The Swing

[agapit]

The Horror does not come from the model, it comes from watching the many different, unsafe, inefficient, illogical models presently being used in America.

Rick Baggett
WSTC LLC

Coach you are right. The safety is and always must be the top priority. Safety largely depends on a proper supervision of a qualified coach. That is why I posted this disclaimer at the end of the Manifesto.

LEAGAL DISCLAIMER: DO NOT ATTEMPT ANY OF THIS WITHOUT PROPER COACHING SUPERVISION. IT MAY REQUIRE SEVERAL YEARS OF CONTINUOUS TRAINING BEFORE DESCRIBED IN THIS MANIFESTO METHOD COULD BE PERFORMED BY ANYONE.

Cheers!

[agapit]

So, the natural swing ends at the pole, and the inversion (the firing of the muscles... pics, hip flexor, etc.) begins at the pole. If we attempt to begin the inversion and fire the pecs and hip flexor right at the instant of takeoff (assuming we had a free takeoff), would this give the continuous swing we need and continue the swing above the COG? So the swing is just a completion or effect of a free takeoff? And then muscle contractions bring the vaulter to vertical? What exactly should the vaulter concentrate on concerning their body before takeoff and immediately afterwards?

Video would help a lot...

Remember, June 27 and 28

I must admit that writing posts takes time, but it is nowhere close to the time one would need to write a book or produce quality training videos. We are contemplating putting up a subscription website. The subscription will support the production. What do you think would be a reasonable subscription price for such a thing?

Any ideas guys?

[RPVA03]

What happened to the first post here by Agapit? It seems that valuable information has been elided. This is unfortunate. That post was pure gold. If there is any way to bring it back that would be great.

[Pogo Stick]

What happened to the first post here by Agapit? It seems that valuable information has been elided. This is unfortunate. That post was pure gold. If there is any way to bring it back that would be great.

I have a copy. I am too old to trust computers :

The Swing

Everyone seems to agree that swing is an important part of the vault. Let us look into this issue. Let's define what swing means. After we give it a proper name we can intelligently understand each other and have a ground for a productive discussion.

I do not use the term swing at all. I use term inversion and hopefully you will understand why after you read this post.

The natural swing.

It is a common knowledge that when a vaulter leaves the ground and arms meet resistance of the pole the lower part of the vaulter's body will move forward in a "swing". This swing will naturally continue until the center of gravity of the vaulter will reach the chord (line. see BTB) of the pole.

Obviously if we just used this natural swing, we would be clearing heights well below our grip.

Redirecting the natural swing.

Our objective in the vault actually is to raise the vaulter's center of gravity well above the grip. To do so, the vaulter must attempt to raise the center of gravity vertically as high as possible. I must say here that the final height of the center of gravity of the vaulter (bar clearance) has a direct correlation to the speed with which the center of gravity is rising.

There is only one way the vaulter can raise the center of gravity above the chord of the pole and it is do something with arms, pecs, abs, hip flexors.

The strength of the chain is determined by its weakest link.

This is a common way to describe a known mechanical principle. It does apply to our discussion. The vertical speed of the center of gravity will be determined by the weakest muscle group that facilitates the movement. In other words if a vaulter has weak hip flexors, it does not matter how strong his abs, pecs, or arms are the input from them will not exceed the strength of the hip flexors. This is also true for every link in the chain including hand grip on the pole. That is why we are using all sorts of adhesives to at least eliminate the weakness of the hand grip link.

Pecs are the weakest link.

I must tell you that we did not measure the relative strength of the muscle groups that participate in the movement due to lack of funds and equipment available for pole vault research, however we have conducted an extensive empirical research that led us to believe that out of all muscle groups participating in the movement the pecs are the weakest link.

Let me describe to you what results from the pecs work. If you keep your arms straight and use your pecs, abs and hip flexors you will produce, so called "Rowing action" that will result in the so called "pocket" or "tuck". Out of all four participating muscle groups; hands (grip), pecs, abs, hip flexors the pecs will be a limiting factor.

To experience it for yourself try to bring your hips on the horizontal bar to your grip without bending your arms just using your pecs. You will find it extremely difficult.

Getting into a handstand.

If you cannot do a hand stand from a "dead" hang on the horizontal bar you do not reach top 0.3% of the vaulter who could do this (for men). However, if you could do a "partial" hand stand you would probably realize that you can only do it if you pull with your arms (and lats not pecs). Now the reason for this is very simple this group of muscle is much stronger.

Where is the swing?

Now if you can get into a handstand from the "dead" hanging position on the horizontal bar the question is where is the swing?

If we established that the natural swing does not bring us much further than the chord of the pole and we established that the best way to get your center of gravity higher is trough the pull/push and not "row" what shell we call swing in pole vault?

The swing.

Action in the pole vault that results from inertia of the vaulter's body and pole resistance after the vaulter leaves the ground and meets resistance of the pole. The swing ends at the moment when the center of gravity begins to rise above trajectory of the natural swing.

Why these two sentences in the definition? Well I think it pretty much a common knowledge when the swing begins and the first sentence reflects this. The more difficult part is to understand when the swing ends. A PHD dissertation could be written about the second sentence, but let me put it in the basic terms.

When the center of gravity is raising above the natural swing trajectory this only can mean that some muscle groups making it to rise above the natural swing trajectory. At that moment the focus is not on the "swing" that is already happening, but on the action that is rising the center of gravity, therefore the focus must shift to inversion.

I must say here that the swing action is so swift that the vaulter will not easily perceive it. The quality of the swing or whip of the take –off foot as Alan Describes it in the pole vault Bible "From Beginner to Bubka and Isinbaeyeva too", depends largely on the quality of the jump/take-off. The take-off foot, in a quality take-off will remain behind ready to "swing".

This is very important, this "whip" helps to generate initial speed of the rotation which is then accelerated in the inversion.

Where Swing Ends?

If you are using free take-off/pre jump and you complete the jump, the swing will begin naturally after the foot leaves the ground and transition into inversion when the left foot has reached the vertical line drawn from the left(bottom) hand grip on the pole. This is where the swing ends.

Goal for the swing.

The goal must be to make swing (as it is defined do not confuse it with the inversion) as intense (short ) as possible, so inversion can begin sooner. Ideally the inversion should begin right after the foot leaves the ground, but in practice this never happens. The goal is to eliminate the time between the take-off and the inversion by making take-off so perfect that it does not require chest penetration and the inversion begins right after take-off.

This is a complex subject to describe it without graphic presentation and additional explanation, so if you would like to learn more or think you can have pleasure in demolishing this model, please come and see us in Slippery Rock, June 13-15.

Cheers!
_________________
there is no spoon...

[rainbowgirl28]

At one point when we moved servers, a lot of posts got chopped up and I have not had time to fix them. I edited the original post back, thanks Pogo Stick for saving me the trouble of looking it up.

[KirkB]

Goal for the swing.

The goal must be to make swing (as it is defined do not confuse it with the inversion) as intense (short ) as possible, so inversion can begin sooner. Ideally the inversion should begin right after the foot leaves the ground, but in practice this never happens. The goal is to eliminate the time between the take-off and the inversion by making take-off so perfect that it does not require chest penetration and the inversion begins right after take-off.

Hmm ... I never read this before. So this appears to be the 6.40 Model, in a nutshell. This is apparently what distinguishes it from the Petrov Model.

It matches what Agapit has always said about pulling (with the lats) with the bottom arm immediately upon takeoff. This is something that I've never tried or felt, and I'm wondering if any other athlete has ever actually tried this? If not, why not?

This is most definitely not part of my model, but then again, I never vaulted 6.40. I think chest penetration is important, as long as you don't PAUSE in that position (the "C" position). It's quite a bold proposal to say that chest penetration isn't required. Does Agapit really mean this, or is something lost in the translation? (Agapit, where are you when we need you! )

There are pics of Bubka "getting hip height" on 6.40 (Altius' avatar), but was he using this "lat pull" technique immediately after takeoff in order to get that hip height? And was he penetrating with his chest or not?

... the swing action is so swift that the vaulter will not easily perceive it. The quality of the swing or whip of the take-off foot ... depends largely on the quality of the jump/take-off. The take-off foot, in a quality take-off will remain behind ready to "swing".

This is very important, this "whip" helps to generate initial speed of the rotation which is then accelerated in the inversion.

I agree with this 100%. Maybe not the first sentence, but definitely the rest of this quote. (But also, I add a trail leg backlift in my BB style of the Petrov Model.)

Where I'm confused is that I don't see how you can leave the take-off foot "behind ready to swing" in preparation for the whip if the chest doesn't pentrate.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, so if you "leave the take-off foot behind ready to swing", then almost by definition, you must penetrate the chest. i.e. If you don't penetrate the chest, you don't finish the take-off. So aren't these 2 quotes contradictory?

In the past few weeks, I have come to realize that you MUST NOT PAUSE in this "C" position (or in BB terminology in the "Split" position). You must KEEP MOVING, in a CONTINUOUS CHAIN of motion - always moving towards the pit, and always moving upwards.

That, I get now. But that doesn't mean that you should totally eliminate (or even minimize) chest penetration.

Or does it?

Kirk

[RPVA03]

Thanks Pogo Stick. I am going to start saving all this stuff too. Kirk, I have tried the pull with my left arm after reading Agapits posts. It really did wonders for me and my athletes. I think Agapit really believes that chest penetration is not required. I understand what he is saying. If your chest penetrates then you end up delaying in the "C" position for a second. Instead it would be better to try and stretch upwards, get as tall as possible and achieve a vertical pre-stretch than to have a horizontal pre-stretch from chest penetration, and have a passive phase in the vault.

[KirkB]

... I think Agapit really believes that chest penetration is not required. I understand what he is saying. If your chest penetrates then you end up delaying in the "C" position for a second. Instead it would be better to try and stretch upwards, get as tall as possible and achieve a vertical pre-stretch than to have a horizontal pre-stretch from chest penetration, and have a passive phase in the vault.

RPVA, I'm with you on almost all of what you said. And I take your "for a second" to mean a fraction of a second, but more than an INSTANT (or no time at all).

...If your chest penetrates then you end up delaying in the "C" position for a second.

I don't see why this must always be true. Can you not penetrate, then "bounce" out of the "C" IMMEDIATELY? This is what I did in my short runs, and my BEST competition vaults.

I don't see chest penetration (per se) as being passive - no matter whether the jump is more in the horizontal or vertical direction. I do agree that there's the HUGE POTENTIAL DANGER for it to become passive (which was my bad in 1972), but that's where you have to be careful.

It's like doing a soccer throw-in. You won't get into the pre-stretch (as you call it) unless your legs stretch BACK, whilst your chest stretches FORWARDS. Just be careful not to hang there in that position (on the pole or with the ball). If you like, think of it as more of a "bounce". Bounce into the "C", then IMMEDIATELY bounce out of it - with NO PASSIVE DELAY!

The "vertical pre-stretch" is a given. You MUST jump vigorously off the ground! I think that a "horizontal pre-stretch" is undesirable. Not because it introduces a passive PAUSE in the "C", but because it's the result of a "lazy" jumping action.

Why do you think that chest penetration implies a passive delay? I will agree that 9 vaulters out of 10 will get this wrong, and will introduce a delay in the "C" (as I did), without careful coaching. But the 1 vaulter out of 10 that does it correctly can "bounce" thru the chest penetration, can he not? Is that not the vaulter that the other 9 should emulate?

I'm still thinking that a lat pull immediately after takeoff will kill chest penetration, which I consider a BAD thing. If I tried that (back in the day - not now!), I don't think I'd have nearly as good of a pre-stretch (aka "C"/Split). I think the "lat pull" would put me back to almost stiff-pole vaulting.

The singlemost statement that you made that shows promise to this model is this one:

... Kirk, I have tried the pull with my left arm after reading Agapits posts. It really did wonders for me and my athletes.

I understand that the 6.40 Model is a bold new model where you have to think outside the box. I'm trying, but I just do see it (or FEEL it) yet.

If you can, please post some vids of this. I'm very intrigued that you've tried this, you like it, and it works! That's the TRUE test!

Maybe after seeing your vids, we can communicate better. Words just don't cut it.

Kirk

[vaultman18]

It's quite a bold proposal to say that chest penetration isn't required. Does Agapit really mean this, or is something lost in the translation?

It is impossible to stop. I think he called it an "compensatory" action, NOT an active "Phase" of the vault. So if it is not active the vaulter must not intend to do it whether he/she does or not.

Where I'm confused is that I don't see how you can leave the take-off foot "behind ready to swing" in preparation for the whip if the chest doesn't pentrate.

You don't leave the take-off behind ready to swing, that is just where it is. I can run and jump and have my take-off foot behind without pushing my chest forward. What makes the chest penetrate is the transfer of the vaulter from the take-off foot and the ground to the top hand and the pole. The longer the swing is delayed the greater the chest penetration. And as we know all delays must be eliminated.

I do not speak for Agapit. Although I have discussed some of these things with him.

Also I think folks still don't understand what bottom arm pull means. At least not what Agapit is trying to convey.

[KirkB]

... You don't leave the take-off behind ready to swing, that is just where it is. I can run and jump and have my take-off foot behind without pushing my chest forward. ...

OK, I think I get it now. My thinking was clouded due to my own experience with my own technique. Since I lifted my trail leg back, my chest naturally went forwards.

In this thread, it's not my intent to debate the merits of one model over the next. For now, I'm only trying to understand the 6.40 Model.

As with any analysis of any subject matter, this type of understanding is a prerequisite to any further discussion or debate.

... I have discussed some of these things with him.

Also I think folks still don't understand what bottom arm pull means. At least not what Agapit is trying to convey.

Vaultman, can you help us to understand this better, based on your discussions with him?

Kirk

[volteur]

I'm also wondering why there is no talk of hip drive

[vaultman18]

Vaultman, can you help us to understand this better, based on your discussions with him?

I will try later. I don't have time at the moment. Who knows maybe Agapit will post something soon.