Pole Vault Manifesto

[volteur]

mmm good.

I already see things from a space-time perspective and i guess that's why i like your model, it is driven from such a perspective. In my opinion technique is being in the right place at the right time. I'm going to look at those bubka photos in the other thread.

[agapit]

mmm good.

I already see things from a space-time perspective and i guess that's why i like your model, it is driven from such a perspective. In my opinion technique is being in the right place at the right time. I'm going to look at those bubka photos in the other thread.

I think the model should be simplified as much as possible to be just like AK-47 performing under any conditions. LOL. We need to think more in terms of what the mechanics suggests rather that what feels right or what we use to do.

[KirkB]

Alright another thing I just thought of. One of the main ideas of efficient vaulting that I have heard (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the center of mass must remain close to the pole. However, with a full body swing, eventually, the center of mass will be way out from the pole.

I'm still reading thru the 35 pages of this Manifesto thread, so I apologize if this point has been answered later on. I don't think BethelPV fully answered it in his response immediately following fx's.

IMHO, the center of mass must remain close to the chord of the pole - not the physical pole. With a full body swing, you can easily do that, even if the physical pole is some distance in front of and to the side of you.

p.s. This in no way infers that I agree that a full body swing is even possible - let alone desirable. I'm not sold yet - but I'm listening! It's certainly a theoretically ideal motion to strive for. I'll reserve further comment 'til I've finished the thread.

Kirk Bryde

[KirkB]

... any time spent off the ground before the athlete arrives into the pole is time spent losing energy.

I'm still reading thru the full thread, but I will respectfully argue that your statement is true, UNLESS you're doing something to improve your body posture - setting yourself up for a better swing.

I'm referring to kicking back the trail leg, in preparation for an extremely long, strong, efficient (not necessarily quick - but it could be) swing.

Also, the drive of the chest forward isn't what's important. It's the straight-legged kickback of the trail leg. It's Newton's 3rd Law dictates that the chest must move forward then.

Kirk Bryde

[volteur]

... any time spent off the ground before the athlete arrives into the pole is time spent losing energy.

I'm still reading thru the full thread, but I will respectfully argue that your statement is true, UNLESS you're doing something to improve your body posture - setting yourself up for a better swing.

I'm referring to kicking back the trail leg, in preparation for an extremely long, strong, efficient (not necessarily quick - but it could be) swing.

Also, the drive of the chest forward isn't what's important. It's the straight-legged kickback of the trail leg. It's Newton's 3rd Law dictates that the chest must move forward then.

Kirk Bryde

i too agree that changes in takeoff posture can aid in increasing the potential energy for the next phase of the vault, however i think these are orchestrated during the time the left foot is on the ground.

I've been wondering about this kicking back of the takeoff leg for a while as i've never been taught it. Basically i think the cause of the takeoff (rear) leg position is not driving this leg backwards after takeoff. I think the cause instead is how far forward the CofG has been taken forward (and upward) of the foot position. The cause for me is that the foot is simply left behind.

With the third paragraph i agree Newton's third law would push the chest forward if the foot is pushed backwards due to action-reaction however the net result would be taking your plumb line and tilting it forwards. When it contacts the pole this will have a clothesline effect on the plumb line and the body. I don't think this is desirable. Newton's first law (inertia) states that once a body is in motion it takes an external force to change that motion. Once a body is in the air there are no more external forces being applied (except gravity which is acting to decelerate).

volteur

[KirkB]

[quote="On May 4, dj"]... Stated by an American champion in 1980

“Run and bend the pole into a high bar.. then…. kip and shoot into a handstand.â€

[KirkB]

... are you advocating a tuck over a pike as you kip?

LOL!!! Please get on a highbar and try a kip with a tuck, then a kip with a pike. Let me know which one works out better for you.

Then consider any other way to do a kip (a normal kip - like gymnasts do them), and let me know what kind of a kip you'd call that.

Kirk Bryde

[volteur]

the second works out better for me

but thinking about a normal kip - the part of it that is working a similar action to the vault is the rising part - when both shoulders and hips are attempting to close angle simulataneously. This is what happens in my mind after full takeoff position has been reached. Shoulders and hips together.

[Robert schmitt]

I've been wondering about this kicking back of the takeoff leg for a while as i've never been taught it. Basically i think the cause of the takeoff (rear) leg position is not driving this leg backwards after takeoff. I think the cause instead is how far forward the CofG has been taken forward (and upward) of the foot position. The cause for me is that the foot is simply left behind.
volteur

The "kick back" needs to happen as a result of the way you left the ground like a long jumper other wise it becomes passive to try to reach it back artificially after the take off. I don't coach a kick back persay as much as I coach a takeoff and foot strike that results in that position.

[KirkB]

powerplant42 wrote:
Quote:
also you could check out Bubka himself and see that his right arm isn't quite straight and not fully extended as the pole hits. This one shows it well, although he is close:

This is an unwanted side effect of having a strong body (and arm) at take-off...

Sorry i don't know what you mean. Can you elaborate?

Sometimes an experienced vaulter might have a slightly bent arm at take-off because of trying to attain a strong body in order to transfer as much energy as possible into the pole/system. In trying to keep a really strong arm, Bubka, as do other jumpers, occasionally (or maybe even frequently or consistently) would try to keep all their arm muscles taught as the plant was finished. All the muscles in the arm includes the bicep, which is rather difficult and uncomfortable to keep tight with a completely extended arm. (You could try this right now...) I'll correct my previous statement now: The slightly bent arm is actually a DESIRED attribute in the vault, because the benefit of being more able to utilized the bicep in keeping the arm strong outweighs the extremely small loss of take-off angle (perhaps 1 - 1.5 degrees?). In addition to being more able to use the bicep, the plant can be more centered over the vaulter's head (try getting your hand directly over your head with out bending your arm. If you can do this, then imagine trying to do it in a vault, and you can see that it's not practical.) Does this make sense?

No, this doesn't make any sense to me. A slightly bent arm is going to jerk into a straight arm when the pole hits the back of the box. Energy will be lost then. Why not just straighten it, to avoid this loss of energy?

I always PUSHED and SQUEEZED. That way, the long arm didn't have any built-in inefficiencies (braking action whilst going from slight bend to straight).

Rely on the bones and tendons to be taught. Tighten up the muscles to keep from jerking your shoulder out of its socket, yes, but tightly STRETCHED, not tight whilst BENT.

I recall another post by someone many pages back (and many hours of reading ago) about "good luck on the shoulder surgery". I'm not aware of anyone having this problem. A good gymnastics/weight-lifting program, plus self-preservation meant that you had sufficient strength to tighten up your muscles during your PUSH/SQUEEZE to prevent that.

I'm not experienced with coaching girls, though. Maybe they don't have the natural shoulder strength that I'm referring to?

BTW, my head never, ever got in the way of my top arm during the plant. My head's not that big!

Kirk Bryde

[KirkB]

... And from rings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn5LIiHm ... re=related

This is the model that I followed. Look at the tremendous lift she gets in her foreswing from this extreme backswing!

The kickback is exaggerated more than is practical on a pole. But still, it's a definite kickback.

Imagine how much less force she would have on her swing if she didn't swing back (as far).

Kirk Bryde

[baggettpv]

Ok so the chord of the pole and the top hand, shoulders, hips and swing leg shall simultaneously pass thru a 45 degree line extended from the box in the direction of the runway. From there the swing leg shall break slightly at the hips moving towards the area above the top hand. The Bottom hand shall exert forces down the column of the pole to assist this movement.

Rick Baggett
WSTC LLC