mid vs 40m and long jump

[kcvault]

I tried to post this to the 40m topic but it would not let me. Anyway here are my results with 40yard dash, flying 30, 6 step long jump, and 4 step mid mark.

Here are my results:
40yard dash=5.14
flying 30=3.25
6 step long jump=17'3
4 step mid=41
pole vault=17'8

Annie Burlingingham:
flying 30=3.88
6 step long jump= 13'3
4 step mid=34
pole vault=12'8

From observing other pole vaulters the most accurate thing that determines jump height potential is mid mark. Here are the results I have noticed for different 4 step mids.

Girls:
29-30=9ft
30-31=10ft
31-32=11ft
33-34=12ft
34-35=13ft
boys:
35-36=14ft
36-37=15ft
37-38=16ft
39-40=17ft
40-41=18ft

When kate almond jumped 13ft she hit a 35 mid, When Cristine silva jumped 12'9 she hit a 34 mid, when Annie Burlingham hit 34'6 she jumped 12'8. When Chelsea johnson jumped between 15' and 15'6 she hit around 37'6, when Mike acceta jumped 15'6 he hit 37'6, When mike Ortega jumped 14'1 he hit 35 mid, and when I jumped 17'8 I hit a 41 mid. These are all people I observed at cuesta. I have several examples of people for all of these mids and when they hit around these marks they jump around these height's, even when there overstriding as long as they take off. This is just what I have observed and I think dj has exsperinced the same thing with the 6 step mid. This leads me to belive that the most important thing is how fast you accelerate into your last 3 strides.

--Kasey

[vault3rb0y]

Good stuff. I can't help but question from an objective standpoint- how do we quantify "over striding?"

We all know what it looks like, but is it a lower COG, a significant CHANGE in COG, stride length, cadence, etc?

I only bring this up because you mentioned that the acceleration is the most important determining factor, even when they are over striding. I would argue that we should still not focus on hitting a certain mid by any means necessary (ie overstriding) in order to jump a certain hieght. Rather, become a better sprinter through both force production AND form, and this inevitably leads to an acceleration. I don't believe that over striding is the answer. Yes, it leads to a longer mid. But no, it does not lead to more acceleration. I believe in a cause-effect order it would look like this:
Initial Speed+ Acceleration -----Leads to-----> longer mid ----leads to-----> Higher jump hieght

Although overstriding may increase your mid, it does not lead to a positive acceleration, and so would not lead to higher jump hieght. Instead, a farther mid point is an effect of being a better runner and/or being in the right place at take off.

[altius]

"Rather, become a better sprinter through both force production AND form, and this inevitably leads to an acceleration." Spot on. The important thing is to be running correctly into take off. I have never challenged the mid mark theory because I have never used it in the manner suggested - but it does not matter where your mid is if you are running poorly and cant control the pole. There are far more variables operating to create a good performance than simply hitting the mid.

There was a classic example of this at the clinic in Boone last year where a very talented young lady was hitting her mid but running like a duck - fortunately both she and her coach were prepared to accept the feedback they were given and proceeded to make changes. There is little doubt - because I have seen the video of her jumping - that this helped produce a great result this year.