ideal technique in the fiberglass vault
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:07 pm
A beginning note: the writer is compelled to take on the role of the devil's advocate on pvp because the great majority of posters on this site are like minded when it comes to this subject. It is arguable that all progress achieved by mankind throughout history can be attributed to contrarian thinkers.
The writer begins this article by posing the question does ideal technique actually exist in the fiberglass pole vault? This may seem like a simple enough question to answer, but in reality it is qute complex. The 1st problem is how do you determine what constitutes ideal technique?
The best tool man has for solving problems like this is science. Science follows strict rules and the single most importat one is that reality always trumps theory. That is scentific proof is always based on real world empirical evidence ( evidence based on observation and or experience of the real world ). So, if a given theory conflicts with reality ( empirical evidence ), the theory will be considered invalid by scientists.
Variations in the execution of the vault must withstand the evolutionary pressures of the survival of the fittest. This means as vaulting heights have increased over the years, inferior variations must by necessity die out. Based on the fact that Sergry Bubka's wr 20-13/4 dates back to 1994, one would assume that the winnowing out process should be pretty complete by now. The logical conclusion is that if there is one ideal technical model, all current elite male vaulters should utilize something very close to it. For the purposes of this article an elite vaulter is any vaulter that has cleared 5.80m or better. Yet, if you examine the technique of elite male vaulters, even though many variations seen in early glass vaulters have been winnowed out, there is still a great deal of individual technical variation seen amoung them. These variations persist even in the super elite 6m club. All of its 18 members display individualy distinctive execution of the vault.
Therefore empirical evidence strongly suggests that there is no one ideal technical model in the fiberglass vault.
Ironically, The great majority of the members of the vaulting community today STRONGLY believe that there is one ideal technical model, the so called Petrov/Bubka model. Russian coach Vitaly Petrov developed it in the late 1970's and Bubka was and still is its foremost exponet. It is important to point out that there is more than one interpretation of the p/b model in existence today. The most notable and influencial is Alan Launder's, which is detailed in his book From Beginner to Bubka. For the purposes of this article information on the p/b model is taken directly from Petrov's own article in the IIIX congress of the european athletics coach's assoc and from several articles featuring his ideas printed in Lane Lohr's news letter The Vault Standard ( now out of print ).
It is interesting to note that as far as this writer knows, unlike his advocates, Petrov himself has never proclaimed the p/b model represents ideal technique.
Based on Petrov's own writings, the p/b model is based on the following key principles:
1. The take off point should be directly under the top hand when the vaulter is in a vertical position before leaving the ground.
2.The vaulter should stive to execute a free-take off ( be off the ground before initiating the bend of the pole ).
3.The vaulter should emphasize extending both arms as vertically as possible while springing off the ground in a forward/upward direction and driving the chest forward.
4. The bend of the pole should be initiated based on the speed and mass of the vaulter and not with pressure/extention with the lower arm against the pole.
5. Once the take off is complete, the vaulter should rapidly sweep the trailing leg around and back while keeping both arms extended. The rock-back ( a term that Petrov does use ) is considered complete when the trailing leg has covered the arc of the pole and becomes a continuation of the upper end of it.
6. The vaulter should extend vertically by exploding from the hips and dropping the shoulders back. This action adds to the thrust of the recoiling pole.
Petrov also emphasizes that the vaulter should be imparting energy into the pole until the completion of the r-b to maximize the catapultic action of the vault.
An important distinction here is that Launder beleives that the pole's catapultic action is minimal. The vaulter must instead, rely on the continued momentum of the swing to lift him/her up and over the bar.
A particular problem with p/b advocates is that they "cast the widest possible net" when including vaulters into the p/b model. The writer has encountered p/b advocates on the net that claim that as long as vaulter is trying to follow the principles of the p/b model he/she is a p/b vaulter ( even if their technique deviates substantually from the p/b model ).
Launder claims that vaulters such as Maksim Tarasov, Dmitriy Markov and Giuseppe Gibilisco are p/b vaulters. Tarasov comes closest to fitting into the p/b model, but used a pronounced stiff arming action during the take off and swing. Although Markov utilized a free-take off, overall his technique diverged significantly from the p/b model. Giblisco was developed by Petrov, but his technique almost completely deviates from the p/b model. This imlpies that unlike his advocates, Petrov is more open minded when it comes to the acceptance of alternative stylistic variations.
So, there is a great deal of confusion about who is and who is not a p/b vaulter. The greatest problem with the p/b model which is alluded to above, is that many variations in execution that are extremely common in elite male vaulters are classified as inferior or flawed execution by p/b advocates because they deviate from the principles of the p/b model.
This is where the theory that the p/b model is ideal falls apart. That is the theory completely contradicts irrefutable real world empirical evidence that the great majority of elite vaulters succeed while violating some or most of the principles of the p/b model. In effect it is irrational and unscientific to claim that only the small number of elite vaulters who truely fit into the p/b model exhibit correct technique and all the rest exhibit faulty or inferior technique.
If a case study is made of the largest possible number of elite male vaulters over the years ( 94 men cleared 5.80m or better by the end of 2005 ), it is possible to discern a great many aspects of technique that are common to virtually all of them. These common denominators form the unvarying foundation of the vault. Other aspects of technique such as the specific location of the take off point, the specific action and positioning of the lead leg during the take off, the action and positioning of the lower arm during the lower 1/2 of the vault, the specific r-b style and so on, vary from vaulter to vaulter. Note, any study or technical analysis that is based on only one vaulter, no matter how great that vaulter may be, will yeld false conclusions if applied to other elite vaulters in general ( a problem that has plagued vaulting since the p/b model was widely accepted as ideal ).
Finally, based on this perspective, it is possible to speak of optimum execution relative to each elite vaulter's individual style, but not of one all encompassing ideal style or model.
The writer begins this article by posing the question does ideal technique actually exist in the fiberglass pole vault? This may seem like a simple enough question to answer, but in reality it is qute complex. The 1st problem is how do you determine what constitutes ideal technique?
The best tool man has for solving problems like this is science. Science follows strict rules and the single most importat one is that reality always trumps theory. That is scentific proof is always based on real world empirical evidence ( evidence based on observation and or experience of the real world ). So, if a given theory conflicts with reality ( empirical evidence ), the theory will be considered invalid by scientists.
Variations in the execution of the vault must withstand the evolutionary pressures of the survival of the fittest. This means as vaulting heights have increased over the years, inferior variations must by necessity die out. Based on the fact that Sergry Bubka's wr 20-13/4 dates back to 1994, one would assume that the winnowing out process should be pretty complete by now. The logical conclusion is that if there is one ideal technical model, all current elite male vaulters should utilize something very close to it. For the purposes of this article an elite vaulter is any vaulter that has cleared 5.80m or better. Yet, if you examine the technique of elite male vaulters, even though many variations seen in early glass vaulters have been winnowed out, there is still a great deal of individual technical variation seen amoung them. These variations persist even in the super elite 6m club. All of its 18 members display individualy distinctive execution of the vault.
Therefore empirical evidence strongly suggests that there is no one ideal technical model in the fiberglass vault.
Ironically, The great majority of the members of the vaulting community today STRONGLY believe that there is one ideal technical model, the so called Petrov/Bubka model. Russian coach Vitaly Petrov developed it in the late 1970's and Bubka was and still is its foremost exponet. It is important to point out that there is more than one interpretation of the p/b model in existence today. The most notable and influencial is Alan Launder's, which is detailed in his book From Beginner to Bubka. For the purposes of this article information on the p/b model is taken directly from Petrov's own article in the IIIX congress of the european athletics coach's assoc and from several articles featuring his ideas printed in Lane Lohr's news letter The Vault Standard ( now out of print ).
It is interesting to note that as far as this writer knows, unlike his advocates, Petrov himself has never proclaimed the p/b model represents ideal technique.
Based on Petrov's own writings, the p/b model is based on the following key principles:
1. The take off point should be directly under the top hand when the vaulter is in a vertical position before leaving the ground.
2.The vaulter should stive to execute a free-take off ( be off the ground before initiating the bend of the pole ).
3.The vaulter should emphasize extending both arms as vertically as possible while springing off the ground in a forward/upward direction and driving the chest forward.
4. The bend of the pole should be initiated based on the speed and mass of the vaulter and not with pressure/extention with the lower arm against the pole.
5. Once the take off is complete, the vaulter should rapidly sweep the trailing leg around and back while keeping both arms extended. The rock-back ( a term that Petrov does use ) is considered complete when the trailing leg has covered the arc of the pole and becomes a continuation of the upper end of it.
6. The vaulter should extend vertically by exploding from the hips and dropping the shoulders back. This action adds to the thrust of the recoiling pole.
Petrov also emphasizes that the vaulter should be imparting energy into the pole until the completion of the r-b to maximize the catapultic action of the vault.
An important distinction here is that Launder beleives that the pole's catapultic action is minimal. The vaulter must instead, rely on the continued momentum of the swing to lift him/her up and over the bar.
A particular problem with p/b advocates is that they "cast the widest possible net" when including vaulters into the p/b model. The writer has encountered p/b advocates on the net that claim that as long as vaulter is trying to follow the principles of the p/b model he/she is a p/b vaulter ( even if their technique deviates substantually from the p/b model ).
Launder claims that vaulters such as Maksim Tarasov, Dmitriy Markov and Giuseppe Gibilisco are p/b vaulters. Tarasov comes closest to fitting into the p/b model, but used a pronounced stiff arming action during the take off and swing. Although Markov utilized a free-take off, overall his technique diverged significantly from the p/b model. Giblisco was developed by Petrov, but his technique almost completely deviates from the p/b model. This imlpies that unlike his advocates, Petrov is more open minded when it comes to the acceptance of alternative stylistic variations.
So, there is a great deal of confusion about who is and who is not a p/b vaulter. The greatest problem with the p/b model which is alluded to above, is that many variations in execution that are extremely common in elite male vaulters are classified as inferior or flawed execution by p/b advocates because they deviate from the principles of the p/b model.
This is where the theory that the p/b model is ideal falls apart. That is the theory completely contradicts irrefutable real world empirical evidence that the great majority of elite vaulters succeed while violating some or most of the principles of the p/b model. In effect it is irrational and unscientific to claim that only the small number of elite vaulters who truely fit into the p/b model exhibit correct technique and all the rest exhibit faulty or inferior technique.
If a case study is made of the largest possible number of elite male vaulters over the years ( 94 men cleared 5.80m or better by the end of 2005 ), it is possible to discern a great many aspects of technique that are common to virtually all of them. These common denominators form the unvarying foundation of the vault. Other aspects of technique such as the specific location of the take off point, the specific action and positioning of the lead leg during the take off, the action and positioning of the lower arm during the lower 1/2 of the vault, the specific r-b style and so on, vary from vaulter to vaulter. Note, any study or technical analysis that is based on only one vaulter, no matter how great that vaulter may be, will yeld false conclusions if applied to other elite vaulters in general ( a problem that has plagued vaulting since the p/b model was widely accepted as ideal ).
Finally, based on this perspective, it is possible to speak of optimum execution relative to each elite vaulter's individual style, but not of one all encompassing ideal style or model.