Unbending The Pole

[RPVA03]

I have heard people say that you should try to unbend your own pole. This is supposed to be done after you have covered the pole and driven your hips up and shoulders down. From here you should pull towards the ground with your left arm but leave your right arm straight. This action is supposed to help unbend and intensify the recoil of the pole, since you are helping to straighten the pole by pulling with the left arm. Is this idea consistent with the Petrov model? I would assume it is not because it is taking energy out of the pole instead of adding it. I feel that this would actually be a passive motion. I think waiting for amplified recoil of the pole would only keep you from working ahead of it. Are my assumptions correct? Thanks.

[KirkB]

This question has been left unanswered for awhile, so I'll take a crack at it ...

The simple answer to this question is that you should extend in unison with the natural undbending of the pole.

I don't think pulling with the bottom arm whilst leaving your top arm straight is going to work at the point in the vault that you're referring to. Since you've already inverted, the best you can do with the bottom arm is to manipulate it so that your inverted body is pointing more in the right direction. (That's usually called "rowing", which is something that you might need to do if the lower part of your vault didn't already invert you sufficiently. There's nothing wrong with rowing at this point of your vault, if you're not already aligned to shoot straight upwards.) Remember that you're not "pulling" yet in the "pull/push off the pole" sense. You correctly state that your top arm stays straight.

What you fail to mention is what the rest of your body is doing. It's the rest of your body that must extend in unison with the pole. Once you're fully inverted and your body is straight (upside down), then and only then should you start pulling with BOTH arms. Well, OK, slightly before then. You lead with the legs extending, as well as your torso.

Try this ...

Stand on a trampoline, keeping your arms, torso, and legs stiff, and flexing only your ankles. You don't jump very high, do you? But with the right timing, you can jump higher and higher with just your ankles, by flexing them in unison with the recoil of the tramp. OK, now flex just your ankles and knees. Higher, eh? OK, third step is to jump any way you want. Just try to bounce as high as you can, going higher with each bounce. Somehow, you went higher than when you just used your ankles and legs, didn't you? How'd you do it?

The neat thing about this experiment is that I don't even have to watch you jump! I know almost exactly how you jumped! And I didn't even have to TELL you how to jump! In fact, you didn't even have to tell your body how to jump! It just intuitively jumped higher and higher, based on WHAT FELT RIGHT!

And what felt right? Well, I'll bet you flexed your ankles, legs, body, and arms, all in unison with the recoil of the trampoline! Without even trying very hard, you just naturally "jumped" in unison with the tramp, didn't you?

That's exactly what you should strive to do on the pole! You shouldn't try to unbend the pole prematurely by doing anything with your bottom arm. Nor should you delay the bend either. You should just extend in unison with the pole! (To be technically correct, the extension of your body DOES delay the recoil of the pole slightly. You're adding MORE energy to the pole, whilst the pole is RELEASING some energy as it recoils. The NET effect is that the pole recoils slower at first, due to your extension in unision with it. This is good - you want to be slower at the start of your extension, and fastest at the end of it.)

There's 2 different tramp drills that I used to use to train my body to do this as an intuitive, reflex action. I'll post these drills on the Training forum sometime, if anybody's interested.

When you're inverted, it's not QUITE as simple as jumping straight up and down on the tramp, as I explained above. But really, just keep in mind that you should time your extension with the recoil of the pole, and you can't go wrong.

RPVA03, I won't comment on whether what you described complies with the Petrov model or not, but I can tell you that what I described certainly complies with the Laws of Physics - upon which the Petrov model was based.

Re passive motion or not, the action that I described (extending first with the legs and torso, then with the arms) is part of what Roman refers to as "the continuous chain theory". There are no passive aspects to this motion. Your body is in continual motion throughout the entire extenson, and on thru the push-off (if you have one - I didn't).

I think that what I described is quite model-agnostic. It's based on the Laws of Physics - but not on any particular pole vaulting model or style.

I hope this helps.

Kirk

[powerplant42]

KB I'd be happy to have your tramp drills in the 'database' topic!

I will have to disagree with Kirk about driving in unison off of the pole... you should drive FASTER than the recoil of the pole! (We just have to be careful about how we word things, we don't want to give the wrong idea...) This would not work on a trampoline, but on a pole, which you're in contact with until you decide to let go, it makes more sense.

I have also heard about this 'unbending' theory... I've heard of a variation that Mark Hannay describes in an article on pvei, but I guess that both make sense... in theory... But RPV, instead of worrying about working on things like this, you should be out working on your plant or your run. When you're jumping 19'10, then worry about applying these things to yourself! (Just trying to save you some time. ) But discussion is always good. I will comment more later, but for now I see this as 'redirecting' energy, not adding it, but it occurs while energy is being added... perhaps it is adding energy? I'll keep my mouth shut for now and read what others have to say, and then I'll give it my best shot.

[KirkB]

... I will have to disagree with Kirk about driving in unison off of the pole... you should drive FASTER than the recoil of the pole! (We just have to be careful about how we word things, we don't want to give the wrong idea...) This would not work on a trampoline, but on a pole, which you're in contact with until you decide to let go, it makes more sense. ...

Powerplant42, I guess we're back to disagreeing.

Of course you should drive FASTER than the recoil of the pole. Otherwise, you're just "riding" it. Extending FASTER than the pole is what adds energy to the system. I guess I should have made that point clearer.

But this DOES work almost exactly the same way on a trampoline. Otherwise, you wouldn't gain height on each bounce. You are in contact with the pole until you decide to let go, and you are in contact with the tramp until your feet lose contact with it. Think about it.

Kirk

[powerplant42]

Well, you can't really 'decide' to leave the trampoline, but you can decide to let go... But I know what you're saying.

[KirkB]

Well, you can't really 'decide' to leave the trampoline, but you can decide to let go... But I know what you're saying.

Irrelevant.

But I do agree that we should choose our words carefully, and I'm afraid that I have to clarify what I meant by "FASTER".

Of course you should drive FASTER than the recoil of the pole. Otherwise, you're just "riding" it. Extending FASTER than the pole is what adds energy to the system.

I retract this statement - it's misleading. What I meant to say is that the NET EFFECT of extending in unison with the pole is that the ENTIRE SYSTEM (the pole + the athlete) moves FASTER.

Let's break this down. On the pole, when you extend (or not), only one of 3 things can happen:

(1) Your body stays rigid - no active extension, yet no energy leakage. i.e. You're riding the pole.

(2) Your body goes a bit limp - sufficient to cause leakage to the system. i.e. As the pole is recoiling, you (a) tuck [too late] or (b) row or (c) drop your shoulders or (d) have some other "leakage" flaw or (e) do a combination of these flaws.

(3) Your body actively extends - adding energy to the system. i.e. You're using the rigid body + the "continuous chain" theories to extend higher.

Compare this to jumping on a tramp.

(1) If you land rigid, then you'll bounce back up to approximately the same height. Of course that's difficult to simulate, because even if your body is stiff, there's other factors that cause leakage - such as friction in the springs and elastic parts of the tramp. But you get the idea. In theory, you don't add any energy, nor do you lose any.

(2) If you (a) let your arms go limp as you land and rebound on the next jump or (b) absorb some of the shock of landing with your knees or torso (i.e. your body isn't stiff), then you're leaking energy from the system (the tramp + athlete).

(3) If you swing your arms going up as you jump up with your knees and ankles - in unison with the recoil of the tramp - then you're adding energy to the system.

Notice that on the tramp and on the pole, it doesn't actually matter how FAST you actively extend your body. Even the slightest bit of active extension is sufficient to add energy to the system, which will result in a positive outcome.

Now, having said that, it is true that the faster you extend your body (whilst the more efficiently you prevent leakage), the higher you'll bounce on the tramp or extend on the pole. But the relative speeds of recoil and body extension are irrelevent.

Also, Powerplant42, to clarify one other misunderstanding, I think you might have taken my term "in unison with the pole" to mean "ride the pole with no additional energy added". That's definitely not what I meant. You may have taken that meaning by thinking about the "common distance covered by the pole and the body" instead of the "common time span covered by the pole and the body". Clearly, I'm referring to the latter.

I hope that's clearer now.

One last point ...

The time span that has the most affect on the outcome is the time immediately after the recoil. Again, this is true of both the pole and the tramp systems.

Think of it this way: Separate your tramp bounce into 3 parts. The first part is as the springs and elastic on the tramp are stretching. The second part is the first half of the time it takes from the lowest position of the jump to when your toes leave the mat. The third part is the second half of the jump.

When you bounce on the tramp, you your objective in part 1 should be to stay as stiff as you can - to minimize leakage (energy loss). Your objective in part 2 should be to jump as vigorously as you can. Your objective in part 3 should be to extend your jump fully off your toes, with straight body, as quickly as you can.

Now imagine what would happen if you tried to apply LESS pressure during part 2, then tried to apply MORE pressure in part 3. It's too late, isn't it?

Same thing on the pole!

I'll give you another good anaology - clean-and-jerk. If you pull up slowly at first, then try to pull up faster, you won't lift as much weight. You must pull as hard as you can immediately off the floor - then just finish pulling as you bring the bar to your shoulders. In my experience, the clean-and-jerk motion is so close to the extension that I extended (my torso, especially) on the pole very much like I was doing a clean-and-jerk!

The first half of your extension is much more critical than the second half!!!

Got it?

Kirk

[powerplant42]

Yes, I understand it, I just thought you might have been a little misleading with saying 'in unison' is all. I knew that you knew what should be happening coming off the pole. Also, I've reconsidered it, and I think the trampoline metaphor is very good. Everything in the pole vault becomes less important (energy wise) as the vault progresses, and the inversion/drive off the pole is no exception. Like we've already said, we just need to be cautious with our words...