Tuck&shoot/Petrov

[KirkB]

Right!

Bottom arm blocking is not synonymous with tucking.

PP and VP, you're agreeing with each other too much ... it's like the blink leading the blind!

It's a cause/effect thing. If you block with your bottom arm, you won't have the pole speed to reach the pit unless you tuck. So almost all tuck/shooters block out.

They could lower your grip, but tuck/shooters don't usually like to do that ... because they want to get on big poles with high grips. By doing this, they veer away from "proper" (Petrov) technique.

Looking at Duplantis he had one of the highest push offs ever, but I don't know what model you would really call his vaulting. He just hauled down the runway, and swung his leg so incredibly fast that it almost looked like a tuck but wasn't.

Duplantis is a very poor example of a tuck/shooter ... and a very good example of a Petrov Model vaulter ... with a 47" pushoff! Isaksson ... another "continuous motion" type vaulter ... pre-Petrov ... is the only other vaulter that I'm aware of with a 47" pushoff.

VP and PP ... to keep this brief ... as requested by TweetyBirdy and 3P0 ... your homework assignment is to compare my 9-point comparison of Petrov v. tuck/shoot to Duplantis ... I wrote quite a bit about his similarity to my own technique here ...
http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=15483&p=116460
... so I definitely think he's in the Petrov camp ... probably better than any other American vaulter ... ever!

Alternatively, you could use my "Petrov Compliance Scale". Search for that one!

Kirk

[powerplant42]

I am not implying that bottom arm blocking does not/can not cause a tuck-shoot, just that you don't need to block with the bottom arm to tuck-shoot.

[vault3rb0y]

Geez.... my .02-


Ok.... so lets say an experienced vaulter is blowing through his biggest pole. Obviously he has two options to progress, either go up a pole and go up in grip.

If he is a petrov vaulter, and is able to swing long the entire vault, going up a pole and keeping the same grip will make covering the pole harder. So.... he raises his grip, making the pole feel softer. Once blowing through, he can then go up a pole and the pole will not feel as stiff, and he can still "catch the ride". Incrementally he may have increased his push off a little by going up a pole, but he has also raised his grip. This is my interpretation of how a petrov vaulter would progress. The only way he could go up a pole without raising grip would be to increase the inversion speed (while staying long, as petrovians require).

Now a tuck and shooter.... blows through a pole. He knows that he can safely raise his grip OR go up a pole, because in order to invert on the next pole, all he has to do is tuck a little more which increases his swing speed, and he can get on the next pole. Raising his grip does much less for him, because he has no trouble covering the pole, and it essentially just makes his pole softer (in most cases). So he goes up a pole, gets a bigger push off, but everytime he blows through he keeps his grip the same and tucks more. The only reason to raise your grip would be if you could not invert quickly enough to catch the vault. therefore with less energy put into the pole but with the ability to invert quicker than petrov vaulters, they hold lower and push higher than their petrov counterparts.


In the end, the more energy you put into the pole, the higher you will vault. It's hard to argue that a petrov vaulter does not have the ability to add more energy into the vault, they just need to hold higher and have more core strength to swing long.

[KirkB]

3P0, I'd like to respond to your comments (in detail), but not on this Beginner's forum. I think TweetyBirdy essentially got the "short answer" she was looking for, but now we're getting into a lot more detail that I think deserves to be discussed in perhaps the Intermediate Technique forum.

My "short answer" reply to your post is that ...

1. Given a certain finite amount of energy (momentum) from the run/takeoff ... and
2. Given the choice to apply this energy to either (a) the pole; or (b) the swing; or (c) both ...
3. A Petrovian will not sacrifice his swing speed for putting more energy into the pole ... but
4. A Tuck/Shooter will put as much energy into the pole as he can ... at the expense of his swing speed ... and as a result of this ...
5. The Tuck/Shooter will end up tucking to maintain his pole speed ... whereas a Petrovian won't have to. Instead ...
6. The Petrovian will swing up and thru his extension in one continuous motion (no pause in a tuck).

Elite tuck/shooters clear 5.80+ (or 5.50+ or 6.00+ or whatever) by reducing the amount of passive time they spend in the tuck. They begin to look more and more like Petrovians in their "continous motion" after the bottom half of their vaults.

To me, that's the main difference ... not what you said.

Sorry, I can't explain it any shorter or simpler than that!

Kirk

[IAmTheWalrus]

This seems way too black and white to me.

THE Petrov model is technical model describing an exact sequence of movements. Each part of the vault from run up until bar clearance is included in the model, and differing from the model at any stage leads to a non-Petrovian vault.

Tucking and shooting is not a technical model, but merely a term used to describe the top end of a vault in which the vaulter prematurely ends in swing to instead tuck his/her knees to their chest and perform a hip extension up the pole.

The tuck and shoot is not a model with rules, and has no specifications on the any other aspects of the vault. Other technical models may employ the tuck and shoot, just as other models may employ a straight trail leg, or even a free takeoff.

Also, because of the generality of the tuck and shoot, it is unfair to make claims on what a T&S vaulter intends to do. I tuck and shoot, but I am a petrovian vaulter by intent. The tuck and shoot is often a result rather than an intention. I think comparing the Drive Model with the Petrov model would be a more fair comparison. Comparing the Petrov model with the tuck and shoot is like comparing the Waltz (specific dance) with Break dancing (used to describe a plethora of crazzzzy dance moves).


*Side note - its also worth mentioning that many people don't intuitively see the benefit of a straight trail leg, as the focus solely on rotational velocity without taking into account the additional energy into the pole from a straight trail leg. Such people may coach or perform a tuck and shoot top end even if the vaulter has a free takeoff with no blocking

[KirkB]

Wally, take a look at this link ... http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=17807.

Kirk