Run Discussion

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.
ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon May 29, 2006 11:38 am

dtrack28 wrote:You are correct when at top speed you will not be putting the same amount of force into the ground as you were during acceleration, but guess who's gonna win the race? The guy who puts the MOST force into the ground once top speed is reached while maintaing minimal ground contact time. If your goal is to put less force into the ground while at top speed (as your equation indicates) you WILL decelerate no matter what the ground contact time does.




Ahhh I see. I think I realize now where I didn't explain myself well enough. When I put less force I didn't mean your goal is to apply less force. It is simply due to the fact your not on the ground long enough to apply as much force as you normally would with longer ground contact times example during acceleration.

You still want to apply as much force as you can but the more important thing once up to top end speed is to spend as little time on the ground as possible.

For me the force you apply during acceleration and top end speed is based on your training and strength, plyometric work and technique. Once an athlete has trained these areas correctly then the body in its cyclical motion will do the work for you.

Personally I have seen athlete try to do what your saying overboard which causes them to spend to much time on the ground thus slowing them down.

Dtrack I am sorry I didn't make my self clear. THough I said less force I meant in respect to the total amount of force they could apply due to the fact if your only in contact with the ground for a very short period of time you won't have enough time to apply a great deal of force. The trick is (this is also why strength training and plyometric training is so important) because during that short period of time in contact with the ground the athlete who can apply the most force quickly over a very short period of time will run the fastest.

Like I said a while ago we are talking roughly about the same thing just a different way to think about it.

However I don't think when running your goal and focus should be on trying to apply as much force as possible IE I will sometimes here the key phrase when someone is running at top speed drive behind you or get a little forward lean. The amount of force your applying should be something that happens naturally and smoothly based on your training.


On a side note. I also recommend that any young athlete learn how to run correctly first before they start to get heavily into the weight room. If you develop to much strength to quickly and your legiments and tendons can not support this amount of force your asking for an injury usually in the form or a hamstring pull or knee problems.

User avatar
vault3rb0y
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:59 pm
Expertise: College Coach, Former College Vaulter
Lifetime Best: 5.14m
Location: Still Searching
Contact:

Unread postby vault3rb0y » Mon May 29, 2006 11:57 am

ADTF Academy wrote:You still want to apply as much force as you can but the more important thing once up to top end speed is to spend as little time on the ground as possible.


This is what coaches tell athletes to get them to move quicker through their stride, basically giving more force. I dont think that thinking about spending less time on the ground will help other than helping you to increase your force into the ground.

And on the thing you said about lifting too early in life, before your tendons and ligaments are totally ready.... do you think that this could contribute to shin splints as well? i know its a muscle and not a tendon or ligament, but ive been getting shin splints really badly, and my coach has told me to keep lifting so that the muscle will get stronger and they will go away, but maybe its just creating even more force onto my shins that they cant take, do you have an oppinion on this? thanks
The greater the challenge, the more glorious the triumph

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon May 29, 2006 8:21 pm

vault3rb0y wrote:And on the thing you said about lifting too early in life, before your tendons and ligaments are totally ready.... do you think that this could contribute to shin splints as well? i know its a muscle and not a tendon or ligament, but ive been getting shin splints really badly, and my coach has told me to keep lifting so that the muscle will get stronger and they will go away, but maybe its just creating even more force onto my shins that they cant take, do you have an oppinion on this? thanks


The thing about lifting is performing certain lifts with extreme weights. General Strength training is good and recommended.


My thing with shin spilts is this. If someone was going to punch you in the arm and you were ready for it you would flex and it wouldn't hurt as much as if they punched you with a relaxed arm.

If you toe drops below your heel your shin region is relaxed. Constant pounding on the ground will break down the muscle and cause fatique. Strength training this region will help in its ability to last longer without breaking down. But your still performing a mechanical error. I would bet your foot drops below your heel and you land toe first. The old generic statement RUN ON YOUR TOES.

If you concentrate on keeping your shin muscles flexed with the toe in a dorsiflexed position (toe up ankle locked in position) it should help in lowering your shin spilts this in combination with strength training as simple as making the alphabet with your foot in the air.

User avatar
vault3rb0y
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:59 pm
Expertise: College Coach, Former College Vaulter
Lifetime Best: 5.14m
Location: Still Searching
Contact:

Unread postby vault3rb0y » Mon May 29, 2006 8:55 pm

hmm, you are right. I notice that when im training only on my toes, i dont get shin splints. Its on the 2 lap warm up and when i get lazy, going heel to toe, thats when i start feeling them. Recently for my warm up in meets, ive just done high knees a ton of times on my toes before i do form running, and i havent gotten them as bad. I will deffinitly try to stay on my toes as much as possible, thanks for the advice!
The greater the challenge, the more glorious the triumph

User avatar
Tim McMichael
PV Master
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:36 pm
Expertise: Current college and private coach. Former elite vaulter.

Unread postby Tim McMichael » Tue May 30, 2006 4:08 am

In a nutshell this is my philosophy on the run. It is the product of trial and error and self analysis, so take it for what it is worth.

There is a clawing motion in most good sprinters. It doesn't happen when the foot is on the ground. When the foot is on the ground it is pushing and not pulling.

Some athletes run effectively by driving the foot down directly beneath them with very little clawing motion. These are very rare, and a comparison between the two styles is virtually impossible.

The foot does strike slightly in front of the center of gravity. That is not where the athlete should feel that it strikes.

The majority of the athlete’s weight is taken when the foot is directly under the center of gravity.

The highest velocity is reached just before the toe leaves the ground.

By far the majority of errors involve striking too far in front. Work on striking directly beneath the center of gravity helps correct this error. There are a number of things involved in this. These include: the pole carry, the plant motion, body posture, leg action, foot position, and any combination thereof.

Tall beats fast at the plant. Being both tall and fast is the best of both worlds.

A one inch higher plant means a three inch higher jump.

In a good jumper there can be a variation of as much as three inches in plant height from one jump to the next, depending largely on the quality of the run.

Every aspect of the run should be considered with this fact in mind.
Last edited by Tim McMichael on Wed Jun 07, 2006 12:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

AKell
PV Nerd
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: Unionville, PA

Unread postby AKell » Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:34 pm

so coming in higher=more height? is this the plant height or the height of the takeoff jump?
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. -Pre

User avatar
Tim McMichael
PV Master
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:36 pm
Expertise: Current college and private coach. Former elite vaulter.

Unread postby Tim McMichael » Wed Jun 07, 2006 12:04 am

The best measurement of plant height would be the distance between the top hand and the takeoff foot the instant the pole starts to bend. It is best when this happens just as the toe leaves the ground. For most vaulters this happens while the foot is flat on the ground. This makes a huge difference in plant height.

I found that when I got as tall as possible while still being able to accelerate coming in to the plant that this was easier to accomplish. I did this by pulling my abs in and my chest up and then slightly shortening my stride as I came in to the takeoff. This made me feel that my foot strike was more beneath me than in front. I was able to accelerate while doing this because as I got taller my turnover increased by more than enough to compensate for the slight decrease in stride length. I also inhaled as much as possible just before takeoff to spread my ribcage and gain a few more centimeters of reach. In my experience, if there is any slack in the body when the pole hits the back of the box, that slack must be taken out before the vaulter can leave the ground. This is an energy leak. The pole is bending and nothing positive is happening to the athlete. The pole and the vaulter become mistimed, the trail leg is short, and the swing is late, and all kinds of awful things result; anything from flagging out to coming up short.

This is different from the long jump takeoff in that there is no deliberate penultimate step. It is about getting tall and then driving in and up off of that tall position. The ideal feeling is that you get lighter and taller and faster coming in to takeoff till you are so fast and light and stretched out that all you have to do is push the ground away without giving up anything in terms of forward momentum.

I once asked Mike Connolly about this technique, and he told me that this was the only other way to do a world class long jump besides the conventional method of lowering the center of gravity in the penultimate step and then jumping up off of the board. He also said that it was very rare.

Don Hood once asked how it was that Joe Dial and I had plants as tall as Billy Olson when we were so much shorter. It was a trade secret at that time so we didn’t tell, but this is how we did it.

This was long before the days of the free takeoff, and Bubka was still a total mystery, so take it for what it is worth. I suppose you could call this a proto-free takeoff. We were on the right track, and I wonder how these ideas would fit in with modern theories.

Sorry, I can’t give a simple answer to a simple question; in this sport, I don’t think there are any simple questions. :D

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

Unread postby dj » Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:32 pm

hey

sorry to take up a lot of space.... but this should be good reading for anyone that wants to get faster... with or without a pole...

carry the pole balanced properly and "dropping' it properly, as resistance free as possible, is of major importance...

has EVERYONE tried a pole run on the track and plant into a towel??? the next time you do them turn loss of the pole with the left hand 3lefts (6 steps) from the plant and see when the tip hits the track... go ahead and plant with the right hand... then turn loss with the right hand at the 6 step mark and plant with the left hand... keep the left hand chest high bfore you let it drop and plant..........

What Contemporary Research Tell us about Sprinting
Illinois Track and Cross Country Coaches Association Clinic
Ken Jakalski
January 12, 2002

Reconsidering the Conceptual Paradigm of Running Mechanics

The history of speed training makes it clear that our philosophical approach changes with the current thinking of the time. For example, several years ago, coaches believed that the only way to increase speed was to increase stride length. Indeed, stride length is a function of running speed, since stride lengths do increase as our speed increases. The natural way for a runner to increase stride length is for him or her to increase the force against the ground in each driving phase. This, of course, requires increased leg strength.

Then, we began almost two decades of sprint training that emphasized what is now referred to as neuro-biomechanics. This approach challenged the commonly held notion that stride frequency was too difficult to improve, and noted that, of the two factors, stride length/stride frequency, frequency was actually more important. The training approach today focuses on reducing the time it takes to get necessary force into the ground. The goal is to increase stride frequency and reduce the time it takes to recycle the leg.

To this end we designed drills to train athletes to place their limbs in more appropriate positions to improve the rate of force development. Since the ground phase was dictated by ground preparation, the key was to generate high speeds backward to minimize breaking forces and maximize propulsive forces. The secret seemed to be the ability to generate high negative thigh speed, or what came to be known in coaching circles as negative vertical velocity.

Unfortunately, the drills we’ve designed have been based more on coaching insight and observation than on hard science, and it’s clear that the questionable carry-over of these drills to actual sprinting has left many coaches and runners frustrated. I have watched many colleagues teaching dorsi-flexion, pawing, clawing, fast foot, stepping over the opposite knee, appropriate arm carriage, etc. only to observe with dismay that these movements don’t appear to be repeated when their athletes begin sprinting. What’s the problem here? Insufficient time to fix these new patterns of movement? Poor coaching of these techniques? Inappropriate cues? Improper drills for appropriate mechanics?

My contention, based upon a wonderful opportunity I had to study over thirty years worth of locomotion research under the direction of renowned Harvard physiologist Peter Weyand, is that we may very well be attempting to make modifications to non trainable entities. I first began to consider this possibility when conventional speed training could not explain to me how it was possible for an athlete without feet to dorsi-flex, or arms to aid in propulsion, could run 22.94, which is exactly what World Paralympic Sprint Champion Tony Volpentest did in Lisle four years ago!

We believe that athlete’s faster muscle fibers can improve stride frequency by reducing the time spent on the ground and in the air. In fact, reducing ground time and air time has been the basic approach to speed training since the early eighties. However, what if we discovered that the mechanical energy to reposition the free swinging limb is actually provided passively through elastic recoil and energy transfer between body segments instead of power generated within muscles?

If this were the case, if muscle speed has little effect on minimum swing time, then training to improve stride frequency, what we now refer to as maximum velocity mechanics, would be of little value.

If frequency is revealed not to be a contributor to faster top end speed, what is? Stride length must be critical. But how do athletes increase stride length? One way to achieve longer strides is to apply greater support forces to the ground. This makes sense, since we know that, at any speed, applying greater force to oppose gravity will increase a runner’s vertical velocity at take-off. As a result, the forward distance traveled between steps will increase.

This was the Harvard researchers’ hypothesis: that greater ground forces rather than minimum swing times enable sprinters to achieve faster top end speeds. In this process, the team re-considered the elementary mechanics of running. First, they explored the possibility that runners reach maximum velocity simply by taking more frequent steps. Next, they explored their original hypothesis, that speed could be achieved by the athlete increasing mass specific force to oppose gravity during the time the foot is in contact with the ground. Finally, they attempted to take into account the fact speed might be achieved by increasing the forward distance the body moves during this contact period, which is referred to as contact length.

The Harvard team expected to find that top speed was indeed more a product of forces applied to the running surface rather than increases in step frequency or contact length. Why did they feel this would be the case? For one, swing time comprises the majority of total stride time, and is the primary determinant of the frequency of a runner’s steps. However, because the range of stride frequencies used by runners at different speeds tends to be narrow, the researchers expected little variation in step frequencies at top speed.

This similarity in step frequency is a difficult concept for most of us to grasp, since video analysis seems to reveal some fundamental yet critical movement “commonalitiesâ€Â
Come out of the back... Get your feet down... Plant big

AKell
PV Nerd
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: Unionville, PA

Unread postby AKell » Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:11 pm

long but good! :yes:
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. -Pre

europevaulter
PV Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:56 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Unread postby europevaulter » Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:23 am

I know this discussion is more turning into "what is the best way to sprint", but I think there is still a big difference with just sprinting and pole vaulting, as is stated earlier by others. I agree with agapit and found a good example of it I think.
go to: www.stabhoch.com and look for Kevin Rans, 12.02.06 Donetsk. I love his run. ok I think his take off has still a lot of work, but he just got this run down.

he used to combine sprints and pole vault. he was one of the fastest sprinters in his country, and in a way that helpt him vault well, but not good. He was overrunning and so was unable to take off well. now he left the sprints for what it is and worked with Petrof and his coach on a new run up, and I have to say with a very positive outcome.

The thing they work on a lot, if I understood correctly, is not to push out at the end and getting the leg back to the front asap with a high kneedrive. when you push out at the end too long, your hips will lower down. I don't say he's not pushing at all, nor is he crawling (although that might be the impression). one thing is sure. his hips and knee are very high and that gives him a big plus, specially for getting on big poles...

I do a lot of runthroughs instad of jumping and I think this is my biggest problem, specially when I try to get on a big pole. very frustrated and hard to correct.

Still I learned a lot out of this discussion!!!
for love of the game!!!

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

Unread postby dj » Thu Jun 08, 2006 6:07 pm

hey

some years ago, 1970's, i read a study done in USSR!...

one group (10-15 athletes) of pole vaulters did nothing but sprints without the pole... group 2 did half and half, pole runs and sprints.. group 3 did all pole runs....

who had he most improvement in the speed of the run-up from start to take-off?????????

SAID.. Specific Adaptations To Imposed Demands

yes the 3rd group..

in '83 and '84 all of mike tully's speed workouts were pole runs...

those that remember him know that was his best and fastest run ever...

that is why i do pole runs that are correct, fast and have the right rythme...

accelerate to the "MID" (6 steps from the plant) to break inertia and to build speed... and then "frequency" acceleration with the same step length into the plant.. of course a "subtle" penultimate is desired to have the mass moving "up" at takeoff....

again look at the "MID" chart an see how it is set up... it is linked on the PVP homepage..

i'm going to start timing all my jumpers from start to finish.. and move them back to 8,9 maybe even 10 lefts...

and start kicking "butt' and taking names............

;)

dj
Come out of the back... Get your feet down... Plant big

AKell
PV Nerd
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: Unionville, PA

Unread postby AKell » Fri Jun 09, 2006 10:54 pm

I agree that all pole runs ought to maximize training productiveness b/c of said SAID :P But my question is would that work well for an imperfect runner? In my case as a decent sprinter but not in any way blazingly fast yet, do you think it would be better to do pole runs or just trin for speed first? And in the study, what level were the atheletes? Top notch or more lke me?
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. -Pre


Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests