Does the Russian model represent ideal technique?

[coachjvinson]

THANK YOU -

[david bussabarger]

no

[Branko720]

No to what?

[vaultman18]

no

??????

[ADTF Academy]

Coaches will always coach. They will always have theories and thoughts on how to do things perfect. We all have what we think is the perfect way. The following story summed it up perfect to me.... (this does not really help the conversation as a whole, but I hope it can calm eggos and allow conversation)

Last year I had the opportunity to eat dinner with Sergey Bubka at a resturant in Portland, Oregon. To explain I'm lucky as a coach to travel all over the world with the athlete I coach meeting and sharing a beverages with some of the top vaulters and coaches in the world. At that dinner Sergey looked at me during a moment of giving a short speech at dinner. I guess its something they do in the Ukarine. At dinner everyone gives a toast so all 8 or so of us at dinner had to stand up and give a toast, Bubka was last. He said, "I hope someday coach you have an athlete that will buy into your beliefs 100% so you can see if they actual work the way you dream they should."

I enjoy hearing and reading the excitement in the posts on this site. I had the same excitment once upon a time. Two elite athletes later I still have the excitement, but some realities have set in. As a coach we all have beliefs, but Sergey summed it up best for me. Will any of us every have an athlete that will do exactly what we want? Be perfect? Will that athlete every have the raw skills to prove it on a pole that will allow them to go high enough? In one of the post it was mentioned the mental ability to handle the concepts we talk about. Many said thats BS..... I laugh!!!!! Many say the raw talent of Bubka didn't matter I laugh. How can you preach biomechanics and physics and than saw raw velocity didn't matter. It's the number one component of the energy equation VELOCITY at the moment of impact. To say a guy who runs 9 m/s can ever jump as high as a guy with 9.8 m/s speed is laughable. The 9.0 m/s guy has no shot if both athletes hit 100% technique.

Can you as a coach get your concepts to be perfect and have a woman grip over 4.40 meters (most to all top woman do) or a guy grip over 5 meters (most to all top guys do). Once they do the mind starts to creep and wonder. Doubt and fear sets in no matter how automatic they are. Its easy to say the concepts work when your on 15' poles for guys and 13' poles for woman.... Put a big stick in their hands and than you see a whole new event. If you never had a guy who can vault on 5 meter poles or bigger sorry you don't really get it.

Coaches who have never had a world class athlete thinks it because they haven't had the gifted athlete they needed. Those who have I hope realized they got the athlete whose mind allowed it. Have you ever noticed the coach who remarks how poor technically other athletes are but doesn't point out how flawed their own athletes are? If as a coach you point out the flaws of others, but consistently say your athletes are a work in progress..... You're the problem and are not helping.

[Andy_C]

How can you preach biomechanics and physics and than saw raw velocity didn't matter. It's the number one component of the energy equation VELOCITY at the moment of impact. To say a guy who runs 9 m/s can ever jump as high as a guy with 9.8 m/s speed is laughable. The 9.0 m/s guy has no shot if both athletes hit 100% technique.

Velocity has a lot to do with biomechanics and physics. True there is a significant biological component, but there is also a large contributing factor to the quality of training both technical and physical. I often don't talk about it on this forum since it's not what the vast majority of the people who casually drop by need to hear but physical training is very important in the athlete's development. But some ways of doing it are more effective and efficient than others!

Can you as a coach get your concepts to be perfect and have a woman grip over 4.40 meters (most to all top woman do) or a guy grip over 5 meters (most to all top guys do). Once they do the mind starts to creep and wonder. Doubt and fear sets in no matter how automatic they are. Its easy to say the concepts work when your on 15' poles for guys and 13' poles for woman.... Put a big stick in their hands and than you see a whole new event. If you never had a guy who can vault on 5 meter poles or bigger sorry you don't really get it.

I think you are trying to make a fair point but I also think it could have been accomplished without being condescending to the vast majority of users in this forum.

"Fear" and "doubt"... what you are describing are parts of the human-aspect of pole vault. Same with the coach-athelte interaction you were talking about. Elite athletes have a unique perspective of this "fear" experience and will often experience it more intensely but it is not exclusive to them. Have you ever coached an un-athletic high school girl with a history of an anxiety disorder? Don't you think she will ever experience fear and doubt? I'll tell you right now, that 4 meter pole will feel like an 10 meter sewage pipe to her. What about a masters athlete recovering from injury? The pole size is only one concern. What about the worry that their body could give way on them on any given jump, even with a tiny pole! Elite athletes and their coaches are not the only people who have problems. All of these problems from the high schoolers to the elite will compromise the efficacy of a the coaches' "concepts."

With that in mind however, we should also acknowledge that there are many "concepts" that surround every facet of life. There are concepts that deal directly with fear and doubt in sports psychology. Again I will reiterate that the one of the huge misconceptions about the technical model is that it only deals with technique. Many of the concepts that deal with fear and doubt have been borrowed from gymnastics and manifest as part of training. The self perpetuating relationship between good technique, confidence and consistency being one of the most important ideas. That said, I would say that there is a large room for growth in the currently available technical model(s) for a greater appreciation of this human-aspect of the sport. Above that, I would just make a point that having a model does not preclude us from developing new ideas, it just gives us a better understanding of where our ideas need to go.

There is no way to perfectly prepare for all of these difficulties that you will run into, but with greater knowledge of a vast array of "concepts" the best coaches will be more prepared than the rest when things get difficult.

Coaches who have never had a world class athlete thinks it because they haven't had the gifted athlete they needed. Those who have I hope realized they got the athlete whose mind allowed it. Have you ever noticed the coach who remarks how poor technically other athletes are but doesn't point out how flawed their own athletes are? If as a coach you point out the flaws of others, but consistently say your athletes are a work in progress..... You're the problem and are not helping.

Flaws need to be pointed out, in your own athletes and in others. But it should happen in a constructive and professional manner (i.e. when asked for), although a lot of the time it does not. The only way we can affirm our ideas is to test them and criticism is often the best method. From concepts to technical models, everything needs to be put to the test. I'm not going to believe in a technical model if it could not stand a conversation like the one that is being held in this thread. Also the current technical model did not "just happen" but instead it evolved over time after a lot of questions were asked and countless criticisms were made by many people. Unfortunately, a lot of those questions just seem to be recycled here year after year, decades after they've been originally asked!

And I disagree with your point about the coaches who's athletes are a work in progress. Every athlete is a work in progress and a coach is only being honest if they make this claim of their own charges. If your statement is true, then nobody should be asking questions of anybody since there isn't a single vaulter (or person) on this planet who is perfect.

Coaches will always coach. They will always have theories and thoughts on how to do things perfect. We all have what we think is the perfect way.

I agree with this in part. Every coach will have their own theories. This includes even those of us who may come across as "drones to the technical model." I just think we need to be very careful about how the word "perfect" is used.

-Andrew

[PV-ATL]

Hey Gang,

I don't think I will be able to write as much as you guys. Seems like almost everything has been said, anyway. We have even witnessed a discussion on the hammer throw, of all things.

I first read Coach B's article in "Track Coach" magazine this summer. I was vey disapointed. I still am.

I have been working very hard to present what I feel is the best PV model to my students. Then I read an article that says it may be just one of many models? I don't think so. I would think that now, I will have to have even more fights with HS coaches that think I am already out of my mind! Especially if they read that article.

Heres how it goes:
1. I have said it before: The days of jumping over hay bales in the back yard are over. To be successful in the PV, athletes will need LEADERSHIP.
2. There are not "more ways the skin a cat" in the PV. There is only the "best way"... Petrov/Bubka model.
3. I will continue on the Petrov/Bubka road.
4. I am now a bit more determined, almost to the militant stage. I will not waiver now.
5. We have to get this PV event better in the USA. That article, if followed, will turn us back. I'm not going back. Neither are my students!

Cheers,

PV-ATL

[ADTF Academy]

Andrew,


You make my points for me. I don't use site enough to do the whole quoting thing....


"Velocity has a lot to do with biomechanics and physics. True there is a significant biological component, but there is also a large contributing factor to the quality of training both technical and physical. I often don't talk about it on this forum since it's not what the vast majority of the people who casually drop by need to hear but physical training is very important in the athlete's development. But some ways of doing it are more effective and efficient than others!" - Andy C

Confused on your point speed development is an indication of quality of training both technically and physically. It doesn't answer my comment towards the people who say Bubka's raw talent didn't matter. Velocity wins if technical components are equal. When your talking about Bubka you're talking about elite athletes not high school kids. Elites are elites for a reason they have the raw talent and technique good enough to be jumping high enough to be called elite.


"I think you are trying to make a fair point but I also think it could have been accomplished without being condescending to the vast majority of users in this forum." - Andy C

"Fear" and "doubt"... what you are describing are parts of the human-aspect of pole vault. Same with the coach-athelte interaction you were talking about. Elite athletes have a unique perspective of this "fear" experience and will often experience it more intensely but it is not exclusive to them. Have you ever coached an un-athletic high school girl with a history of an anxiety disorder? Don't you think she will ever experience fear and doubt? I'll tell you right now, that 4 meter pole will feel like an 10 meter sewage pipe to her. What about a masters athlete recovering from injury? The pole size is only one concern. What about the worry that their body could give way on them on any given jump, even with a tiny pole! Elite athletes and their coaches are not the only people who have problems. All of these problems from the high schoolers to the elite will compromise the efficacy of a the coaches' "concepts."" - Andy C

I disagree..... I find it interesting the number of high school and club coaches who think they know the answers to solve elite vaulters issues yet they have never been able to work with or produce an athlete who can grip high enough. Technique is looked at in terms of how the vault looks. Technique is ability to get the hips above the grip and ability to rotate a grip. Not how it looks. Just because it looks good doesn't mean it's effective. I think its condescending the number of coaches who trash elite athletes and coaches when they have no idea what its like being in their shoes or producing an elite athlete. It's not as easy as go jump 19'......


"And I disagree with your point about the coaches who's athletes are a work in progress. Every athlete is a work in progress and a coach is only being honest if they make this claim of their own charges. If your statement is true, then nobody should be asking questions of anybody since there isn't a single vaulter (or person) on this planet who is perfect." - Andy C


If you read my comment it was meant towards the people who criticize other athletes but say their athletes are a work in progress. I agree all athletes are a work in program even your own and another coaches. The key point that was made is in a professional manner. It's the issue our sport is lacking from the top down. Is there really a professional manner at which our sport operates? Can you ship a kid off to a camp like a factory and spit out 200 athletes that look the same? Will all 200 athletes succeed the same or will certain athletes come out on top and others left behind?

Is there one way to coach or hundreds of ways to say the same thing. If you coach one way and you can't mold a wide variety of kids are you really a good coach or a system coach? I could be wrong, but we have too many jumping for magic height if they reach perfection and not enough trying to learn to jump high. Good luck to those on the lower levels. You get 4 years with an athlete. Than a college coach gets 4 years with them. Than they have 2 years after college to learn how to jump high or they quit and get a job. There is no money for a vaulter who can't jump high.


I think the best question is, "Does the Russian Model Represent Ideal Technique for whom?" For your average vaulter who does not have the raw ability to be world class or for everyone? For high school, masters and average college vaulters I think its a very safe and technically correct model. It doesn't match everyone and to say its the only system that can and will work is arrogance IMO....... If you look hard enough you can make an argument the top people use petrov model cause you want to say they do.... Put 4 elite woman or elite men overlapping and they all do it different. They have common moments in time they all hit because in order to jump high you have to do certain things right, but they all do it in a different way.

I've coached 7' woman, 5 meter high school guys, 13' high school woman, 15' elite woman, and near 19' elite men. They all did similar things but all jumped their own unique way. Find the common themes needed to produce height while landing safe in the pits and as a coach you will start producing more successful athletes. If you're an everyone must do it the same coach you may produce artificial results, but stagnate athletes who are doomed to fail in college. I'd take the high school 5 meter vaulter on 16' poles who can't vault technically over the 5 meter vaulter on 14'7 poles doing everything perfect all day long. Where can the guy on 14'7 poles go? You produce a very good looking vaulter that has learned to cheat the system to look the part.

*******I'm not saying grip grip grip.... You must do things that allow the athlete to land safely in the pit.***************


Topics like this are so tough. You have different level of coaches trying to make arguments. A coach thinking about and looking only at elite athletes will never see things eye to eye with a coach who only works with 13' men vaulters. This topic is just way to broad or maybe it is as it seems everyone on here thinks coaching pole vault is like an assembly line put the athlete in and produce. Good Luck!

[david bussabarger]

vcoach/
First of all I think we must clarify what is meant by the term model. webster's dictionary defines it as: a standard or example for imitation or comparison. therefore the inidvidual technical style of a given vaulter becomes the standard or example in the model ( as bubka is in the b/p model ). altius greatly complicates the meaning of the term by unnecessarly adding additonal meanings , so this why I feel it's meaning needs clarification.
based on petrov,s own description of his model several key points define his model:
1. beginning with the take off, all the phases of the vault should be actively executed in succesive order.
2. the vaulter should employ a pre jump or free take off. I take this to mean that the vaulter should take off so far back that he/she can leave the ground before the tip of the pole can contacts the back of the box. I have also had disagreements with altius on this point. he c laims a vaulter can execute a free take off while taking off under!
3.the rock-back is a continuation of the swing ( the vaulter continues to lead with the sweeping action of the left leg until the rock -back is completed ). As the vaulter rocks back (using this rock back stlyle ) he/she should shift weight back towards the shoulders, increasing the input of energy into the pole.
4. as the vaulter actively extends the legs and hips vertically, he/she should also drop the shoulders back.
if this descrption is followed in the strictest sense their have only been a hand full of vaulters who fit reasonably well into this model: tarasov ( however his highly pronounced stiff arming action creates important mechanical distinctions vs. bubka ) starkey, volz, borges, v. bubka, and holzdeppe. here again I have had diagreements with altius on this point. From my point of view he includes so many stylisticly different vaulters in the russian model that it the model becomes meaningless.
It is worth pointing out that if you exclude tarasov from this list the next highest vaulter has best of only 19-43/4, which is not too great if this is the best possible model.

[IAmTheWalrus]

2 quick points.

1) model vs style - A high pole carry is component of the model. Open hand/closed hand grip is a stylistic variation.

2) Just because someone has not perfected the model, or does not employ every aspect of the model correctly, does not mean they aren't trying to. I'm a terrible high jumper. I try to do the flop but my technique is awful, does that mean that I'm using a different model or that the flop is flawed.

Let us not forget that Bubka was an incredible student. Other people may have trained as hard as Bubka, but i doubt any are as disciplined. Bubka is one of few examples of someone dedicating themselves to a model. Training from the age of 10 for the 1984? Olympics, you just don't see that kind of long term training anymore.

3) lastly, I'd again like to point out that bubka jumped 6m more times than many elites clear 19'. He also cleared it with enormous height. I think that should factor into the discussion.

[coachjvinson]

[quote="david bussabarger"]vcoach/

2. the vaulter should employ a pre jump or free take off. I take this to mean that the vaulter should take off so far back that he/she can leave the ground before the tip of the pole can contacts the back of the box. I have also had disagreements with altius on this point. he c laims a vaulter can execute a free take off while taking off under!

I would agree that a vaulter can employ a free take off while being UNDER.
The further Under the vaulter is the less likely the occuerrence, but it is by no means impossible any more than it is impossible for a free take off while being ON or OUT.
Moreover, there is a point at which a free take off that is employed too far OUT is not ideal and is counterproductive.

Additionally, the important factors being established at this stage of the vault are not only the optimum manner by which to transfer total energy into the SYSTEM but also, the optimum angle of attack.

For a vaulter to employ a free take off while simultaneously being under, the the top hand would be behind the head and the jump impetus initiated from a point closer to the box than the point which is directly below the top hand hold.
I am not suggesting this is ideal...

What can be established is an ideal (most effective) manner by which to transfer energy into the system, and an ideal (most effective) angle of attack which is determined by the vaulter taking off either UNDER, ON, or OUT.

I would also state that it is a misconception to state that a free take off involves or occurs only when...

[quote="david bussabarger"]vcoach/
I take this to mean that the vaulter should take off so far back that he/she can leave the ground before the tip of the pole can contacts the back of the box.

And please, someone clarify if I am in error: My understanding of the free takeoff concept involves the vaulter having initiated the jump impetus as indicated by either the athlete being on the ball of the foot or slightly in the air BEFORE the pole begins to flex. (not at a point significantly OUT or at a point where the pole tip travels a significant amount before contacting the back of the box)

And again, this is not predicated on the premise that the vaulter is significantly OUT.
It is however predicated, ideally, by the athlete having fully extended the top hand and having initiated the jump impetus. It is a product of ideal, quick, and early timing...

Now, the vaulter can have the combination of ideal timing with the plant and the jump impetus while having stretched the stride with the result of a take off step that is UNDER and the compromised energy transfer which results from the subsequent body mechanics and angle of attack.

I must state that I am thankful for the healthy debate (even if it was debated previously), for the continued guidance, and for the opportunity for self analysis of the ideologies and methods which I subscribe to.

[rainbowgirl28]

I'd take the high school 5 meter vaulter on 16' poles who can't vault technically over the 5 meter vaulter on 14'7 poles doing everything perfect all day long. Where can the guy on 14'7 poles go? You produce a very good looking vaulter that has learned to cheat the system to look the part.

I don't think that's cheating the system. You just have a kid who is probably fairly close to their maximum potential. Of course a college coach wants the kid who is beastly enough for 16' poles, that's reasonable.

In some ways it's sad if a kid maximizes their potential in HS, but given that most kids never advance past this point, it's probably not the end of the world.

It is sad if a kid never reaches their full potential because of issues that were developed in high school, be they technical, mental, burnout, etc.