Non-Petrovers

[KirkB]

My vaulter girl could run close to 5.0 and the fastest woman I have ever tested with the steps ran 4.7 and was on the national women’s Rugby team.

Was her last name "Johnston"?

Kirk

[dj]

hey

no it wasn't Kirk.. even though my daughter was "smoking" in her day.. she choose soccer instead of track.. she did run a 60.0 quarter when she was 15 and long jumped 15-7.. she also caught Tully's pole, caught his step and told him he needed to run better and "punch' the takeoff better... all on the same jump.. when she was 15 and i was away from the pit coaching the long jumpers....

the rugby team does have a "lean and mean" wing right now that can run these times and could long jump with USA tracks best.. she had JJK speed and hops when i tested her two years ago, but she likes the feel of running away from the "beast' that think they are going to slam her to the ground....

....WR...........4.25..........4.50..........4.75...........5.00..........5.25
0-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 3’9 ¾ ”.....3’ 9 ¾ ”.......3’7”...........3’5”..........3’2 ¾ ”........3’0”
2. 4’2 ½”......8’ 0”..........7’7 ½”........7’2 ½ ”......6’9 ¾ ”.......6’4 ¾”
3. 4’9 ½”......12’ 9 ½“.....12’1 ½”.......11’6”........10’10 ½ ”.....10’2 ½
4. 5’2 ½”......18’ 0”........17’1”..........16’2 ½”......15’3 ¾ ”.....14’4 ¾
5. 5’7”........23’ 7”.........22’5”..........21’2 ¾ ”.....20’ ½ ”.......18’10
6. 5’11”...... 29’ 6”........28’ ¼ ”.........26’6 ½ ”.....25’ ¾ ”.......23’7 ¼
7. 6’2 ½”.....35’ 8 ½”......33’11”.........32’1 ½ ”.....30’4”.........28’6 ¼......
8. 6’5 ½”......42’ 2”........40’1”..........37’11”........35’10”........33’8 ½
9. 6’8”........48’ 10”........46’4 ½ ”.......43’11 ¼ ”....41’6”.........39’ ¼”......
10. 6’10”..... 55’ 8”..... ....52’10 ½ ”.....50’1”.........47’4”.........44’6 ¼”
11. 6’11 ½".....62’ 7 ½”......59’6".........56’4 ½ ”......53’2 ¾ ”......50’1”
12. 7’0 ½”......69’ 8”........65’10”.........62’8 ½ ”......59’2 ¾ ”......55’9 ½”
13. 7’1 ¼ ”......76’ 9 ¼”.....72’11 ¼”......69’ 1”..........65’3”........61’5”
14. 7’2”........83’11 ¼ ”.......79’8 ¾”.......75’6 ½”.......71’4”.......67’1 ¾”

What is interesting about this acceleration chart is I have used it to move a vaulters run from 6 lefts back to 8 lefts, in a meet! The girl I mentioned before was jumping from 6 lefts because we didn’t have the poles we needed for a longer run. After a second miss at 14 feet another coach said “I think I have a big pole in my bag”. The pole he loaned us would mean she would need 8 lefts instead of 6 or 7. Her 6 left “MID” was 43 ish and the run length was about 69 feet…. Which put her in the 4.75 column. I knew her “MID” would need to be 44ish with the slightly higher grip so I added the distance from the acceleration chart for 5 lefts (10 steps) which was 50 feet.. I told her to start at 44 + 50 + …..94 feet.. she came hauling down the runway and never “blinked’.. unbelievable… she was actually “piked” a foot and a half above the bar but had so much pole speed she bumped the bar with her wrist!!! And it barely slid off. That was on a third vault with no “run troughs” between a 6 step run and a 8 step. That young lady showed me that the “natural” built into every “thoroughbred” athlete needs to be coached with “physics” because only physics will match the “natural feel” that athlete has. I’m am quite sure Petrov knew/knows that what Bubka “felt” had to be what he (Petrov) saw and what he saw and described had to be what Bubka felt and could be relate to in words and communicated properly.

Becca.. this may be over done for this thread…sorry.. but I feel one of my post up above may be the most important post I have ever made. I notice the “MID” thread has been “hit” again with a good post and I do know this could be beneficial to the MID thread but I don’t want to duplicate anything unnecessarily. You make the call..

dj

[Tim McMichael]

To return to the Petrov vs. Non-Petrov debate, I know I have been a vocal critic on the side of alternatives. I have tried very hard not to offer an opinion that other models are better, just that some can be effective and ought at least to be understood. I have also tried to be faithful to the tradition that has been so good to me for so many years.

After I lost my argument about the influence of the bottom arm, I went through a kind of crisis. It was a shock to realize that after all these years there was something so very basic that I simply did not understand at all. Being completely wrong is not something I am used to. So I thought more and talked less for a while. Here is my conclusion.

The Petrov model is, to my eye, a thing of incredible beauty. Even with the most rudimentary understanding of this model, the jump flows with an exquisite symmetry and timing. I could sit and watch my sophomore girl's 10'6" jump a hundred times and not get tired of seeing it. The beauty of the thing and the way it can be given like a gift to athletes of any ability has been a source of continual amazement and delight.

Teaching along these lines has energized and revitalized my coaching and has taken my focus away from myself and my own threadbare reputation and has centered it in the kids and their expressions of sheer joy - - where it ought to be and stay. This has been an exercise in humility that has enriched my coaching more than I can express, but I still feel obligated to try.

[altius]

Would that others - many with far less understanding of this event than Tim - accept this model so that they can have the same experiences with their athletes.