This is why the new box collar is more dangerous

[VaultPurple]

The biggest problem I noticed with the new box collar is how it raised the pole vault pit up about 4 inches when you slide it into place. This means that if the front of the pit was already flush with the plant box or close to it, it now posses an angle that goes into the box, causing the pole to hit the mat much more than if it were not raised.

The simple solution to keep the pole from hitting the mat as much would be to simply move the pole vault pit back away from the box until the angle matched up with that of the box collar. However this provides one key problem.

The safest part of a pole vault pit is the actual non slanted portions of the pole vault pit. So when you slide the pole vault pit back to match the taper of the box collar, you are actually moving the safest part of the pole vault pit away from the plant box.

[KirkB]

I get your point, but I think there's some flaws in your analysis ...

1. Nice diagram, but it's a 2D diagram. This is a 3D problem, and I think there's more danger in the pole hitting the side or corner of the apron than the front (your diagrams infer that hitting the front is the only concern). It would be harder to draw a 3D diagram to show this, but I don't think we should draw your conclusions based on a simple 2D diagram. Does anyone have any proof that bending poles come anywhere close to hitting the front apron of the pit, or the front lip of the box? I personally think that the danger is in the corner or sides of the apron - not the front.

2. I know you're trying to simplify the diagrams, but your diagrams infer an incorrect conclusion, because (obviously) the pit doesn't float in mid-air as shown. In reality, there will be a slight bump on the portion of the Port-A-Pit above the box collar (where the pit and the collar overlap). The overall depth of the pit, across both the overlap part and the rest of the pit (further away from the box) will be a consistent depth (roughly). Thus, even tho the pit may be pushed back a bit, the pit is the same depth (therefore just as safe) from the front of the box all the way to the back of the pit. To be picky, the pit in the third diagram is actually even safer now, because (a) the pit is now another couple of inches longer; and (b) the extra density of the box collar makes bottoming out on the overlap section safer.

3. I think the issue you raise is more psychological than logistical (logical in the real world). I think this is because people adjusting the pit's position will want it to "look nice" - as you shown in the third diagram. But in reality, this adjusted position isn't any less safe - it just looks less safe!

I would be more concerned with how the sides of the apron overlapped with the sides of the box collar. There is no adjustment possible to satisfy both lefties and righties in this dimension. It just won't "look nice".

There is no doubt that the pit manufacturers have an opportunity to modify their design to fit the new box collars. However, IMHO, this is purely to make it "look nicer" as opposed to making it safer.

Kirk

[VaultPurple]

Kirk,

I understand what you are saying about how the collar makes it just as deep after being slid back, however now it is slanted right there, and more importantly my drawing is not to scale, so I do not know if the collar actually goes that deep into the pit.

The biggest psychological problem is people do not feel they are as deep when they look down and see slanted pit instead of flat pit.

Also, one thing I saw this weekend but was fixed, was how the home team had the set up slightly shifted to the left to allow for the bend. The problem with this as you mentioned, one of the guys I coach is a left handed pole vaulter.

Also the same theory as the above diagram applies for the side buns as well with affecting the angle.

Here is a video of a pole bending into the new box collar (and the hitting the pit). The video is of an athlete jumping 5.05. He was still able to jump decently well with the collar, but had some trouble getting deep with bigger poles. It was the first meet though, so no real scientific method to show what caused that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ0Z72KdXY8

Not the best camera angle, I was trying to stay out of the way of the athlete jumping.

[VaultMarq26]

It doesn't appear to be affecting the pole at all in this video. Where do you feel it was hitting?

[dj]

The biggest problem is it doesn't work...

NCAA needs to change the requirement today...

Schools that have $20,000 dollar pits that cover the box area correctly cannot use the collar..

I don't believe those university presidents will spend 40,000 on new pits on a ruling that has a huge NO vote..

Dj

[VTechVaulter]

there is a movement coming to get rid of it. so far there are quite a few injuries cause by pole being improperly deflected by the vault collar. it will be gone soon, i predict, and good riddance. its not the answer

[Decamouse]

It does not help the front opening is at the runway end does not meet the ASTM dimensional standards -- see college section for photos and more info

[altius]

The answer has always been to teach athletes to move the pole up and forward at take off - not to try to bend it - that is after they have mastered a consistent, accurate run up and a precise well timed plant. But I suppose that is asking too much. I just wonder if there was a box collar in place for Lavellinie???

[pv161]

It's obvious that most of you don't like the new collar either because of the design, the price, or you didn't like it being forced on you. I can't argue with the price or being forced issue but I have no problem with the design.
We have been using the new collar since Nov. and doing some simple math, number of vaulters x practices X average jumps in a practice there have been at least 9000 jumps.
Our vaulters include stiff pole new vaulters to 16' + jupers
I have not seen one jump that the pole hit the leading edge of the collar.
We always practice with the standards on 80 and have not noticed any increase in vaulters coming up short because the pole flexed into the collar.

If they changed the rule tomorrow we would still use it since it doesn't seem to hurt anything and you can't argue it adds more padding.

[Decamouse]

so you are ok with being close to meeting a standard? Which parts is it ok not to meet? The front is not dimensional correct -- the pole bend area does appear to meet the standards - at least the one I photo'd and measured -- It is the NCAA's decision to require a collar that meets the ASTM standard and it needs to have the wings -- fine -- can go with that --- then it needs to "meet" the standard - or as it says on the collar itself - "complies" -- do not think it says except for the part we goofed up

[KirkB]

To add to your point, PV161, I think the purpose of the new box collar is to protect vaulters from that one mistake in a thousand that will inevitably happen - with or without any collar pads.

So at your club (if you accept my ratio of 1:1,000, which is obviously just an approximation), there may have been about 9 vaults where the vaulter came up short, and landed on or near the box. I don't know if that's true or not (maybe not, because your club may have more rules than the average club - and training routines requiring vaulters to land in the coaches box - and that increase their safety at your specific site), but if it is true, then if just ONE of those 9 might have been a SERIOUS accident (needing a trip to the hospital or worse), then the cost and "annoyance" of the new box collar would be worth its price.

At least that's from my viewpoint, as someone that could have used the new box collar THREE TIMES in his career!

My point is that even with the best of coaching and club rules, accidents do happen under rare (maybe 1:1,000) circumstances. And that's what the new box collar is for.

Then let's say there's a death for every million vaults (someone did some calculations on this, but I forget what they were - so one million is obviously just another approximation). That would be a thousand clubs with the same vaulting volume as yours. Deaths are rare (maybe 1:1,000,000), but we know they happen every few years. THAT is where the value of the new box collar really comes in as literally a life-saver! You won't notice this statistic in your weekly vaulting practices and meets, but those death statistics are very real - there's no denying that they do exist. And THAT's what the new box collar is for.

I hope the details of solving the (minor) technical issues of the design (the topic of this thread) can be sorted out soon, but I for one am a definite proponent of protecting vaulters against the rock-hard edges of the box.

Kirk

[KirkB]

We always practice with the standards on 80 ...

I think that's a GREAT club rule, and not only for safety purposes. It also encourages proper technique!

Kirk