19+Plus

A forum for coaches to discuss coaching technique and advice with each other. Only registered coaches can post in this forum.

Moderator: AVC Coach

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

19+Plus

Unread postby dj » Fri May 21, 2010 9:11 am

19 PLUS

DAVE JOHNSTON

Copyright 1981

By: Dave Johnston

In 1970, Chris Pananiclaou made the first 18 foot pole vault. Our sights then turned to

19 feet. In 1975, when Dave Roberts made 18’ 6 ¼ , 19 plus became more of a reality.

In 1980, we saw more than twenty vaulters clear 18 feet and nine vaulters cleared

18’6 ½ or better. With the refinements that are now taking place in pole vaulting, at

least a dozen of those vaulters clearing 18 feet are capable of 19 feet plus.

The use of better equipment has been a contributing factor. The vaulter now

has greater confidence in his poles, he is gripping higher, using more speed, and utilizing

greater strength to his advantage.

More intense competition is a second factor. A height of 18 feet is now

common. If a vaulter is to be recognized, he must seek and obtain greater heights.

A third factor is the greater distribution of knowledge. Coaches and athletes are

sharing more of their ideas. Television, video, and film loops are common aids and are

analyzed more carefully.

If we are to continue out climb upward, we must now concentrate on a fourth

factor, the utilization of the knowledge we have gained. This means placing emphasis

on three major mechanical/technical areas.

The first of these areas is the “hang” position. When a vaulter grips higher it is

logical to assume that he must hang longer if he is to penetrate to the pit. Even though

this is a logical assumption there has been a great deal of confusion as to how this is

accomplished. Most of us are still thinking “swing” and we should be thinking “hang”.

There is a difference. This difference is of major importance. When the vaulter swings

there is a tendency to pass the pole too early. By doing this he loses his ability to move

the pole forward, or more aptly put, his ability to “penetrate” into the pit. Let me try

and explain further. When you shorten the body’s swing radius (tuck) and begin to

move into the rockback position, there is a decrease in forward pole velocity. We have

know for years that it was to our advantage to stay behind the pole, but it has only been

recently that these limits have been tested. It does not become necessary to change

our complete vault style, we just need to emphasis this area more. A longer lever (the

body) used properly can apply more force than a short lever. By hanging longer and

pushing the pole out in front of the body, the vaulter can swing/hang with the body in

an elongated position causing more force to be applied to the pole.

This is not a new concept. In earlier days vaulters using steel poles utilized this

technique. Earl Bell, who vaulted with fiberglass, demonstrated this type of technique

in 1975 by dripping the lead knee after take-off and swinging with a semi-double leg

action. This action was considered wrong at the time but in actually he was able to grip

higher and still obtain the needed “penetration” to make the pit. Other vaulters have

demonstrated the same technique, not necessarily by design but from necessity, with

positive results. Dave Roberts, in his world record vault of 18’6 ¼ in 1976, is another

example. After the initial take-off his lead knee dropped slightly, only to be pulled back

up later with the trailing leg. With the new array of successful European vaulters, the

examples could go on and on.

To help us further in forming a mental picture of this action, we should think of

the pole as a “bow” and the vaulter as the “arrow”. The vaulter nust hang and stabilize

himself behind (under) the “bow”. Even though there is still rotary movement around

the top hand the force generated should be put into the pole by using the bottom arm

as a “fulcrum”, pushing the pole forward into the pit (penetration). The pushing of the

pole forward has been described by some vaulters as giving the jumper the sensation of

rolling the pole (bow) into the pit. The top arm is being pushed forward and up towards

the crossbar, while the bottom arm is still keeping the body extended and away from

the pole. The higher the grip, the larger the “bow” ; the larger the “bow”, the greater

the amount of force that must be applied to get the “bow” to penetrate. Not only does

a vaulter have to possess good speed, good strength, and good plant technique, but he

must elongate the swing and force the pole in front of the body as long as possible…

“hang”.

This brings us to our second point. It is generally considered that the pole must

be moved to the side of the box to allow the vaulter room to swing and obtain the

rockedback position. Let us study this a little more carefully. When this happens, the

vaulter loses valuable force that should be applied to the pole, because the pole is no

longer going in the direction of the vaulter’s intended flight. By keeping the pole in

front of the vaulter and moving toward the pit, force can be applied longer and more

effectively. This extra amount of force will enable the vaulter to grip the pole higher,

hopefully producing higher vaults. Undoubtedly, this puts the vaulter in a very

precarious position, one that most vaulters had rather not think about. To perform this

action the vaulter must have confidence in his pole and in his own physical abilities.

This brings us to the third phase. The vaulter must come from a delayed “hang”

position, work around the pole and shoot into a vertical handstand position. This phase

has produced mixed results. When Dave Roberts made 18’6 ½”, he came off the pole at

a slight angle, crossing the bar in a parallel position instead of a vertical fly-away

position. This was an outcome of his hanging longer and having to work around the

pole. However, this is not a necessary outcome. We have seen more recently many of

the European vaulters doing the same or similar erratic action at the top of the vault.

Now that several vaulters have had an opportunity to work with the “hang” technique

they are solving many of the problems and performing more effectively and

consistently.

To perform more efficiently off the top of the pole the vaulter must first make

some adjustments. He must mentally see himself working around the pole, not vice-

versa. To work around the pole, the vaulter must rotate his shoulders and then his hips

up the axis of the pole. He must train and develop the timing necessary to perform this

action. This action bares many similarities to a gymnast performing on the high bar.

The gymnast kips and shoots to a handstand. A highly technical move, but in some

ways, very simple. The vaulter, on the other hand, must perform this move while the

pole is moving, which demands the action be perform with an exceptional amount of

speed and timing. It is necessary to program this action into the vaulter by repetitious

training. Repetition in the gymnastics room, working on the high bar, rope or the rings

is the first step. From there, repetitions vaulting will enable the vaulter to put things

together.

In its embryonic stages, this technique has had its drawbacks, but it also has

produced some amazing results as is indicated by the fact that in 1980, nine vaulters

cleared over 18’6 ½”, and even now, weekly attempts are being made at 19 feet.




PVP

Good Morning,

I though I would share my “opinion” of the vault as I saw it in the late 70’s and early 80,81’…

This was published in the British Athletics Journal in early ’81 and later by Track Technique Annual ’81 by TAFNEWS PRESS.

My vocabulary was slightly different than today because of “new” terms but hopefully the “gist” of my points are understandable.

I have “retyped it”, unedited and unchanged from the original (the original was on a type writer. lol ; ) yes dirt and I are running neck and neck for age…

Though I would share and “lay it out there” form some productive technical discussion.

dj

Ps.. I must say this, when I came back to the states from my travels (82-83) I was having a discussion with a vault “expert” and he was telling me about this “new” emphasis of “hang” that he read about (he didn’t know It was my article because Track and Field News had another Dave Johnson) and how he had started to coach the vaulters to “hang and drive longer”!! Actually instead of being excited I realized he had over emphasized/interpreted something that could actually create issues. That is when I realized that my writing would be “in others eyes” and not necessarily in my own. If I had a message I thought I needed to relay to other coaches I needed to do it first hand in person..

So.. discussion would be great here….. I’m sure we will “re-live” other discussions but maybe this will help us “summarize” all the models into .. in my minds eye..
RUN-PLANT-SWING

charlie
PV Pro
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:36 am
Location: fitzgerald,georgia

Re: 19+Plus

Unread postby charlie » Fri May 21, 2010 3:45 pm

Well, what do you know. Dave is right on , on the bow and arrow i have been telling coaches about and teaching alot the last 3 years. One step further is , i teach vaulters to cock the pole by a tall-early press support and at the same time invert and they literally get blown off the top!!!!! It is a gutsy thing to do, so i teach it on a light pole., and you can get great pop off a light pole with this technique!!!!

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: 19+Plus

Unread postby KirkB » Fri May 21, 2010 10:21 pm

DJ, thanks for sharing your 1981 article. I think it reflects the kind of thinking that was around in the 1970s. When Bubka came on the scene, I believe a lot of these "drive vault" ideas changed.

My biggest complaint of your 1981 model is that you promoted a passive phase ... the "hang". Roman Botcharnikov wrote his "Continuous Chain Model in the PV" paper http://polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=16118 in 1992, so I can't fault you for predating that. I'm a VERY strong believer in his paper ... it follows the Laws of Physics EXACTLY! Hanging and pausing doesn't ... which we now all know today.

To put this in the perspective of my Bryde Bend, I actually had a passive phase in MOST of my vaults in 1972 ... but not in the 1971 outdoor season. I had a great short run vault (no pauses - no time to pause!), but in my long run ... except for very few times when I wasn't even thinking about technique ... I purposely paused (similar to your "hang").

Funny thing is, on my PR vaults, I DIDN'T pause (by accident)! Once was when I was coming off an injury, so I had done a lot of short runs indoors. Got outdoors and I was so pumped, I sorta "forgot" to pause. Another time was when I spent a few days at Bruce Simpson's cabin between a couple meets in Toronto. After swimming, canoeing and cliff-diving, my body was super-relaxed, so I just JUMPED ... without thinking about technique. Again, I sorta "forgot" to pause ... and I set another PR that day.

I never actually figured this out until 2008. :(

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

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

Re: 19+Plus

Unread postby dj » Sat May 22, 2010 1:38 pm

hey


quote
My biggest complaint of your 1981 model is that you promoted a passive phase ... the "hang".


actually i did not intend for this to be viewed as a "slow" or what you are calling a passive phase...all though i said "delayed"... i was trying to get vaulters to swing like Earl, Roberts and Volkov and not like the French (tuck) were doing.

i realized a couple of years later that this quote...

The vaulter, on the other hand, must perform this move while the

pole is moving, which demands the action be perform with an exceptional amount of

speed and timing.


would mean nothing unless i begin to emphasize the speed of the swing with the length of the body during the swing... which is what i started doing with Tully after comparing the speed/time of Bubka's vaults 1.47 seconds with his.. 1.55.. i started coaching him to plant really high.. finish the takeoff fully extended AND swing as fast as he possibly could swing.. all the way past vertical and off the pole.. one fast continious move...

dj

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: 19+Plus

Unread postby KirkB » Sun May 23, 2010 1:50 am

dj wrote: ... i started coaching him to plant really high.. finish the takeoff fully extended AND swing as fast as he possibly could swing.. all the way past vertical and off the pole.. one fast continuous move...

:yes:

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


Return to “Pole Vault - Coaches Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests