The Swing

[KirkB]

Volteur, I'm sorry to tell you, but you're way off base. Instead of being aggressive, jumping vigorously on takeoff, and attacking the box by hitting it hard, you are trying to convince me that you should:

1. Hit the box SOFTLY.
2. Jump only to the point of the takeoff foot leaving the ground.
3. Abruptly STOP any takeoff follow-thru, and lock the knee without following thru.

As if #3 isn't bad enough already ...

Unbelieveably, in your last quote (at the bottom of this post), you go on to say that you must stop driving your lead knee PRIOR to the takeoff foot leaving the ground!

Your exact quotes are:

... on the notion of hitting it hard i don't agree that is the correct intention. Hit it hard with with softness would be more in line with my intention.

... Bubka. In ALL cases his lead knee STOPS once he has left the ground ... During takeoff the hip and knee lock (paraphrasing PP) into a relationship

You then say that by purposely STOPPING the lead knee drive, energy is transferred from the knee to the core of the body.
Your exact quote is:

... What happens to the lead knee is that it is driven into POSITION where is abruptly STOPS. This stopping allows the momentum of the leg to be transferred into the rest of the body allowing for more energy in the jump.

You go on to clarify that this STOPPING action (a passive action if I've ever heard one) occurs BEFORE the takeoff is complete. Here's your quote:

PP i am with you totally regarding the thigh stopping at the tranverse/horizontal plane. That energy transfer from the momentum of the leg into the momentum of the body is vital in jumping events. To also agree with you and Golfdane the faster the limb is stopped the more energy is transferred. If it is not stopped prior to leaving the ground then that potential energy is lost.

All of your assertions are so wrong, in so many different ways, that I don't know where to begin ... [sigh]

Edit: [snip]

My assertion is very, very simple ... run like hell, plant smoothly, jump like hell (with follow-thru), swing like hell, then shoot (extend) straight up and over the bar! ... no SOFT plant, no STOPPING the lead knee drive BEFORE or AFTER takeoff, and no PASSIVE vault parts!

Kirk

[powerplant42]

Chill KB... you're becoming like a certain PP42...

Somehow volteur, I agree with KB, you agree with me, but you disagree with KB...

This is what's going on. KB, you're one to describe what should be felt or attempted in the vault, whereas volteur is more about what happens as a result of those attempts. I believe that is the connection you two are missing.

And why is it bad to look at the vault as a whole? ONE CONTINUOUS CHAIN... sound familiar?

[KirkB]

In my previous post, I had second thoughts about the wisdom of my 2nd last paragraph, so I snipped it. It wasn't very constructive.

I think if we all stick to posting wheat and avoid the chaff, we should do fine.

Quite frankly, PP, I'd rather you just stick to the wheat too. PM me next time.

And why is it bad to look at the vault as a whole? ONE CONTINUOUS CHAIN... sound familiar?

The reason is that IMHO volteur is muddling his vault parts, and somehow thinks that a vaulter shouldn't strive to follow-thru after his takeoff foot leaves the ground. My assertion is that the reason for the follow-thru is to improve the takeoff, whereas volteur appears unable or unwilling to separate the follow-thru from subsequent vault parts.

Once you break the vault into separate parts for ANALYSIS, of course you have to put it back together again as a harmonious, continuous chain of body motions. But if you ONLY look at the whole but not the parts (right-brain thinking), you lose the opportunity for logical, sequential, rational, analytic, objective thinking. This is the best way to understand any complex event - like PV.

Kirk

[volteur]

Kirk take a few deep breaths before you reply, i know i had to.

I'm having problems with you right now because you are being too right brained (yes you are right brained mate) and not willing to take this step by step. Also you aren't willing to answer my direct questions step by step at all. I'm wondering if you actually took a look at any Bubka videos because once you do (and i assume you have) you will see the stopping of the lead knee at the end of takeoff, prior to any further stage/phase of the vault.

Also you are accusing me of muddling the phases of the vault wherein fact you are actually doing this. For example i asked you were does the takeoff precisely end. No answer yet. I also asked you to point me to a single Bubka video where his lead knee does not stop at the end of takeoff and i'm still waiting on that one. By the way i'm still waiting on you stick figures of your vault.

Moving on i'm wondering why you are mis-reading me. In fact even when you quote me back to me you are misreading the exact quote. Here are some examples.

Volteur, I'm sorry to tell you, but you're way off base. Instead of being aggressive, jumping vigorously on takeoff, and attacking the box by hitting it hard, you are trying to convince me that you should:

1. Hit the box SOFTLY.
2. Jump only to the point of the takeoff foot leaving the ground.
3. Abruptly STOP any takeoff follow-thru, and lock the knee without following thru.

1. i said hit the vault hard WITH softness. The combination is what i actually said. (i would prefer aggressive to hard though)

2. i never said jump only to that point i said jump THROUGH that point but slightly paraphrasing myself i said takeoff during the takeoff and minimise the time spent during the follow through because unlike javelin for example the vault does not end there, there are still things to come.

3. i didn't say there is no follow through i just said the lead knee does not follow through past the transverse plane of the body. It stops and the momentum from the leg/knee is TRANSFERRED into the rest of the body at the end of the jump or takeoff. When this exactly occurs, like which mircosecond or which frame of a video, is what i need you to answer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These misinterpretations aside Kirk what we are talking about is a fundamental of track a field. Stop the momentum of a limb to transfer the momentum gained by that limb into the rest of the body. It occurs in all events including running. It is a fundamental of any basic coaching course. In javelin you do this many times, with each cross-over step you do it via the hip/knee/leg stopping and also with the lead arm on delivery. Yes also focus on the follow through but not to the detriment of the delivery - it is a fine balance between gaining maximum delivery power and maximum follow through. Both are important.

In pole vault yes you follow through but it is the body, via the hip connection, that follows through. Not the lead knee because this has the role of transferring momentum instead.

Now if you still think i am being right brained here i think you are making a huge mistake. There are many parts above that are clearly defined. By the way most left handers are right brained thinkers, it is one of their gifts but also one of their drawbacks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please tell me where the takeoff ends.

Please show me a Bubka video where his lead knee continues motion after the takeoff ends.

Two questions only. Please respond to these next post before you attack and belittle me again.

Volteur

[volteur]

PP i was specifically agreeing with you on the locking or stopping of the lead knee into place.

Otherwise yes i agree that the maximisation of energy throughout the vault is an essential factor just like every other event in track and field.

Kirk talks about the feeling of the energy and i have no problem with that approach. In fact his ability to see this in his minds eye is what i like most about him.

Bubka said the thing he likes most about pole vault is that it is a professors sport. I agree. He had a professor of track and field showing him the way of it.

We can be broad thinking energy types like Kirk or we can be fine detailed mechanics types like Agapit (although he may not like that pigeon holeing because like me he bridges both ways of viewing the vault - the FlOW and the PARTICLE to borrow from quantum mechanics. He can look at the continuous flow of the vault yet stop each microsecond(particle) and analyse it to great detail. - video is great for this but the coaches eye is really what is doing it)

The balance between both types is what is important. Left brain analysis equal to right brain analysis.

[KirkB]

I'm having problems with you right now because you are being too right brained (yes you are right brained mate) and not willing to take this step by step.

Ditto.

Also you aren't willing to answer my direct questions step by step at all.

Only because you insist on proceeding past the "takeoff follow-thru" vault part, before we settle our differences on that one step.

I'm wondering if you actually took a look at any Bubka videos because once you do (and i assume you have) you will see the stopping of the lead knee at the end of takeoff, prior to any further stage/phase of the vault.

I did, and as I said before, the 6.11 Bubka vid is the reference vid.

Please tell me where the takeoff ends.

The takeoff ends when the follow-thru of the takeoff is finished.

Please show me a Bubka video where his lead knee continues motion after the takeoff ends.

As I said before, the 6.11 Bubka vid is the reference vid. Let's assume in that vid that he had a "perfect takeoff" according to the Petrov model. In that vid, the driving of his lead knee is stopped as soon as his foot leaves the ground.

The paradox that you don't get yet is that you don't have to SEE a follow-thru on a vid for it to exist. It exists in the vaulter's INTENT, and is manifested in the actual jump itself - BEFORE the foot leaves the ground. If he didn't follow-thru, his jump would not be finished.

This stopping upon the foot leaving the ground is NOT by vaulter's intent, but by the pole hitting the box. Even tho you can't see it, he follows thru on this jump. If he didn't follow thru, he would not have stretched his trail leg and his lead knee completely when his foot left the ground. That's the paradox of the follow-thru. You must think PAST the point of release, otherwise the actual jump (release) is compromised.

By the way most left handers are right brained thinkers, it is one of their gifts but also one of their drawbacks.

Be careful not to assume that I'm right-brained simply because I vaulted left-handed. I'm right-handed at everything else. I vaulted left-handed because my right leg was significantly stronger than my left leg. It was easier to train my left arm to be the top arm than to train my left leg to be the trail leg.

(BTW, this is one example of where athleticism beats technical training hands down. All the technical training in the world wouldn't have gained me the edge that I gained the day I switched takeoff legs!)

I switched from right-handed vaulting to left-handed in Grade 9. I do recognize quite a few right-brained qualities in myself, but I don't attribute them at all to whether I was right or left handed. I actually consider myself fairly "whole brained" - not "half-brained".

Two questions only. Please respond to these next post before you attack and belittle me again.

Volteur, if you felt that my remarks were unfair, then I sincerely apologize. Just as you are frustrated at us not understanding each other, so am I. I thought I had toned down my post to the point where we could talk turkey (you should have seen my first draft! ), without offending you. Obviously, I didn't tone it down quite enough.

I do get tired of repeating myself, though. [sigh]

Kirk

[volteur]

as do i Kirk but no hard feelings (even though the sigh should elicit some but i'm sweet with that if you were simply holding your breath and had to release it ) By the way i did stop referring to anything past the takeoff (and follow through) quite a way back.

I'm glad you agree now that Bubka's lead knee does stop at the end of the takeoff and sure Bubka continues to move forward after takeoff, that's a given. What is not happening is his lead knee is not changing position anymore RELATIVE to his body. That is what this debate was centered around. The knee has stopped in relation to the body and his body has gained the benefit of that relative stopping.

I was stating all along that the lead knee isn't following through, it is the body that follows through and it is the HIP that connects the leads knee's momentum into the rest of the body. I totally agree that you have to intend to follow through or as i would say drive past the takeoff, drive through the shot put or drive over the hurdle. Agreed that if not intending to do that the drive won't be as complete as otherwise.

For me the knee was the easy part to drive into takeoff and it was the hip that took time and training to develop drive with. Hence my initial leading comment about the hip driving that brought this discussion into being.

Where can we go next?

Possibly the fact that the quicker the follow through after takeoff is short circuited the better for the purposes of vaulting? The quicker we can begin the inversion the better?

good debating though, just lets both refrain from using emotional tactics in future, what do you say?

peace

[volteur]

or maybe we can analyse this video as it is my new favourite and something really special

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYaBPDTr ... re=related

it would be so good if someone knew how to get this frame by frame and post it on here.

we could analyse whether he is swinging or not and bring this thread back on topic (sorry for taking it off in the first place by the way)

[KirkB]

... no hard feelings (even though the sigh should elicit some but i'm sweet with that if you were simply holding your breath and had to release it

Well, you did say to "take a few deep breaths before you reply", so I did. The [sigh] was my exhale.

I'm glad you agree now that Bubka's lead knee does stop at the end of the takeoff and sure Bubka continues to move forward after takeoff, that's a given. What is not happening is his lead knee is not changing position anymore RELATIVE to his body. That is what this debate was centered around. The knee has stopped in relation to the body and his body has gained the benefit of that relative stopping.

Well, that wasn't my understanding of "the debate". I thought that you couldn't agree that "you have to intend to follow through". I have no issue of his knee position not changing relative to his body. That was never an issue - it was just that I consider that position "downstream" from the takeoff follow-thru. But I was definitely opposed to saying that you lock that position BEFORE takeoff - including the follow-thru INTENT!

I was stating all along that the lead knee isn't following through, it is the body that follows through and it is the HIP that connects the leads knee's momentum into the rest of the body. I totally agree that you have to intend to follow through or as i would say drive past the takeoff, drive through the shot put or drive over the hurdle. Agreed that if not intending to do that the drive won't be as complete as otherwise.

You just agreed that "you have to intend to follow through", so I'm cool with that.

I hesitate to question what you mean by saying that the HIP follows thru instead of the knee, as I don't want to get back to the old debate. It gets back to "the knee bone's connected to the hip bone" debate. If they're connected, and the angle of the lead knee doesn't change in relation to the hip, and the hip and knee are both going in the same direction (rotating about the same axis), then I fail to see any distinction here. Is it not just semantics?

I prefer to think of the knee driving, and you prefer to think of the hip driving? Can we just leave it at that, or by capitalizing "HIP" are you inferring that the hip plays a bigger role than the knee at this point? I'm not trying to perpetuate the debate for the sake of bringing up old arguments - I really want to know!

For me the knee was the easy part to drive into takeoff and it was the hip that took time and training to develop drive with. Hence my initial leading comment about the hip driving that brought this discussion into being.

Nah, I don't get what you're saying. Convince me that there's a difference between hip drive and knee drive. I'm from Missouri.

To confuse matters even further, PP is just dying to tell us that there's no drive at all - according to Agapit, you swing immediately upon takeoff!

I advised PP by PM last week that swinging immediately upon takeoff wasn't for mere mortals, but since he's advising VaultPurple (in the Video Review forum - "First time indoors for the year") to swing immediately upon takeoff, I guess he wants to debate this. (I'll let him speak for himself.)

I really think that anyone advising how to swing should have the personal experience - either as the coach of someone that executes it "properly", or as an athlete. I don't think just reading it in a book, paper, or on PVP is sufficient "proof" that it works as advertised.

Just as in a court of law, the defender of the technique (the expert) should be present. I'm cool with Altius and Agapit defending their works. I'm just not cool with a non-coach or non-elite athlete representing themselves as so thoroughly understanding the model that they can hold it up to public scrutiny and defend it.

I wish Agapit was here to defend his statement (after all, he started this thread), but I don't think it's advisable to tell a beginner or an intermediate to swing immediately upon takeoff. I believe that that's the 6.40 model - for elite athletes only, but is not in the Petrov model - for "Beginners to Bubka".

Let the new debate begin ...

Where can we go next?

Let's try to get 2 things out of the way: (1) Whether knee drive and hip drive are the same or different; and (2) Whether mere mortals (non-elites) should strive to (or can) swing immediately after the takeoff foot leaves the ground. Sound like a plan?

Possibly the fact that the quicker the follow through after takeoff is short circuited the better for the purposes of vaulting? The quicker we can begin the inversion the better?

Well, that's pretty close to my #2. We will need to define the athleticism of the vaulter, tho. Mere mortals can't do this, IMHO.

... Bubka ... we could analyse whether he is swinging or not and bring this thread back on topic (sorry for taking it off in the first place by the way)

I don't think you or I should apologize for talking about the takeoff when the topic is "The Swing". Because the vault parts meld together so intricately, and because the upstream parts affect the downstream parts, we really have to have a sound understanding of the sequence. This is particularly critical in the takeoff/swing/extension phases (not so much in the run/plant or fly-away/clearance phases).

Also, root causes of technical flaws need to be traced back to their source. You can't do this if there's no agreement on "proper technique" for previous vault parts.

So now we covered the takeoff, and can move on to the swing - the thread topic. We should not be too surprised if we have to dip back to the takeoff for remedial clarifications, as I doubt that we have yet to reach 100% agreement on the takeoff. However, let's give it a try.

I also look forward to hearing the ideas and opinions of other PVP members - not just V, PP, and myself.

Kirk

[powerplant42]

KB, tell me what energy is being created during this 'drive'? Yes, it might happen if you are mortal, but should it not be the goal to immediately finish the take-off and SWING? No pauses, right? Remember that crucial difference (that we just so intimately encountered) between what should be attempted and what actually happens?

[KirkB]

That's one way to analyze this.

Another is for people to speak up from practical experience - either as an athlete or as a coach.

PP, have you personally swung immediately after takeoff, with good success?

If so, what height did you clear?

If not, why not? And if not, how can you be sure that this works exactly as Agapit has advertised it?

My personal belief, based on personal experience, is that you can drive your lead knee on takeoff, follow-thru (including driving with the chest as well as with the lead knee, whilst the trail leg FINISHES the takeoff), and then swing, ALL WITHOUT ANY PASSIVE PHASES. Right, PP - with no pauses! No passive vault parts!

You can do this by following either the Petrov model or the Bryde Bend model. i.e. The debate is not whether the BB model has any passive parts to it or not, or how closely the BB model matches the Petrov model - that's for the BB thread.

So let's take the premise of Petrov model only. Whether you choose to consider the Petrov model and the 6.40 model as one-and-the-same, that's up to you. I don't. I truly believe that the Petrov model hits the mark (i.e. is practical and proven), but as I've mentioned on several occassions in the past several months, I'm still unconvinced re the 6.40 model.

One reason is the "immediate swing" issue. Another related issue is the "lat pull" to initiate the swing (which I now understand to be a pull with more than just the lats). We'll have to discuss these 2 together, I guess, as Agapit proposes that they both happen right after "takeoff", presumably in a cause-effect sequence.

Another (which we'll get to later, I guess) is swinging straight-bodied thru the entire swing.

But let's just talk about the first two for now ...

PP, do you initiate your swing immediately upon takeoff by the so-called "lat pull" technique? Or how?

Kirk

[KirkB]

or maybe we can analyse this video as it is my new favourite and something really special

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYaBPDTr ... re=related

it would be so good if someone knew how to get this frame by frame and post it on here.

we could analyse whether he is swinging or not and bring this thread back on topic (sorry for taking it off in the first place by the way)

Yes! I really like this jump too! Can anyone place it? When? Where? How high?

If we can agree on this particular vault as the reference vault for the topic of this thread - "The Swing", I'm very happy.

Notice how he FINISHES the takeoff, with a very nice stretch of his trail leg, and very good chest penetration? (Yes, chest penetration is GOOD, and no, it's not passive the way he does it!) Look at his top hand in relation to his head. Not many vaulters can do that and still stay vertical. And I can almost guarantee you that he's not pushing with his bottom arm. In that position, how could he possibly push? (He doesn't have to - he has a great swing going, with almost his entire weight on the top hand. Very nice, and very familiar to me.)

I was going to post drawings of my BB posture during takeoff/split, but Bubka's posture in these pics is actually very close to what I had planned to draw. Not quite, but just about. Look at how erect (vertical) he is after takeoff, and how he holds that position for quite awhile! (In many other Bubka vids, I disliked how he was leaning back whilst in the C.)

Then look at how powerful his straight trail leg is!

He does SLINK a bit once his hips pass horiz, which I consider sub-optimal technique. However, the main point is that because of his long, powerful swing, he inverts quite easily, and then gets a powerful extension.

What I mean by slinking is when he swings until his back is horiz to the runway. You'll notice that his back stays in that position for quite a few frames. Then, to get out of it, he rocks back (Yes - ROCKS BACK! That's bad.) to where his knees come close to touching his chest. Immediately after that is the slink - the curving of the back to extend straight up.

I really don't know why he slinks, tho. With such a powerful trail leg swing, he shouldn't have to. He should be able to just continue SWINGING so that he doesn't "freeze" with his back horiz to the runway. Instead, his hips should CONTINUE to rise - HARMONIOUSLY in a smooth motion. The stopping of the hips at horiz (not the vaulter's intent, I'm sure) is a PASSIVE state!

I wonder if it's out of habit, on too heavy a pole, or some other reason. With optimal technique, there should be no reason to slink (IMHO). I suppose that as good as this vault looks, it's still not PERFECT.

Despite my critique of his slinking, the bottom half of his vault is VERY NICE!

Kirk