Rythm Run (how I failed to teach it) Help

[Tim McMichael]

Here is my take on the difference between the rhythm run and just sprinting as hard as possible the whole way.

I agree with Altius that the Europeans in general use the slow-out-the-back, gradual acceleration method more often than Americans who are more likely to just turn on the afterburners and head toward the box. I am also certain that the rhythm run is a much better technique.

It is much easier to set up a good takeoff with a more methodical start to the run. The problem is that it is also a MUCH more difficult technique to learn and teach. It took me years to get it right consistently. Granted, I was working on it completely alone with no direct model available to me to follow. All I knew was that I had to be as tall and powerful as possible at the takeoff, and I had found out by accident that a more deliberate start to the run helped.

I was completely blown out from squatting too much and had to compete in a meet when it felt like I could barely walk. The only thing I could do was start very slow and then try my best to run faster as I got to the takeoff. I jumped a personal best (my first outdoor 18’) and got on the biggest pole I had ever used up to that point. I knew I was on to something; I just had no idea what or how to repeat it.

When I tried to run that way on purpose, I found my step was all over the place. I could not figure out how to accelerate at a consistent pace. It was harder to pick up the box because I was inconsistent at when and where I was turning on full power. When it was working though, I gained six to eight inches on my potential height. It was that significant a difference. Often I went back to the full-blast-from-the-start approach out of sheer necessity. I had to make some bars or risk putting a dent in my season, but I kept trying to find a rhythm run whenever possible.

After six years of tinkering with it off and on, I finally learned it through the feel of my plant. As my focus and feel for the right takeoff improved, it began to dictate how I ran. I couldn’t set up for my best plant any other way, so I just naturally began to run with a more deliberate start. It happened almost without me being aware of it.

This is what it feels like: The first four steps are tall and bouncy, almost like a slow bound. This helps get my feet under me while I am still moving slow. If you start a gradual acceleration without this high, bounding start, it means that your feet have to strike slightly in front of you as you begin to accelerate. If they keep striking in front of you, you will be leaning back as you reach full speed. The whole thing can fall apart from there with a decelerating, under takeoff. It is much easier to maintain good posture from the start than it is to try to get there during the run. After the first four steps there is a gradual acceleration that culminates with a full-blast charge into the takeoff while still being as tall as possible. The box seems to draw you to it like a magnet. The closer it gets, the faster you go automatically. It is like a ball rolling down a hill, naturally gathering speed and power as it goes. This happens without losing posture. On my best runs it feels like I almost have to stretch down with my legs or my feet will miss the runway. Of course, this is an illusion, but it feels that way. (There are some pole carry issues here, but I won't go into that.)

The difficulty is in knowing and trusting that your step will be on. There is a kind of break-over point about six steps out where you know that you will have just enough strength to reach a slightly outside takeoff with good posture and all the power against the track that you can possibly give.

I taught a good college vaulter to do this by simply explaining it to him in much the same terms as I have attempted here. He got inspired and went out to the next practice and PR’d a foot. Then he didn’t plant again for three months. It was the most frustrating coaching experience of my career. I ruined a decent vaulter’s season because I gave him the feel of the right way to do something. He could not repeat it, and he could not go back to his old run. The problem was an issue of confidence. He just could not trust that his step would be on. He was always anxious that he would be too far outside, that he would not have the power to get to the right takeoff. He began to try to think his way through the run and completely lost his feel for the box. All I could tell him was that he had to feel his takeoff and let the run lead him to it. That was (and is) the only way I know to do it, and I found out the hard way that if an athlete does not have a good feel for the takeoff to start with, my method will not work. I worked at it for six years after my first 18’ vault before I found it. I could not expect someone who had not made 17’ yet to use the same method.

My question is – Altius and anyone else with 2 cents or more to give – how can this be taught? I am the classic example of someone who can do it, but not teach it.

[gtc]

Tim, did you count steps at all in your head?

[jumpbackin]

I'm sure you tried this, but I'll post it any way. Practice on the track until it's consistent.

[theczar]

Tim, did you count steps at all in your head?

counting steps confuses me. whenever I do that I concentrate on counting and it completely messes me up

[rainbowgirl28]

When I tried to run that way on purpose, I found my step was all over the place. I could not figure out how to accelerate at a consistent pace. It was harder to pick up the box because I was inconsistent at when and where I was turning on full power. When it was working though, I gained six to eight inches on my potential height. It was that significant a difference. Often I went back to the full-blast-from-the-start approach out of sheer necessity. I had to make some bars or risk putting a dent in my season, but I kept trying to find a rhythm run whenever possible.

Did you try using a visible speed or check mark to help your consistency out of the back?

[gtc]

counting steps confuses me. whenever I do that I concentrate on counting and it completely messes me up


That's to bad!! Really!!

[Tim McMichael]

If it made any sense at all, I tried it. Check marks didn't work because it was too artificial. I found myself looking for the mark and losing my sense of where the box was.

[dbwsportz]

I used the gradual accelleration method when I was in high school and college. When my son started vaulting I taught him the same run. We experienced inconsistency with his steps. We worked with DJ's mid mark chart and had to make some modifications. In our experience, we finally figured out that he was starting his run too slow (like a jog). A little stronger and faster out of the back made his run and check marks more consistent while. The problem is that I don't know how to describe how fast it should be. A check mark placed a couple of strides into the run helped him hit his mid and take off much more consistantly.

[baggettpv]

I want to infer that running and accelrating is a part of the training process. I feel that thru the correct training program the run will become a natural process the athlete learns to do. relating to Dj's info, when the run is properly trained then the relationship to locations on the runway will become more consistant. Check what you do in training.
Too tired to go into more detail....taught and coached for 14 hours....


Rick Baggett
WSTC LLC

[EIUvltr]

The problem with teaching the gradual run is that although it is superior, it is much more difficult to master due to the consistency issue. I know it seems as if I'm stating the obvious but bear with me.

As my coach so eloquently stated/quoted in another post...
"The laws of oscillating systems dictate that for each step in the acceleration process there is an ideal frequency that, if exceeded, results in loss of efficiency. Frequency should progressively increase, but at a unique rate. This rate of frequency development should not compromise the elastic energy development. Failure to increase frequency sufficiently can impair the achievement of maximal velocity and maximal velocity mechanics."

What this means is that you can't start your run too fast because you will be inefficent, but you can't start it slowly either because you will be inconsistent. Yes! This is why it's so hard! The problem is that there is no such thing as a slow and controlled acceleration. What most people do who are trying unsuccessfully to change to a "European" run is they try to control both their stride frequency and stride length at the same time, which is impossible to accomplish consistently. The unspoken myth that Bubka gradually accelerated by simply running harder and harder, which implies he wasn't putting forth maximal effort the entire run is...hogwash.

Just because Bubka didn't get his strides down as fast as an American vaulter does at the beginning of his run doesn't mean he wasn't being aggressive. The difference between the two is that the American is trying to accelerate as fast as possible and Bubka was trying to increase his stride length to maximum amplitude as early as possible by applying force to the ground as long and forcefully as possible. By increasing his stride length early, he would be able to have good posture and have his feet strike directly beneath him which would help him quicken up his stride frequency in the middle phase of his run. What all this accomplishes is an efficent AND consistent long stride at a high frequency which allows him to concentrate on all that other vaulting stuff he did so well.

Sorry if this came out kind of garbled, its hard to spit out complex theories coherently at 2am.

[Tim McMichael]

I completely agree. The effort must remain a constant. What changes is the direction of that effort. The beginning of the run is about getting tall and achieving the posture that allows for a slight shortening of the stride and constant acceleration through the takeoff. The entire run is nothing more than a set up for the last three steps.

The question remains. How do you teach it? While the suggestions on check marks and mid marks are helpful, I am not sure most beginners are strong enough to do it. It takes what we used to call “blow,â€Â

[ladyvolspvcoach]

this post may help with a method to measure rythm runs and give the approach some metrics by which to see your athletes improve on their approach. I used DJ's chart to develop a series of run drills. The logic goes something like this: if in fact these data on the chart are correct then they can be used to develop tools to measure the effectiveness of the approach. Normally when a young lady comes into my program from high school they are on 12' or 12'-6" poles generally gripping no higher than 12'3 or so. If they are going to compete at a high level they have to grip high on 14' poles or bigger. So my first job is to teach them the correct way to handle the pole and the correct way to develop speed on the runway while maintaining proper pole descent, posture, and plant. The biggest problem I find with new athletes is that they have been taught (or more correctly not taught) that to run fast you either have to reach with your feet to increase stride length or move your feet faster to go faster. Neither of these concepts develops speed. So how fast do they need to go? and how do you know? Check out DJ's chart. Since they come into the program holding around 12' look at the chart and find the stride length that will develop the energy to get that grip to vertical - about 5'2". I start with 5 left runs. make or find a mark on the track. Measure 5'2" and make a chalk mark on the track. Now you have two marks. Do this repeatedly until there are 7 marks. Have the athlete toe (put his/her toe of the left foot on the last mark step back with the right foot and run away from the marks. Catch the second left. If you have several athletes they will likely each have a different mark. These last marks are the start of the 5 left runs. Have them run back toward the 7 marks on the track. What you will find is they will all hit the first mark ( mid or coaches mark) and each of them will hit each of the 7 marks. If you have them count down the mid is always the 4th left. The first mark you started from is the take-off. I usually do this using 4 lanes on the track. If I want their highest grip to be 14' then the last lane's marks are spaced (per DJ's chart) 5'11" apart. And for the drill I have them run 9 lefts. So in summery I have 4 lanes one 5'2" where we run 5 lefts. Then one measured 5'6" and we run 7 lefts. Then one 5'9" and we run 9 lefts and the last one 5'11" and 9 lefts.
The amazing thing (to me) is that in the beginning when they are running back to get their starting points, the marks can be 8 to 10 feet different from one another. As they practice these runs in a few weeks the difference in their starting point grows closer and closer together until their are barely 18 inches apart. By using these "ladders" yoiu can see them hitting each mark on the track regardless of where they start. AND if they are hitting the marks then they ARE running fast enough to get a 12', 12'-10", 13'5", and 14' grip to vertical. You can actually see on the track if they are running correctly. I have videoed these ladders and timed each of the ladies from the time they hit their mid marks to take off. In the early days the times are all over the place. After a month or so they are all exactly the same to the .001 of a second. If someone told me this would happen a few years ago I'd have told them they were nuts. But it works and give you a chance to work on posture, pole descent, plant and take off while measuring their progress on the approach. Hope this isn't too confusing. IT WORKS!