what different models are out there

This is a forum to discuss advanced pole vaulting techniques. If you are in high school you should probably not be posting or replying to topics here, but do read and learn.
User avatar
master
PV Lover
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 2:03 am
Expertise: Masters Vaulter, Volunteer HS Coach, Former College Vaulter
Lifetime Best: 4.36m
Location: Oregon

Unread postby master » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:19 am

vaulter870 wrote:ok now that we have established that the petrov/ budka model is the best can we get back to how to ease a vaulter into this?? i know that i need to start with the approach and go from there but anhelp would be appreciated!

It would be impossible to satisfactorily provide that information on this forum. At least 30 of the 160 pages of BTB are directly what you are asking for. The rest of the book is providing the background to understand why this method makes sense and how to teach pole vaulting, in particular, this method.

Go to this link http://www.beginnertobubka.com/, check out the table of contents and read some of the articles Alan has on line. I'm confident you will decide it is an investment worth the making. While you are at it, get the CD (video) that shows the drills and makes obvious to the observer what the goals are.

- master

User avatar
MadeinTaiwan
PV Wannabe
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:06 am

Unread postby MadeinTaiwan » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:02 am

First i would like to say that i use the petrov model, i own b2b and i am a fan of allan launder.

but when a biomechenist asks where they can find these oft mentioned studies it perks up my intrest, i would like to see them too and have them interpreted by someone on this board.
it makes me wonder if these studies are like the ones by the scientists who studied bubbka in the world champs and said his com cleared 6.40, but yet no-one can find the studies.

EIUvltr
PV Pro
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:38 pm
Expertise: Ex-collegiate pole vaulter B.S. Exercise Science ACSM personal trainer
Location: Homewood, IL
Contact:

Unread postby EIUvltr » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:22 am

MadeinTaiwan wrote:First i would like to say that i use the petrov model, i own b2b and i am a fan of allan launder.

but when a biomechenist asks where they can find these oft mentioned studies it perks up my intrest, i would like to see them too and have them interpreted by someone on this board.
it makes me wonder if these studies are like the ones by the scientists who studied bubbka in the world champs and said his com cleared 6.40, but yet no-one can find the studies.


Exactly!! It isn't that we are saying he is a fraud, we just want to see them
"If he dies, he dies"

User avatar
vaulter870
PV Great
Posts: 905
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 2:00 pm
Expertise: Current Club Cocah, Current College Vaulter, PV Addict!
Favorite Vaulter: Toby Stevenson
Location: Ft.worth , TX and anywhere there is jumping
Contact:

Unread postby vaulter870 » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:32 pm

OUvaulterUSAF thank you for getting back to me on that topic. i agree that i will be spending from april till next sep trying to convert him and it seams like from what everyone is saying that i should just try and hlep my vaulter where i canright now untill we can work on switching. i think we have meet before too did you sell a cut 16'5'' 170 (16' 180) a while back to osmeone from michigan?
If you cant do it right , do if 10000 more times till you can

User avatar
rainbowgirl28
I'm in Charge
Posts: 30435
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 1:59 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter, I coach and officiate as life allows
Lifetime Best: 11'6"
Gender: Female
World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
Favorite Vaulter: Casey Carrigan
Location: A Temperate Island
Contact:

Unread postby rainbowgirl28 » Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:25 pm

MadeinTaiwan wrote:First i would like to say that i use the petrov model, i own b2b and i am a fan of allan launder.

but when a biomechenist asks where they can find these oft mentioned studies it perks up my intrest, i would like to see them too and have them interpreted by someone on this board.
it makes me wonder if these studies are like the ones by the scientists who studied bubbka in the world champs and said his com cleared 6.40, but yet no-one can find the studies.


I don't know if they are here, but this is a good place to start:

http://www.iaaf.org/nsa/archive/index.html

User avatar
craigmtb
PV Wannabe
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 1:25 pm
Expertise: High School Coach, USATF Level 1
Favorite Vaulter: Toby"Crash"Stevenson
Location: Washington

Unread postby craigmtb » Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:17 pm

Becca, I totaly agree, hopefully when can get our hands on the studies and get them posted. I know that PVPHD, has done recent biomechanical studies in the vault, perhaps he has information that would be useful in this discussion.
Craig Hanson
PV Coach Yelm High School

Keep vaulters safe!
(I want to keep my job)

User avatar
ashcraftpv
That one guy
Posts: 1202
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 1:06 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter (D1), Current High School Coach, 1999 Outdoor Big Ten Champion
Lifetime Best: 5.25m
World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
Favorite Vaulter: Jason Hinkin
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Contact:

Unread postby ashcraftpv » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:34 pm

PoleVaultPlanet is coming.....

PVstudent
PV Pro
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:53 am
Location: South Australia

Bubka: Evidence from Biomechanics Study

Unread postby PVstudent » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:41 pm

Readers of PVP I draw your attention to the following study:

IAAF Athletics Foundation (1999), Biomechanical Research Project Athens 1997. Final Report. Edited byG.-P. Bruggeman. D Koszewski, & H. Mueller. Published in 1999. (ISBN 1-84126-009-6)

In this report the section authored by:
Arampatzis A., Schade F., Brueggemann G.-P., (1999) Pole Vault. (pp.: 145 - 160) in table 95 shows that Bubka in a 6.01m vault had an effective centre of mass vertical height of 6.50m.

The authors are recognised around the world as leading experts in their field and in the biomechanical analysis of pole vault in particular.

A word like fraud is a "weasel" word. Anyone about whom fraud is not claimed has the brand of fraud indirectly impugned. This use of the word fraud in association with the person Altius is quite uncalled for and as the evidence above shows Biomechanists have indeed Recorded and Measured (using valid biomechanical techniques and methodologies) a height of 6.50m at the peak of Bubka's bar clearance trajectory.

I hope that interested PVP readers and contributors will take the time to find and study this report. 1999 is quite a long time ago! However I still believe that the principles of Mr Newton were not violated by Bubka and that Altius does indeed apply them appropriately in B2B.

B2B is a work in progress and no doubt some bright, gifted pole vaulter some where on the planet will develop a better technical model for successful vaulting. Any such model will rely upon proven biomechanical principles being applied pragmatically. Pole vaulting safely and effectively are outcomes of a long process, refined and honed by practical experience.

By their deeds are great persons known! Speculative ramblings,
without sound scientific underpinning' will not improve the art of vaulting with a pole.

On the other hand speculations as the outcome of informed, wise reflection on personal performance and achievement is to be applauded.

Ignorance is bliss!

Student practioners of the pole vault please choose your words carefully before you "inadvertently" or otherwise bring discredit to someone whose work you don't know or whose books you haven't read.
Every new opinion at its starting, is precisely a minority of one!

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:25 am

"do you believe we have reached the point where the perfect technique is known, and now we have to strive to achieve it."

Indeed I do. In fact I cannot repeat this often enough. Bubka first appeared on the international scene in 1983 and Petrov detailed the model he used in 1985. In the past 20 years there has been plenty of time for alternative approaches to appear - and biomechanics experts in particular =to challenge this model and to show that they have more effective and efficient methods. They have not done so.

Consider only one aspect of the model - the 'free take off'. Does it make sense to waste energy bending the pole like 95% of US vaulters - and therefore waste speed - before leaving the ground, or to leave the ground with an unloaded pole and so lose no speed like Bubka, Tarasov,Markov et al.

I suggest that you go to BTB and deconstruct the logic there if you would like to. You may find it more useful than going round in circles here.
_________________ :confused:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

User avatar
SlickVT
PV Follower
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:06 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter, Post-Collegiate Vaulter, College Coach, High School Coach
Location: Blacksburg VA

Unread postby SlickVT » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:34 pm

Which former president of the United States was it that said he was 110% sure that there will never be any use for a computer in the common home?
Vertical Technique Pole Vault Club
Blacksburg, Virginia
verticaltechnique.com

User avatar
vault3rb0y
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2458
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:59 pm
Expertise: College Coach, Former College Vaulter
Lifetime Best: 5.14m
Location: Still Searching
Contact:

Unread postby vault3rb0y » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:17 pm

All i would say is that the Petrov model is the perfect model of converting all energy possible into the vault. However i believe there may be slight miniscual changes in body position to add more energy. For instance- swinging harder to add more energy, or running faster to add more energy. However right now, barely anyone in the world is able to implement the petrov model PERFECTLY. Until we can do so, i dont think we will have the knowledge to improve upon it. Whats the point of improving a model until you can perform the original model? From the looks of it, the Petrov model can be proven by biomechanics and physics to be the best transfer of energy on the ground + energy from a powerful swing into the most energy into a pole and best position to recieve that energy on top. Until we have studied the vault and biomechanics as much as petrov, we dont have much place to question it. That doesnt mean there wont be a solution undiscovered out there. Just look at the High jump and its changes over the years, or the straight pole- to fiberglass pole transition. Thats the only reason i question the absolutism of the petrov model, but from all scientific evidence present, we should all still follow the petrov model.
The greater the challenge, the more glorious the triumph

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:44 pm

So SlickVt - why dont YOU put your money where your mouth is and deconstruct the interpretation of the Petrov Model that Master alluded to above - you will find it at BeginnertoBubka.com. That should keep you busy for a while and perhaps slow the overly clever comments which add nothing to this important discussion. Alternatively you could go to Formia and debate the issues with Petrov himself - as some of us have. :idea: :yes:
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: Google [Bot] and 123 guests