PoleVaultPower.com

Readers may find some interesting data re Izzys run up. Let's see who is first to point out what is interesting!!!

Unfortunately, changes to this board make it very difficult to display data within the post itself. So at present you will have to view the data page by clicking on this link.

There are charts of the data within this Excel file. After opening the file, click on the "page tabs" at the bottom of the window.

I noticed two things, but I did not study this for more than a few minutes...
1. Her numbers are extremely consistent
2. She is accelerating more at the end of her run than the others are
Maybe I didn't read it correctly or understand what you're getting at altius, but I think that I might be on the right path...?

I don't usually like to agree with powerplant42, but in this case, I do.

Also, her average velocity throughout the competition ...

4.74 (3) 8.03
4.87 (1) 8.08
4.93 (1) 8.07
5.04 (1) 8.00

... tells me that her 4th jump (at 4.87) was her best, but then she got slower and slower - assuming that the number in brackets is the attempt # at each height, and that all of her attempts (between 4.74 and 5.04) were logged.

She was out of gas on her 6th jump - her 5.04 WR attempt.

So she should time her heights so that her WR attempts are on her 4th or 5th jump, rather than her 6th. In other words, she should have passed 4.93. In an interview, she or Petrov explained why an intermediate jump between her winning jump of 4.87 and her WR attempt was desirable, but I think based on the data, that was a tactical mistake.

Data for Jenski's 4.81 clearance - good for 2nd place - is missing.

Kirk

Hey, we finally have some common ground! We are patiently awaiting your own thoughts and analysis altius!

Let more folk take a look at it first because it is interesting isnt it!!

Yeah im going with her gradual build up of speed because she has someone else who has a faster adverage from every point even at 10m-5m, but her max speed is still the greatest at 5.424m. The only person who did a better job accelerating at take off was Anna Rogowska because she hit her max speed at 5.019m out, but it was slightly slower than Isinbayevas.

So she should time her heights so that her WR attempts are on her 4th or 5th jump, rather than her 6th. In other words, she should have passed 4.93. In an interview, she or Petrov explained why an intermediate jump between her winning jump of 4.87 and her WR attempt was desirable, but I think based on the data, that was a tactical mistake.

I think it was timed for her WR to be on 4th attempt, but she just didnt plan for it to take three tries at 4.74, and it would not have been smart to pass 4.93 because Jenn was still in the competition at that time. Well unless she has developed the ability to predict the future and know that she would be able to clear 5.04 on her first try while Jenn would miss her first try at 4.93 or try to follow her up to 5.04 and not make the height.

Things are getting more intresting now that there are two women jumping at the high heights and Isinbayeva can no longer jump a few decient height to win and then jump to a world reccord attempt.

Well things the cross my mind

1. she may not be out of gas on jump 6. maybe she got amped up and changed her run early and settled in later, or there may have been some wind issues. hard to 100 percent say

2. both russians have very similar approach styles, being much more relaxed through the beginning and really accelerating into the last few meters while jenn and anna are both a bit more aggressive early on
(though currently kate dennison is closer to anna/jenn, i would guess she will eventually tend to fall towards the "russian" approach as her coach (steve rippon) has roots with parnov and therefore similar pole vault philosophy)

3. as was mentioned previously, isi seems to also be super consistent, which in my mind comes from her relaxed start and very controlled run. although we dont have a ton of data jenn or anna so its hard to know how conistent they are

and altius, was this chart sent by rippon, seems odd to have so much focus on dennision, who, not be insulting, is one of the lesser know vaulters in this list

and altius, was this chart sent by rippon, seems odd to have so much focus on dennision, who, not be insulting, is one of the lesser know vaulters in this list. But if it is of any interest, Steve was/is far more by influenced by Rodion Gataullin than Alex.

altius wrote: But if it is of any interest, Steve was/is far more by influenced by Rodion Gataullin than Alex.

interesting....

Kate Dennison: In all 3 fail attempt she was slowing down in 10m-5m interval. In both clearance jumps she was able to revert that and accelerate in 10m-5m interval. She also reaches max. speed at 7-8.5m from box - pretty far comparing to others. I did not see her jumps, but I would say she has the problem with planting.

Yelena Isinbayeva: very consistent running in all 4 attempts with excellent pattern: almost uniform acceleration in last 20-5 m (see "KD WPV" worksheet)

There are no enough data for other athletes to conclude anything significant except that Jenny and Anna are as fast as Yelena.

Are these marks (20m, 15m, 10m, 5m) set from end of box or some other reference point?

Pogo Stick wrote:Are these marks (20m, 15m, 10m, 5m) set from end of box or some other reference point?

I'd like to know as well...

Data is somewhat inconclusive, if you ask me. There are more factors than pure speed.

As I read the data: Isinbayeva reaches max speed 8.625 m/s @ 5.665 from the back of the box at her 5.04 attempt (correct??).
However, that does not tell anything about the quality of the take-off. The penultimate step sequence would normally cause a slight decrease in speed, which ideally converts into a vertical component (active take-off). Her 4.87 clearence has a higher max-speed, but it happens closer to home (20 cm), which MIGHT indicate a less active take-off. Speed at take-off could be very neat

I have no knowledge of Dennison, but I would think that the planting action is using to much of her attention (or is simply poor), causing max-speed to happen too far out.