Lavillenie vs Bubka

[KirkB]

I am withdrawing from this thread. I don't care to get in the middle of any disputes between PVDaddy, Altius, and David.

However, I will read with interest any scientific evidence or quotes from Lavillenie's inner circle re his intent - especially re the questions that I posed re "free takeoff" and "bending the pole before takeoff".

I am very interested in facts. I am not at all interested in biased opinions or personal attacks.

Kirk

[rainbowgirl28]

Kirk why don't you try asking Renaud on Facebook? His English is decent, if you keep it simple he'll probably understand.

[altius]

"Yup you altered your position alright, or your position was altered when you decided it? This bad information (Saying that the re-extension after going elastic is in fact a pull when in fact it is a push) from Mentors like you and Agapit probable has confused and harmed to many already! Why not just keep it simple and say you were badly mistaken? It could happen to anyone, even an old aficionado like you!"

Clearly you didn't read the post in which I detailed why I changed my view on this issue - but that doesn't surprise me. When you have read it it you may have a clear picture of this issue. On the question of misleading folk I think you will find that has not happened because it is in fact something you do not cannot teach of course only IMHO, But I explained that as well. The athlete learns to it intuitively in their work on stiff poles and or the rope. There - you are easy to mislead because as a pure theorist you have no perceptually absorbed knowledge - -ie the knowledge that actually comes for coaching. However if my docs will let me come to the US this year, come on over to the West Coach and you can show me what you really do know.

Incidentally I never use terms like "saying that the re extension after going elastic is in fact a pull when it is a push"

[Wan]

(...) But the point I was trying to make is that Renaud's marks this year certainly didn't come out of the blue. He has been gradually improving over time.
Yes Renaud has a new coach. Although I don't know what his input is. It may be limited to changes in training or pshycological input, etc.., while not making any significant changes in Renaud's technique. I know if I were coaching him I would be very hesitant too make any technical changes. I would just tell him your technique is great and you can break the world record just by getting better at what you are doing now. In otherwords be supportive and build his confidence.

It seems to be the case reading Lavillenie's coach Philippe d'Encausse saying (Jan 27, 2014 - Ouest-France newspaper, http://www.ouest-france.fr/athletisme-philippe-dencausse-renaud-peut-faire-mieux-que-604-m-1886300) :

When we started working together, more than one year ago (October 2012), there were two options : either Renaud managed his career plan and made business, or he saw further, trying to improve himself. Figuring who he was about, I knew he was not going to make the first choice. Now, it can happen that one regresses with new training methods. Here, this is not the case. We just have optimized what he was already doing the best so that he continues to improve.

[Wan]

Another interview of D'Encausse, November 9th, 2012, two months after the beginning of the collaboration with Lavillenie (http://www.physiquesperformance.com/8-blog/21-interview-philippe-d-encausse) :

- You 're the new coach of Renaud Lavillenie, how did you feel about those first few weeks of collaboration and what are the priority areas of work ?
I started based on the fact that Renaud was Olympic champion, that he made 6.03 meters 2 years before and that he was the current best in the world. It means that he already make a lot of things very well. My line of thinking in relation to this observation is to optimize everything he does well already. What it does well, if we can do it on a little better, we'll necessarily win a few centimeters. We did'nt start in the context of a deep change : if he puts on weight, for example, I'm sure he will regress back down to 5.70 m, what we can't afford. Renaud is an Olympic champion, he changed his coach, then it's not for losing a year adapting to new training methods. Pole vault is matter of kinesthetic ! You must have good feelings to jump high, you can't change too many parameters, it will generate too much fatigue and make you lose the technical scheme. Technical scheme is essential for confidence, we know one can lose it very quickly and then there is a very long way to recover it. Here is a striking example : the previous Olympic champion Steve Hooker is no longer able to jump high for over a year now, it asks him a huge investment today to make 5.70 m while his personal best is 6.06 m.

[Wan]

A good account (in english !) of a lecture with Philippe d'Encausse talking about technical and spirit facts... Hop it'll make you help reach a consensus...
http://www.wearepolevault.com/category/articles/technique/

[Wan]

To end with d'Encausse physical and technical considerations :

- What are the qualities needed to excel in this discipline ?
Firstly, performance is determined by physical qualities. The first is the speed quality. Someone who doesn't run naturally fast will have great difficulties to exceed 5.80 meters, it's really the key point in pole vault performance, you must be able to run top fast with an apparatus and be able at full speed to achieve very precise gesture, there is therefore a notion of speed but also of easing off. The 2nd is what I call the specific strength : we have to deal with a mobile apparatus, so we'll get closer to a kind of gym type muscle building because once the jump engaged, you need a good closing ability (arm on the trunk ) and therefore a very big core strenght, because you run with a weight that can go at the end of the pole up to 45 lbs, it's necessary to be like "wrapped" to be effective. You also need a good power / weight ratio, because you try to take off the ground so the heavier you will be the more complicated it will be. In this ratio I think the balance must always be in favor of strength, not weight. Besides there aren't many beefy bodybuilders left in this discipline, rather we are dealing today with slender athletes, and this is not because they are thin they are not strong.
Another determinant of performance : the psychological commitment to the jump, there is a notion of risk taking in pole vault that can't be found in other disciplines of athletics.
The performance will depend both on the lever, that's to say the length of the pole, and its stiffness. Basically, the higher leverage will be (then the longer pole will be) and the more a chance to succeed a high bar will be facilitated. The only problem is that the greater the lever is and the further you take off from the target, which is the point of impact of the pole. This means that the need of speed increases with the leverage used, and the greater stiffness the pole has, the faster and the more dynamic its return will be. All this means that the more you increase lenght and stiffness of the outer apparatus, the more your physical capacities need to follow.

[PVDaddy]

Kirk:

I am withdrawing from this thread. I don't care to get in the middle of any disputes between PVDaddy, Altius, and David.

Talk about stirring the pot! I believe you just took the spoon out of Altius hand!





Furthermore Kurk nobody wants you too!

[palm1234]

To end with d'Encausse physical and technical considerations :

Wan

The whole interview of d'Encausse has already been translated, in a thread of
Pole Vault International.

[Wan]

To end with d'Encausse physical and technical considerations :

Wan

The whole interview of d'Encausse has already been translated, in a thread of
Pole Vault International.

Sorry... Will try to be more aware in the future...
Where's the post you're talking about ?

[edit] Found... http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=27122&p=170356#p170356 Translated by canag. [end of edit]

[david bussabarger]

Thanks PV Dweeb for the D'encause posts. Even if they have been posted before they are germain to my post and confirm my speculations about his coaching.
I'm not sure if Launder is refering to me as a theorist. If he is my reply is I have been vaulting for over 50 yrs. I ahieved world class status in 72 with the 40th heightest vault in the world ( 5.10m ). I have conducted literally thousands of trial and error technical experiments over the years ( I've tried everything thing I can think of ). I still continue experimenting to this day ( there is no end to possible variations in execution in the fiberglass vault ). I have also spent decades painstakingly analyizing the technique of top fiberglass vaulters going back to the 60's. So I think I have more than alittle first hand knowlegde about the mechanics of fiberglass vaulting.
If anybody is a theorist here it is Launder and other die hard supporters of the B/P model. The claim that the B/P model is ideal is primarly based on theory ( how many times have I read the claim that physics proves the B/P model is ideal? ). At the same time advocates of the B/P model deride variations of technique that don't conform to said model as inferior or faulty, no matter how successful they may be. In other words advocates of the B/P model ignore what is going on in the real world of elite vaulting. It never seems to occur to these people that their ossified thinking may have held back possible progress in the event by impeding technical progress.

[CoachEric]

So far you haven't asserted anything specific about Lavillenie's vault for comparison to the Petrov model except differences in takeoff angle. I think that horse has been beaten. What else are you offering that is distinctly different about what Lavillenie is doing that you think makes him successful?