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.
Aznvaulter42
PV Newbie
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 11:33 pm
Expertise: High school vaulter
World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie

6.40 Model?

Unread postby Aznvaulter42 » Sun May 08, 2011 11:39 pm

Hello forum, I just read the Manifesto post by agapit and now I feel like everything I learned was incorrect. I've been trying to picture myself using this method but cant seem to get it right. Are there any videos of people vaulting using the 6.40 model?

-aznvaulter

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

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Mon May 09, 2011 8:28 pm

Yes indeedy - plenty of film of Bubka out there! Check out Neovault.com if you want to access some of the very best clips of him.
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby KYLE ELLIS » Mon May 09, 2011 9:45 pm

You can't say Bubka used this model, just like I can't say that he didn't. If anyone knows him I would like for them to ask him if he tried pulling down with his bottom arm right after takeoff.
On a whole new level 6-20-09

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

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Tue May 10, 2011 1:12 am

Suggest you ask Roman about that because he certainly believes that Bubka represented the 6.40 model - and Roman certainly does know him. Also if you read the posts on this topic you might find one where I confirmed my belief -already stated in BTB - that after the vaulter leaves the ground their behaviour is almost completely intuitive - rather than cognitive -so it is possible that even he could not tell you exactly what he did after he had left the ground. In fact it may have varied with every jump depending on all of the preceding elements. Indeed we have his almost hilarious response to Romans question "What do you think about after you leave the ground?' when he replied "The pole vault for me is RUN. TAKE OFF AND THEN AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!

My position on the use of the left arm changed when I returned to the notion of pole vaulting simply as stiff pole vaulting on a flexible pole. Indeed I posted a mea culpa on that topic last year to explain my view. As always you can take it or leave it - but you do not have to take it personally. This may indeed remain one of the great uncertainties of the vault for most folk.
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Tue May 10, 2011 1:14 am

Forgot to add - for the benefit of the original inquirer - no matter how much the issue is debated, you wont go far wrong if you accept that the closest you are likely to get for the forseeable future is Bubka.
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby KYLE ELLIS » Tue May 10, 2011 11:33 am

altius wrote:Forgot to add - for the benefit of the original inquirer - no matter how much the issue is debated, you wont go far wrong if you accept that the closest you are likely to get for the forseeable future is Bubka.


I can agree with that. I also believe a pull exists with the bottom arm in the vault, the timing is the debate.

I take nothing personally on here. I tried the 6.40 model for a year with terrible results. Now I have been doing what Petrov states and what I see in Bubka's jump, and it is easier, safer in my opinion, and far more effecient. I have never seen 1 jump by Bubka that remotely resembles a pull (I can point out plenty of elite vaulters who do).

If you pull your hips don't rise, so until your hips are in the right position there is no point in pulling. It will take much longer to get your hips up which will waste valuable time. Push your shoulders down and hips up through muscle effort and when your hips are in the right position you will naturally start pulling to continue the rise of the hips. I believe you get the best of both worlds here, and there is no dead end.

I do believe in an action that might be considered a pull, which Tim refers to. As soon as the takeoff is finished I beleive you pull down with the left towards the hip in a circular motion (wide arc!). The catch is that the hand is going to the hips but since its a circular motion it has to move up and out first, If this is what Roman speaks of I agree 100%. But he has made it clear that this is not what he is talking about.

That is exactly what I see occuring in this jump. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjeXZJpTGLQ
On a whole new level 6-20-09

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

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Tue May 10, 2011 12:17 pm

If you have tried this and it did not work for you I can understand your opinion - although it might be interesting to discuss how you tried to modify your old method -what drills did you use - and, I suppose - was the rest of your technique up to and including the take off good enough to build on. I am not commenting here, just asking the question.

" I have never seen 1 jump by Bubka that remotely resembles a pull." That may be the problem because when you watch even slow motion film the left hand always appears to be moving away from the shoulder - so how can that be a pull? So instead consider this. Beg borrow or steal a 2.1 copy of the BTB dvd and take a look at the second of the black and white clips of Bubby there. The first focuses on the pre jump take off - remember when nobody believed THAT was possible??? The second clip shows the other element of this technique that Vitali was so proud of - Bubby covering the pole -for he does indeed 'cover' the pole here as well as, or better than, any jump I have ever seen in this clip. No one else has got close to this. And the question you have to ask is - how did he get back fast enough to get into that position??? By his standards it was still not fast enough because in BTB I quote him as saying his aim was to be vertical before the pole started to recoil! Romans answer - and I am inclined to agree with him - is that he was able to do this because he accelerated his swing with an early pull.

I have met Sergey on several occasions and I think it is fair to say that he would regard me as a friend; but I must admit I never thought to discuss this with him - just focussed every time on his notion of the correct take off. I would also admit that I never specifically taught my own athletes to do this. However we did an immense amount of stiff pole jumping which I believe is the key to doing this intuitively - where my definition of intuition is that 'it is the distilled essence of past experience'! But this may remain one of those areas that will not be resolved until we have much more sophisticated sports science available - and another Bubby!

Been writing all day and cant get to sleep at 1.30 in the morning - hence these musings!
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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:

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby vault3rb0y » Tue May 10, 2011 1:16 pm

Elaborating on your definition of intuition, it follows that Bubka simply let himself remember the feeling he had from doing his inversion drills correctly. So then it follows that if we want to know how to invert correctly (whether we pull or not, and when we pull or not), that we must be taught to do the drills correctly. But the drills must then be taught by someone who knows exactly what they are looking for- and in this case, it seems the goal is the fastest and longest inversion possible? I'm not sure anymore.

But we have two separate issues, the theory and the execution of this motion. Knowing some of the theory can help in the execution, but it is not entirely necessary. Most great athletes don't know the biomechanical principles behind running, let alone pole vaulting. But, as sure as Usain Bolt knows how to run fast, Bubka knows how to pole vault.

Thats the athlete, though. A successful coach in my opinion SHOULD know enough about the theory behind the task they are trying to get their athlete to execute. But their job is not to teach their athlete the theory, their job is to teach them the execution. It's frustrating to hear coaches say "just do it" or "begin to accelerate your leg at a greater angle with the pole", because 9 times out of 10, we need more than that as athletes. We need cues, and we need "intuition" that comes from drills. Whether we understand the specific muscles being activated during that drill or not is irrelevant. So, we need to decide- are we discussing the theory, or are we discussing the execution? Because getting an athlete to do something can be a much different task than getting him/her to understand the theory behind something.

I would be much more interested in understanding how to execute the drills correctly, because it seems that if we can do those correctly, they will begin to intuitively show up in the vault. What drills should we be doing in preparation of a 6.40 model, and what are a few things we should be focusing on while doing these drills?
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:

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Tue May 10, 2011 9:57 pm

3PO -when my blood pressure comes down I will try to get a response to you. Prepared two lengthy replies and lost them both when the internet dropped -suffice to say either might have clarified the issues you are interested in. :crying:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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:

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby rainbowgirl28 » Tue May 10, 2011 11:25 pm

Alan, sometimes it helps to type long replies in Word or Notepad or TextEdit and then copy and paste into the web browser so that they are saved if the internet dies at the wrong time. I have really crappy internet where I live now and I've lost a few posts over the years for the same reason. :deadrose:

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

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby altius » Wed May 11, 2011 10:28 pm

This is just for you benefit 3PO as a student of sports science – it is probably the basis for a PHD! Unfortunately it is not as detailed or useful a response as the first two attempts that got lost!

“it seems the goal is the fastest and longest inversion possible?” ABSOLUTELY This is the guts of the issue.

“We need cues”. NO YOU DON’T. Cues are ok for some skill learning – for youngsters who have no idea what they are doing AND if both parties know EXACTLY what the cues mean. But cues tend to break a movement pattern into segments – when as we know in sports they are usually flowing and integrated. Most importantly they bring a cognitive element that interferes with the intuitive nature of skilled performance – bearing in mind my definition.

Case study; A couple of years ago Roman and I did a coaches clinic in Boone NC under the aegis of vaultman 18. Naturally he wanted to introduce his idea of the an early pull so we went to a rope and he tried to ‘teach’ people what he wanted them to do –using cues. Completely unsuccessful. I simply suggested – with no other information - that folk jumped onto the rope to swing themselves up to get their toes as high up the rope as possible. Success. However this is when I began to move towards Romans position on this issue.
Clearly this needs to be done by folk who have already mastered the basic elements of a good take off and of course can sweep their trail leg long over their head. You don’t want a double tuck and extension up the rope.

This experience confirmed my belief that teachers and coaches often get in the way of progress by giving too much information – instead of ensuring that learners have an absolutely clear idea of what the task is – and letting them get on attempting it.

We need "intuition" that comes from drills. YES INDEED WE DO
Six step straight pole take offs – trying to continually increase grip height. This is an autocorrecting exercise – if you don’t take off effectively you cant increase your grip height and still get through to land feet first on the pad. Straight pole bar clearances with the bar being raised every three jumps –standardize grip height. Straight pole jumping to touch a bungy. Keep prs of all these performances and cross check them. For example great bungy heights and relatively low bar clearances may tell you something very important – what is it?

SO “what are a few things we should be focusing on while doing these drills?” FOCUS ONLY ON COMPLETING WHATEVER THE TASK IS - IE to clear higher and higher bars while maintaining grip height.

I have always tried to base my writing on hard won experience and to avoid too much pure theorizing but in this case I am pushing the envelope out and discussing ideas that I did not consciously apply in my own coaching – although I suspect we did get to the right place through drills – not a deep understanding of this specific issue. Perhaps understanding would have got in the way!
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

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:

Re: 6.40 Model?

Unread postby vault3rb0y » Thu May 12, 2011 1:31 pm

GREAT!!

This is golden wisdom, thank you so much for sharing. I just finished a "philosophy of sport" class that's required where I go to school, and I think I learned more practical information from that small post than I did in the entire class.

If a straight pole vaulter can get their feet on a very high bungee but has a low bar clearance, it seems like that would mean they are not finishing their pull and keeping pressure on the pole through their turn and clearance. They are flopping onto the bar after they get their feet pretty high. This could also be because they lose pole speed and come down on the bar. I'm not totally sure? Maybe they change how they are jumping when a bar goes up, too.
The greater the challenge, the more glorious the triumph


Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests