I'm still a rookie coach with youngsters jumping around 4 meter.
I teach my athletes to keep their knee up, so they can invert faster. A few of my athletes have seen both Lukyanenko and Hooker on television during the Olympics. Of course they ask me why they should keep their knee up, when the elite polevaulters are dropping the lead knee. I don't have the answer to that. Ofcourse That doesn't make me look good...
I just can't comprehend there is an advantage with dropping the lead knee. Must I say to them Lukyanenko is making a mistake?
I know there are a lot of high level coaches on this board. Can someone tell us why Lukyanenko is dropping his lead knee? And if he keeps his lead knee up, will he eventually jump higher?
His 6,01 jump:
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=1FrureAG8rI
Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
It is not "wrong" to drop the lead knee. It is "wrong" to not finish your takeoff. 99% of the time that a youngster is dropping the knee it is because they are not finishing the takeoff. The elite vaulters who drop the knee do so to stabilize themselves in the air after takeoff. Much of this instability is caused by how forceful their takeoffs are in the first place which is the opposite of what most young kids are dealing with. Hope that makes it as clear as mud.
Facts, Not Fiction
- altius
- PV Rock Star
- Posts: 2425
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
- Location: adelaide, australia
- Contact:
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Barto is correct with his assessment because if you look at Lukanyenko you will see that he has a passive take off. Not sure if that causes the double leg swing, although it is likely, or if he has been taught to jump that way. No matter, you should not use him as a model for kids - he does not employ a free take off and take a look at his position when the pole is at maximum bend and compare it with that of Bubka - he is recovering all the time from mistakes made earlier. He is a very skilful athletic guy who gets away with technical mistakes to jump as high as he does.
Run2neils - You will never go wrong using the Petrov/Bubka model -even with very young athletes. Also remember this - and this is coming from one who has never coached a 6.00m vaulter - Petrov made the point in Reno a few years ago that coaches should stop seeing 6.00m as a benchmark -they should be looking at 6.10 - 6.20. Given that Bubka first jumped 6.00 over 23 years ago - prehistory in pole vault terms - he has a point. I have long argued that the tragedy of Bubka's career was that his need to provide security from his family - then injury - prevented him from fulfilling his potential; I know he agrees with this view. Sadly this means that his WR seems gettable even by athletes with poor technique -the 6.30 he was capable of would not have been!! That would have kept the focus on his method without any distractions of the kind being discussed here.
It will be interesting to see how Hooker's technique continues to change - he had a great coach up to 5.92, but not the best of coaching contexts - now he has an almost perfect situation. We will see.
I think KirkB has done a great job of injecting much needed interest into this forum but newcomers should be aware that these issues - especially the clear advantages of the Petrov model have been dealt with before.
Finally i will repeat what I said on the Reno Summit ten years ago - much to the disgust of folk like cowpoke - that unless all US coaches take up and apply the Petrov model they will find the very strange scenario of an Australian winning the Olympic title being repeated. Although next time it really could be a New Zealander or even a Canadian. Now perhaps that is stretching things a bit!
Incidentally buy "Beginner to Bubka and Izzy too" - an Australian approach developing pole vaulters! You will enjoy it!
Run2neils - You will never go wrong using the Petrov/Bubka model -even with very young athletes. Also remember this - and this is coming from one who has never coached a 6.00m vaulter - Petrov made the point in Reno a few years ago that coaches should stop seeing 6.00m as a benchmark -they should be looking at 6.10 - 6.20. Given that Bubka first jumped 6.00 over 23 years ago - prehistory in pole vault terms - he has a point. I have long argued that the tragedy of Bubka's career was that his need to provide security from his family - then injury - prevented him from fulfilling his potential; I know he agrees with this view. Sadly this means that his WR seems gettable even by athletes with poor technique -the 6.30 he was capable of would not have been!! That would have kept the focus on his method without any distractions of the kind being discussed here.
It will be interesting to see how Hooker's technique continues to change - he had a great coach up to 5.92, but not the best of coaching contexts - now he has an almost perfect situation. We will see.
I think KirkB has done a great job of injecting much needed interest into this forum but newcomers should be aware that these issues - especially the clear advantages of the Petrov model have been dealt with before.
Finally i will repeat what I said on the Reno Summit ten years ago - much to the disgust of folk like cowpoke - that unless all US coaches take up and apply the Petrov model they will find the very strange scenario of an Australian winning the Olympic title being repeated. Although next time it really could be a New Zealander or even a Canadian. Now perhaps that is stretching things a bit!
Incidentally buy "Beginner to Bubka and Izzy too" - an Australian approach developing pole vaulters! You will enjoy it!
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden
-
- PV Beginner
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:44 pm
- Expertise: College Coach
- Favorite Vaulter: Bubka
- Location: Los Angeles, California
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Finally i will repeat what I said on the Reno Summit ten years ago - much to the disgust of folk like cowpoke - that unless all US coaches take up and apply the Petrov model they will find the very strange scenario of an Australian winning the Olympic title being repeated. Although next time it really could be a New Zealander or even a Canadian. Now perhaps that is stretching things a bit!
Incidentally buy "Beginner to Bubka and Izzy too" - an Australian approach developing pole vaulters! You will enjoy it!
Mr. Launder
Are you saying that Hooker is using the Petrov model? From what I have seen Hooker does not use the "Petrov" model. Hookers himself has told me that his model is not the "Petrov" model. It's the Parnov model. Parnov's style is much different from Petrov. Right before Dima(Markov) retired he was training with Petrov, as you may recall. Petrov was trying to get him to take off right on, unlike the way he was taught prior to take off a little out. To say that unless ALL U.S. coaches change to the Petrov model, in order to win medals in the future is a horrible statement. I don't know why you would say this. There are many great coaches in the U.S., but unless they buy your book you wont consider them to be good. Talk to you soon Alan.
Incidentally buy "Beginner to Bubka and Izzy too" - an Australian approach developing pole vaulters! You will enjoy it!
Mr. Launder
Are you saying that Hooker is using the Petrov model? From what I have seen Hooker does not use the "Petrov" model. Hookers himself has told me that his model is not the "Petrov" model. It's the Parnov model. Parnov's style is much different from Petrov. Right before Dima(Markov) retired he was training with Petrov, as you may recall. Petrov was trying to get him to take off right on, unlike the way he was taught prior to take off a little out. To say that unless ALL U.S. coaches change to the Petrov model, in order to win medals in the future is a horrible statement. I don't know why you would say this. There are many great coaches in the U.S., but unless they buy your book you wont consider them to be good. Talk to you soon Alan.
- altius
- PV Rock Star
- Posts: 2425
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
- Location: adelaide, australia
- Contact:
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
"Parnov's style is much different from Petrov". Not sure how you can be certain about that - but since I worked alongside Parnov for over two years in Adelaide before he moved to Perth I do have some idea of his methods - however there is just the possibility that a feud between Parnov and Petrov which goes back to 1983 means that Alex may be reluctant to talk about using Petrovs methods. Remember that Steve is in transition from another -very good - coach and may not be there yet technically - but as I have suggested before, take a look at Alex's daughters -if that is not the Petrov model tell me what is??
"Right before Dima(Markov) retired he was training with Petrov, as you may recall". Yes I do recall because I was in Formia at the same time as Dimitri - but the problem was not where he took off but how he planted the pole - and of course that dropped lead leg, which Dima had realised was a problem. Sadly his foot injury prevented him from doing anything about it - otherwise the result in China might have been even more interesting.
But what is the point -It always comes back to the same ol,same ol defensive response. I know there are great coaches in the US - I work with some of them every year - and I am aware of US success over the past 100 years in the vault -but I also know that there is a pervasive parochialism there which does prevent folk from looking at alternatives. Dont buy the book - write your own -the only problem is you will need about fifty chapters to cover all of the different 'models' you will find. Note that the suggestion to buy my book was made to a coach who is obviously looking for some sort of guidance, not to an experienced individual like yourself.
Sorry KirkB -I will stay out of the fray and let this topic run its course without further interference.
"Right before Dima(Markov) retired he was training with Petrov, as you may recall". Yes I do recall because I was in Formia at the same time as Dimitri - but the problem was not where he took off but how he planted the pole - and of course that dropped lead leg, which Dima had realised was a problem. Sadly his foot injury prevented him from doing anything about it - otherwise the result in China might have been even more interesting.
But what is the point -It always comes back to the same ol,same ol defensive response. I know there are great coaches in the US - I work with some of them every year - and I am aware of US success over the past 100 years in the vault -but I also know that there is a pervasive parochialism there which does prevent folk from looking at alternatives. Dont buy the book - write your own -the only problem is you will need about fifty chapters to cover all of the different 'models' you will find. Note that the suggestion to buy my book was made to a coach who is obviously looking for some sort of guidance, not to an experienced individual like yourself.
Sorry KirkB -I will stay out of the fray and let this topic run its course without further interference.
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden
- 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: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
There are other threads - some several years old - that have dealt with dropping the lead knee. On this thread, the difference is that we're discussing the topic in a new light, given the fact that all 3 Olympic medalists drop their lead knee in some fashion. I hope we can continue the thread in this light.
I find it interesting that Hooker and Lukyanenko both drop their knee, yet their technique is so drastically different that we should really not even be talking about the two of them in the same breath.
On the one hand, Hooker is very close to the Petrov model, other than dropping the knee. I've yet to figure out the full history of how his technique has evolved, but it's starting to unfold, thanks to the contributors on this thread. I suspect that he's not done yet. Even as good a coach as Parnov might be, he can't be expected to change Hooker's technique overnight. Look how long it's taken Petrov with Isi. I would classify Hooker as having a single-legged swing, with a slight difference in style (according to BTB2's definition of "style"). I'm still all ears as to whether the slight dropping of his lead knee is an advantage or a disadvantage. It does load the pole more, but it also slows down his swing. However, his swing isn't so slow that he gets behind the pole. He's still able to keep up with the pole, and invert fairly early, without any noticable pike or tuck during inversion - at least to my naked eye. How is he able to do this? That's what I'd like to know! I must admit that I still haven't analyzed any of his vaults in slo-mo yet. Perhaps then, I'd see what he's doing a bit better.
On the other hand, Lukyanenko has a two-legged swing. There's no other way you can describe it. By necessity, he drives the lead knee forwards, as he jumps off the ground. I think that's a natural consquences of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. But he barely jumps off the ground before he gets into the double-leg swing. What he loses by his lesser jump and slower swing, he seems to gain in a HUGE amount of energy loaded into the pole by the two-legged swing - whilst his CoG is extremely low. I think he even does a two-legged "tap" or "whip". That's totally different than Hooker. The "magic" happens after the whip. He's behind the pole, and must play catchup. Most mere mortals would fall apart at this point, but he somehow recovers enough to catch up to the pole again, and get a very good handstand. (Yeh, he's curving his back bigtime to slither to inversion. I've seen vid of Bubka doing that on some of his bad vaults, but Lukyanenko does it on EVERY jump!) The only explanation I can offer (just a guess) is that he's a very good [high bar] gymnast, and practices [two-legged giants], then applies that technique to his vault.
Another guess I have in comparing Hooker to Lukyanenko is that Hooker's on a much lighter pole than Lukyanenko. Hooker has less leakage (a much better "continuous chain"), wheras the "magic" motion that Lukyanenko has from end-of-swing to inversion is fraught with leakage. But he makes up for it by his heavier pole.
"From end-of-swing to inversion" is quite an abrupt, noticable transition with Lukyanenko, but hardly noticable at all with Hooker and his "continuous chain".
Since I'm just guessing, I'm hoping somebody else with more knowledge here can put me straight.
And what about Yurchenko? Sorry, I just don't know much about him, other than seeing a few of his Olympic jumps.
Kirk
I find it interesting that Hooker and Lukyanenko both drop their knee, yet their technique is so drastically different that we should really not even be talking about the two of them in the same breath.
On the one hand, Hooker is very close to the Petrov model, other than dropping the knee. I've yet to figure out the full history of how his technique has evolved, but it's starting to unfold, thanks to the contributors on this thread. I suspect that he's not done yet. Even as good a coach as Parnov might be, he can't be expected to change Hooker's technique overnight. Look how long it's taken Petrov with Isi. I would classify Hooker as having a single-legged swing, with a slight difference in style (according to BTB2's definition of "style"). I'm still all ears as to whether the slight dropping of his lead knee is an advantage or a disadvantage. It does load the pole more, but it also slows down his swing. However, his swing isn't so slow that he gets behind the pole. He's still able to keep up with the pole, and invert fairly early, without any noticable pike or tuck during inversion - at least to my naked eye. How is he able to do this? That's what I'd like to know! I must admit that I still haven't analyzed any of his vaults in slo-mo yet. Perhaps then, I'd see what he's doing a bit better.
On the other hand, Lukyanenko has a two-legged swing. There's no other way you can describe it. By necessity, he drives the lead knee forwards, as he jumps off the ground. I think that's a natural consquences of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. But he barely jumps off the ground before he gets into the double-leg swing. What he loses by his lesser jump and slower swing, he seems to gain in a HUGE amount of energy loaded into the pole by the two-legged swing - whilst his CoG is extremely low. I think he even does a two-legged "tap" or "whip". That's totally different than Hooker. The "magic" happens after the whip. He's behind the pole, and must play catchup. Most mere mortals would fall apart at this point, but he somehow recovers enough to catch up to the pole again, and get a very good handstand. (Yeh, he's curving his back bigtime to slither to inversion. I've seen vid of Bubka doing that on some of his bad vaults, but Lukyanenko does it on EVERY jump!) The only explanation I can offer (just a guess) is that he's a very good [high bar] gymnast, and practices [two-legged giants], then applies that technique to his vault.
Another guess I have in comparing Hooker to Lukyanenko is that Hooker's on a much lighter pole than Lukyanenko. Hooker has less leakage (a much better "continuous chain"), wheras the "magic" motion that Lukyanenko has from end-of-swing to inversion is fraught with leakage. But he makes up for it by his heavier pole.
"From end-of-swing to inversion" is quite an abrupt, noticable transition with Lukyanenko, but hardly noticable at all with Hooker and his "continuous chain".
Since I'm just guessing, I'm hoping somebody else with more knowledge here can put me straight.
And what about Yurchenko? Sorry, I just don't know much about him, other than seeing a few of his Olympic jumps.
Kirk
Run. Plant. Jump. Stretch. Whip. Extend. Fly. Clear. There is no tuck! THERE IS NO DELAY!
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
altius wrote:It will be interesting to see how Hooker's technique continues to change - he had a great coach up to 5.92, but not the best of coaching contexts - now he has an almost perfect situation. We will see.
I think KirkB has done a great job of injecting much needed interest into this forum but newcomers should be aware that these issues - especially the clear advantages of the Petrov model have been dealt with before.
Finally i will repeat what I said on the Reno Summit ten years ago - much to the disgust of folk like cowpoke - that unless all US coaches take up and apply the Petrov model they will find the very strange scenario of an Australian winning the Olympic title being repeated. Although next time it really could be a New Zealander or even a Canadian. Now perhaps that is stretching things a bit!
Incidentally buy "Beginner to Bubka and Izzy too" - an Australian approach developing pole vaulters! You will enjoy it!
Hi Alan, nice prophecy by the way. I would like to comment on your above points - firstly i think beginners would have a hard time in this section understanding anything so they are probably safe and personally i need to keep talking about Petrov and the Bubka example, so please continue re-analysing that older stuff before some of us got here.
Kirk is great -i love you Kirk
I'll just flesh out Hooker's past a little for general knowledge -please correct me if i'm wrong.
Steve was coached by Mark Stewart up to 5.92 over say 4-5 years. Steve's parents were standout athletes in their time but i don't know details except Bill Hooker is still up there on the Aussie All-Time list for the 800m. I saw a lot of Steve and have known Mark since he was still jumping say 15 years ago (same city - same competition track) - lovely guy, great coach but disagrees with needing the Petrov model - he has researched the French system. Mark also coached Emma George from scratch through to WR. I asked him how he felt losing both Emma and Steve to Parnov and he just shrugged and said at some point i can't cover their needs any more - for one i can't travel with Steve overseas but Alex can. He was pretty philosophical about it all - wonderful guy to be friendly with.
Just a couple of things i know about Parnov - he works with energetics far more than he works with mechanics. So his athletes have a great flow and a continuous buildup of energy - at least till the plant. This is why the lead knee is not focussed on so much - it is a minor technical point and it is more important to energise the takeoff maximally instead. The focus there is fully completing the drive with the right side - emphasis on opening the arm pit. I would say he knows conditioning and he knows how to be an elite athlete very well but the mechanics especially the subtle mechanics are not his focus. I have done some sessions with him and loved them - he is quite complete in the roundedness of his coaching - all aspects are under scrutiny although for my personal liking i need a coach who gets mechanics deeply. Altius, Julian completely satisified me in this way.
Last edited by volteur on Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
guess i didn't really expect a reply.
Thinking about this it could come down to the need for whole body relaxation just prior to attempting the inversion. If the athlete has to artificially hold his drive leg up, then the tension created to do so is not desirable for the athlete. Such an athlete will want to let go of this tension as he lets go into the inversion (or rockback as i would have said a year ago).
Another athlete will be able to hold this leg up without any appreciable tension.
The first athlete is using psoas and other hip flexors to achieve this raised drive leg whereas the second athlete is using his abdominal stability (or core if you like the current lingo)
The hip flexors are not the muscles for this job and the body knows it so at that moment prior to inversion, it will switch them off whether the athlete likes it or not. If the torso stabilisers (or whatever individuals like to call this section of the body) are active then they will stay on post takeoff.
Since this is something addressed in gymnastics, pilates, feldenkrais, alexander technique and many martial arts, it would not be difficult to find out what to do to ensure the correct muscles are holding the drive leg up.
comments?
Thinking about this it could come down to the need for whole body relaxation just prior to attempting the inversion. If the athlete has to artificially hold his drive leg up, then the tension created to do so is not desirable for the athlete. Such an athlete will want to let go of this tension as he lets go into the inversion (or rockback as i would have said a year ago).
Another athlete will be able to hold this leg up without any appreciable tension.
The first athlete is using psoas and other hip flexors to achieve this raised drive leg whereas the second athlete is using his abdominal stability (or core if you like the current lingo)
The hip flexors are not the muscles for this job and the body knows it so at that moment prior to inversion, it will switch them off whether the athlete likes it or not. If the torso stabilisers (or whatever individuals like to call this section of the body) are active then they will stay on post takeoff.
Since this is something addressed in gymnastics, pilates, feldenkrais, alexander technique and many martial arts, it would not be difficult to find out what to do to ensure the correct muscles are holding the drive leg up.
comments?
- powerplant42
- PV Rock Star
- Posts: 2571
- Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:58 am
- Location: Italy
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Volteur, you're saying that an athlete might only drop their leg due to poor hip flexor strength and strong abdominal strength?
I believe that this "lead leg" question's answer, like many that we develop, requires numbers that we will never get.
I believe that this "lead leg" question's answer, like many that we develop, requires numbers that we will never get.
"I run and jump, and then it's arrrrrgh!" -Bubka
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Volteur is on the right track with looking at what muscles are being used. The bigger issue is takeoff mechanics. If the takeoff is executed incorrectly the the "wrong" muscles come into play to initiate the swing. This leads to some of the technical characteristics we are discussing here.
Facts, Not Fiction
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Hi Barto and powerplant
i'm not really thinking it is a pure strength issue, more of an activation issue and this as Barto says is largely caused by incorrect takeoff mechanics. The main incorrect aspect i think is a lagging hip girdle. Lagging in the sense of falling behind the other parts of the body ie the foot and hand timing (chest and shoulders). In sprinters, especially many females, this looks from side on like their hips are dragging behind them as they run, almost always accompanied by a leaning forward action with the upper body, but not always. Bubka as the best model we have is vertical at takeoff and his hips can be seen driving through the last few steps of the runup into the plant.
this is one of my favourite Bubka vids as it is so short and slomo and closeup (and you can keep hitting play to see it over and over again) - you can clearly see the hips leading the rest of the body in the 3rd and 2nd last steps - in fact he is slightly leaning backwards as he goes through the planting mechanics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FILObFtp ... re=related
So for me if the hips are not actively driving through the takeoff then there is little chance the abominal stabilisers will be activated enough to stabilise the lumbar spine. Instead the psoas will be forced to stiffen and do the job of stabilising this area instead. This role is meant for the abdominal stabilisers (transversus, obliques internal and external). The psoas and its assistant in this regard, the rectus abdominus, are meant for active movement and not stabilisation.
As a side issue many lower back injuries in the vault are caused when the lumbar spine cannot move due to being stiffly held in place by the psoas etc (iliacus and rectus to assist). Since it has no ability to move, if the takeoff is under something else has to give. If the shoulders and upper spine cannot provide this give (if the vaulter is under) then it has to occur somewhere else.
how does that sound?
i'm not really thinking it is a pure strength issue, more of an activation issue and this as Barto says is largely caused by incorrect takeoff mechanics. The main incorrect aspect i think is a lagging hip girdle. Lagging in the sense of falling behind the other parts of the body ie the foot and hand timing (chest and shoulders). In sprinters, especially many females, this looks from side on like their hips are dragging behind them as they run, almost always accompanied by a leaning forward action with the upper body, but not always. Bubka as the best model we have is vertical at takeoff and his hips can be seen driving through the last few steps of the runup into the plant.
this is one of my favourite Bubka vids as it is so short and slomo and closeup (and you can keep hitting play to see it over and over again) - you can clearly see the hips leading the rest of the body in the 3rd and 2nd last steps - in fact he is slightly leaning backwards as he goes through the planting mechanics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FILObFtp ... re=related
So for me if the hips are not actively driving through the takeoff then there is little chance the abominal stabilisers will be activated enough to stabilise the lumbar spine. Instead the psoas will be forced to stiffen and do the job of stabilising this area instead. This role is meant for the abdominal stabilisers (transversus, obliques internal and external). The psoas and its assistant in this regard, the rectus abdominus, are meant for active movement and not stabilisation.
As a side issue many lower back injuries in the vault are caused when the lumbar spine cannot move due to being stiffly held in place by the psoas etc (iliacus and rectus to assist). Since it has no ability to move, if the takeoff is under something else has to give. If the shoulders and upper spine cannot provide this give (if the vaulter is under) then it has to occur somewhere else.
how does that sound?
Re: Dropping the lead knee - time for a retrospective?
Right on target. Correct the posture and takeoff mechanics become much better. Coaches and athletes must learn to conceptualize jumping with the quads and not the hamstrings. Achieving a vertical shin angle and pushing down against the ground at takeoff will make the athlete look like a great gymnast in the air.
Facts, Not Fiction
Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests