Now that I have some “numbers” from the WC and have had a little time to compare what I have collected for 30 plus years to those numbers, I want to make one last post to urge everyone, coach, athlete, beginner to world class to take a very serious look at two very valuable points I have been trying to make.
One.. the six step “mid”/check point is an absolute must to be understood and used by every coach and vaulter in the world. Nothing from the start to a completed plant can give you the “why”... as well as this mark.
Two.. everyone needs to understand “what” happens to every vaulter 80/90% of the time from the start of the approach...to the “mid” (first half of the run..) when they are in the heat of battle, going for a PR, gripping higher or trying a bigger pole.. what happened to T-mack in 2000 that was “fixed" in 2004. This happens to everyone, including Isi and from the numbers looks like others had the problem “on a fast runway”.
… I hope I can “plug” these numbers into the MID MARK CHART numbers and compare them to these numbers from Bubka and Tully and more readily explain the significance and correlation of these numbers to the 6 step mark and the relationship it has to success or failure.
I can’t and will not say this (the 6 step “mid”) is the “holly grail” that determines everything that happens at the point of takeoff
, (what happens at the take off from the numbers i'm calling "it")and why things happen and “fit” together as a “chain” of action-reaction.. and promotes the “continuation” of energy, but the correlations and the physics of speed can and has identified where you should be “exactly” 6 steps prior to that point.
If I can really make my points clear enough you can begin to understand “why” a free takeoff, or a correct takeoff with the correct IMPLUSE.. that “impulse” and the positions Bubka's COM was in, the height of his plant and his ability, with his speed that was hardly faster than other vaulters BUT.. he had a huge resultant velocity, a “freer” higher plant for his physical body height.. that made him the world record holder.
Bubka’s run was trained, practiced and developed with Petrov’s guidance.. and is was also part intuitive because of the training and the athlete that he was… the 6 step “mid’ process can “tighten” the run up so it becomes more calculated and intuitive for an even better result.
and a point i need to make here is this... you can look at the 6 step "mid" to determine what "may" happen from that point in.. and still have plenty of time to "focus" on the jump.. but with the advantage of knowing what to look for.. based on that mark.. in or out or on...
we all have variuos methods that help us help the vaulter reach for perfection. On the run and in the heat of battle.. i always tell the vaulter to "push" out of the back because i knoiwmthey will be running faster and attacking.
By the way I’m not “adding” the “mid’ here because the other one was closed I’m adding it because these numbers tell you where the “mid” should have been or was.. on each vault.
Bubka was the best at “it”.. and it is in these numbers. You can coach, left hand, free takeoff, pre-jump, high plant, swing, get vertical.. and numerous other “Q’s” that are all good.. but the key element is planting as high as you can reach… with a monster impulse that combines horizontal and vertical velocities with a huge “resultant” velocity. This is accomplished by combing these two with a very fast time and distance to maximum bend, the data says .49 or faster AND the flat back position has to be at the same time as max bend.
I have no doubts that “it” is what Alan has been trying to say with pre-jump and free takeoff.
This position at the plant can be correlated with 99% accuracy to the 6 stride mark. if you hit the right “mid, for you and your speed and grip, your chances of being successful will go way, way up in accomplishing the correct plant/takeoff. The “it”.
Hope I can shed more light on “how” and “why” with these comparisons…This will involve combining and utilize the WC data, some of the discussion from the MID MARK thread and this “Numbers” thread.
First if you look at Bubka’s % of reach at the plant it was 99.4%.. Mike’s two in 1984 were at 92% and two in 1987 at 96.5 and 97.1.. we had started trying to change after Peters info (which had reach above shoulder.. that told us Mike was not getting fully extended at the plant/TO.
This number speaks volumes.. first the pole angle is greater with the plant/reach at 100%. Second, if the reach is at 100% the takeoff would not be under, or AS under with the same takeoff point, higher the reach (taller the athlete) the closer in the takeoff point. this position is contingent on an accurate 6 step mark/point on the runway.
This, along with the “impulse” is the “physical” description of a “free takeoff”…. This “action” is what sets up all the other possibilities of penetration, swing, the amount of pole bend combined with grip and flex, the “speed” of the vault and ultimately the potential maximum height above the grip.
From the numbers thread we can compare Tully’s jumps and Bubka’s jump.. four Tully jumps with approximately the same COM height result but one faster than the other, one with a very different maximum pole bend (but same pole) and one more “under”, different “resultant” velocity and how that has to relate to the takeoff factors.
Actually they all are a result of the takeoff action…
NUMBERS SPREAD SHEET
Bubka’s jump was slightly less “under”, on all but one.. slightly faster on all but one BUT had a greater “resultant” velocity and super “pole speed”.
Tully’s reach at the plant was not in the data of his first 5.71m jump (5.85 max COM).. his hand was .58 above his shoulder. Based on his reach height at 6-4.. he should have been at about 4 meters (13-2ish) at the plant if he was “on”.. he was 15cm/5” under which would mean 3.87/12-9.. TO. With a grip of 4.87/16’… His other 1984 jump was .60 above the shoulder. Based on the numbers I determined he was only at 92% reach at the takeoff compared to Bubka at 99.4%.
Height of the center of mass at the takeoff (impulse)did give some good “feed back’. A lower than normal COM at the takeoff means they had not completed the “impulse” to be going up..
Interestingly the lowest of mike’s COM at the plant was on a jump that he had a good “vertical” velocity and his best resultant velocity. On first thought you would think he must have “jumped” (impulse) ok?? But he was not only “low” but he was under by 10” with the plant only 97.1% up. This means he was “snatched” from the ground and the strength of the pole “pulled” him up.. he also had a 17degree TO angle, which is ok or actually high. His penetration was only .66cm. another indication of being under, not fully extended and no “impulse”.
The stride lengths were reasonably close over the last two. Mike’s were slightly longer which tell me he was still over striding. And since I know where his mid was on most of these jumps I can do a very sound correlation.
On mike’s fastest jump he was 9.55m/s for the last two steps compared to bubka’s 9.50 on his jump. Mike had a very low vertical velocity because he was 8” under AND didn’t have the top plant hand higher when the pole tip hit the back of the box.. he didn’t have “position’ or impulse.
Bubka’s resultant velocity was WAY higher.. and this is where you have to look at the speed, the “Impulse” and the 6 step mid…
Mike cleared 19-2 on this jump.. but had a 33% bend, caused by a low, flat, reaching takeoff. He only penetrated .66cm.
The step lengths tell you if the athlete was stretching and where the 6 step “mid” probably was.. I knew mikes “mids’ so I know why the strides were that long and that he stepped under by reaching.. because of the 6 step “mid” point he lost the ability to plant correctly, to impulse correctly.
This is true for every vaulter…
The accuracy of the 6 step “mid” will “predict” with 100% accuracy your chance to perform the “techniques” you have learned or are being coached to perform. 100%.
Can you over come a wrong 6 step “mid”?? yes to a point.. but only to a point and depending on your overall speed and athletic ability.
Now how the numbers fit the numbers I got from the WC…
From Isi interview.
"I need to find the spark again mentally," the Olympic champion and world record holder said on Sunday after failing to win a medal in a second consecutive global championship.
"To win at this level, you need to be fresh," said Isinbayeva after failing to clear 4.75 metres, well below her world indoor record of 5.00 metres.
"Maybe I am tired emotionally and need some rest," she said. The Diamond League outdoor circuit begins in May. "I am going to talk to Vitaliy (Petrov, her coach) and we will talk about it," she said. "It might mean taking off this summer."
The 27-times world record holder said she did not think the problem was physical.
"It's just something strange that happens to me and I can't get over," she said. "I felt really good physically."
Her problems began with last year's world outdoor championships, at which she did not clear any height in the final.
But she responded to that failure by setting the world outdoor record of 5.06 metres in Zurich days later.
"Every time I feel the pressure of having to be the best," she said. "Win the medals and not let down all my fans, the Russians, myself."
The info I got from the outdoor and indoor (two different sources) was mostly at 4 steps (two lefts). The 6 lefts.. info was in meters and showed Isi at about 15.00/15.20 meters on her good jump and at 15.40/15.50m+ on the failures. She was at 37-6ish on her good jump and 38-10ish on the failures. Lacy was at 15.50ish at 6 and at about the same as Isi’s “out” run’s at 4, 38 feet+. Chelsia was at 27-4ish when she was on.
I can only say that because of the “pressure” of the big meet and fast runways (same thing that happened in Sacramento when most of the vaulters were moving their step back 2 feet and then had a problem of stretching) that many of the vaulters, ones that hit to far out at the “mid”, were coming out of the back faster than usual, taking slightly faster and slightly shorter steps TO the mid, making them out and having to stretch into the takeoff.
The stretch could be so subtle that in the ‘pressure’ the coach or athlete will not catch it. They may even still be fast but stretching. The stretching will make it all most impossible to have “it” at the takeoff.
On Tully’s 5.81 jump he was fast. 9.55m/s.. but he was under by 8”.. and I know he stretched because of the last two stride lengths and I know he hit around 56-2 on that jump!!! There is no reason his stride should be 7cm longer than bubka’s at the same speed.
Even with the speed his vertical impulse was the lowest ever.. stretch… he bent the pole 33%.. yes that is to much bend.. and he didn’t move or penetrate the pole.. BUT it wasn’t because he needed the next pole it was because of HOW he took off.
I’ve seen other vaulters, men and women, do the same many times.. change to a bigger pole.. come out of the back faster, be farther out at the “mid”, stretch even more and bend that pole too much but not move it to vertical at all.
Lacy said they were having trouble moving the poles on a fast runway to vertical. The first thing I do is check the 6 step “mid”. If it is on and not “out”.. then you can look for the problem elsewhere. It’s out 90+ percent of the time.
The relationships are this… from my chart comparing the 4’s and 6…
I don’t know how to explain any better the importance and validity of what I have been trying to say for years. It is clear it can’t be done in threads like this, it can’t be done in writing, or in a book. I have shown the “whys’ and “how’s” in person with coaches and athletes at meets with real live vaulters to some success.. but many(most) walked away and never used it again. That’s been 27 years ago. I “called” misses and makes at 6 steps out at the Mt Sac relays and only called one wrong of 20 plus jumps.. JJ and Anthony C. asked for a copy of my chart after asking how i knew that far out. I know Jan uses 4 steps successfully.
Pole vaulting has been a “passion” and has been great pleasure for me for many years.. but pole vaulting is not how I make my living or is it in the top 2/3 things (hobbies) I have. But I will continue to answer questions and help coaches and athletes who want help.
Since “hands” on is the only way I think this (my) 6 step “mid” process can be “passed on” I will try to continue to make time for those that want to come to me, meets or practices…..