Jojo, you have a lot of potential, and you sound willing to change (improve) your technique to reach your potential, but the biggest problem you will face is that you have 9 years of "technique" ingrained in your brain and in your body. That's a lot! You can't just start over from scratch, as you want to continue to make steady progress thru your college career.
jojovaulter wrote: ... I was taught to press the pole strongly up, and so I would block out my bottom arm to keep the pole away from me. However, the only way to swing was to bend my bottom arm ...
It sounds like you discovered first-hand the "Achilles Heel" of the Drive Model. TOO MUCH PRESSURE WITH THE BOTTOM ARM KILLS YOUR SWING!
jojovaulter wrote: I don't understand how to apply force to the pole to keep my body upright and get the pole bending.
You may not have a very good understanding of the Laws of Physics as applied to the PV. There's many other threads where we've discussed this in the last few months (search for "bottom arm press" and other related key words). Basically, once your takeoff foot leaves the ground, your momentum from your run and jump adds energy to the pole; some energy is lost (energy leakage that's absorbed as wasted muscle action), and what's left over is what propels you during your swing. By pressing hard with the bottom arm, you'll put A BIT more energy into the pole, but you'll kill your swing ... as you discovered. It's a bad tradeoff.
You also shouldn't be striving to "stay upright" by pushing with your bottom arm. That's the wrong intent. Instead, you need to jump up and into the pole at an angle that will retain this good forward lean (good body posture) after takeoff. If you read my comments re Feofanova then you now understand the importance of good body posture after takeoff ... up to and including in the C position.
jojovaulter wrote: I think my shoulders and arms should be more elastic ...
Yes, but think "tight elastic" and not "loose elastic". Keeping the body tight ... from head to toe ... on takeoff and beyond ... especially when the pole hits the box ... is essential to minimize energy loss. That's a "tight elastic" body. If your body is too "loose", then the impact of the pole hitting the box is just going to be absorbed into inefficient muscle actions ... energy leakage.
jojovaulter wrote: Recently I have been studying some elite vaults and noticing (1) their bottom arm bends at takeoff and (2) their bottom arm straightens as they swing (pretty much the opposite of what I do). ... Are they "rowing"? or is their swinging trail leg causing this? or is it something else?
Which vaulters are you trying to model your vault after? This will be a good reference point for us to discuss. By describing those elites that bend their bottom arm at takeoff and
supposedly "straighten it as they swing", you're describing Petrovers.
Don't be fooled by thinking they're straightening their bottom arm by intent. They’re not … it's just that their holding onto the pole, so as the pole bends out of the way of their bottom arm, their arm naturally follows. This is the opposite of what you're thinking. The bend is occurring because of the force applied into the pole from the TOP ARM … and ONLY the top arm (well, OK, maybe a little thru the bottom arm … depending on particular vault STYLES).
Depending on which elite vaulter you're talking about, the Petrovers aren't rowing. They're swinging their trail leg in unison with their entire body ... going from a backwards C to sort of a forwards C ... thru the Whip position (when the body is straight under the pole, aligned somewhat with the chord). A ROW would be more of a muscling action. That's not it. What you're seeing (assuming Petrovers) is a natural SWINGING action, of which the arms play only one role … and the torso and leg actions play just as important roles … the entire torso and legs are part of this swinging action.
jojovaulter wrote: Another reason I think I am missing this part (at least I think this is related) is because once I initially bend the pole at the plant, I don't really put any more force into the pole for the rest of the vault. In vaults when I try to swing hard or fast I end up throwing my head back and pulling my body towards my hands causing my legs to curl into a tuck - there is no swing or whip or pushing of the pole because I don't know how to initiate it and where or how to apply the force.
The only additional force you need to put into the pole after takeoff is in the DOWNSWING and in the EXTENSION. Don’t throw your head back, and don’t tuck. Just SWING! Downswing, then upswing! Then EXTEND.
jojovaulter wrote: And of course on these "tuck" vaults the pole always ends up unbending before I am inverted.
Ahh! The OTHER Achilles Heel of the Drive Model! The idea of the fast, early swing is not only to apply MORE energy into the pole, but to also set you up for a quick INVERSION ... then an EXTENSION in unison with the unbending of the pole. The timing of this for a Petrover ... swinging instead of tucking ... is so much easier and more efficient (IMHO).
jojovaulter wrote: The weird thing is my best vaults (like the video) are when I am very relaxed and don't try to do anything. The problem with this strategy is I end up doing a slow partial tuck that is not explosive, and I use a very small amount of strength. This tells me that I am not using my full potential.
I'm guessing that by "relaxed" you mean when you don't purposely apply much force into the pole with the bottom arm. If that's the case, I'm not at all surprised. That's exactly how it should happen!
jojovaulter wrote: The problem with this strategy is I end up doing a slow partial tuck that is not explosive, and I use a very small amount of strength. This tells me that I am not using my full potential.
I dunno. I'm not sure what you mean by "slow partial tuck that's not explosive". How would a "fast full tuck" be more explosive? I think our words might be misleading here ... I’m losing your drift. You'll have to explain what you mean by using different words.
And why tuck at all?
Petrovers don’t tuck!
jojovaulter wrote: I am always trying to improve my takeoff - I try to raise up, and I try to think about "chasing the pole to vertical". And I think it works out ok though I want to jump up more at takeoff and have more leg separation so I can take off farther out … But I basically hit the positions that I would like, though as I said before my thought is my arms are not doing what they should be.
This part sounds good.
jojovaulter wrote: And is it possible that you don't penetrate because you panic when you feel the pole sinking, so you don't complete your vault like you should? Do you actually bail on these attempts, or what happens?
... When the pole feels like it is sinking I end up bailing because it feels as though I won't make it on to the pit. After the initial takeoff, I am on the pole trying to push the pole beyond the pit but the pole looses all forward momentum as I near the box. Once I get to this point the pole straightens to either above the box or a little in front of it. If I tried to get upside down to finish the vault the way I normally do, by breaking my bottom arm, I don't think I would make it to the pad.
Perhaps this is your problem …
… I am on the pole trying to push the pole beyond the pit …
Why “push the pole”? Why not just swing?
jojovaulter wrote: Seriously, maybe you just need to move to a heavier pole when this happens?
I never thought about this. I thought for the most part if a pole is too soft then I should land deep in the pit.
Yes, that's NORMALLY what happens. But if you panic and bail, you're not whipping your trail leg, so maybe you're not applying as much TOTAL energy into the vaulter/pole system? I'm just conjecturing here ... without seeing your attempts when the pole sinks, it's hard to understand what happens after that.
The key is to make GRADUAL changes, so that each little change doesn't feel that radical ... it needs to feel comfortable ... so that you can slowly adjust to the new sensations. If you change too much all at once, I think you're going to bail a lot and have some digressions. Slow, incremental technical improvements!
Kirk