appendix to does the russian model represent ideal tech.

[coachjvinson]

I do not take it that way at all.
There are many advanced topics people try to teach to 12' guys. WHY? In fact I do teach the movement on small levels to high end athletes and I teach the path at which we want the hands to move to low level athletes...

Agreed

Look at the pure moment in time of an athlete like Bubka who can be completely inverted and catches the ride while the pole is still bent. He is not a fluid moving object. He is a straight body object being thrown in the air. A dynamically skilled athlete knows when to make movements and when to hold body shapes. Holding body shapes in itself makes you a dynamic athlete. A system that allows the athlete to be in a position to catch the most potential energy on their top hand will produce the most vertical lift if enough potential energy is in fact still available. Energy in and Energy out.

Thank you for clarifying, specifically...

Any pulling or moving sensation with the arms that directs the pole back down the runway is bad due to ceasing pole rotation into the pit and due to not being in the line of final thrust of the pole.

[coachjvinson]

The pull that was talked about in the article was the final movement by which the top hand moves passed the body. There is a difference between not making use of something and attempt to do something that causes an incorrect movement.

A pull that gets the vaulter away from the system is exactly the opposite to what the concepts talk about.

To sum it up are you telling me a guy or woman that can't even clear his or her own grip height should be trying to pull as hard as they can on the top of their jump? Such a vaulter would be better off attempting to use all their energy to stay connected and in line with the pole. By attempting to create an imaginary additional amount of force such an athlete will tend to just fall off and out of alignment with the line of thrust. Not wanted or needed for any vaulter of any level. Try to shoot and arrow with not holding the arrow next to the bow frame.. How far and straight does the arrow go.

In review, this application of "Error Analysis" and watching out for pitfalls in this stage of the vault has merit.
In reflection, I believe that I missed what you were trying to say, as in...
at this stage of the vault, this is what can go wrong if the effort is misapplied

Taken in this context, I can better understand the point you were making

[coachjvinson]

In the two attached quotes I believe we are making similar points...

...in the inverted state of the vault there is a certain static coordination to simply maintain balance and position as the pole recoils and releases the stored energy. I would argue that static is almost a mischaracterization when it comes to the vault...

...No actually if the arrow is not made of a solid material the arrow goes no where. If the arrow stays in line with the bow string it gets launched very quickly. The vaulter is the arrow and the pole is the bow.

And the following statements are based on my misunderstanding of what you were communicating

I have not read anywhere that anyone is suggesting this- to try to introduce this NON fact to support your position IS HIDDEN BIAS... NOT really an effective argument - an arrow is a STATIC object, where the TRAINED VAULTER is a DYNAMIC SKILLED ATHLETE...

thank you for taking the time to elaborate and clarify your position
V

[david bussabarger]

toadtf acad from nefastus nefastum:
an execllent post. I couldn't agree with most of what you said more. particularly the part about theories ( I think in most cases hypotheses ) and concrete knowledge. Alot is unknown about the vault and admitting this is critical to moving forward ( vs. claiming that everything is perfectly and absolutely understood as in the p/b model ). as I see it, the arguement as to who is a b/p vaulter and who is not, has become so diluted that the model becomes meaningless. when v.pyhco says gibilisco was coached by petrov, therefore he is a b/p vaulter and in addition he was a good example of a vaulter adpapting his own personal style ( note, I am paraphrasing here ) to the b/p model, the model is reduced to meaninglessness. I refer to my point about about the term art being reduced to meaninglessness in the current art world ( which has absolutely noyhing to do hitler's ideas on decedent art ) because anyone can claim anything they want as art.
my original conclusion in "does the russian model represent ideal technique?" was that there is no one ideal model or technical style. there are,instead many elements of vaulting technique that have become standardized, while at the same time there are also many aspects of technique that are subject to individual interpretation. how is this different from v. physco's statement about gibilisco?
n.n.

[coachjvinson]

I want to take the opportunity to formally and publicly apologize to ADTF, you were very gracious in both your reply to my post and your reply to my message. I misread and misinterpreted what you were trying to communicate: thank you for your time and patience. Any knowledge or understanding that I have has only come from others that were gracious enough to share and their willingness to take the time to guide me. I am thankful for the dialogue and am taking the opportunity to review the wealth of information that has been introduced, discussed and debated over the years.