PoleVaultPower.com

PVJunkie wrote:The NCAA rule is clear and well written. I have yet to see that anyone has submitted an iterp to them as is their procedure requires. They have not reason to put out a release if no one is asking them to interpret the rule.

99% of the college coaches I have spoke to have wanted a better interpretation of the rule. The USTFCCCA can not even get an official statement from the NCAA as to if the wings are required. So I think it is pretty clear that there are still plenty of people that want the NCAA to offer an interpretation of the rule. USTFCCCA (although you have expressed your opinion of their interpretations not holding merit) is who people went to with questions about the rule because they are a source for coaches to turn to in our sport, they released a statement that everyone could see, and if it was wrong the NCAA should have said something. Them releasing a statement that may have been wrong is good enough evidence to me that someone needs to issue an official interpretation.

To my knowledge the USTFCCCA has not pushed the NCAA for an answer or has not shared the info if they have. As I explained in an earlier post, the email from them was a result of them sitting in on an ASTM conference call. It was not the result of communication with the NCAA. Its disappointing that even after being notified by the ASTM, as well as others involved, of their completely inaccurate information they have made no effort to correct it.

I know several coaches who will not be renewing their membership with USTFCCCA because of how poorly they have handled this issue.

I find it hard to believe the NCAA has not replied to an official request for an interp from a member institution.

Well here is clarification:

The NCAA is in the process of finalizing a memo that will be sent to the membership this week regarding the pole vault box collar requirement. The memo provides clarification to coaches and administrators that the NCAA’s pole vault box collar padding rule requires all pole vault box collars to include box collar wings, and otherwise conform to the applicable ASTM Specification Standard. Doing so will give effect to the NCAA’s purpose in adopting the rule, which is to reduce the risk of injury to student-athletes caused by impact in and around the pole vault box.

At the time of the rule’s adoption, the NCAA Track and Field/Cross Country Rules Committee, the Playing Rules Oversight Panel (PROP), and the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sport (CSMAS) were of the understanding that pole vault box collars with box collar wings would provide student-athletes with greater protection from injury than what would be provided by box collars without box collar wings. Additionally, the NCAA does not construe the current pole vault box collar specification (ASTM designation F2949-12) to render box collar wings optional in the design and use of pole vault box collars. Rather, the standard provides adequate specificity regarding the nature, purpose and dimensions of the box collar wings. This interpretation is consistent with the NCAA’s rationale for revising the rule – to enhance student-athlete safety.

I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have additional questions.

Sincerely,

Rachel Seewald
Associate Director, Championships and Alliances
NCAA

Now the next question is, will any other manufactures be able to come out with a box collar that has wings.

VaultPurple wrote:Now the next question is, will any other manufactures be able to come out with a box collar that has wings.

Well, Jan has a patent pending on the wings. They can get a license from him, try to design around the patent, or ignore it and take their chances on him suing them once the patent is granted.

Patent was issued in May of 2013 and the assignee is Litania Sports Group (Gill) so that is who it would need to be discussed with.

Decamouse wrote:Patent was issued in May of 2013 and the assignee is Litania Sports Group (Gill) so that is who it would need to be discussed with.

Ah sorry, apparently patents are granted a lot faster for pole vault equipment than for cloth diapers!

have not posted or followed in a while........ but just thought i would share with those that still use PVP

my thoughts... it should be optional from the NCAA.. baseball bats where "mandatory" but where avaible from more than one company.. the same with football helments.

i have not found ANY evidence to show that the wings will help the vaulter avoid injury or death. ANY!!!!


Pole vault Box Collar….

There's a meeting in Jacksonville on Thursday of this week concerning the box collar. I have been asked by many if I was going… no for several reasons. One I'm not a voting member so could not affect the outcome in any way. Two, I don't "remotely" believe that a "box collar" of this design will help the injury/death factor in pole vaulting. It just may have the opposite effect in a big way, cause MORE injury and create more people to blame and for the lawyers to sue.

I have done my own testing here at ETSU in our sports science labs with pressure plates and various materials from no padding to "football" turf padding, which seemed to be the closest to what was needed "around" the box but not in the box.

First, padding in or over any part of the "bottom" (none angled sides surface that is 90 degrees to a falling object) part of the box has a nominal benefit. In the testing we did the "padding" only "helped" expeditiously up to one meter!, even with two layers of turf! After a meter "fall" the numbers are so high with and without turf and paralleled each other so closely that the impact force would cause nearly the same amount of damage with and without padding. The ONLY thing that could/would save injury from landing in the box was a potion of the actual foam pit in the box area just after takeoff!

My conclusion, don't land in the box! Make the right choices and coach the vault correctly.

Pole vault injury/death accidents are solely from two factors,

1. Incorrect technique, both RUN and Plant.. more so RUN than Plant. Every video I have seen from a pole vaulter landing in the box, the run was WAY off and the vaulter was stretching!

If you have landed in the box tell me your grip and a six step from takeoff mark (my chart has the right six step to grip relationship and the correct stride length and frequency for that grip) and I can tell you if you had a correct run.

2. Incorrect grip height for the athletes actual speed into the takeoff. If you stretch or "hesitate" you will lose speed.

Coach to the "physics". Yes being aggressive and pushing an athlete is truly a great part of coaching butt… giving the wrong instructions, holding to high for the athletes speed and technique, using a pole that is to stiff or giving the athlete a false since of security by "tapping" at takeoff leads to failure, frustration and more importantly leads to injuring and/or death.

Vaulting is being destroyed by the mentality that it is only about a big pole and high grip… coaches and young vaulters seem to put little or no thought into HOW you get to a big pole and high grip!

The best young vaulters I'm getting now are the "worst" because of that mental though process. I don't know how long it could take or if I can change those vaulters. I'm having better luck starting new vaulters from other events at the college level, rather than bringing in preset thought processes.

Vaulting, safe and successful, is about getting the pole to vertical. It's about the right pole with the right grip and about following the physics from the approach run to the plant-swing.

Padding around the outside of box should be used and is helpful from minor "miscues". In the box, NO. The only way to make the vault safer is to coach and perform the technique as correct as possible, every vault from the approach to the plant/swing, and do the correct things (grip height to speed) that keep you from landing in the box.

A box collar that extends "over/in to the box" has absolutely no benefit to safer vaulting.

Some of us will spend money and some will make money. The NCAA will try to cover their A$$ but will change the rule in due time, after all the money has been spent and made…. And the lawsuits will still come and the lawyers will always try to say that it was/is not the athletes or coaches or it was not "just a miscue" and will always pay the money to the injured when it was the injured or their coach that made the mistake.. either from ignorance, ego or misinformation.

Physics rules.. coaches and athletes wake up….

Dj

Welcome to the NCAA. Where everything is made up and the research don't matter!

Just wanted to take a minute to thank all the coaches and individuals who have supported my efforts during the past year to draft a revision to the current ASTM Standard for box collars. We nearly had the present standard withdrawn but came up one vote short on the full committee ballot.

After 20 plus years of proposing box collar padding and inventing many different models and designs to facilitate the safety of the plant box, I have been on this ASTM roller coaster for the past year and have decided its time to get off.

I was encouraged by messages received recently from our sub committee leadership that have proposed to include dynamic collars in the proposed revised standard. This will possibly pass the sub committee at the upcoming Nov. meeting. Should this happen then it will go to the full committee to be approved in February.

The evolution of my design has outpaced the ASTM and during the last year I have worked hard to refine the parameters that are necessary to provide a pad that offers nearly full coverage of the plant box after deployment. At the present time consider the required box collar covers less than 10% of the hard surface of the box, as it is a static collar, covering the hard edges only. This leaves the slide area wide open with no protection from the possible 10,000 HIC ( Head Injury Criteria).
This essentially means if someone crashes into the box and strikes their head on the open and exposed slide area of the box the result will be death.

In order to provide a better solution I have suggested a one sided pad that when deployed after the pole is planted, would cover the slide area. The pad I have designed and patented is made of 2" closed cell foam, the same type as the present approved collars. The unique feature of my pad is that when deployed it bridges the plant box, resting on either side of the present box collar. It would collapse when struck increasing the reducing the HIC value to under 1,000. I designed it specifically as a supplement to the already approved collar and not as a full collar.

I named it the "Angel Wing' and it would be available to all high schools, colleges, clubs and private individuals who would elect to have the option to provide additional protection for their vaulters. I have designed it to operate manually with a simple pull cord. This gives the coach the responsibility to activate the collar or the option to assign the responsibility to a designated parent or official. The collar also has a trigger that can be used to activate the collar when necessary.

Overall I think it goes the furthest in solving the problem of protecting the hardest area of the plant box and does it in a simple and easy operation. Although the process and development and testing has taken several years, I believe as do many others who have seen the supplement, that it is a worthwhile and logical next step in the future of plant box protection.

I am available to send emails and pictures to any interested coaches or clubs who desire more information about my product. my email is jerryhock@hotmail.com

Thanks again to everyone who helped in the development of this great new product.
Jerry Hock

I moved this post to Jerry's Dynamic Box Collars thread here:
http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=50094&p=210966#p210966

Kirk

Purchasing season is upon us, and I need to tell my AD which box collar to buy in order to be compliant. I know there is the Gill collar, and UCS sells one (but there is some contention as whether it meets the standard or not). Are there any other viable options, or do I have to just tell him to bend over and take the $600 price tag for the SafetyMax collar?

You are correct - there are two on the market that state they meet it - ASTM sub committee meets next week in New Orleans - reality is they do not "approve" anyone's collar -- they set the standard -- I am telling my school and some other coaches I know are waiting a little longer until the dust settles -