... we are now much closer to a common understanding (hopefully best practices) of the science behind the theory. THAT thread should continue discussing THAT topic, but in that thread, I raised a follow-up question re auditory feedback that deserves its own thread - this one.
To start this new discussion off (and to keep it separate from the other thread), here's what I asked PVStudent re this new topic:
KirkB wrote: What about audio feedback? i.e. The vaulter and/or coach (especially the coach, I suspect) hearing the thump of the pole hitting the box in relation to when the takeoff foot leaves the ground?
If you were to ask me if I used audio feedback, I could only give you a vague answer. I can only say that audio was only one aspect of what I call the "feel" of the vault. This "feel" gave me a sense of whether the "timing" of the vault was "spot on" or not. It sounds rather mundane to even mention this admittedly vague alternative to measuring the mechanics of the takeoff with more accurate equipment, but (a) if it works, the equipment needed to diagnose each vault-instance is readily available (the ears); and (b) that's all I had in my bag of tricks from back in the day.
My coach (Ken Shannon) never had the opportunity to "feel" my vaults in the tactile sense as I did - only I could feel the timing of the impact of the pole compared to when my foot left the ground, but he could certainly "hear" the pole hit. I don't recall ever discussing what HE thought of the timing though - based on HIS audio perception. Rather, the first question that he always asked me after each vault was how I thought the vault felt, and then a discussion would ensue from there.
I would be interested to hear from other coaches and vaulters whether they have been successful in using audio feedback? I think it goes without saying that today everyone uses recorded video feedback (watching vids immediately after the jump), but do you listen for the thump of the pole in the vids? Or do you reference back to the timing of the thump of the pole (outside of the vid)? Or?
I would also be interested in hearing what you think, PVStudent, from a scientific POV re audio feedback. Is there sufficient precision via this feedback channel for it to be reliable in classifying a jump to being "under", "free-takeoff", or "pre-jump"? Or not? I suspect "not", else you would have already mentioned it.
Kirk
... and here's what PVStudent had to say about it (which I find fascinating):
PVStudent wrote: The screen shots of the film editing program shows the still frame image recorded and its temporal coincidence with the sound track from the inbuilt microphone of the video camera used in recording the images. The red vertical red line indicates the location of the top right image of the vaulter that is coincident with the sound track.
Note the vaulter’s position in each screen shot.
Two facts, first the video can only have an accuracy of +/- 20 millisecond (+/- 1 video field) and two, the sound of the pole tip hiting the rear wall of the planting box will be heard a few milliseconds before the sound of the impact reached the camera microphone.
Within the limitations implied by the facts it is physically and physiologically impossible for the vaulter to hear the sound of the pole impact until airborne in a "free take-off".
Pre Jump answer sound question 1B.jpg (74.45 KiB)
Pre Jump answer sound question 2B.jpg (73.81 KiB)
Pre Jump answer sound question 3B.jpg (72.96 KiB)
The question of the use of auditory feedback by coach and vaulter is not the issue I was addressing.
The evidence I present above shows despite some uncertainty that both the coach and the athlete are relying on the feedback retrospectively in regard to real time of event occurrence.
I point out that the sound can only be heard some very small quantum of time after the causative event.
Therefore the information conveyed by hearing the sound can only be used to start to modify the vaulter’s action after another 300 – 700 milliseconds (fastest times recorded to start to correct error in complex human body motions) have elapsed before being physically able to start to amend any error that may have been recognised from the signal stimulus conveyed by the sound.
My practical experience is that both vision and sound assist greatly in improving the accuracy and precision with which the vaulter and coach, after the completion of the vault, can make the decisions as to whether or not the jump approximated their respective preconceived perceptual understanding of the timing of the pole impact in a “free and pre-jump” take-off.
The simple way to deal with the sound issue in real life action is decide after the take-off has occurred the answer to the questions:
(1) Did I hear the pole hit before, just as, or just after our Kinaethetic perception tells us we are off the ground in the case of the vaulter? (kinaesthetic reaction (70-120milliseconds) is faster that auditory reaction (150 – 180 milliseconds))
(2) Did I hear the pole hit before, just as, or just after I saw the toe tip break the ground contact when observed in the case of the coach? (Auditory reaction time is faster than visual reaction time (180 – 220 milliseconds)).
If the sound is heard before the take-off is felt or seen then the plant completion is too early for a “free take-off” to be possible.
If the sound is heard as the take-off is coincident with kinaesthetic sensation of take-off by the vaulter then the vault might be a “free” or a “pre-jump take-off”. If the vaulter hears the pole strike the rear wall after the kinaesthetic sensations of the take-off then the probability of having executed a pre-jump is high and the chance of the take-off being free is relatively higher.
For a the take-off to be a “free take-off”( ie the plant has been completed coincident with pole tip rear wall strike sound) the coach should clearly perceive that the toe tip had left the ground slightly before hearing the pole tip strike sound!
As the coach’s perception of the time interval separating the vision of the toe tip breaking ground contact and hearing the pole tip strike is subjectively assessed to have increased there is a higher probability of a pre-jump take-off having occurred.!
The decisions of the vaulter and the coach have to be accepted as qualitatively sufficient to correctly guess what actually happened in the take-off.
Experienced vaulters and coaches have sufficient qualitative auditory and auditory discrimination to be able to recognize what has occurred from contextual visual and auditory information perceived initially at the conscious level during learning to take-off.
These essential cues become subconsciously involved in guiding the process by the vaulter and pre-cuing the coach in advance (ie feedforward control) of the critical events allowing automated perceptual processes to operate at faster recognition speeds during more skilful performance and observation of the take-off technique in elite pole vaulters.
This area related to use of auditory and other forms of sensory feedback or feedforward in the timing and learning of a complex coordinative pattern such as the “plant and take-off sequence in flexible pole vault” has an extensive body of accumulated research by scientists interested in motor control and the neurophysiology of motor action.
I believe this is outside the scope of the current forum which is focussed on the issues specifically related to the question “Is there a correct take-off in modern pole vaulting?”
Fascinating though the question to is, and though I could have plenty to say on the science of the matter, I desist from going any further on answering the question posed to me because I believe it drives the discussion away from the original question.
To view these original pics ...
... please refer to the original thread.Pre Jump answer sound question 1B.jpg (74.45 KiB)
Pre Jump answer sound question 2B.jpg (73.81 KiB)
Pre Jump answer sound question 3B.jpg (72.96 KiB)
I have created this new "audio, tactile, visual feedback" topic, since I agree with PVStudent that we want the previous thread to focus on the original question re "the takeoff".
Please comment on each of these 2 threads accordingly.
Thanks.
Kirk