletes that look remarkably similar. Maybe not in the numbers you've suggested. And no they will not all succeed to the same effect as athleticism will play a role.
As I see it, the big fear is that systematizing things will leave individuals out of a lot of the benefits that they could have received. This is a very rational concern but one that is ultimately negated by the human-aspect of coaching. There is the system, and then there is always the people who deliver the system (the coaches). And as long as the coaches are humans and not robots, there will always be room for individuality. The system is designed to correct human error but it ultimately cannot define the human - this "flaw" is actually the philosophical sweet spot between systematizing and individuality. With all good systems (of any field) there is a fine balance between rigidity and flexibility... structure and chaos. But from the sound of what you're saying, I think you would agree with me.
What I'm concerned about is that the system is coming across as a super-rigid system that "forces" everybody down the same path - and I'm sure this will prevent a lot of people from adopting it's ideas. I think this is best dealt with by clarifying the "ethos" of how I personally interpret it:
There is an ideal way to pole vault as defined by biomechanics. It is not perfectly achievable but we pursue it because the closer we get, our performance will be more optimized. There are some instances where it's pursuit will not work well and for these individual cases, concessions will be made. Not everybody will take the same identical path to this goal, however there is a track in the ground which is reasonably wide to allow for variation but it has been well worn and tested.
ADTF Academy wrote:I think the best question is, "Does the Russian Model Represent Ideal Technique for whom?" For your average vaulter who does not have the raw ability to be world class or for everyone? For high school, masters and average college vaulters I think its a very safe and technically correct model. It doesn't match everyone and to say its the only system that can and will work is arrogance IMO....... If you look hard enough you can make an argument the top people use petrov model cause you want to say they do.... Put 4 elite woman or elite men overlapping and they all do it different. They have common moments in time they all hit because in order to jump high you have to do certain things right, but they all do it in a different way.
I've coached 7' woman, 5 meter high school guys, 13' high school woman, 15' elite woman, and near 19' elite men. They all did similar things but all jumped their own unique way. If you're an everyone must do it the same coach you may produce artificial results, but stagnate athletes who are doomed to fail in college.
I would disagree with you there. I've seen and also heard of numerous elite men and women trained to remarkable results using very similar principles. Perhaps what you are seeing is 4 elite men or women being coached by different people with different points of views. The repeatability of it all is quite extraordinary when you think about how different the people are involved.
A good example I could give would be Alex Parnov. He runs a very well structured system, although again, he is a human and not a robot. But he is one guy and he has his system. Not all of his vaulters "look" exactly the same (but as you said, looks can be deceiving) and he may not deal with them all in the same exact manner as people but they all go through his system. With his system he's produced 3x 6 meter vaulters (i.e. they weren't 6m jumpers before they met him) and 3x 15'+ women. And the kids he trains also look incredible, they're not robots but they sure look like it! His system is not 100% identical to Petrov's and I'm sure he has a lot of his own ideas that nobody else has heard of but in the grand scheme of things they are extremely comparable when you look at all the other systems out there. I personally like to categorize these models under the umbrella term The 2nd Generation Fiberglass Philosophy - there are numerous subcategories created by coaches who have their own perspective of many of the same principles. They are all a little bit different but all fall into the criteria because there are countless recurring themes that have been established for a long time. These recurring themes actually make up the bulk of each individual system! These themes should also now be standard practice amongst pole vault coaches but unfortunately are not.
All people certainly are individuals, but there is enough scientific evidence that we can predict/expect that people will behave in certain ways under certain conditions. Having a good system will let you use this to your advantage. If something happens outside the realms of that system then you can treat it by individual case - or you could refer onto and consult with another system much better suited at handling the problem! There are research projects of titanic proportions with these ideas in fields that are much better funded than our little backwater sport. I think it's high-time that much of the information that is used in more professional and well developed fields across all corners of the world be used in our event.
All that said, I cannot deny your success which speaks for your skill as a coach. There is after all, a human-aspect behind all of this and the results say that you seem to be quite good at it.
Just a little point to add, I tend not to use the term "Russian." While the original ideas did come form the Soviet Union, many people outside of Russia and the former Soviet States use these ideas to great effect. And I would also argue that much of the current development of the 2nd Generation Philosophy, is happening outside Eastern Europe. I use the term 2nd Generation since it refers to the intellectual schism that happened between the Soviet Union and the rest of the world. The 1st Generation Fiberglass Philosophy was established when fiberglass poles were first introduced and people started to have all sorts of ideas of how to use this bendy thing.
ADTF Academy wrote:Find the common themes needed to produce height while landing safe in the pits and as a coach you will start producing more successful athletes.
That's already been done for everybody and it's been done very well. Everybody just needs to find it. Or they could go through the process of finding out everything for themselves. But that kind of defeats the purpose. There will be other things that people can add to it, but the core of it all should be "standard education" for all coaches.
ADTF Academy wrote:Topics like this are so tough. You have different level of coaches trying to make arguments. A coach thinking about and looking only at elite athletes will never see things eye to eye with a coach who only works with 13' men vaulters. This topic is just way to broad or maybe it is as it seems everyone on here thinks coaching pole vault is like an assembly line put the athlete in and produce. Good Luck!
I think we've ended up actually agreeing on a lot of things. Maybe our exchange was much ado about nothing but I think some things were clarified for the benefit of myself and others.
All the best.