The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

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.
ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:41 pm

I decided to start a new topic not to take away from the previous one though it already started going all over the place.

On a daily basis I have the privilege to work with one of the fastest men and fastest women vaulters in the world on the runway.... Mark around 9.7 m/s and Mary around 8.6 m/s. Both have exceptional reaches for a man and women as well. So what next you might ask.

I was one of the main people who three or four years ago sat on here and talked about all kinds of theory and beliefs than read information about the 6.40 model and people's theories of what others are doing. Most of us can't think or are patient enough to look 10 years into the future. Sadly we live in a world of results now or someone else will come along.

Despite all the conversation here DJ summed it up based, the best men go from takeoff to full bend in under .5 seconds and takeoff to max height in under 1.5 seconds. Gripping as high as possible on as stiff of a pole as possible to allow the previous statements to hold true. What occurs between that is a blur. If the vaulter is not sold out to what ever model you are attempting to perform it doesn't matter. I use this analogy all the time when i give presentations on training theory.

Athlete A works with coach who does everything wrong with basic training theory but athlete A trust coach and would do anything for him therefore athlete A succeeds. Athlete B works with best coach doing everything correct with training theory but doesn't trust coach and athlete B fails.

Why? How long does it take a behavior or action to become habitual? How can we sell this model or our own ideas to our athletes to produce results? Before you can have one agreed upon model you need to have one agreed upon training environment that lasts more than 5 years at a time. How many of our top vaulters do you think come out of high school meet there college coach day 1 and he or she goes, "congrats on coming everything we do from this day forward will be based on you peaking 10 years from now?"

Everything is based on vaulters jumping as high as they can 1 year at a time. This is why our top vaulters right now are in their mid to late 30's. They finally got away from this and slowly developed into the vaulters they are.

Will Mark Hollis ever developed into the model I believe in perfectly.... Right now as Kirk put it best I hope he can stay healthy enough to last 7 more years to find out (he will only be 32 than). We are seeing progress and running into new obstacles all the time. But he is advancing and is healthy enough to keep vaulting.

Next are the real questions that need to be answered!

What is the traits of the athlete everyone thinks it will take to jump the 6.40 Model.... What elements will allow them to grip high enough to make this work... What grip will it even take to jump that high? None of these questions where ever answered in the 6.40 model just what they should do.

Will it allow a vaulter jumping with a lower grip to produce a greater flyaway or will it allow vaulters to grip higher or will it just create magic height for now real reason? Cause and effect. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If you have a vaulter do something there will be a consequence. As a coach you need to make that logical decision that produces the least number of consequences in hindering max height achieved for your vaulter. if you only think in terms of benefits to doing something your doomed to fail before you start. DJ has been the only one to give us coaches pure data to look at. Everything we attempt has to be one with the fact that Mark needs to go takeoff to max bend in under .5 seconds and takeoff to max height in under 1.5 seconds. Despite errors I can say we are way under both of those figures in his jumps.

Fighting over what the bottom arm does without concrete data to produce an athlete even possible of breaking the WR is not someone who can contribute to a conversation about breaking the WR. Sorry! If you do not understand the consequences of having a stiff bottom arm to bend the pole you need to go figure out that first... If your ok with them than you can preach have a stiff bottom arm. Won't lie the reason I advanced as a coach so fast is because I was smart enough that when I worked with coaches that had been around for 30+ years and they told me, "Danny you will be tempted to slam your head against the wall, don't do it, when I was a young coach I thought it would help and guess what it only hurt." I actually listened to them most of the time and will say I have only slammed my head against a few walls.

As a coach when you read or think of something new it sounds amazing like you discovered the holy grail. The bottom arm is everyones holy grail at first it sounds so amazing and productive till you actually identify the consequences. Stop slamming your heads against the wall.

So please tell me the answers to those questions. Theory is good but what are the rewards for doing something and what are the consequences.

WR will be broken either with higher grip or more flyaway.

20'3" - 3'7" = 16'8" grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 17'4" or just under a 5.30 grip with 3'7" flyaway
20'3 -4'3" = 16'grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 16'8" or just under a 5.10 grip with 4'3" flyaway

How do we produce 4'3" of flyaway is the thing that needs to be answered we have many vaulters who can rotate 5.10 grips but can't get that flyaway or how do we produce 5.30 grips or any combination in between.

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:42 pm

Please respond if you can give exact examples or thoughts of how something to help meet criteria of what it will take or how it will occur. Give us reasoning.

User avatar
Barto
PV Great
Posts: 919
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 1:55 pm
World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby Barto » Sun Mar 28, 2010 9:22 pm

Will the WR (6.15m) be broken in the foreseeable future?
Yeah, probably.

Will anyone jump 6.40m?
Not in our lifetimes.

The wheel is not going to re-invent itself. The same characteristics that produced the top vaulters 50 years ago are still going to be prominent in the top vaulters 50 years from now. There is no 6.40 model.

The top coaches in the world all coach basically the same technique (have for about 30 years) and all produce very similar results given the power levels of the athletes available to them.

All other conjecture is hype aimed at selling snakeoil.
Facts, Not Fiction

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Sun Mar 28, 2010 9:28 pm

:D

User avatar
KirkB
PV Rock Star
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:05 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter; Former Elite Vaulter; Former Coach; Fan
Lifetime Best: 5.34
Favorite Vaulter: Thiago da Silva
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby KirkB » Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:03 pm

Agreed that we should leave "Bubka before Bubka" debates, safety advice to aspiring elites, and bottom arm rants to other threads. :o :yes:

Let's focus on the topic of this thread as you've stated it, ADTF.
ADTF Academy wrote: What is the traits of the athlete everyone thinks it will take to jump the 6.40 Model.... What elements will allow them to grip high enough to make this work... What grip will it even take to jump that high? None of these questions were ever answered in the 6.40 model just what they should do.

The WR will be broken either with higher grip or more flyaway.

20'3" - 3'7" = 16'8" grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 17'4" or just under a 5.30 grip with 3'7" flyaway
20'3 -4'3" = 16' grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 16'8" or just under a 5.10 grip with 4'3" flyaway

How do we produce 4'3" of flyaway is the thing that needs to be answered we have many vaulters who can rotate 5.10 grips but can't get that flyaway or how do we produce 5.30 grips or any combination in between.

I think a thorough analysis of the 6.00+ Club vaulters would be a good start. This link http://www.polevaultpower.com/6mclub.php lists MOST of them, and states their grips, speeds, and pole flexes ... as well as other metrics ... quite well ... but there's still several empty cells. Why don't we know all the metrics for Walker? Why don't we know Hooker's speed? And what about Renaud Lavillenie and Yevgeny Lukyanenko? They're not listed yet, but they jumped 6.00+ in the past couple years. I suspect that the gaps in that spreadsheet are simply becuz it was done several years ago, and no one updated it.

I propose this series of steps in the analysis:

1. Gather and post the missing data for the vaulters already on the list.
2. Gather and post the data for Lavillenie and Lukyanenko.
3. Decide on the most important OBJECTIVE parameters ... things like PR, grip, flex, and speed. Maybe a few others - according to science. DJ, Dr. Peter McGinnis, and a few others have already identified most (maybe not all) of these factors.
4. Plot these values for each vaulter, and for combinations of vaulters that have common "attributes". These will be multi-dimensional graphs.
5. Try to find a good "weighting formula" ... using a scientifically sound curve-fitting mathematical process ... that will boil the multi-dimensional graphs down into a lesser number of two-dimensional graphs. For example, a single graph with grip on the vertical axis and speed times flex on the horizontal axis. In this context, "flex" means "relative resistance" across all pole weights and lengths ... perhaps as Jan Johnson's table has already established.
6. Based on the groupings and the trends, look for correlations.
7. Categorize each athlete according to their degree of adherence to a certain model ... or a certain subjective techical factor (e.g. "Has a free takeoff".)
8. Rank these categorized subjective technical factors in order of importance. This is where it gets to be subjective, "fuzzy science", since there will be considerable overlap between the factors, and depending on the way they're defined, some may even be subsets of others.
9. Plot the objective factors against the subjective groupings of athletes.
10. Analyze the graphs in various ways - to find trends.
11. Extrapolate the most promising, most statistically consistent trends ... to discover the "best mix" of things like grip, speed, and pole flex ... to break the WR.
11. Highlight the trends in the most objective, unbiased way possible ... preferably with coloured graphs ... instead of just opinions.
12. Discuss the reasons (or opinions!) why certain trends that have been exposed by this process are most plausible or most likely.

Or something like that. Notice that opinions don't enter this process until Step 12! ;)

I can't help with much of this. Coaches/ex-vaulters with a keener eye ... and with many more years of coaching experience than myself in watching these vaulters should do this.

Really, I don't think this process should be all that difficult. It should preferably be done under the watchful eyes of a statistician who has a solid mathematical background, but once you capture the metrics, it's relatively simple to plot them graphically (albeit in a difficult-to-visualize multi-dimensional graph) ... and then draw min, max, and mean lines thru the dots.

I don't think I'm proposing anything brand new. Rather, I'm proposing that we consilidate all of the data together into a single page - the Six Meter Club page - and then sort, plot, and analyze it in an objective fashion. Just a consolidation of data to answer "The Questions of the 6.40 Model".

I would also like to point out that THIS "Rebuttal to the 6.40 Model" has a rather different approach than the actual model that Agapit proposed in his Pole Vault Manifesto here: http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=4622&p=39316. In THAT model, Agapit has described a series of subjective techical factors over and above the Petrov Model that he considers important to break the current M WR ... irrespective of objective factors like grip, pushoff, speed, and flex. The QUESTIONS you're asking, ADTF, is what are the best combinations of objective factors like grip and pushoff required to break the M WR?

Maybe if we can find this elusive formula to predict how someone might break 6.15 (and we'll have to wait for someone to clear 6.16 before the formula is proven), we should call it "The 6.16 Model". After all, the WR is still only 6.14 outdoors and 6.15 indoors. Wouldn't we all be happy if we predicted the optimal grip and pushoff to break 6.16? ;)

Kirk
Run. Plant. Jump. Stretch. Whip. Extend. Fly. Clear. There is no tuck! THERE IS NO DELAY!

KYLE ELLIS
PV Lover
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 12:31 am
Expertise: former college vaulter, Current college coach
Lifetime Best: 5.26
Favorite Vaulter: bubka
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby KYLE ELLIS » Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:30 pm

ADTF Academy wrote:
Why? How long does it take a behavior or action to become habitual?


I believe Roman said something like 2 years.

ADTF Academy wrote: What is the traits of the athlete everyone thinks it will take to jump the 6.40 Model.... What elements will allow them to grip high enough to make this work... What grip will it even take to jump that high? None of these questions where ever answered in the 6.40 model just what they should do.


I believe they were, Roman believed Bubka could have jumped 6.40. So how high would the grip need to be? 17ft. For the traits he gives testing results for Bubka in the 60, long jump and other tests. As far as the mental aspect, if you read any articles on the man, or watch enough jumps of his you will realize the freakish mind set that Bubka has.
What elements will allow them to grip that high and make this work? Science, efficiency, biomechanics, & physics... What I believe to be the beauty of Bubka's jump is that everything he does technically is both vital for grip & push-off. This answers your very last question.

ADTF Academy wrote: Will it allow a vaulter jumping with a lower grip to produce a greater flyaway or will it allow vaulter’s to grip higher or will it just create magic height for now real reason?


As I said I believe the way Bubka jumped allowed him to get the best of both worlds. And if you watch the guys who grip 5.10 like you mentioned, you don't see "activeness" in their jumps, probably to many passive movements to allow them to grip that high.
And same goes for the great swingers who don't grip high, either not tall enough, fast enough, fearless enough, or whatever...
There is no magical reasoning. Obviously the STAPLE OF BUBKA'S JUMP his run up and initial take-off. This is the holy grail of pole vaulting to me; this allows him to grip 17ft and land past the back of the box.
As far as the left arms role in adding to this equation is that if this is the most efficient way to swing a long body, then this can add to increase both pole rotation and vertical velocity. This where I believe he gets the best of both.
There are a couple area's that I am still grey about, but the more I study the more I begin to understand and appreciate the 6.40 model.
Lastly for someone to jump 6.40, I believe there will need to be 2 future "bubka like" jumpers, who can battle back and forth over WR's and major championships. I think Bubka needed another Bubka to even get close to approaching "6.40", which he showed on some jumps what might be possible one day.
Last edited by KYLE ELLIS on Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
On a whole new level 6-20-09

dj
PV Enthusiast
Posts: 1858
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:07 am
Expertise: Coach
Contact:

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby dj » Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:34 pm

hye

i had some "numbers"... that i was working with in the 80's with Tully which were based on 90+percent of the varibles that i listed on the other thread..

I used the same varibles and "percentages" to give Tim Mack and idea (in 1995) in where and what he needed to improve to jump worldclass..

I don't have the whole file but have some of it with the notes/studies i just posted from on the other thread..

I determined what "average" speed Tully/Tim could bring based on the study numbers and what Tully was doing in meets and practice from my own timing of the last six steps..

i determined what grip, of course with the right takeoff point, best "impluse".. horizontial and vertical... and the time of the complete vault.. max bend and max time of COM..

here is what i have for a 6.20m/20'4" vault...

I used a factor of 5 or 20% of the hand grip to determine the height above the grip.. because of "swing force" a longer swing distance (from a higher grip) in the same amount of time would/will produce more height above the grip...

a 20'4"/6.20 vault..


"MID"..............57'/17.47m
GRIP...............16'11"/5.16m
TAKE_OFF........14'8"/4.47m..(based on the vaulters physical height/reach...of course)

The last 6 steps will take 1.35 seconds which means the vaulter is traveling at 9.5m for 6 steps and will be slightly faster over the last two...

Maximum bend will occur one half .............(.50seconds) of a second after takeoff...
The pole will bend approximately................30%
The total vault will take approximately.........1.44 seconds from takeoff to max COM above the bar...

If you look at the numbers of the Bubka jump you will see the "percentages" of the Horizontal and Vertical, the "up" Impluse combined with the horizontal speed. and a key factor is not only the speed/time to max bend but the speed/time to max COM or the finish of the vault.

you can only get the "pop"/fly/air if you have a fast swing.. very fast swing.. i know this is "most" times interprted as a "catapult" or throwing of the vaulter by the pole... i don't believe that you (Bubka included) swing from the pole... faster swing over a longer distance.. more air..

dj

User avatar
Pogo Stick
PV Pro
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:42 pm
Expertise: Former "College" Vaulter, Masters Vaulter
Lifetime Best: 4.70/15'5
Favorite Vaulter: Władysław Kozakiewicz
Location: Vancouver, Canada; Split, Croatia
Contact:

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby Pogo Stick » Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:49 am

ADTF Academy wrote:I was one of the main people who three or four years ago sat on here and talked about all kinds of theory and beliefs than read information about the 6.40 model and people's theories of what others are doing. Most of us can't think or are patient enough to look 10 years into the future. Sadly we live in a world of results now or someone else will come along.


Here is Agapit's quote from Manifesto:
agapit wrote:Usualy 18-24 months is sufficient. ;)



ADTF Academy wrote:What is the traits of the athlete everyone thinks it will take to jump the 6.40 Model.... What elements will allow them to grip high enough to make this work... What grip will it even take to jump that high? None of these questions where ever answered in the 6.40 model just what they should do.

...
WR will be broken either with higher grip or more flyaway.

20'3" - 3'7" = 16'8" grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 17'4" or just under a 5.30 grip with 3'7" flyaway
20'3 -4'3" = 16'grip plus 8" in the ground so hand hold of around 16'8" or just under a 5.10 grip with 4'3" flyaway

How do we produce 4'3" of flyaway is the thing that needs to be answered we have many vaulters who can rotate 5.10 grips but can't get that flyaway or how do we produce 5.30 grips or any combination in between.


Roman, again:
agapit wrote:Bubka and Petrov opened the new horizon in modern pole vaulting, however like most pioneers, without the full realization of their remarkable achievement.

The 6.40 Model so far has produced 6.15, however most experts at the time agreed that 6.30 and even 6.40 was a real possibility.
...
The Pole Vault Manifesto was written to make this statement and outline a direction in development to achieve 1.40m push on 5.20m grip in competition, the level Bubka already has achieved in training 15 years ago.


Roman was not talking about some new model - the 6.40 model has already been tested and applied in most parts in real life. It was not produced 6.40m jump in competition (yet), but is not theoretical mind-game of mad scientist. We can discuss why nobody did not applied all elements of model, but I think the biggest challenge is training method. Roman has offered some general answers in Manifesto and 3-7 Training System:
agapit wrote:The important difference in training of the 6.40 Model is that a vaulter would train only active phases with an intention to eliminate passive phases completely. The passive phases do not have to be trained at all instead all precautions have to be taken to avoid any kinetic or psychological reminders of passive phases.
...
The auto feedback is an essential part of the 6.40 Model and it occurs when increase in energy output by a vaulter directly leads to a desired outcome (higher bar clearance). This process creates subconscious demand for a higher physical output by a vaulter and is absolutely essential part in training process of 6.40 Model.

...
Obviously if you aspire to reach 21' for men or 18' women you have to seriously think about training system you employ. If you think of the 3-year period you only have about 30 vault sessions when you really can introduce changes. 30 sessions is not that many as you can imagine, so every session should become like gold to you.

I told Bob Frailey once that a vaulter that runs 300m at 29 seconds probably over trains in that discipline. The logic behind it is that at some point the progress in one skill set would mean regress in another. This is because our muscle and organ complexes adapt to certain skills and often different skills require different coordination between these complexes.


Training for 6.40 require rethinking of whole training process, creating new drills, etc. This can put more pressure on coach too because he will need to work with team of scientists and experts from different areas. Whole training process require re-evaluation and every details needs to be addressed.
"You cannot do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Talking about training, here is a part of interview with Blanka Vlasic after Doha:
"It is much easier to do this job when you feel that at any time of the year you can jump two meters. Nobody work like us. We are the pioneers of this work. We will not be be back in the spring to basic training, I did them when I was 15-16. I am doing now only specific preparation. I can't make even one push-up, but I can jump two meters."
This is pretty bold statement :yes:
-- Pogo

"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory." W. Edwards Deming

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:36 am

KirkB wrote: I think a thorough analysis of the 6.00+ Club vaulters would be a good start. This link http://www.polevaultpower.com/6mclub.php lists MOST of them, and states their grips, speeds, and pole flexes ... as well as other metrics ... quite well ... but there's still several empty cells. Why don't we know all the metrics for Walker? Why don't we know Hooker's speed? And what about Renaud Lavillenie and Yevgeny Lukyanenko? They're not listed yet, but they jumped 6.00+ in the past couple years. I suspect that the gaps in that spreadsheet are simply becuz it was done several years ago, and no one updated it.

Kirk



I agree I asked the people of USATF this exact question. Renaud on US Soil and no data how does that help us beat him. Mark did on that day, but still no data at all or film of him.

6 meter jumper history has shown us over 4' flyaway gripping over 5 meters to do it. So minimal to join the club you need to be on 5.10's with a technique that allows for a 4' flyaway. I wish we could get more data on those who are in the club.

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:38 am

People BUBKA IS DONE!!!!!!! Move on from the past and look into the future......


Petrov worked with other athletes besides BUBKA why didn't they develop into the same kind of vaulter. Same model same coach same way of learning yet not the same results...

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:50 am

dj wrote:here is what i have for a 6.20m/20'4" vault...

I used a factor of 5 or 20% of the hand grip to determine the height above the grip.. because of "swing force" a longer swing distance (from a higher grip) in the same amount of time would/will produce more height above the grip...

a 20'4"/6.20 vault..


"MID"..............57'/17.47m
GRIP...............16'11"/5.16m
TAKE_OFF........14'8"/4.47m..(based on the vaulters physical height/reach...of course)

The last 6 steps will take 1.35 seconds which means the vaulter is traveling at 9.5m for 6 steps and will be slightly faster over the last two...

Maximum bend will occur one half .............(.50seconds) of a second after takeoff...
The pole will bend approximately................30%
The total vault will take approximately.........1.44 seconds from takeoff to max COM above the bar...

dj


As usual DJ to the rescue..... Capping a 5.20 pole reaching takeoff speeds of near 9.6 m/s performing a technique that will reduce the pole cord down to 3.64 meters (11'11") at max bend in under .50 seconds while not slowing the entire time it takes to reach a 4'1" flyaway in more than 1.44 seconds.

Can anyone dispute these figures or give a reason why this is not a near exactly mathematical goal to produce an ideal 6.20 vaulter.

DJ can I ask you a favor to use your data and produce the scenario for a guy gripping 5.06 (16'7"). Would the bend % decrease to near 28% (3.64/5.06) and time need to reach max height decrease as well to under 1.40 seconds (producing a faster moving swing thus produce more flight on release) and a flyaway of near 4'5". Is it even feasible for a guy gripping 5.06 to jump the WR?

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Re: The Real Questions of the 6.40 Model

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:09 am

Pogo Stick wrote:
Here is Agapit's quote from Manifesto:
agapit wrote:Usualy 18-24 months is sufficient. ;)


I will have to call BS on this one... Maybe for someone jumping low or picking things up on a short approach run with small pole, but full approach on a big stick it takes longer than this. Even Bubka didn't pick it up in 2 years..... BS BS BS BS BS stop letting yourself get tricked into believing it is that easy.

Pogo Stick wrote:Roman, again:
The Pole Vault Manifesto was written to make this statement and outline a direction in development to achieve 1.40m push on 5.20m grip in competition, the level Bubka already has achieved in training 15 years ago.


DJ data posted reports a 1.25 push for a 20'4" so an extra 15 cm and 4 cm grip would do the trick.... I believe DJ numbers are confirmed.

Pogo Stick wrote:Roman was not talking about some new model - the 6.40 model has already been tested and applied in most parts in real life. It was not produced 6.40m jump in competition (yet), but is not theoretical mind-game of mad scientist. We can discuss why nobody did not applied all elements of model, but I think the biggest challenge is training method. Roman has offered some general answers in Manifesto and 3-7 Training System:
agapit wrote:The important difference in training of the 6.40 Model is that a vaulter would train only active phases with an intention to eliminate passive phases completely. The passive phases do not have to be trained at all instead all precautions have to be taken to avoid any kinetic or psychological reminders of passive phases.


If this system was so sound why didn't it produce any other 6.10+ vaulters.... Same camp same coach same methods no other 6.10+ vaulters. I do agree 100%, but lets think real for a moment, we don't live in a bubble, so how do you do this in the normal world we call EARTH! Between weather, injuries, pole selection, mental and emotional fatigue and the fact people have real lives. These outside factors make it more difficult than if we lock them away in a prison. There is an idea lets make prisoners pole vault they have nothing else to do perfect subjects.

Pogo Stick wrote:Obviously if you aspire to reach 21' for men or 18' women you have to seriously think about training system you employ. If you think of the 3-year period you only have about 30 vault sessions when you really can introduce changes. 30 sessions is not that many as you can imagine, so every session should become like gold to you.


I thought you said 18 to 24 months so you should be able to do it in 20 sessions not 30 correct?

Pogo Stick wrote:Talking about training, here is a part of interview with Blanka Vlasic after Doha:
"It is much easier to do this job when you feel that at any time of the year you can jump two meters. Nobody work like us. We are the pioneers of this work. We will not be be back in the spring to basic training, I did them when I was 15-16. I am doing now only specific preparation. I can't make even one push-up, but I can jump two meters."
This is pretty bold statement :yes:


It also helps that this particular women is almost 2 meters tall as well, but I do agree at this level general prep is not as important as it is for a college or younger athlete. Wasting time in such a phase is counterproductive to overall timing of success.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but your tone makes it sound so easy like anyone can do this.... I think you read the work of a very bright and informed man who I admire for putting his work out there, but not fully understanding the labor it takes to produce it on the elite level. Bubka wasn't born in 18 to 24 months same system since he was what 14? No other habits no other issues just what he was told.


Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests