Is Pushing with the Bottom Arm Good or Bad?

[powerplant42]

The 6.11...
Yeah, it looks like he was a little bit too far out... He doesn't row though. And if you'll notice, Bubka almost hit a lot of bars on the way down, including the indoor WR and the 6.01 in Athens. There's definitely a pattern.

[KirkB]

I don't know that he was a foot under. The vids were very long-range and hard to see the details of his takeoff. I wouldn't call it a "tuck and shoot". He does follow the Petrov model - to a point - but his style is more of a "pike and shoot". I see that as better than tuck/shoot, but still sub-optimal compared to classic Petrov. But as far as pike/shoots go, his is the most incredible style that I've ever seen!

Take a look at Brads 6 meter vault on stabhoch.com and click forward to the flat back position. His body position could not be more different from Bubka's .

Not faulting either one they are just using a different model.

Agreed. It's the bottom half of Brad's vault where I think it's Petrov. In the top half, it's not. But since the bottom half is where you make or break the vault, the closer you are to the Petrov model, the better chance you have of jumping high. But I even hesitate to call it the Petrov model, as Petrov didn't invent the technique in the bottom half. It was well-known before his (and Bubka's) time.

Comparing Brad's 6.00 to Bubka's 6.11 and Feofanova's 4.75 ...

Brad's top arm doesn't collapse as much above his head. It collapses more than Feofanova's, but less than Bubka's. I suspect that Brad is apply SOME pressure with his top hand. Not much, but some. If you're following the pure Petrov model, this is bad. In Brad's case he's doing it by intent.

His C is what I call a little bit lazy - not much, but a little. Less than Feofanova, more than Bubka. I think his steps are a little in, but it's hard to tell on the vid. And only Brad can say whether that's by intent or not. But perhaps this is key to why he cowboys later.

Despite his slight backwards lean in the C, Brad's trail leg swing is very good, and he keeps the lead knee up very well. Much better than Feofanova ... about the same as Bubka.

The next few frames is where Brad's style differs from Bubka's (I'm agreeing with you). He pulls the trail leg in - to maintain his forwards momentum (needed to keep the pole rotating to vertical). A couple frames later, he cowboys it, to get back as far as he can (and keep moving forwards). He's not stuck in the flat-back like Feofanova. Many tuck/shooters or pike/shooters are. But Brad keeps his hips moving. This is why you can't categorize him as a classic tuck/shooter.

The 6.00 jump is close to tuck/shoot - not as much of a pike as what he did in Eugene on his AR 6.04 - but differs from "classic" tuck/shoot due to his hip movement in the flat-back.

I believe his 6.04 AR style to be a technical improvement over his 6.00.

I agree that Bubka and Walker just have different models. How can you criticize an AR?

From hearing all of his interviews and talking to Pat Licari occasionally, I'm confident that Brad is VERY body-aware and know's what technique he's targeting. It's not pure Petrov - it's his own. He knows what his intent is, and he's getting there. I'm confident that he'll get over 20' with very few technical changes.

You can see that Walker has distinct differences from Bubka, Feofanova, and others.

To keep this post on topic, I would categorize his technique as #1 - Petrov with a bit of a push.

BTW, as a UW grad, I'm a HUGE fan of Brad's!

Kirk

[KirkB]

Notice how his bottom arm collapses and his hand almost hits his forehead? Do you consider this good or bad?

Nice video. I hadn't seen that vault before.

...

He took off too far out and got sucked under when the pole hit. Being superman he recovered with a tremendous row and extension. He got great height but just barely made the bar. How many times have you heard the phrase " You were way over that but you hit it on the way down?". If he weren't celebrating a new record he would have walked over to his coach and asked "What happened?".

Compare that vault with his vault on stabhoch.com at 6.11 meters. Which one would you like to duplicate?

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

I actually like the 6.01 better - MUCH better!

The reason is that he's much more upright in his C in the 6.01. This gives him much more "room" and "time" to swing his trail leg down, and then up. The power of the vault is determined by the power of the DOWNSWING. i.e. The downswing is the last part of the vault where the vaulter has an opportunity to apply additional energy into the pole.

In his 6.11 jump, you might notice that his hips pass "too slowly" thru the flat-back frame. I wouldn't say he's stuck - he's Bubka and he knows how to recover from bad vaults (if you can call 6.11 bad! ha! ha! ). So then he recovers by "slinking" and "rowing" this up into a pretty good extension and pushoff.

I'll agree to disagree with you on your use of the term "got sucked under". To me, it looks like he kept his chest forwards and his trail leg back - much better than on his 6.11. All BY INTENT!

On his 6.01, he didn't need a "tremendous row" because his natural swing (due to his upright C and strong downswing) got him into an early extension, whereas on his 6.11 he had to slink/row.

Kirk

[altius]

Right on Becca. BTB is my interpretation of Petrovs ideas - but it has been influenced by discussions with Bubka himself , working alongside Botcharnikov for over a year in Adelaide, working with Alex Parnov (Steve Hookers present coach) for over two years. observation of Jean Claude Perrin (coach of Quinon 84 Olympic champion) and Maurice Houvion (coach of 96 Olympic champion Galfione), observation of Anje Krysinski (coach of Olympic champions Slusarski in 76 and Kosakeiwicz in 80) and, most importantly, taking many beginners to reasonable performance levels using an amalgam of these experiences.

On the original topic -I state again that the bottom arm is not passive! It should be driven up through the pole - but with the arm positioned with the elbow outside the pole so that it cannot resist the force of the hit - and is inevitably driven back over the head. it should not simply collapse. If you do not recognise the critical importance of the angle of the bottom arm and the position of the hand on the pole you will not begin to understand this issue. At take off the vaulter should be able to see 'through the gate' created by this positioning. Note that no further discussion will be entered into on this topic by this author.

[KirkB]

... but isometric muscle activation in that arm to stop any negative motion is important.

The bottom arm should be putting a positive pressure on the pole at take off; not to try to bend the pole but to prevent the hips from swinging faster than the top hand is moving. This is at take off only.

There is no push - just enough pressure on the pole so the athlete can stay behind it early on ...

Perhaps the very question "Good or Bad?" drives people to one extreme or another.
Maybe we ought to be asking: How does pressing with the bottom arm fit in with the other movements of the vault?

These are good points. To reflect this option of "isometric resistance", I've now added this survey choice:

Petrov - no push but a little isometric resistance is OK

You can alter your vote anytime you like. I think the way it works is that if you select a different #, it will subtract your previous vote from the totals.

I personally still vote for #1, but my objective in creating this thread was really not to try to convince everyone that #1 is the ONLY correct choice. Rather, it's to really see how much diversity we have on this topic. I understand this diversity better now, and I can appreciate the differences between #1, #2, and #5 as mere style differences.

Good discussion so far ... but we're not done yet! Let's continue to explore this topic! Revote if you like!

Kirk

[KirkB]

You can alter your vote anytime you like. I think the way it works is that if you select a different #, it will subtract your previous vote from the totals.

Oh crap! By adding another choice, I clobbered all of your votes!

What I just found out is that you can revote anytime you like, and it will change it AS EXPECTED. But if the pollster adds another choice AFTER THE POLLS ARE OPEN , then the entire poll is restarted.

Sorry about that! You'll have to vote again ... please!

Just go back to page 1 of this thread, and cast your new vote. Thanks!

Kirk

[powerplant42]

Isometric resistance... RIGIDITY! PART OF THE PETROV MODEL!

[dougb]

I agree with Powerplant42.
The bullets for voting seem to have disappeared.

And remember 6p, we are talking about elite vaulters on this board.

Doug

[KirkB]

... The bullets for voting seem to have disappeared.

They only disappear while you reply. At any other time, you can vote at the top of ANY page of this thread.

Also, from my initial post of this thread ...

By running this poll in the Advanced forum, I don't mean to imply that this issue is only important for advanced vaulters. Anyone can vote. If you think there's some distinction between "proper" technique based on Beginner, Intermediate, or Advanced, please explain that too. It's just that I think this topic will ultimately drift towards very advanced, technical differences. But I could argue the other way too, and say that beginners need to know what to do with their bottom arm on Day 1 - so it's definitely not just an Advanced topic.

Kirk

[dougb]

Also, from my initial post of this thread ...

By running this poll in the Advanced forum, I don't mean to imply that this issue is only important for advanced vaulters. Anyone can vote. If you think there's some distinction between "proper" technique based on Beginner, Intermediate, or Advanced, please explain that too. It's just that I think this topic will ultimately drift towards very advanced, technical differences. But I could argue the other way too, and say that beginners need to know what to do with their bottom arm on Day 1 - so it's definitely not just an Advanced topic.

I stand corrected, but when you are straight polling, none of these concepts apply.

Doug

[powerplant42]

If you do it with the stiff pole, why don't you do it with the flexible pole? What changes? The vaulter operates around the cord of the pole, the biomechanical pole... The pole itself is quite unimportant. There is no difference between the bottom arm for stiff poling and flexible poling, except it is in a different spot. It behaves the same way: 'push' up with it at take-off while it stays rigid (along with the entire body)!

[dougb]

If you do it with the stiff pole, why don't you do it with the flexible pole? What changes? The vaulter operates around the cord of the pole, the biomechanical pole... The pole itself is quite unimportant. There is no difference between the bottom arm for stiff poling and flexible poling, except it is in a different spot. It behaves the same way: 'push' up with it at take-off while it stays rigid (along with the entire body)!
If you do it with the stiff pole, why don't you do it with the flexible pole? What changes? The vaulter operates around the cord of the pole, the biomechanical pole... The pole itself is quite unimportant. There is no difference between the bottom arm for stiff poling and flexible poling, except it is in a different spot. It behaves the same way: 'push' up with it at take-off while it stays rigid (along with the entire body)!

This is really a topic for the historical board.

Basically, when stiff poleing( herein after SP) you are not trying to put any energy into the pole because it won't store any.

When you plant with a SP you begin to go up immediatly. There is no horzontal motion where energy is being transfered into the pole. The whole point is to swing off the ground and keep the pole moving, rock back as hard as you can, and pull /push against gravity. Back in the day vaulters were able to do this quite effectivly. George Mattos ( 1952 olympics) had a pushoff of 42".

To properly SP Your hands should be together so there is no bottom arm. We don't teach it that way now because the idea is to move beyond SP and on to a bending pole. it is when vaulters are in this transition phase that the resistance starts to come into play.

Note: I know of only one elite vaulter who was able to transfer from stiff to fiberglass. (That was John Pennel for history buffs.) The point is that ,it is almost a completly different set of movements and reactions. Obviously it the same basic abilitys are required ,athough height is not as important as it was.

doug