what different models are out there

[robillard]

ok first off i want to make it clear that i am a supporter of the petrov model. that said heres a little quote "to know one religion is to know none".
just because you know the petrov model doesnt mean you know everything about the pole vault. in order to effectively help others adn gain a better understanding of wat you are doing you should gain some sort of understanding of the other models.

[vaultman18]

Unfortunately most people know plenty about other models but not enough to abandon them. You can make analogies and give quotes all you want but I still contend you should focus your energy on the correct way not the wrong way. I have spent time trying to understand other models and wondering why I couldn't get any better and I regret every second I wasted. I wish I had never learned anything other than the Petrov model. If you are willing to pursue knowledge that you know to be less than the best possible you are wasting your time.

[vault3rb0y]

So apparently its ridiculous to be curious about the physics of models that have brought jumpers over 6m. Your mindset is that of someone obsessed with jumping world records, which will only be done with the petrov model, i agree. My mindset however, is that of someone interested in learning as much about the vault as possible. Like it or not, there are many models and hybrid models of vaulting, and i will take the opportunity to educate myself on all of them. Of course i dont plan on implementing any of them, i implement what my coach tells me to implement. I just plan on researching them in the same way i would research the physics of the high jump or triple jump.

Honestly, the vault is way more about education and fun to me than becoming closed minded and completely focused with one model. Sure, jumping PR's is important, and i will do that with the petrov model. but equally important, at least to me, is the education in physics and biomechanics i will get from the vault. Its been said by mark twain that "the only thing that got in the way of my learning was my education". If you are only educated with one model, even if its the only right one, you will never learn how other models have helped some jumpers jump pretty high too. You are welcome to focus on the petrov model, but some others might feel differently. I know Alan's main goal for posting on this site is (hopefully) to help educate young vaulters. He knows the petrov model in and out, so he can help kids with that. We all know its the best model, and he can advocate that. But that shouldnt stop those curious about the physics of other models from learning about them on this site.

[vaultman18]

Look back through some of the comments on this thread and you will find them to be argumentative. As was the case with agapit's pole vault manifesto and now he doesn't bother posting on here. It is like banging your head against the wall. I am saying to anyone who comes to this forum looking for knowledge, look no futher than BTB. If a beginer comes to this forum they need to know what the best model is. I don't care how anyone spends their time. But for anyone learning about the vault for the first time they are much better off to focus on implementing the Petrov model and not wasting any time trying other methods. And why not strive for world records or at least set yourself or athletes up to do so. It is a disservice to teach an athlete anything other than what will allow them to reach a maximum potential. I am not the closed minded one here I am looking to the future of our sport. So far six pages of this topic and nothing has been said that supports any model other than the Petrov model. So vaulter870 don't fuse the Petrov model with any other models. So to give you an answer to your original question. If you have a kid at 17' in high school let him be he will find plenty of schools that want him. And if they so desire they can change his way of jumping. The only draw back you have to consider is that you have withheld the knowledge that could have one day led to him jumping 6.40.
Sorry for the rant I am finished on this thread. Vaulter870 I hope you do find the answer you are looking for seriously.

[vaulter870]

thank you. my point for the "fuse" comment was knowing that i cant change him over in one year and he will "fuse his techniche while moving towards the petrov model. sorry for the confusion.

[altius]

Just to remind folk that I started writing BTB following the deaths of three young men in the USA a few years back. I had been to Reno several times by then and had noted that many young vaulters were putting themselves at risk -essentially because they had no technical model. Like a bat out of hell in the run up, a take off which could be two feet under, a huge early bend in the pole, an early inversion into a position over the box and jump after jump coming down on the bar. I have to say after watching carefully this year not a great deal has changed.

Since I have been a sports educator since 1957 this was anathema to me - in my profession the safety of the player/performaer is always your major priority whether it be gymnastics, soccer or swimming, so my concern about safety in the vault devolved from that.

In an effort to remain positive on this site I will contribute the following. To understand the limitations of other methods you have to first have a clear understanding, visually, verbally, cognitively of the Petrov model. This provides you with a template against which you can assess the effectiveness of other models. So with this in mind what are the advantages and disadvantages of the double leg swing. The advantage is that it helps keep the centre of mass of the body lower as the athlete swings to the chord of the pole and enables them -assuming they drive effectviely at take off - put slighly more energy into the vaulter system in that phase. This is why stiff pole vaulters used it = but remember they had to because they could not store energy in the pole. The disadvantage is that the swing with two legs slows down the rotation of the vaulter so they invariably are unable to rotate fast enough from the chord of the pole up to cover the pole -IE get their centre of mass at least level with or ideally slightly above the pole when it is still well flexed -a major element of the Petrov model. Bubkas aim - never achieved of course - was to be vertical when the pole was still at maximum bend! Clearly getting on top of the pole early allows the vaulter to better exploit the recoil of the pole that the tuck and shoot which inevitably partners a double leg swing.

In essence athletes should have enough energy in the system and enough rotational speed to swing at least one leg -the take off leg virtually straight above the head. The tuck results when vaulters realise -intuitively - that if they are to get upside down they must shorten the axis of rotation. Unfortunately what is an intuitive reaction then becomes something folk aim for when they should not. The shoot - which puts no energy into the pole -unlike the Petrov method -is an ineviatable result of the tuck!

The only athlete I have seen who got close to resolving the disadvantages of the double leg swing was world indoor champion Igor Potapovich. Markov does not use a double leg swing. the drop and instand pick up of his lead leg is inadvertant -the consequence of a poor plant - in essesnce the shock of the plant shakes the right leg loose and he has to recover it. But for that fault -hopefully still curable with another input from Vitally - he would have cleared at least 6.10 and possibly broken Bubkas record.

Note also I would not have set out on BTB journey if I had not had clear evidence - in the form of both performances and film - that young athletes - some after less that 100 training sessions - can master elements of the Petrov Model to the point where it helps them vault higher. That evidence was presented in Reno but is available in BTB and on the BTB DVD.

I would conclude by suggesting - in the spirit of "First know your enemy" that if you want to propose alternatives to the petrov Bubka model you must first really understand that model. I am not convinced that all contributors to this forum have attempted to do that.

[EIUvltr]

So far six pages of this topic and nothing has been said that supports any model other than the Petrov model

There are things about the other models that make them superior to the Petrov models in segments of the vault. For instance, the power vault allows vaulters to to have a faster and more powerful swing due to a low driving takeoff where they have a large amount of resistance thru their arms, shoulders and shoulder girdle (you need resistance to act against in order to swing, and there is more resistance in the power vault due to the low takeoff). This more powerful swing creates more rotational kinetic energy which is key to the power vaulter to move the pole to vertical and not get "stuck." Watch Tim's jumps under media to see one of the fastest swings in history.

Now despite this advantage, I still believe that OVERALL the petrov model is more effective at getting the human body higher in the air due to but not limited to: The ability of the vaulter to get into a position to receive the energy out of the pole better than in the power vault due to a higher takeoff angle, a wider parabola to clear a bar than people who focus on driving the pole thru the bottom, and a more efficient conservation of energy due to the vaulter keeping some of his energy in his body as opposed to transferring the energy into the pole and then receiving it back (which results in more energy bleeding out of the entire system). In a nutshell, the petrov model is the best because from takeoff to bar clearance, a perfect petrov vault will lose less energy than a perfect double leg swing or perfect power vault.

I wrote this post not to promote a technical model besides the petrov model, but in response to vaultman18's post to show that there are some advantages in certain phases of different techniques. And teaching athletes about the pros/cons of other techniques besides the petrov model isn't a bad thing but in fact can help them better understand the reasons why the petrov model is a better choice since they will have something to compare it to. Think of it as mental cross training.

[Carolina21]

Alan,
If you don't mind explaining a little further exactly what part of Markovs plant is poor and causes the dropped leg? I have the same issue with a slight drop of my lead knee followed by immeadiate recovery, as the year progresses it gets better, but I have never heard an explanation as to why this happens, or exactly figured out where the break down is occurring. I always have guessed the shock of the plant moves the hips forward and this quick drop is to compensate and allow the vaulter to stay behind the pole, but was not sure if that was the case? Also what is the fix?

[Tim McMichael]

Ok. Now I’m motivated. I will try to finish a detailed description of a drive vault in the next few days. I honestly don’t know what to say to those who think this information is worthless and detrimental. I am not interested in harming anyone’s ability to jump high, and if someone thinks that an understanding of different models will do that, then I encourage them to not read my post.

I have the utmost respect for Alan’s experience and expertise. He has more than paid his dues in understanding, explicating, and propagating the Petrov model. I understand it in general terms, and having read Beginner to Bubka, I now understand it better, but I am not exaggerating when I say that I know the drive vault from the inside as well as anyone alive and may have something to say about it that has not been said before. I have broken my body and my heart to learn what I know, and it is no fault of my own that this is where I spent my life’s study. We had no other knowledge to guide us. The model we followed grew out of trial and error over years of devastatingly hard work in the pastures and backwaters of rural Oklahoma - far removed from the laboratory precision of the Eastern European sports machine. For that reason, you will have to forgive me if my approach to this task is lacking a degree of objectivity. I have always tried to give due respect to different points of view when they are well reasoned and persuasive. If I decide, as Alan suggests I will, that the Petrov model is best, I will do my best to swallow my pride. Surely Ptolemy would have been devastated by Galileo’s telescope had they been contemporaries. It is no easy thing to see a life’s devotion go up in smoke, and you will have to bear with me if I take some pains to defend it. When I finish my paper, take it for what it is worth, even if you find it worthless.

I will begin by saying this - and Alan please correct me if I say something in error concerning the Petrov model. It is important to be able to jump off of the ground at the end of a precise, methodical, and powerful approach to take the Petrov model to world class heights. The ability to long jump is essential. At 5’8â€Â

[gtc]

I knew if pushed Tim could produce an Oklahoma Pole Vault Manifesto.

[vaulter870]

thank you alan for putting that last post up there that is really what i am trying to do. get the best possible understanding of the petrov model so that i can see how to fix what is wrong with my vaulter. tim it is good to see that you are going to grace us with your knowlege of the drive vault i am very much looking forward to what you have to say!!

[robillard]

ok just wondering, after reading parts of BTB on the btb website i was wondering were i could buy a full version of the book. is it available at barnes and noble by any chance.