High School Safety – Weight vs Pole Ratings

[Tom Wilson]

In answer to Master’s question, moving to a softer pole( less stiff) is safer when landing short of the coaches box (PLZ, preferred landing zone). To think of it in another way instead of as pole weight versus vaulter’s weight, just think of jumping into a big headwind versus a strong tailwind. Headwinds may cause vaulter to go to a softer pole, tailwind may allow use of stiffer pole. Why - to achieve proper penetration. I think most vaulters know this so I wonder if you are looking for some official answer versus one I think most vaulters just know.

So for an official answer on why using a softer pole is safer when landing short of the coaches box you could go to the Pole Vault Safety Certification Board course. I still have my 2005 Edition of the course and under the “Landing Shortâ€Â

[Bruce Caldwell]

By the way posters this is great stuff thanks for timing in!!
Have I ever vaulted yes it is my passion
While every USA pole manufacturer has an ex-Vaulter as its owner.
ESSX: I jumped 15'8" holding 13'6" on a 14' pole in college While other college vaulters held 16' on 16'5" poles and jumped 15'6" I was vaulting in the MAIA leaque at CMSU (Missouri state)
UCS: Steve has done over 17' and was an English Champion in England and his sons here in the USA are jumping very high too

PACER: Dave from Gill Jumped I think 18'9" a Baylor

ALTIUS: PAUL AT ALTIUS WAS A 17'8" VAULTER His dad was a two time Olympian and brothers too jumped very high

NORDIC: The owner of Nordic I doubt pole vaulted but not sure on that point.
A training pole is the answer and at age 19 I used these rather than jumping on under weight poles
While Gill may have been the first in the USA with a trainer pole that was soft & under rated.
I was the first at age 19 to discover and present the short run trainer. A pole that could hold the load up to 165 and bend depending on the load combined with the velocity.
Two things went wrong with this pole
1. Coaches used trainer poles with full runs in meets which was not good for continued technique and they over bent the pole!
2. Other manufacturers cloned the trainer with softer rated poles vaulting poles for full run which defeated the safety factor.

Yes in the beginning I had to jump on poles under my weight because pole manufacturers then and even today do not know what we at ESSX know!
Sounds arrogant I realize. so let me step out here and explain.

We make a pole that is not round it is oval. in our 10"8"to 13'7" lengths the pole is made to bend one way and with less effort to bend or to initiate the bend. These poles and all our poles, even the 10"8" poles have a natural pre determined mathematically calculated and an aligned soft side to pole natural pre-bend (THANK YOU BETO our engineer)
Pre-bent poles will bend easier than a straight pole.
We make 10'8"=66-77-88-99-10-105-110-114-118-121-123-125-127 etc you get the point in this line special order not guaranteed to be in stock with no up charge.
Frankly a beginner does not need to bend the pole I often used a stiff pole to drills to develop a better swing.
( 8'10" with a straight bamboo pole holding 7'1" in my back yard set up)


(personal Feelings)
Poles today by other manufactures require the vaulter to bend the pole from the take-off rather than from the swing as I have advocated since 1972 at the age of 19 years old. Swing vaulting is the most efficient method of jumping while there are several models. Vaulting poles for many years never supported this theory, our does and is made on the double pendulum theory. There is a law of the double pendulum that will help you to jump over your grip if you time with the pole. it is physics/
See this post for more info

http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/vie ... highlight=

I see that you mention often a shorter softer pole
NO move to a shorter stiffer pole weight rating to get into the pit and jump properly.
I don’t advocate the purchase of every 2.2 lbs increment, some athletes have .1 flex which is unnecessary. Your working series over time should be 5 lbs increments’ and learn how to adjust that by 2-3 lbs by the movement of the grip up and down 1 fist on the same pole.
If you have a vaulter who when uses a shorter pole blows through , they may be running farther on the approach than their ability. Everyone I talk to tries to take the short cuts. Longer poles higher grips, long approaches.

Rhino quote No rule is any better than a competent coach

Good statement but that coach has to have an open mind and learn about poles. I see the most knowledgeable vault coaches out here that do not understand pole.
I hear it every day I have a 15.2 flex I want the same pole with a 20.3 flex???
That is not possible. Forget flexes use the Xlogic system of 2.2lbs it works
Bruce Caldwell 532

[master]

I can't see how it can be questioned. If you lack penetration, drop your grip and go to a softer pole and land on the pit. That is safer.

Maybe I misunderstood your previous post. I thought you were saying the two choices were 1) to drop your grip, OR 2) go to a softer pole. In this post you say do both? Either method can help you land in the pit, but there are differences in safety in my mind. Of course, another option is to do both, but I didn't think that was what you were saying.

- master

[master]

... The section does have the statement never jump on a pole rated below your weight and that puts the discussion back to the original post.

You are a vaulter I presume, have you ever jumped on a pole rated under your weight?

That is exactly my point. The choice of going to a softer pole is only legitimate (from a safety perspective) if the vaulter is on a pole rated above his body weight. Most of this discussion has been centered around HS vaulters that are being coached to get on longer poles than their skill level justifies (from a safety perspective). So that is how I have been couching my comments.

Yes, I am a vaulter as well as a coach. I am 61 years old and jump 13'. I weigh 143. I jump on a series of 4.15m Pacer FX poles and on those I start with a pole that is rated at 155, and on a good day, I can jump on my 165. The other series of poles are 4.25m Nordics. There I start on a 150 and move through a few flex levels of 150 and 155. I think when I first returned to vaulting 5 years ago after a 35 year layoff, I may have vaulted on a pole under my weight, I don't remember for sure. At that time I did not own any poles so I was using poles at I HS where I volunteer coach.

As a coach, and a student of the vault, I know I can safely vault on a pole below my weight if I reduce the amount of energy I deliver to the pole, and/or drop my grip appropriately. Unfortunately not all high schools have knowledgeable enough coaches to make those kind of decisions and that, I submit, is the genesis of the NFHS rule. They are trying to protect the kids from accidents that can happen because of lack of knowledge and ability. That puts a big burden on coaches and schools because the best answer is an expensive one, have an appropriate series of poles for kids to learn on and compete on. For as long as I have been volunteering at our school, we coaches and the kids, put on a vaulting camp to raise money that goes directly into buying poles. Over the years, we have accumulated a large selection of poles. But we still have to buy poles to accommodate vaulters that are bigger or smaller than our "usual". We also borrow poles on occasion and of course we loan our poles when we know the coach and the vaulter that would be using them.

I'm starting to ramble here so I'll stop. But I'm willing to answer questions if you have them.

- master

[Tom Wilson]

Maybe we need more shorter poles with higher weight ratings to get through the transition phase when the athlete goes from straight pole to bending. That is in essence what we are doing when we put an athlete that is learning on a pole under their weight but have them hold low (but this is illegal). We then go back to my initial question and the root cause is many schools do not have a great selection of poles. Given that, would it not be good to find a way to allow a vaulter to use a lighter weight pole that is held down lower where it is likely 10 - 30 pound stiffer but effectively shorter? That was my start point on the forum, discussing the possibility.

I think many of the comments are excellent learning points even if they seem to redirect the question posed.

1) I would like to learn more about training poles and what range of uses they provide young vaulters. If a training pole or two could truly cover many weights and speeds of vaulters trying to learn to bend I think that is an excellent idea.

2) Kids overbending on too soft of poles is likely the genesis of the weight rule as Master says. Yes, that is a risk even for poles over an athlete’s weight if they are strong runs and takeoffs. However kids jumping on too stiff of poles is a risk and I think the genesis of that risk is the pole weight rule. My original post was to discuss allowing athletes that outweigh the pole rating but with the caveat the rules would require a lowered grip height based upon 10 lbs per 6 inches or some formula.

3) I am curious if the excellent vaulter’s in the pole companies recall when they were youth, if they at times had the issue of too few poles and early on jumped on poles under their weight. Perhaps they are elite and had such talent/.strength/speed/co-ordination early on that they always jumped on heavier poles? So far it seems that everyone responding has or may have jumped on poles under their weight for some reason.

4) I like the vault camp idea to buy poles as a fundraiser and maybe would copy that. So far I have been thrilled to build up what we have for a facility which is very nice and outside funding would be great.

5) Regarding the pre bend / soft side pole manufacturing as unique. Doesn’t every manufacturer build poles so there is a soft side? I recall in my younger days buying a blue pre-bent Sky Pole but I don’t think ESSX is saying they have that design or is that what ESSX is saying?

6) Esoteric question to pole manufacturers. To determine the pole weight for a given length is that not determined based upon the flex number? In other words each weight rating corresponds to a small range of flex numbers and then lower flex numbers are a higher weight rating. I feel like the weight number is an arbitrary number that happens to be in pounds. I realize poles can’t be rated on energy, but isn’t a real factor of bending and overbending the amount of kinetic energy developed and transferred by the vaulter into the pole? Thus if the perfect vaulter of some weight transferred 1.0 units of energy a younger transitioning vaulter of the same weight might transfer only a small percentage, say 0.25 to 0.5 units of energy into the pole. That would mean they would be safe on a pole designed for lower energy input which I would think be a lower weight rated pole, since poles are rated in pounds.

[Rhino]

I've been afraid to give much of my history because I don't want to bore anyone. I am fascinated by everyone else's though, so here's a little background on me:

I stiff-poled into my sophmore year of high school, using a hand-shift (bottom hand came up at takeoff) and clearing 11' 6". The school's only unbroken pole was a 1435 black pacer. I eliminated the hand shift and at 135 bodyweight I bent the pole, held higher, and cleared higher, but still didn't clear above my handhold until I was a very old man (because I couldn't find a copy of The Elusive Bar.

I agree with practically everything Bruce has to say, and Master too. After watching Brian Hancock vault, I am convinced that there is merit to holding low on big sticks and standing on the end of them as Bruce has consistently advocated.

I will strengthen the earlier statement with which Master had a disagreement, that going to a softer pole after being stood up can be safer than staying on the stiffer pole. This doesn't necessarily require lowering the handhold. Some may okay this suggestion as long as the pole rating exceeds the vaulter's weight. The pole's weight rating is unfortunately arbitrary. I have an 11' 90 lb pole that is as stiff as a newer 110 lb pole of the same brand. It's a pity to discard the pole because I'll never be able to find a sub-90 pounder who can use it (of course she could stiff-pole on it, but she could do the same with a steel pole). Most of all, I cannot fathom how it is safe for a girl who weighs in at 118.8 lbs to vault on a 118.8 lb pole but unsafe for a girl who weighs in at 119.0 to vault on the same pole.

If we all had unlimited budgets, and we all were 1/2 second faster in the sprint this would not be an issue at all. There are some vaulters who yet lack the strength to clear above their handholds and I think they still deserve the right to participate without being hampered by an arbitrary rule like the weight restriction.

On another note, I have made some mistaken statements I would like to clear up:

I said that the rule stated that the vaulter's bodyweight shall not exceed the pole's rated weight. The rule instead states that the competitor's weight shall not exceed the pole's rated weight. That means the meet officials have a right to choose whether or not to require shoes at weigh-in.

I also stated that the AMF Pacer III poles could not be re-certified. Gill, the current manufacturer of Pacer poles will indeed re-certify them

[master]

Both poles and vaulters are on a continuum of performance. If there is going to be a rule, it will by definition have a cutoff point. With the current rule, this means if you are .1 lbs over the weight rating of the pole it will not be legal. I am certainly not saying that a vaulter at the pole rating weight is safe and at .1 lbs over is unsafe. It is just the nature of the beast. It is like so many other laws; X mph is OK but X+1 mph is illegal; If you are at least Z inches tall you may ride the roller coaster if you are Z-.5 inches tall you may not; if you are caught with Y ounces of marijuana it is a misdemeanor but Y+.1 ounces is a felony (I don't really know if that is true, but hopefully you get my point.)

If there were an easy to measure variable of a vaulter's ability to load energy into a pole, that might be the best method for determining safety. I don't know of any.

This rule doesn't make everything safe. Imagine a good vaulter that is able to jump well/safely on a pole 25 lbs over his/her weight (many HS vaulters can do this). Now imagine they decide to see what would happen if he/she jumped on a pole rated at their weight but with the same energy level as they do on their "big" pole. Now there would be a big safety problem. I guess the people that write the rules figure when you know enough to be able to jump well on poles above your weight, you are smart enough to avoid the hypothetical situation I just imagined. But I wouldn't bet on that always being the case.

- master

[Bruce Caldwell]

[color=darkblue]Sorry to do this guys as I appreciate your long posts. And your questions deserve answers and most can be found by using the Search on here, It is difficult for me to answer these questions 2-3 and even 4 times when it is on here, plus this is the heat of the season and getting poles out the door is paramount.
TOM you have great questions that both Gill and myself have answered on here. Please excuse me to ask you to search for them.
Again the rule does not make things safe it makes things happen properly.
Also "The pole's weight rating is unfortunately arbitrary".
While many may think this word “arbitraryâ€Â

[Rhino]

Sorry, I can't resist imparting a couple more of my windbag comments.

So a vaulter can break a pole that is rated 20 lbs over his weight (I have). And a vaulter can vault on a pole that is rated 20 lbs under his weight without breaking it (in fact, I would have a hard time bending a 16' 5" 140). Seems to me that the rule is arbitrary, unnecessary and counter productive.

Here is a hypothetical that I consider a reasonable scenario: A high school vaulter weighs 162 and has a 14' 160 and a 15' 175 in the school's inventory. He is doing fine on the 160, but his coach (who is an expert on distance running) tells him to get on the 175 and just hold higher to make it bend. The vaulter lands on the runway. This is what happens in the real world. The rule is responsible for this being the case.

We haven't dwelt on the other part of the rule, that the vaulter cannot hold above the maximum handhold band, which on most Spirits I have seen is six inches from the top. I have seen pictures of a world record holder or two holding a bit higher than this. Are they being unsafe and should they be banned from competition?

[SKOT]

Here is a hypothetical that I consider a reasonable scenario: A high school vaulter weighs 162 and has a 14' 160 and a 15' 175 in the school's inventory. He is doing fine on the 160, but his coach (who is an expert on distance running) tells him to get on the 175 and just hold higher to make it bend. The vaulter lands on the runway. This is what happens in the real world. The rule is responsible for this being the case.

If you are saying that the rule is responsible for the athlete landing on the runway, you are hiding your eyes from the truth. You are blaming a few words in a rule book for the negligent ideas of an uneducated coach.

This rule is not perfect. Nor are a lot of other, even more important, rules and laws in our lives.

I don't think there are many people that believe that this rule in question is meant to describe every safe way possible to pole vault. In my opinion, there are safe ways to jump on poles rated below your body weight. But, the NFHS also needs simple standard for ways to jump safely.

I feel like this conversation has gone in circles many times already. If we don't like the current standard, we should try and come up with a solution that is as simple and comprehensive as the current rule.

[master]

... He is doing fine on the 160, but his coach (who is an expert on distance running) tells him to get on the 175 and just hold higher to make it bend. The vaulter lands on the runway. This is what happens in the real world. The rule is responsible for this being the case.

My take on this is the coach is responsible, and at the same time, irresponsible.

- master

[Tom Wilson]

Proposed simple standard for discussion/ consideration. I think it would enhance safety.

“Coaches may mark a reduced maximum pole grip height for any vaulter using a pole rated lower than the vaulter’s weight. Marking shall be with contrasting colored athletic tape to easily standout versus the pole’s grip tape. No added mark is to be required for poles at or above the vaulter’s weight. Marking shall be based on 3â€Â