Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

This is a forum to discuss advanced pole vaulting techniques. If you are in high school you should probably not be posting or replying to topics here, but do read and learn.
dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby dj » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:28 am

Good morning,

Part of what we have seen since the beginning of fiberglass vaulting in "technique" is the result of how a fiberglass pole will bend based on the "pattern" of the pole.

Bubba gripping 4.99 on a 5m pole will give a "different" look (with the same physics, technique and forces applied) than Bubka gripping 4.99 on a 5.30m pole, with the same exact stiffness, but with a proportionately longer sail piece.

Bubka would not have to apply additional force, or any force with the left arm to "make" it go straight.... It would follow the symmetrical bend of the pole and go straight on its own if the proper plant, takeoff and extension of the arms were preformed at the takeoff.

On a "different" bending pole there would be a different "look" and different physical actions whither we could see them or not the vaulter would feel them.

Most of the time we as coaches sadly attribute incorrect "technique" to the athlete even when he/she says it didn't feel right, blaming them, making them crazy...

It's called pole vault for a reason.. A coach needs to understand not only the "physics" of the athlete and the event but how that pole will respond when the correct physics is applied.

Usually the physics we try to coach and consider "correct" is the physics from very high jumps.

Many of Bubka's jumps had the best physics, speed on the runway (9.5mps) high plant-out takeoff, fast swing to vertical... Correct grip on a symmetrically bending pole...

And Tim Mack ... 9.3mps, high plant, just a touch "under" but very active "impulsed" takeoff, extremely good/great fast swing to vertical and off the pole. A symmetrically bending pole.

Dj

dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby dj » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:28 am

Good morning,

Part of what we have seen since the beginning of fiberglass vaulting in "technique" is the result of how a fiberglass pole will bend based on the "pattern" of the pole.

Bubba gripping 4.99 on a 5m pole will give a "different" look (with the same physics, technique and forces applied) than Bubka gripping 4.99 on a 5.30m pole, with the same exact stiffness, but with a proportionately longer sail piece.

Bubka would not have to apply additional force, or any force with the left arm to "make" it go straight.... It would follow the symmetrical bend of the pole and go straight on its own if the proper plant, takeoff and extension of the arms were preformed at the takeoff.

On a "different" bending pole there would be a different "look" and different physical actions whither we could see them or not the vaulter would feel them.

Most of the time we as coaches sadly attribute incorrect "technique" to the athlete even when he/she says it didn't feel right, blaming them, making them crazy...

It's called pole vault for a reason.. A coach needs to understand not only the "physics" of the athlete and the event but how that pole will respond when the correct physics is applied.

Usually the physics we try to coach and consider "correct" is the physics from very high jumps.

Many of Bubka's jumps had the best physics, speed on the runway (9.5mps) high plant-out takeoff, fast swing to vertical... Correct grip on a symmetrically bending pole...

And Tim Mack ... 9.3mps, high plant, just a touch "under" but very active "impulsed" takeoff, extremely good/great fast swing to vertical and off the pole. A symmetrically bending pole.

Dj

dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby dj » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:28 am

Good morning,

Part of what we have seen since the beginning of fiberglass vaulting in "technique" is the result of how a fiberglass pole will bend based on the "pattern" of the pole.

Bubba gripping 4.99 on a 5m pole will give a "different" look (with the same physics, technique and forces applied) than Bubka gripping 4.99 on a 5.30m pole, with the same exact stiffness, but with a proportionately longer sail piece.

Bubka would not have to apply additional force, or any force with the left arm to "make" it go straight.... It would follow the symmetrical bend of the pole and go straight on its own if the proper plant, takeoff and extension of the arms were preformed at the takeoff.

On a "different" bending pole there would be a different "look" and different physical actions whither we could see them or not the vaulter would feel them.

Most of the time we as coaches sadly attribute incorrect "technique" to the athlete even when he/she says it didn't feel right, blaming them, making them crazy...

It's called pole vault for a reason.. A coach needs to understand not only the "physics" of the athlete and the event but how that pole will respond when the correct physics is applied.

Usually the physics we try to coach and consider "correct" is the physics from very high jumps.

Many of Bubka's jumps had the best physics, speed on the runway (9.5mps) high plant-out takeoff, fast swing to vertical... Correct grip on a symmetrically bending pole...

And Tim Mack ... 9.3mps, high plant, just a touch "under" but very active "impulsed" takeoff, extremely good/great fast swing to vertical and off the pole. A symmetrically bending pole.

Dj

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby altius » Sun Jun 16, 2013 10:45 pm

"And quite frankly, it is entirely impossible to jump up effectively without lowering the center of gravity or lowering the hips or whatever one wants to call it; something basketball players learn quickly, but many jumpers completely overlook."

Sorry but you do not understand the point I am making - from the perspective of one who has spent a life time teaching sports skills -including the traditional basketball lay up from one leg, power lay ups from both sides of the basket from a double legged jump, jump shots et al - AND working with Henry Jackson an 8.15 long jumper in winning the OVC title in 1970 - and a few other guys in the lj over 7.50, triple jumpers over 16.50 and six consecutive OVC champs in the HJ - straddle and flop note - if my memory does not serve me ill. The point is that yes long jumpers do settle/lower the hips in the penultimate stride but I think you will find that almost every decent coach of elite long jumpers with tell you that if you try to TEACH this it will automatically result in them losing speed at take off. I repeat that it is a non conscious movement that results from the brain/body 'knowing' that this action is important if the athlete is to be able to 'jump high at the end of a fast run'. The basketball player simply does what is necessary to get up closer to the hot spot on the back board -they do not think about settling or sinking to get up there - any more that a volleyball spiker or blocker does!

So it you don't teach it - help the athlete LEARN it - by - for example asking them to run in jump up to touch a volleyball - or foam ball suspended over the long jump pit - initially form 6/8 steps. They will respond just a basketball player does - non consciously from the point of view of how they do it - but they will do exactly what you would like to them to do. Try it> As coaches we can spend so much time teaching things that we actually get in th way of the athlete learning! Of course the classic example of this in the vault is all the misinformation that folk give vaulters as they "tell' them what do after they leave the ground. If you want to ignore the wisdom of the ages, go for it - but eventually you will learn the truth - that is if you get to coach any decent long jumpers. :yes: :heart:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby dj » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:25 pm

Agree Alan

Becca can you remove my extra duplicate post...

Dj.

Ps. Had two Long Jumpers jump 7.80 and 7.52 on the team this year that had pr's reasonable below that before this year..
If you "try" you slow down... The action is subtle... And even more so in the vault.

Still needs to be "long-short". But quick-quick

Dj

User avatar
KirkB
PV Rock Star
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:05 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter; Former Elite Vaulter; Former Coach; Fan
Lifetime Best: 5.34
Favorite Vaulter: Thiago da Silva
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby KirkB » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:30 pm

dj wrote: If you "try" you slow down... The action is subtle... And even more so in the vault.

Still needs to be "long-short". But quick-quick

Dj

:yes:

I definitely didn't purposely dip down, but I intentionally shortened that last step. If I didn't, I always felt I'd be under - and my body posture would be leaning back instead of slightly forward.

And yes - quick-quick for sure!

So I think the cue is to be QUICK on the last step - not to dip or "gather".

Is it possible to jump vigorously UP without dipping? Yes it is! It's all in the ankle action - not the hip action.

You need STRONG ankles and CALF muscles to takeoff efficiently. :idea:

Any training to strengthen them is worthwhile. Ankle raises with heavy weights on shoulders ... slight knee dip and ankle raises with heavy weights on shoulders ...

Kirk
Run. Plant. Jump. Stretch. Whip. Extend. Fly. Clear. There is no tuck! THERE IS NO DELAY!

dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby dj » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:54 pm

Hello

There should be a very slight "lowering" of the COM but slight... The "side" move you see, especially in the LJ, generally slows the jumper and then you have a... Lose of speed compared to how much jump did you get from the "prop".

Like Alan said it depends on the speed of the last two steps... And can you move the trail knee past the plant knee fast enough to move the hips forward to "catch" the jump impulse... Same in the vault...

The faster this move, even with a slight under takeoff the better chance you have of moving the pole to vertical correctly...

Dj

PVstudent
PV Pro
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:53 am
Location: South Australia

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby PVstudent » Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:43 am

Perhaps readers of this topic would like to review the evidence in regard to Bubka before Bubka at
http://youtu.be/w3UTcP5YUCA
http://youtu.be/HyHHN-XvtvI

and consider the tables below showing data on male pole vaulters jumping equal to or greater than 6.00m with the 10 highest vaulters ranked 1 to 10.
The data shows that recent assertions in regard to technique and style have to be entertained with more than a few grains of scepticism.
The data were up to date as of October 2012.

Five out of the top 10 are from the Soviet School and display the following technique characteristics:

1 Attempt to use a Free take-off
2 Approach run with High pole elevation and shoulder width grips
3 Show increased cadence synchronised with initiation and placement of the pole planting action
4 Structured smooth acceleration from the first step of the approach run
5 Use high arm elevation overhead and toe - tip take-off with erect trunk posture and whole body firmness in preparation for pole impact
in the planting box
6 Attempt to be inverted as close in time to maximum pole bend as possible to maximize their use of the pole recoil
7 Execute a spiral turn as close to the longitudinal axis of the recoiling pole as possible
8 Show high arched trajectories in attempting bar clearance
None of these techniques are style related but based on demonstrable biomechanical principles underpinned by fundamental Newtonian Mechanics.

Each of these 5 individual's vaulting style has their unique personal signature by which we readily recognise them.

The list above is not comprehensive but I think raises some doubt about the veracity of the claims made in regard to style.

That vaulter's in the past could display some of the vaulting principles being employed in their vaults and also employed by Bubka is to be expected. But it is quite erroneous to claim that before Bubka any pole vaulter had combined and mastered all the elements displayed in the Petrov-Bubka pole vault technical Model.

Bubka, Tarassov, Markov, Gataulin, and Trandenkov produced 56 vaults greater than or equal to 6.00m.
The other 5 vaulters in the top ten managed 11 such vaults.

Bubka produced 43 vaults indoors/outdoors over 6.0m and Tarrasov followed with 5. Surely it is not stylistic difference but the superiority of the technical model based on the Free-Takeoff that marks the most outstanding achlevements in male pole vaulting.

Top ten 6.0m club 1.jpg
Top ten 6.0m club 1.jpg (65.69 KiB) Viewed 6480 times

Top ten 6.0m club 2.jpg
Top ten 6.0m club 2.jpg (72.61 KiB) Viewed 6480 times

Bubka TD MS TO.jpg
Bubka TD MS TO.jpg (122.67 KiB) Viewed 6480 times
Every new opinion at its starting, is precisely a minority of one!

PVstudent
PV Pro
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:53 am
Location: South Australia

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby PVstudent » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:57 am

Check out the following to see exemplars of Free Take-Off technique other than being performed by Bubka.

http://youtu.be/v9Ne--kuMUU
http://youtu.be/MHGFpk9fx7U
http://youtu.be/-TWAbc5TdpM

Markov Paris 1.jpg
Markov Paris 1.jpg (62.42 KiB) Viewed 6476 times

Gibilisco Paris 1.jpg
Gibilisco Paris 1.jpg (74.62 KiB) Viewed 6476 times

Markov Paris 2.jpg
Markov Paris 2.jpg (80.44 KiB) Viewed 6476 times


The question that has to be resolved is whether the wide variety of vaults claimed to be successful from a technique perspective do in fact give the vaulter employing them the maximum opportunity to achieve their optimal performance commensurate with their acquired proficiency, physical capacity and actual ability level. The contextual framework within which the performance is achieved also cannot be ignored.
Every new opinion at its starting, is precisely a minority of one!

PVstudent
PV Pro
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:53 am
Location: South Australia

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby PVstudent » Thu Jun 20, 2013 11:31 am

Horizontal Acceleration into the take-off during the final three steps of the approach run and planting phases of the vault is part of the "ideal" model for all modern vaulters. I would argue that this is a "Gold Standard" to be successful in performing the start of the touchdown phase of the take-off step. However, the vaulter's "Gold Standard" or "Ideal Model" to be striven for during the take-off is the efficiency with which the vaulter can redirect. momenta to propel the total system toward the vertical plane of the crossbar.

To be efficient the vaulter has to optimize the relationships between the grip length along the pole (a constant), the pole angle to the ground at the instant of take-off which is primarily dependent on stature and the erectness of the vaulters trunk, The width of the grip on the pole and the distance forward from the chest and height of the leading hand at the instant the take-off foot breaks ground contact.

My Previous post showed the positions in this regard achieved by Bubka.

Feofanova Plant Torques.jpg
Feofanova Plant Torques.jpg (64.73 KiB) Viewed 6425 times


Feofanova shows a "Free Take-off" and on the other hand in the diagram below Yelena Isinbayeva set a world record but was under in the take-off

Isinbayeva Under takeoff 5 5.01 world record.jpg
Isinbayeva Under takeoff 5 5.01 world record.jpg (91.52 KiB) Viewed 6425 times


Isinbayeva, I argue achieves her record not because of stylistic or better mechanics in an under takeoff but because she has superior athleticism, gymnastic ability and technical proficiency in the pole support first and second phases of her vault. The take-off to be the most efficient must satisfy the fundamental law of trigonometric ratios of the sides of Right Triangles and timed with precision to minimize energy wastage and optimise momenta redirection. Therefore I suggest that Isinbayeva, on this occasion succeeded by being able to compensate for her technical error in the takeoff because she was more proficient physically and in her technique in the pole support and aerial phase of the vault.

Readers can judge whether being under is mechanically efficient and therefore quite acceptable within "functional Limits". How functional limits are defined is another matter in this case.
Every new opinion at its starting, is precisely a minority of one!

PVstudent
PV Pro
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:53 am
Location: South Australia

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby PVstudent » Thu Jun 20, 2013 11:54 am

To follow on from my previous post...

Isinbayeva Under takeoff 6 5.01 world record.jpg
Isinbayeva Under takeoff 6 5.01 world record.jpg (67.79 KiB) Viewed 6420 times


The illustration above indicates the velocity distance graph measured on this occasion of 5.01m World Record.

Below I show some real world data obtained in a competition concerning the step length relationships and a horizontal speed distance graph of the same vault by a vaulter that I coached.

Acceleration and takeoff issue 6.jpg
Acceleration and takeoff issue 6.jpg (84.32 KiB) Viewed 6420 times


Acceleration and takeoff issue 7.jpg
Acceleration and takeoff issue 7.jpg (71.28 KiB) Viewed 6420 times


Careful examination of the data does provide some insight into the acceleration question.
Every new opinion at its starting, is precisely a minority of one!

CoachEric
PV Whiz
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:47 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter, Current Private Coach for HS and College Athletes
Lifetime Best: 16'
World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
Favorite Vaulter: Bubka
Contact:

Re: Fourteen Year Gap in Modern PV Technique in the 1970s?

Unread postby CoachEric » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:27 pm

Great post! I appreciate the data.


Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests