The Flex # Issue Explained

[Bruce Caldwell]

"but what the ASTM is asking is to use it as a finite number a fixed to a weight rating that is a totally differrent thing" - if you had chosen to attend you would realize that what is said above is not correct

OK Lets hear what you have to say
I had other obligations and I did not choose to not attend. Tell us what they intend to do because you may be correct I might be incorrect.
I only have what a vaulter sent me as the proposal as the ASTM never sent our company any proposal to look at.

Earl Bell, Steve Chappell, and Mark Strawderman, as well as Greg From Stackhouse all told me about the meeting.
So if you have something to say please correct me, I will be the first to admit it if I am wrong about the perceived intentions of the ASTM.
I only have the past 2 years of what has been represented as their intentions to go by.

Oh let me throw in a quote from JAn Johnson I received

written Monday, November 03, 2003 11:08 AM
"As we all know, many variables exist in the manufacturing process of vaulting poles. These variables, of course represent individual differences between brands and models. The only purpose of the proposed standard will be to create a common methodology for the purpose of grading the resistance of vaulting poles, and assigning appropriate max weight and handhold values. In short, the manufactures will still be able to use any materials or methods in the manufacturing process, just as they always have in the past. But when the standard goes into place they will be obligated to grade and label their products based upon an industry standard.
Sincerely,
Jan Johnson

[hardflex]

Bruce, sorry buddy, but that is truly nuts to think everyone should use that system to buy poles with. As soon as you start converting to lbs all simplicity goes out the window. And that's why this ASTM stuff has to be careful not to permanently etch a bad system onto our sport!

The 170 Altius will be 12lbs stiffer than the 160 however the Alitius is a body wrap pole and the spirit is a spin wrap pole so add 2-3 lbs for the Alitius making it 15-16 lbs stiffer.
SO in this case you have a Altius 170 that is a 180 light really a 175 Hard we would call it a 178.2 lbs
A spirit 150 that is a medium flex and a 160 that is a light flex
You may need a transition pole 14- 170 spirit M flex 17.3 to a 17.0 in our line that would be a 169.4 to a 171.6

[Bruce Caldwell]

Bruce, sorry buddy, but that is truly nuts to think everyone should use that system to buy poles with. As soon as you start converting to lbs all simplicity goes out the window. And that's why this ASTM stuff has to be careful not to permanently etch a bad system onto our sport!
T

Hello Paul it is great to see you in this discussion.

Explain which post you are referring too??

If you mean by power number
yes it is difficult for a dealer to stock all those poles.
And yes the simplicity of the 5lbs increment does go out the window

YES YES you are correct. It is not a simple method.

When we get an order for a 14- 145 we reserve the right to ship them at least the next size pole up which could be a
14-145 S 430/66 145.2
14-145 M 430/67 147.4
14-145 H 430/68 149.6
Other pole makers will ship a 14-145 S M H?????

The same as all the other pole makers do except the stiffness is hidden within the flex number and fits with in a range of 4-5 flex number per 5 lbs rating that is difficult for the coach and vaulter to determine without a flex chart.

From an inventory standpoint it is not simple just as it is if you had to build each flex number within each range.

If you are talking about the rule of thumb break down yes that is only a rule of thumb and not exact.
We do not propose that a coach or vaulter use this a a means of ordering just to get a rule of thumb feel frothe poels they may need and to understand the GAPS.

But the bottom line here is we do not need any more rules for the Highs schools Another one will eliminate the sport.
I do not see the flex differences as a safety problem that warrants the ASTM to make new rules for the manufacturers or the High Schools.

PS Your Altius web site looks great , I see you are about to explain flex numbers soon
Check it out readers
http://www.altiusint.com/

[Decamouse]

"This is not an ASTM standard" - that is a quote from the very first line of the document passed out - It is the work of one of the members of the F.08.67 committee. It was stated that a sub-committee made of manufacturer's reps (if they chose to participate) would be the meat of the group. (yet to be formed - it was discussed that letters would be sent to all the manufacturer's ) I know who was there - I sat between Earl and Mark, with Greg next to Mark. ASTM as an entity is not asking for the standard - ASTM as an organization would review and vote on a standard yet to be developed, for acceptance. If members have a disenting vote it must either be withdrawn or proved to be unsupported or invalid if the standard is to move to the next level. If all the info was passed on to you you would know that Jan would not have a vote on the yet to be formed sub-committee. We are talking about a standard that has to have sound engineering principles backing it - not marketing or sale hype, or double speak. The intention here is not to argue or market systems - a persausive argrument is not because someone said so - they will require engineering facts, test results and some agreements between those who choose to participate.

[vaultmd]

I know who was there - I sat between Earl and Mark, with Greg next to Mark.

Hey! I was sitting right next to you. I thought only women treated me like I was invisible! LOL

[Decamouse]

Sorry - the distingushed Doctor was next to me. - and I did catch my plane with a few minutes to spare. A very key member in the discussion on helmets. Hope to some day vault in a meet with ya -

[DFW-ELITEpv]

Hey , vaultmd, black jack or craps either on e is fine with me. Reserve a table for us in Reno. will be there on thurs noon

see ya there

[Bruce Caldwell]

Bruce, sorry buddy, but that is truly nuts to think everyone should use that system to buy poles with. As soon as you start converting to lbs all simplicity goes out the window. And that's why this ASTM stuff has to be careful not to permanently etch a bad system onto our sport!

The 170 Altius will be 12lbs stiffer than the 160 however the Alitius is a body wrap pole and the spirit is a spin wrap pole so add 2-3 lbs for the Alitius making it 15-16 lbs stiffer.
SO in this case you have a Altius 170 that is a 180 light really a 175 Hard we would call it a 178.2 lbs
A spirit 150 that is a medium flex and a 160 that is a light flex
You may need a transition pole 14- 170 spirit M flex 17.3 to a 17.0 in our line that would be a 169.4 to a 171.6

OH that part yes it is nuts to order poles by that method especially when comparing two brand poles. It is not for marketing only a way for me to determine a gap it is all a rule of thumb and not an exact science. It is only a rule of thumb break down and you are correct it is not an exact science.
We do not propose that a coach or vaulter use this as a means of ordering just to get a rule of thumb feel for the poles they may need and to understand the GAPS.

But the bottom line here is we do not need any more rules for the Highs schools Another one will eliminate the sport.
I do not see the flex differences as a safety problem that warrants the a new rule for the manufacturers or the High Schools.

Paul RIchards was taught by one of the guys at the original Skypole company in Ca who worked with Herb Jenks when he was with Browning Skypole. The two main people there were Ted and Dan who also help Nordic build their equipment and patterns originally.

Paul knows his flexes
PS Your Altius web site looks great , I see you are about to explain flex numbers soon
Check it out readers
http://www.altiusint.com/