ADTF Academy wrote:agapit wrote:But let’s be real. Stiff pole vaulting is different from fiberglass vaulting. What about putting energy into the pole and then most importantly receiving the energy back from the pole at the top, stiff pole vaulters did not have to do that and the timing is totally different right?
Is anything in life 100% the same? Overall positions are similar, overall movements are not 100% equals.
Are you saying you don't put energy into a straight pole? Are you saying just cause the pole didn't bend the energy disappears? The straight pole still has an elastic components its like saying a copper wire does nothing? It stores and conducts electricity. A stiff pole stores energy it just doesn't bend because its components are of such design that the energy provided to it won't bend or break it. Prove that isn't a correct statement? If there was no energy why would bamboo poles break?
I don’t believe you “put” (store) energy into the straight pole, no. The straight pole resist, like any physical object would (rock or telephone pole for example), resist the forces generated by the impulse of the body (mass x speed) and that resistance changes the speed vector of the body’s COG (center of gravity) from horizontal to vertical, lifting the body up towards the bar. No energy does not disappears, some energy loses are converted through friction into the energy of heat.When the force generated by this impulse exceed the strength of the straight pole, it would break, but straight pole does not give you energy back in a way fiberglass pole or a rubber band does, right? The energy is stored in a fiberglass pole as it would be in rubber band and is not stored at all in the straight pole in the way that you can get it back, other than small “vibrating” bend that recoils so fast that is impossible for the vaulter to be in upside-down position in time to catch that recoil as people do on fiberglass poles.
I am not arguing, I am just trying to more clearly understand how is it the same on the straight pole as compared to the fiberglass?
You are describing secondary acceleration (unbending of the fiberglass pole) that is desirable for an athlete to “catch”, if she could get in the position to catch that recoiling energy. Wouldn’t this make the method on fiberglass pole significantly different from the straight pole because no one was trying to catch a secondary acceleration on the straight pole?
Another point of difference that may need to be explained is takeoff actions. On the fiberglass pole some vaulters are trying to bend the pole (to store more energy) and also to move the takeoff foot (in the air) way behind to generate a whipping kick by the foot, most coaches call it a “swing”. A good example of this whipping kick would be Janice Keppler and drills she is doing to achieve that. Some coaches like Don Hood (Billy Olson, Tim Bright, Brad Pursley at Abilene Christian University) and some other coaches for example advocate a flat direction of the takeoff, so the pole bends more and therefore stores more energy for later use. None of that was possible on the straight pole. No one was trying to bend the straight pole or “whip-kick” with the foot or perform a low angle takeoff. It seems these are few points of significant difference, yes/no?
It’s a good conversation, I believe, because it makes us all aware of the issues and we all could get on the same page, speak the same language, no pun intended. Conversations like that would move our understanding forward, so I think it is very positive!