The location of the take off point in fiberglass pole vaulti

[dj]

Alan

i agree some are born or haven't developed the right strength and motor skill to "jump" big..

but i also know from experience we are letting that "thought" hold us back...

i can use myself as an example... not touch the BB rim in high school to "dunk" and 40 inch vertical 5 years later... from 21-7LJ to 25-1LJ… 5-10HJ to 2.02m 6-7……..

the physics hasn't changed and training methods hopefully have gotten better.. even though I trained like Brummell.

if you get your feet "under" you and build strength and power from that position you will improve... if you are a world class athlete you can make it "functional..

in 84' with Tully we only got part of the way..in 18 months.. plus Tully was taught to run off the ground with no up impulse... by 88' we were much closer...

it shows in the McGinnis papers... he jumped 19'..18-11 and 19-2 first three meets.. unfortunately his Achilles… got the better of him… bad shoes and a photo shot without warming up!!!!

Dj

[ADTF Academy]

Just cause it worked for you... Maybe you were underdeveloped as a kid. Maybe you grew into your body. Maybe things finally clicked.


Thousands of athletes later the reality is no matter how precise, perfect and thought out a training program is some people do not posses the ability to learn speed and hops. Yes they can improve. Yes they can get better for themselves. We all have limits. Most never reach theirs while they are an athlete. To say its as easy as the correct mechanics can cause any athlete to jump 25'. I just laugh and say prove it. Your 12.4 100 meter sprinter guy who has dropped down from 12.8 due to perfect training won't eve see 21' probably. If that was the case than why don't we have more athletes jump 25'+ in the LJ from the same school. If you can get one to do it why can't all your LJ's jump 25'+.


To say vertical has nothing to do with jumping is a stretch. Vertical is pure power. It's a pure moment of impulse does it relate 100% obviously no, but 9 times out of 10 I can here a vertical, SLJ, and 3 step Jump and know if the athlete has any kind of speed or not. Penultimate and run up does allow for an elastic component. But if your vertical is lets say 28" whats the chances your elastic vertical will be 40"...... Slim to none. Yes some athletes are better off a preload action than straight power. I wouldn't say the norm is to see a vastly big difference. As alan said in my own words. You need an athlete (or train one) to produce athletic performances.

*****Athleticism can be trained and improved.... We all have caps though. Genetics is the underlying factor on those caps. Blame your ancestors*****

[VaultMarq26]

So.....what you are saying is if an athlete is not a very good athlete (lets just say 30" vertical is a determine factor of that) they should not be trained to jump with proper techinque?

Does a throws coach tell an athlete "since you are not strong enough to throw the shot put, I will teach you a different method than I will teach the strong throwers"

Why would you strive for mediocrity. Yes there are some people that just are not going to be high level vaulters because they are not strong, fast, or athletic enough, but teaching them improper technique doesn't seem like the answer.

I am misinterpreting your post?

[david bussabarger]

I will state again that except for a few exceptions, virtually all the respondents to my posts seem to believe with absolute certainty that 1 ideal model exists in the pv. in addition they believe that the b/p model is that one ideal model. again, the intensity of these beliefs are to me, are very similar to a devote religious belief that cannot be swayed by any possible arguement.
whatever the correct term, free take off or pre jump, What I am arguing against is the idea that the vaulter should leave the ground before the pole contacts the back of the box. I consider this idea mechanically flawed and extremely dangerous.
From my point of view I did not cherry pick the members of the 6m. club for my arguement that there can be significant variations in the take off point that can produce outstanding results ( which runs contrary to studies that state the farther under you take off the greater the velocity lose ). I simply chose the best possible examples. based on irrefutable empirical evidence, the mentioned studies have to be flawed or incorrect. a few other examples of elite male vaulters taking off under with excellent results are quinon, otto and krupski. this list can easily be extended if I take the time to review more vaulters.
I dispute the fact that mack moved his take off point out. based on about 20 videas I have of him ( including all his vaults at the 2004 olympics ) he consistently took off 6" to 9" under. inadition, all vaulters take off points vary some what from jump to jump, and day to day . I have many videos of vigneron taking off slightly under for instance.I even have a video of bubka setting a w.i.r. in 83 at 19'-11/2" taking off about 12" under. this was spectacular vault with a monster clearance of at least a foot.
I hope the responders will be satisfied that I have at least attemted to address some of the major points raised ( although I expect them to br dismissed in the same manner as every thing else I have written ).

[dj]

hey

sorry ADTF but i have to hold my ground here....

it's not just my own "development" that i have to draw on, it's my education and the 40 plus years of working with 1000's of athletes.

and it's not just gene's we are dealing with... genes give us a "base" structure and a base strength ratio.. but everyone can improve and develop with enough time.

and we are not talking about a 12.4 100 meter person... we are talking about an athlete that has the "genes" to be elite or world class… and even the vaulter mentioned by Alan could have improved with the correct approach and if someone would have started early enough with him.

Based on his result as a "none" jump person it would not have taken much for him to be world record holder…

Sorry, but I know enough about jumping and human physical performance to know that I can't use the athlete's "genes" as an excuse not to push for the max..

What we have failed to realize in our "education" on motor skills, especially "jumping", is that many of those athletes that we have "labeled" as natural jumpers did not have the "magic" gene that is alluded to (my brother, same parents, genes and physical characteristics and I didn't have it… I changed and he didn't) but went on to "fool" us by jumping out of the gym! Why!! Because they jumped a million times on the play ground, from the time they were 5 until they were 20, when we first saw them and labeled them a "natural" jumper. In just an hour basketball game a player will jump approximately 300 times!

If the athlete has the speed to jump 5.60/5.70 he has the tools and can be taught to "impulse at the takeoff.

dj

[dj]

hey

David B.

taking off under IS taking place most of the time.... the less efficient the run has become, shorter runs and less speed… the vaulters are continuously taking off under…

I don't believe and according to "physics', "under" is not the best method to transfer energy onto the pole..

But because of fiber glass and the ability to "shorten the radius" allowing a higher grip 1000's of vaulters are very successful… but the down side is they will never reach full potential by not "working" with physics…

dj

[coachjvinson]

I will state again that except for a few exceptions, virtually all the respondents to my posts seem to believe with absolute certainty that 1 ideal model exists in the pv. in addition they believe that the b/p model is that one ideal model. again, the intensity of these beliefs are to me, are very similar to a devote religious belief that cannot be swayed by any possible arguement...
...I hope the responders will be satisfied that I have at least attemted to address some of the major points raised ( although I expect them to br dismissed in the same manner as every thing else I have written ).

The devout religious belief is science... more specifically, Sports Science which relies heavily, and at times entirely on Physics.
We all understand that each individual is ultimately the INDEPENDENT VARIABLE,
Next, and the root of the discussion is the method by which to train an athlete to most closely match and interpret or define a mechanical model through the athletes actions -PHYSICAL, MENTAL, and yes SPIRITUAL!)

I am satisfied, that the dialogue has taken a more systematic direction. I would state that major points are not being merely dismissed but DEBATED on the MERITS. Ultimately, I am thankful for the disagreement and the dialogue: may we all have the opportunity to continue to EXPAND our understanding and to GUIDE and INSTRUCT individuals which follow our direction:
Primum Non Nocere
V

[superpipe]

But because of fiber glass and the ability to "shorten the radius" allowing a higher grip 1000's of vaulters are very successful… but the down side is they will never reach full potential by not "working" with physics…

Bingo! Perfectly said DJ! Physics, Physics, Physics. Why so many ignore it is beyond me. Too many also ignore DJ's first comment above that Alan did a fantastic write-up about in his books:

But because of fiber glass and the ability to "shorten the radius"

Again, pure PHYSICS explaining why you can grip higher on a fleixble pole, not just by watching somebody do it. This is science. Yes, pretty complex science with human biomechanics and a flexible pole involved, but it's science that has ONE correct answer and a zillion "close, but not quite" answers.

Thinking about it from a coaching education perspective, they should require a basic physics background (or offer the course) as part of coaching education for Track & Field. You don't have to be a physics guru, but you do need to understand the basics of energy and forces and how, when and where they apply.

[ADTF Academy]

So.....what you are saying is if an athlete is not a very good athlete (lets just say 30" vertical is a determine factor of that) they should not be trained to jump with proper techinque?

Does a throws coach tell an athlete "since you are not strong enough to throw the shot put, I will teach you a different method than I will teach the strong throwers"

Why would you strive for mediocrity. Yes there are some people that just are not going to be high level vaulters because they are not strong, fast, or athletic enough, but teaching them improper technique doesn't seem like the answer.

I am misinterpreting your post?

What I saying is not everyone should be preached to have a 1' outside takeoff. I have heard of coaches trying to get everyone to jump from a foot out. That is taking it to the extreme. If you don't have athleticism to handle that kind of impulse and maintain velocity coming off the ground than its not a good idea to teach taking off a foot out.

Even at the bottom I said you can train and improve. I agree 100% with DJ that in fact the impulse can be trained. However, at some point in time you can only train so hard and you can only improve so much and sadly so many in our past took to injecting themselves to train harder. Thats a whole seperate issue. Doping was a huge thing of the past and sadly maybe now too who will ever know. Once again I thought the discussion was geared around elites and world class. I didn't mean to affend any 12' vaulters out there. But you're a 12' vaulter why are you taking off out a foot. Don't say cause the B/P model tells me to. LOL thats exactly what I'm referring to. The principles need to be in place but it must match what the athlete can give. Sorry for the confusion, but as I put we all have limits on our abilities. The job of a coach is to help each athlete approach their limits, but they do exsist.

[superpipe]

What I saying is not everyone should be preached to have a 1' outside takeoff. I have heard of coaches trying to get everyone to jump from a foot out. That is taking it to the extreme. If you don't have athleticism to handle that kind of impulse and maintain velocity coming off the ground than its not a good idea to teach taking off a foot out.

Are you saying it's ok or even "good" for certain athletes to take-off one foot out, much less 6" out? If so, how do you justify this?

[dj]

hey

A foot our is ridiculous… 10 cm "out" from vertical, even for the best and fastest elite jumpers, can produce "disastrous" results…

I have never understood when the "correct" method has been presented, in any sports activity, that any coach could think that taking it to an extreme is the right thing to do!!!

Even Levenelli who has taken of "out" with bad results… taken off out, with an "impulse" and was ok.. bottom line is when the Olympic champion takes of "on" he has his best, highest and safest jumps…

Is this (extreme behavior) a USA "mental" glitch that feeds our consumer mentality, that makes 80% of use obese, or causes us to eat chocolate or ice cream or burgers until we are sick of our stomachs???!!!

What causes us to think that, although we have "received" what is correct from "physics" (a takeoff up on the toe, creating the maximum pole angle just "nanoo" seconds before the pole smacks the box) and "think" seemingly seriously that we can change it in any direction… and it would be "ok"…

Maybe this is how most of you have thought about my "preaching" on the run! Enough already…

Ok I'll get off the "box'..

"under" is bad!… "out" is bad! A foot out and you should have your license revoked…

"On" is good……….

[Branko720]

DJ great posts, I again will say I don't understand what David B. is advocating and I asked on a previous post an important questions. I would like to know what David B. think that the advantage a fiberglass pole has over a stiff pole (bamboo, aluminum)? The answer to this question may be very revealing. I don't think anyone in their right mind would advocate an under take-off on a stiff pole. And is David B. advocating coaches to teach an under take-off?

Also who out here on these posts has been calling for athletes to take-off a foot out?

I agree with DJ too far out or under is bad, and on is good.