Semantics and Collapsing the Bottom Arm

[KirkB]

You know Rhino, your 2 short sentences clarify this far better than the lengthy post that I just prepared offline!

For the Reader's Digest version, you're the man!

If I had read you post earlier, I might not have bothered. Oh well, I'll post it anyway, for anyone that wants more than the RD version!

Kirk

[KirkB]

PP, I don’t know where you got the Bubka quote from, but it sounds counter-intuitive to Agapit’s “lat pull as soon as the pole hits” idea in the 6.40 model. You can’t be “pulling” and “pushing” at the same time with the bottom arm! Not that Bubka ever performed the 6.40 model IMO, but there should be SOME consistency between what Bubka quotes and what Agapit proposes. I’d like to know the BTB2 page # of that quote, and we can go from there.

You PUSH and SQUEEZE with the TOP hand, but you DO NOTHING with the BOTTOM hand, except use if for balance. (Search for keywords “PUSH SQUEEZE” and you’ll find my relevant posts from June of this year.)

I’m not going to browse thru the entire book for Bubka’s quote or any other statement in support of pushing with the bottom arm. BTB2 is chock full of various advice not to push.

Here’s one example, on page 45-46 referring to Isi:

… she makes no attempt to bend the pole! At the instant she leaves the ground the pole is unloaded. She drives her hands up through the pole at and immediately after take off in order to maximise the pole ground angle. … To ensure that the body is not forced to rotate forwards under the hands by the shock of the impact, she allows the impact shock to drive the arms back – often called the soft left arm … (‘a disengaged left arm ‘ is the term used by German coaches). …

To understand the context entirely, you need to read the entire book.

What do you say the difference is between 'pushing' and 'reaching'?

Well, reaching is “finishing your plant” by reaching as tall as you can before the pole hits the box. There’s no pressure on your bottom arm while reaching, other than the weight of the pole.

“Pushing” is too easily mixed up with either (1) “reaching to finish your plant” or (2) pushing to bend the pole”. That’s why I thought you’d agree that “reaching” is what you are trying to describe. I have only introduced the word “reaching” this week – to try to distinguish the pre-takeoff pushing (good) from the post-takeoff pushing (bad). The word is only good if everyone understands what it means. As I mentioned before, the word “pushing” is too ambiguous – too easily misunderstood.

If you’re back to “pushing after the takeoff”, then what can that mean other than “pushing to bend the pole”? Why else would you continue to push? Vaultman explains this as “pushing to get the pole out of the vaulter’s face”. That’s also “pushing to bend the pole”, right? Whatever the reason, I assert that pushing AFTER takeoff is a bad thing (believe me – as an intermediate, I’ve done it – it’s a bad thing), and I think I have Bubka, Petrov, Altius, Agapit, and McMichael are all thinking the same way. Not that majority rules. Like Tim, I’ll challenge the majority if I feel strongly enough about something. Let’s clarify this.

In 1985 in Birmingham, Vitali Petrov said:

… We do not share the view of those who say … pressing the pole perpendicularly, and that this helps in this initial bending. We approach this differently. … while the pole bends beneath him of itself, and not by pressure of the left hand in the take off. … it bends under the effect of the vaulter’s speed and body mass … Making or encouraging the vaulter to force bending of the pole as much as possible in penetration means allowing him to make a crude error.

It is almost an incontrovertible fact that the bottom arm plays a role in the pole bending.

Nope. It's not a fact just because you say it's a fact. You need to back up your "facts". Read BTB2. Read Petrov's 1985 speech. Read the PV Manifesto.

Re-read the full text of the Repent thread, and you will see that Tim thought that too, but after testing in his backyard “lab”, he came to the conclusion that the bottom arm wasn’t needed to bend the pole.

I'm just now thinking that if one truly does 'push as hard as they can with the elbow out' right before take-off, the pole tip will move up...

Good thinking.

The “reach” that I’m talking about is a less assertive action than the “push” that you’re talking about. You only need to “push” (I hate that word in this context) as hard as is required to move the pole to as high as you can “reach”. That’s why I prefer calling it “reaching”. Said a different way, the vaulter’s focus during the plant should be on letting the pole drop WEIGHTLESSLY into the box. If the pole’s weightless, then it will require very little pressure to reach as high as you can with your top hand holding the pole during the plant. The bottom hand also reaches fairly high, but is really just “coming along for the ride” - since it's hanging onto the same pole that the top hand is controlling.

... But what about during take-off?

Take another look at the Duplantis Video. He reaches more forward with his bottom arm than what seems necessary, but it’s only because of his wide grip. But once his plant is finished, and he’s off the ground, there’s no more “reaching”, “pressing”, or “pushing” with his bottom arm. If there was, he would slow down his swing. You can see that he has a very fast swing. He couldn’t swing that fast if he was “pushing” after takeoff.

At the risk of arguing against myself, Tim McMichael DID push after takeoff, and he had a very fast Hinge. But that’s not as good as a very fast Whip (i.e. overall Swing). He lifted his trail leg backward/upward on takeoff – like me. That sped up his Hinge. But since he loaded the pole on takeoff, his overall Swing was sub-optimal. I would guess that knowing what he knows today, Tim would not push after takeoff. But I should let him speak for himself.

You want to speed up the swing – not slow it down. Pushing with the bottom arm slows it down.

To repeat:

I would say that there’s apparently still confusion about it, so it deserves further study and discussion.

[sigh]

Kirk

[KirkB]

The bottom arm is not needed to bend the pole. But it is needed to plant the pole properly and provide balance. One very large problem for most vaulters (especially beginner - intermediate) is the plant and take-off tend to overlap too much. If a vaulter is under and planting late the bottom arm becomes more important. If the plant is low and late the bottom arm must apply significant pressure to get the pole out of the vaulters face. The bottom arm can only push while the vaulter is still on the ground (not Free).

With a proper pole-drop, plant action and free take-off the bottom arm will provide upward pressure only in the plant action. The plant will end as the take-off foot leaves the ground (plant is over and take-off begins) so the bottom arm is no longer pushing. Once the take-off has begun the vaulter can't push any long without going into a passive phase.

So to recap:
bottom arm pushes up in plant only
bottom arm does not push after take-off
If the take-off and plant overlap the the bottom arm will push during take-off due to the plant not being finished

Very nice summary, Vaultman!

MY recap (slightly different than yours):
1. top hand reaches up, pushes and squeezes during plant
2. bottom hand reaches up (but does not push or squeeze) during plant
3. top hand pushes and squeezes during take-off
4. bottom hand does not push or squeeze after take-off

I simply prefer the word “reach” to “push”. Just as I was confused (above), beginner and intermediate vaulters may be confused, so the word “reach” serves to clarify the proper action. Semantics!

The word "squeeze" means "hang on tight". It's the word that I keyed on during my plant - to remind me that I need to tighten my grip in prep of the pole hitting the box. Until the very top of the plant, the top hand DOES NOT SQUEEZE - the pole is held with just thumb and forefinger. Thus, you must remember to SQUEEZE at the last second.

You will notice that I omitted your third recap point. I don’t know what to put in its place, other than “bail if you’re under”. That’s what I did, but I’m not talking about when I was a beginner or intermediate. So I leave that one open, for more experienced coaches of that calibre of vaulter to decide how to handle.

However, I think it’s expecting too much of a vaulter to not push (to bend the pole) when the takeoff ISN’T under, but to push (to bend the pole) when the takeoff IS under. It seems to me that you’re asking the vaulter to make a split-second decision upon takeoff, and to not push in one case, and to push in another. I fear that this can lead to pushing all the time. I just don’t know how you can expect a beginner or intermediate vaulter to make such a quick, intelligent choice in the heat of the moment.

Wouldn’t it be better to try to ingrain into the vaulter’s head the PROPER method of REACHING during the plant, and FINISHING the takeoff (without mentioning the word PUSH at all), rather than advising him – under certain conditions – to PUSH during and after the takeoff?

I tried to jump from approximately 4 inches out, so that if I was under my normal takeoff point by up to 4 inches, I’d still get a free takeoff. If the toes of your takeoff foot are 4 inches back from directly below the top hand, the trick here is that you have to JUMP! With a free takeoff, you can’t expect to just get picked off the ground by the pole!

I think that’s a good thing to teach. I would not, however, advise a beginner or intermediate to set their takeoff mark 4 inches behind their top hand. Instead, I would advise them to gradually move it back an inch at a time, more and more – as they became comfortable with a free takeoff. The process of gradually moving the takeoff mark back might take weeks or months – even years.

The previous 2 paragraphs are slightly off topic, but I hope they give you some ideas on what to focus on INSTEAD of focusing on “to push” or “not to push”. i.e. You should focus more on what the feet are doing, rather than what the hands are doing. This goes along with the principle that you should always trace a bad vault back to its root cause (its source), and fix that first. For example, if you’re under and that “causes” you PUSH to bend the pole, don’t focus on trying to fix that. Instead, go back to the root cause, and take off from further back. You see?

I’m sorry, but short of bailing and trying to take off further back on your next attempt, I don’t really have any better solution to suggest if you’re “under” by quite a bit.

Kirk

[joebro391]

WOOOOOOOOOOW!!!!!!!! how did this thread happen while i was at school and practice today??? HAHAHAHA

i actually read the whole thing too. um...i think i was mentioned...once or twice. My original question was more about lateral placement, And when i was agreeing with PP i was just reffering to keeping the elbow OUT, instead of bringing it DIRECTLY over my head.

MY TAKE ON IT: is that, there are differences, between pulling and pushing, SURE. but, there is also a difference between RISING (to get the pole to the best angle, right before take-off). NOW, as far as i can tell, most people can agree that pushing on the pole will "force" and bend. and yet, bubka and Petrov both said that your hands must continoulsy push away from the ground, towards the sky. So my beliefe is that most people, the people that believe that pushing forces a bend, don't really understand WHY it forces a bend.

HERE'S WHERE I PUT MY TWO CENTS IN: I believe that you MUST continue to PUSH the pole away from you. AND the only way that that can TRUELY "force" and bend, is if you are simultaneously PULLING DOWN with the TOP arm (first degree lever)

SO, IN SHORT: PUSHING away with top AND bottom arm = RISING of the pole, while PUSHING with the BOTTOM and PULLING with the TOP = "FORCED BEND"

MING, talk about semantics

idk, i see a therapist, don't ask questions :-P

[KirkB]

Joebro, I'm guilty of getting into too much detail on this thread, so I'll keep this short and sweet ...

If you believe in the Petrov model - which you do according to your taglilne (PR: 13'6 iPolevault !!!!PETROV MODEL!!!!), then you should not be trying to continue "pushing the pole away from you".

Re-read my quote from Petrov's 1985 speech (3 posts above), and you will see that he's definitely opposed to pushing with the bottom hand.

Honestly, all you need to do is hang on with the top hand, and the pole WILL BEND due to the force of your run and takeoff!

Rhino's post said it best. Re-read that one, and you will see what Bubka says and doesn't say.

Just my 3 cents worth. (It would have just been 2 cents, but I’m Canadian and our Loonie is worth more than the American $1 bill these days! Ha! Ha!

Kirk

[altius]

The problem may well be semantics - because we are trying to use words - with all of their limitations - to describe something that will best be understood when seen and felt. This may well be why there is a discrepancy between what I wrote on page 240 of BTB2 and what YOUNG athletes pick up in a coaching clinic. I think we should be grateful that they at least understand that they should never drive a straight and locked arm into the pole at take off.

However take a look at the photo on the front inside cover of BTB2 and work out what is going on there with the left arm.

But with my original comments in mind about the difficulty of describing complex and rapid movements with words, I will be happy to discuss the issue in Reno in January.

[ADTF Academy]

PP, I don’t know where you got the Bubka quote from, but it sounds counter-intuitive to Agapit’s “lat pull as soon as the pole hits” idea in the 6.40 model. You can’t be “pulling” and “pushing” at the same time with the bottom arm! Not that Bubka ever performed the 6.40 model IMO, but there should be SOME consistency between what Bubka quotes and what Agapit proposes. I’d like to know the BTB2 page # of that quote, and we can go from there.
[sigh]

Kirk

Thats the question... what did Bubka do. It appears as though he extended after takeoff and the pole ran away from him. But I can only go by what I see I was not in there camp when they worked on technique. Myself and agapit have stated in posts that the opposite is wanted that you use, as you put it, the lats or a pulling sesation behind you to keep your body as close to the imaginary pole cord as possible. If you extend you push your body away from the imaginary pole cord.

Can this be done effectively and get on big poles and jump high.... Watch out in 2009 you may have your answer....

[vaultman18]

This thread is definitely getting out of the realm of Intermediate. Kirk to answer your recap question if the vaulter is under all bets are off. The vault becomes reactionary and that is why the bottom arm pushes. The real problem starts when coaches begin to tell their vaulters to take-off under and drive through the pole.

Ideally I say no push, practically sometimes you have no choice. The key is to train in way that will allow you to have a proper run, plant and take-off. A coach and vaulter must have a clear vision of the proper model and train to obtain it. If a vaulter makes 10 mistakes leading up to the point he/she leaves the ground and only tries to fix 11th mistake the results will be minimal.

[powerplant42]

I just don’t know how you can expect a beginner or intermediate vaulter to make such a quick, intelligent choice in the heat of the moment.

It's just like 'steering' at the end of a run. We discussed the same sort of thing in the 'lead knee retrospective' thread.

powerplant42 wrote:
It is almost an incontrovertible fact that the bottom arm plays a role in the pole bending.

Nope. It's not a fact just because you say it's a fact. You need to back up your "facts". Read BTB2. Read Petrov's 1985 speech. Read the PV Manifesto.

Re-read the full text of the Repent thread, and you will see that Tim thought that too, but after testing in his backyard “lab”, he came to the conclusion that the bottom arm wasn’t needed to bend the pole.

I did not say that the bottom arm was NEEDED to bend the pole. This is simple physics... if it's pushing or pulling at ALL, (which it ALWAYS is,) it is affecting the bend. Perhaps I'm just waffling and need to adress the main point:

First of all, I don't believe that more than maybe 2 vaulters in the world could 'force bend' their competition pole to any point of real significance with the 'elbow out' position I first described.

Secondly, I agree that the top hand is the most important... by FAR! But what about this 'growing' that has been described by agapit? What of that? Is it only referring to the top hand?

[KirkB]

... I agree that the top hand is the most important... by FAR! But what about this 'growing' that has been described by agapit? What of that? Is it only referring to the top hand?

I searched for "growing" on PVP, and found this on the PV Manifesto thread (page 36):

None of the vaulter who use a free takeoff method have their arms completely extended before the takeoff of the ground is complete. It happens in the air. Neither any of the steel vaulters had their arms completely extended until after the jump off the ground was complete. In addition it would be impractical to attempt a jump with the straight arms, wouldn't it. Bubka described it as growing after takeoff.

And while searching for posts re "bottom arm" I found this little gem ...

on Tue Jul 29, 2003 5:12 pm

When you plant, reach forward/up with both arms, so they're both as extended as possible. But let your top arm take your entire weight, using your bottom arm only for balance. Don't try to resist with the bottom arm, or you'll kill your rockback and your forwards momentum into the pit. Then (assuming your takeoff speed is OK; your grip is at the right height; and your pole weight matches your speed/weight/grip/technique) the pole will bend naturally, and the natural pendulum action from your top hand down to your takeoff leg will be all that's needed to bend the pole. Pressing with the bottom hand on or after takeoff dampens this natural pendulum motion, and kills your forwards momentum into the pit.

Kirk Bryde

That was one of my very first posts on PVP. You can see that it's an important topic for me. And like you, PP, at least I'm consistent in my preachings!

Kirk

[Vaultingman]

I have done one arm vaults before and kept the pole rolling over the box with bends and swung upside down, but surely the bottom arm must have some job to do other than steering the bend. My biggest problem was collapsing the bottom arm on poles that I should of been capable of pressing out.
If sliding boxes are bad for blocking and wide grips not good then surely just softer poles then!

[KirkB]

Vaultingman, I hope you will take my comments constructively, as I know you must have read all of the previous posts in this thread, yet you have still reached some incorrect conclusions (assuming the Petrov model).

Let's break this down ...

I have done one arm vaults before and kept the pole rolling over the box with bends and swung upside down ...

... but surely the bottom arm must have some job to do other than steering the bend. ...

No, the bottom arm doesn't even need to steer the bend. The pole will bend naturally - first forwards, and then out to the side. There is no steering involved in this. This surprised me too at first, when my college coach told me that. After some discussion and experimentation, I found out that he was right.

... My biggest problem was collapsing the bottom arm on poles that I should of been capable of pressing out. ...

"pressing out" is incorrect. There is no "press out" or "push" needed to bend the pole. "collapsing" is also incorrect, since you don't actually need to do ANYTHING with the bottom arm. You just need to use it for balance.

... If sliding boxes are bad for blocking and wide grips not good then surely just softer poles then!

I can't comment on sliding boxes since I never used one. Instead, I just aimed for a towel on the track.

"wide grips not good"

"softer poles"? Well, no! You seem to be concluding that "pressing out" with the bottom arm gets you on bigger poles. This is not true!

Let's separate what you do prior to takeoff from what you do after takeoff. Let's say everything's fine right up to and including your takeoff. Let's even say that you have a "free takeoff" i.e. You don't load the pole prior to your foot leaving the ground.

So once your takeoff foot leaves the ground, you have a couple choices.

You can:
1. press with the bottom hand, to try to get maximum bend out of the pole, or
2. "push and squeeze" with the top hand and swing with your body, to try to get maximum bend out of the pole.

I assume that your line of thinking is that #1 is the best way to max the bend (and ultimately vault the highest).

In reality, here's what will happen ...

Your bottom arm will press into the pole. There will be some "leakage" (loss of energy) in doing that. As your bottom arm presses, your top arm will be inclined to pull a bit (more leakage). (It shouldn't, but it will.) This is a "shrugging of the shoulders" action, which inadvertently raises your Center of Mass (CoM) prematurely. By pulling with the top arm and pushing with the bottom arm (especially the pushing), you will slow down your natural swing. Since your CoM is higher than it needs to be, the pole won't rotate to vertical quite as easily. And since you've slowed down your swing, you will not be able to finish it with a long pendulum motion - from your top hand to your trail leg foot. That's less energy put into the pole (so you'll get less energy coming back out). Instead, you will prematurely tuck your trail leg up, in an attempt to keep the swing going. Once your trail leg is tucked, your pole will still not be quite to vertical, so you'll have to pause in the tucked position for a split second. This is a passive phase (bad).

Once the pole gets to vertical (roughly), you can then extend, or "shoot". But you're shooting from a tucked, static position, so your body must exert more energy to fully extend than if it was already in motion. The Isi pics on the "Comparing still frames" thread here http://polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=16521 show this quite well. Isi passes THRU the "flat back" frame dynamically, whereas Allie is stuck in it. The outcome of all this is that you've lost momentum, so you can't finish your extenstion straight up, above the bar.

Now compare this to #2 - the Petrov model, where you "push and squeeze" with the top hand and then swing with your entire body ...

Your top arm is fully stretched, so you keep your CoM as low as possible (so that it will swing as efficiently as possible as the pole rolls to vertical).

You chest drives forwards as your trail leg extends/stretches into the "C" position. This not only stretches your body into an "elastic band" - ready to recoil - but it also gives the pole more time to roll to vertical.

You swing in a pendulum motion about your top hand, and then about your shoulder. Simultaneously, you hinge (swing) your trail leg about your hip. The combination of this swinging is what bends the pole most efficiently, culminating (roughly) when your entire body passes the chord of the pole in an elongated "I" position. THIS IS WHAT BENDS THE POLE!!!

Now, you may wonder, what do I do with my bottom arm whilst all this is happening? Won't it collapse into the pole? And if it does, isn't this bad?

Well, believe it or not, you really don't need to worry about what happens to your bottom arm. It's going to just hang onto the pole and come along for the ride! It's going to be used just to balance your body on the pole. No push; no pull; no steering - just hang on.

Your bottom arm will probably collapse into the pole somewhat. That's not a problem, because as that's happening, the natural bending of the pole is going to simultaneously bend it out of the way. Whether you're collapsed into the pole, or away from it isn't important. Either way, keep good body posture and JUST HANG ON!!! Let the REST of your body do all the work!!!

I hope I didn't waste my time by describing this for you. I hope you "get it" now. However, it's not something that you'll "see the light" on until you actually try it. THEN you'll become a true believer in the advantages of the Petrov model!

Kirk