Using the lead leg (drive knee) as the first swing leg...
Altius,
Thanks I look forward to a better understanding. For what it's worth, I've written 4 books and 25 academic journal articles since I began teaching law school in 1989. I'm currently working on 2 more books and 2 more articles. So I completely understand the "vocabulary" problem that you describe. We get so enmeshed in the minutiae that we occasionally forget some of the more elementary aspects of what it is that we are trying to write about. Communication is a very difficult business. And I am sure that in my own writing I've been guilty of every writing sin possible - from typos and factual errors to downright miscommunication. As someone much smarter than I once said, "There is no good writing, only good re-writing."
Regards,
Thanks I look forward to a better understanding. For what it's worth, I've written 4 books and 25 academic journal articles since I began teaching law school in 1989. I'm currently working on 2 more books and 2 more articles. So I completely understand the "vocabulary" problem that you describe. We get so enmeshed in the minutiae that we occasionally forget some of the more elementary aspects of what it is that we are trying to write about. Communication is a very difficult business. And I am sure that in my own writing I've been guilty of every writing sin possible - from typos and factual errors to downright miscommunication. As someone much smarter than I once said, "There is no good writing, only good re-writing."
Regards,
Russ
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
-
altius
- PV Rock Star
- Posts: 2425
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
- Location: adelaide, australia
- Contact:
When Petrov first explained the essence of his model to me in 1985 he emphasised two things. First the 'free take off' - here he drew a diagram with the athlete about a foot off the ground before the pole hit the back of the box!! Clearly an exaggeration but one which lead me to think of pre jump not just free take off and to continue to make a distinction between the two - with all due respect to agapit!!
Secondly he drew a diagram which showed the athlete almost like an inverted comma curling back over a flexed pole. Only the head and shoulders were below the pole - the rest of the body was drawn above the pole in parallel with it - with the legs and feet becoming an extension of the pole. This was his notion of 'covering the pole' but again clearly an exaggeration. He made it clear that the free take off lead automatically to covering the pole and that there must be no shortening of the body by flexing at both hips and knees -as shown in Figure 24.5 on page 154 -incidentally this was a 5.90 vaulter. Note laso that I quote from Petrovs 85 paper at the bottom of Page 155 in BTB.
On page 155 of BTB Fig 24/6 shows Bubka in position 'covering the pole' -not a great photo but one taken in haste on the warm up track in Atlanta. Position 4 of Figure 24.1 on page 151 shows it better.
'Covering the pole' has got lost in the focus on the free take off/ pre jump but in fact is just as important to the Petrov Bubka model because it puts the athlete in position
1. Where they can put even more energy into the pole by driving the hips up and the shoulders to the pad -a charateristic of all of Bubka's vaulting.
2. Where they can better exploit the energy of the recoil by staying ahead of the pole as it straightens. This is illustrated by the photo -unfortunately truncated - on the front cover of BTB which shows him arrow straight while the pole is still flexed.
3. Is already closer - at least 30cm/1 foot - to their target the space above the bar - than athletes who rock back and finish UNDER the pole at maximum flex -again see Figure 24.5. Interestingly this small but important fact has rated little attention in all the discussion about effective technique here and elsewhere.
For these reasons anything which prevents a vaulter from 'covering the pole' as fast as possible must be seen as poor technique - which is where this topic first began with its question about the possible advantages of the lead leg swing. I believe this also puts into question any dropping of the lead leg at or immediately after take off because this too slows the rotation to cover the pole. It should also raise doubts about anyone who tucks and shoots because these folk cannot get 'on top of' the pole so cannot put energy into in the third phase as Bubka did -or come off as vertically -- although it has to be said that Galfione wasnt bad!
Not sure if this helps - can only live in hope!
[/list]
Secondly he drew a diagram which showed the athlete almost like an inverted comma curling back over a flexed pole. Only the head and shoulders were below the pole - the rest of the body was drawn above the pole in parallel with it - with the legs and feet becoming an extension of the pole. This was his notion of 'covering the pole' but again clearly an exaggeration. He made it clear that the free take off lead automatically to covering the pole and that there must be no shortening of the body by flexing at both hips and knees -as shown in Figure 24.5 on page 154 -incidentally this was a 5.90 vaulter. Note laso that I quote from Petrovs 85 paper at the bottom of Page 155 in BTB.
On page 155 of BTB Fig 24/6 shows Bubka in position 'covering the pole' -not a great photo but one taken in haste on the warm up track in Atlanta. Position 4 of Figure 24.1 on page 151 shows it better.
'Covering the pole' has got lost in the focus on the free take off/ pre jump but in fact is just as important to the Petrov Bubka model because it puts the athlete in position
1. Where they can put even more energy into the pole by driving the hips up and the shoulders to the pad -a charateristic of all of Bubka's vaulting.
2. Where they can better exploit the energy of the recoil by staying ahead of the pole as it straightens. This is illustrated by the photo -unfortunately truncated - on the front cover of BTB which shows him arrow straight while the pole is still flexed.
3. Is already closer - at least 30cm/1 foot - to their target the space above the bar - than athletes who rock back and finish UNDER the pole at maximum flex -again see Figure 24.5. Interestingly this small but important fact has rated little attention in all the discussion about effective technique here and elsewhere.
For these reasons anything which prevents a vaulter from 'covering the pole' as fast as possible must be seen as poor technique - which is where this topic first began with its question about the possible advantages of the lead leg swing. I believe this also puts into question any dropping of the lead leg at or immediately after take off because this too slows the rotation to cover the pole. It should also raise doubts about anyone who tucks and shoots because these folk cannot get 'on top of' the pole so cannot put energy into in the third phase as Bubka did -or come off as vertically -- although it has to be said that Galfione wasnt bad!
Not sure if this helps - can only live in hope!
[/list]Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden
Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests