vaultwest wrote: basically the flex chart is how poles are separated into smaller weight increments. Right now Gill has about 350 different models of poles in their catalog so if they used their flex chart to make the models go up by 1 pound increments instead of 5 then they would have to list 1400 models and then of course they would have to stock that many different poles and all of us dealers would have to also stock so many poles that this system would be unmanageable. ...
Thanks Vaultwest, it makes sense, and I thought that might be the reasoning. That's just how it's always been.
But ... and I'm not trying to change the world here ... I'm just trying to clarify "fact" from "false logic" ...
Poles are assigned a model # by: (a) the brand; (b) the length; and (c) the weight. This is a voluntary choice that each mfr makes.
The premise of the mfrs and their dealers is that:
1. the RULE is tied to the WEIGHT,
2. the WEIGHT and LENGTH are tied to the MODEL,
3. the MODEL is tied to the SKU (unique Stock Keeping Unit identifier),
4. each dealer would like to (I assume), stock as many SKUs in inventory as is "practical" (based on cost-efficient inventory practices, and based on the demographics and buying habits of his customers)
Notice that the RULE is not tied to the MODEL, nor the LENGTH, nor the FLEX, nor the SKU, nor the [desired] inventory of the mfr or of each dealer.
So if increments of 5 pounds suffice at the HS level, then ALL poles of a certain weight that a dealer stocks could be the exact same length and flex. OK, maybe not the same length, as different vaulters have different grips, so they need different lengths. But a smart coach (?) should buy only the LOWEST flex #s of each 5 pound increment - to comply with the NFHS rules, yet allow his "beginner" vaulters to use the lightest poles allowed under the rules.
I'm not saying that the SKUs or the MODELS should be changed. I'm just saying that REGARDLESS of MODEL or SKU (brand, weight, length), the smart mfr and the smart dealer still need to be cognizant of the NFHS rules, and still need to stock the appropriate number of poles at the appropriate FLEX. Regardless of MODEL or SKU. So the argument that "... all us dealers would have to stock so many poles that this system would be unmanageable" is weak.
Maybe what you didn't notice is that - like it or not - you're stocking at the FLEX level!
And I suspect (but don't know for sure) that the mfr doesn't have complete control over the exact flex. I suspect that there's some variability in the mfg process, the flex # is measured AFTER the poles are built, and this might be what causes a range of flexes for each weight/length.
I'm interested in the details - and I certainly don't know them all - but I will guess that on the one side, the dealer might request certain flexes "to cover a range within a weight and length" (or maybe asks for the LIGHTEST flexes of a MODEL), and on the other side, the mfr will send the dealer what he has in stock. i.e. instead of specific back orders for specific flexes, there's some give-and-take on what's requested and what's received/accepted. After all, the order is for a SKU, and the specific FLEX would only be added "nice-to-have" comments (verbal or written) when the order is placed - not firm specs.
Now, if the dealer really wanted EXACT flexes, then wouldn't it be better to order an EXACT SKU that specifies that? i.e. to prevent substitutions.
I know I'm getting into a lot of detail re FLEX and WEIGHT. Really, my main points are that:
1. the mfr and dealer still have freedom of choice (within reason) to stock whatever exact flexes they want of each model; and
2. the NFHS rules aren't perfect - there's still the potential of SLIGHT competitive advantages for lighter poles
3. there's still "confusion in the marketplace" due to the inconsistencies of flexes between mfrs
BTW, I think the Gill CarbonFX Weave and PacerFX poles have a consistent FLEX throughout all their pole weights and lengths. I believe they're the first mfr to do this. So maybe Gill (Pacer and Pacer Carbon brands) and the other mfrs will follow suit, and then this issue is then resolved?
Kirk