Bemiller/Mack Model

This is a forum to discuss advanced pole vaulting techniques. If you are in high school you should probably not be posting or replying to topics here, but do read and learn.
User avatar
SlickVT
PV Follower
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:06 pm
Expertise: Former College Vaulter, Post-Collegiate Vaulter, College Coach, High School Coach
Location: Blacksburg VA

Unread postby SlickVT » Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:13 pm

I think everybody has valid points here.

You can't argue that Bubka's performances speak for themselves, and in order to jump that high, the technique has to be pretty fantastic. Physically, the Bubka Model (this has now been officially changed) is pretty darn good.

However, I am leaning towards DJ here. Lets be honest. Anyone as fast as Bubka can jump high. Hitting some positions at the correct time, and even tuck-and-shoot with that much speed on the correct pole will send you 5.80+.
Seeing as Tim Mack had greater pushoff at his peak with less speed is pretty darn impressive as well.

The other issue here is the longevity. It is obvious that Bubka was good for a long time. Tim Mack has been good for quite some time now, and I think he is gonna kick it up again here in a little while.

Anyone have any thoughts as to why Bubka had such longevity at such a high level, and still recovered from some decent injuries so fast?????
I guess thats a whole different discussion in itself...
Vertical Technique Pole Vault Club
Blacksburg, Virginia
verticaltechnique.com

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

Unread postby dj » Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:06 pm

vaultman..

and the world... i want everyone to know that i respect every great vault that has been made... and i have seen some pretty high ones.... volkov 65cm above a 5.50 bar..montreal 1979.. is one.. and that jump and super 8 film prompted me to write and publish an article called 19+plus..vigeron jumped 19' in june 1981...

and i think bubka tried to create and covert every ounce of force he had in his athletic body everytime he set foot on the runway... i can even understand why a vaulter would want to be as high in the air as possible when the pole hit the back of the box... but bubka's "lack of efficiency" came from one issue and one alone... that issue eventually gets the best of the best and will even "get' izzi if she isn't careful... it happened to gatalin and he was every bit the a$$ kicker bubka was...

that issue...? to stiff of a pole and like slick said...maybe to much grip...

i know gatalin wanted a pole that ... in his words "was the fastest in the world and i will set a world record'.. i handed him the pole and he tried it the next day in a meet in LA.. it STOOD him up... what do you think it would do to a mortal...

big poles are not the answer... matching the varibles with your fastest speed and your best takeoff IS the answer..

you know.. it's interesting most of you..us prove this point by jumping a PR from a short run on a soft pole

tranfer those same parameters, %bend, %grip, speed etc.. and you will jump your max with seemingly less effort........from your long run...

t-mack did that the best.. if we follow suit we will jump higher.........

dj
Come out of the back... Get your feet down... Plant big

User avatar
ladyvolspvcoach
PV Follower
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

bemiller/mack model

Unread postby ladyvolspvcoach » Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:04 pm

Great post! and Great analysis! It's very interesting to see the actual data compared not influenced by the weight of legend..

JKSvault
PV Beginner
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:34 pm

Unread postby JKSvault » Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:37 pm

You are comparing Tim's PR to the WR, compare the same hieght. You can't compare Bubka's 6.15 because no one is close.

Vaultman- Efficiency in numbers do not lie. You can take an athlete's numbers and plug them into a mathematical formula to compare who is superior. And this is exactly what I have done. At a later date, I will share with everyone how I came to the conclusion that Mack is a more efficient vaulter. I am a little confused on how Bubka having a heavier resume leads you to believe that he was more efficient...

Bubka had such a powerfull and superior swing that it was hard for him to control himself when going over the bar.
Captain Falcon- I believe that a more efficient vault contains the element of control. I like DJ's definition of efficient- "producing the desired result with a minimum of effort, expense, or waste…" If a vaulter is unable to control what his body is doing, he must be exherting energy in other ways that are not productive to the vault. And Bubka is doing just that- putting more energy into controlling the position of his body rather than it being a natural flow over the bar.

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:10 pm

Well my old granny taught me that 'a man convinced against his will remains of the same opinion still', so we are going to have to agree to disagree. But while are some of us may be using the weight of Bubka's performances to justify our views, I have a sneaking suspicion that jingoism or a distorted sense of patriotism - never far below the surface on PVP or in the US - is driving other opinions being expressed here. However before the debate really does become about them and us, someone might want to establish exactly what contribution - if any - our friend 'agapit' - a Petrov disciple - had in Tim's later development.

Be that as it may, when we meet in Columbia dj, I will be expecting you to explain to me exactly how Tim's flat take off contributes to the efficiency of his jump and - more importantly - how you would teach what you believe to be the significant advantages of his technique to young athletes. In the end 'efficiency' must be reflected in the positions and movements the athlete achieves and makes during the vault - what does Tim DO which makes him superior technically to Sergey - and how would you teach it?

So i will leave the rest of the debate until we meet!

:idea: :idea: :yes: :rose:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

User avatar
polevaulter08nw
PV Master
Posts: 816
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:33 pm
Expertise: College Vaulter, Coach
Lifetime Best: 5.40
Favorite Vaulter: Renaud Lavillinie
Location: Greensboro, NC
Contact:

Unread postby polevaulter08nw » Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:13 pm

Great discussion, I enjoy reading this!
Age:22
PR: 5.40
Indiana University '13
University of North Carolina '12

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:45 am

"It's very interesting to see the actual data compared" -- What data - where is it detailed?? :yes:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:50 am

"Your statement that Bubka “could have easily jumped higherâ€Â
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

User avatar
altius
PV Rock Star
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:27 am
Location: adelaide, australia
Contact:

Unread postby altius » Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:00 am

"If a vaulter is unable to control what his body is doing, he must be exherting energy in other ways that are not productive to the vault."

If you can show me a better example of a male vaulter - of any ability level - showing greater control than Bubka in the shot on the front cover of BTB I will pay you 100 bucks and put the photograph in the next book I write on the vault. Not sure if I will live long enough to do that but its a good thought!! :idea:
Its what you learn after you know it all that counts. John Wooden

User avatar
vaultman18
PV Pro
Posts: 401
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:07 pm
Expertise: College Coach, Former College Vaulter
Favorite Vaulter: Tim Mack
Location: Sacramento, CA

Unread postby vaultman18 » Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:28 am

Yes where is all this data and numbers?

Vaultman- Efficiency in numbers do not lie. You can take an athlete's numbers and plug them into a mathematical formula to compare who is superior. And this is exactly what I have done. At a later date, I will share with everyone how I came to the conclusion that Mack is a more efficient vaulter. I am a little confused on how Bubka having a heavier resume leads you to believe that he was more efficient...


You are missing my point in the fact you are using their PR jumps yet Bubka has 40 more jumps that are within 1cm or better that could be compared. That is a lot more data and numbers to put into this formula you have. Your research is incomplete. How many 121cm push off clears does Mack have compared to Bubka, with your data it is 1 to 0. Yet with similar hieght jumps it could be 1 to 40 I really don't know. I do know Bubka jumped 6m 41 times Mack did 1. Yet some how Mack's technique is superior.

[quote]but the bubka “techniqueâ€Â

ADTF Academy
PV Follower
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Unread postby ADTF Academy » Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:04 am

Its been a while for me, but I couldn't resist.


In the end what is the priameter for vaulter/pole efficiency. How do we measure the effecincy of one jump to another. To me the vault in simplistic terms is ENERGY IN and ENERGY OUT. Simply put how much of the orignial energy applied to the system is still available to use at the end of the system (the flyaway).

The realitive vault mechanics are simple if you take away how the vaulter gets from takeoff to inversion for a moment. Vaulter puts KE into the system the bent pole stores the energy as strain energy pole release the energy remaining as potential energy. The vaulter who can not only put more KE into the system to begin, but maintain as much or efficently keep that energy in the systerm will in the end have the greatest potential energy available for the flyaway.


So how do we measure this. Simple bar cleared minus effective hand hold. However, The crossbar is just an arbitrary object used to decide a winner not in looking at efficiency. Lets look at potential because thats what matters when you look at efficiency. Mac's 6m jump could he have gone any higher, how much higher was his hips over the bar. Bubka's 6.01 jump could he have gone any higher, how much higher was his hips over the bar. Lets say for argument that the 6.40 was not quite accurate I am sure everyone could agree that his hips were at least 6.30. Do the math that jump would produce a greater pushoff than Mac's. I know some will say well thats not actual clearance, but that is just a statement made by those that don't want to look at actual comparison and are stuck on the old cliche we are better than you mindset. The conversation is efficiency and that can only be measured by KE in compared to PE out. The greater the efficiency the closer these two are to one another.

So going back who was more efficient. How can that be measured till we determine how much potential energy each had after the pole unbent. What was availlable during the flyaway. Till then it is your opinion vs someone elses. Can we go by body posture at the conclusion of the jump once again I do not think so.

Where I do agree with DJ is that Bubka's pole stiffness selection was not appropriate to his abilities and Mac did a better job on matching his abilities with his pole selection. Alan might not agree, but I feel that Bubka and Petrov overshot his abilites on this topic. Why i feel this is because of the finishing position shown by bubka on a numerous of his jumps. Was this out of control position due to a lack of body control or lack of ability to handle the potential energy available on top. My opinion is the latter and if that would of happened to any other jumper they would of been in danger. My respect for Bubka comes in his body awarness to handle those situations when there was to much potenital energy available during the flyaway.

Now to my point. What is the stiffness of the pole dictate. In simply terms the stiffer the pole the less energy needed to uncoil it in terms of the weight (you) hanging from the end of it. The less energy that is needed to uncoil the pole the more energy that is potentially available for the flyaway. Overall effiency is this point coupled with the valuters takeoff and swing effiency to inversion as well as effiency to rotate that pole cord (hand hold to plug) into the pit.

The stiffness of Bubka's pole to his releative takeoff and swing effiency was intense. I feel so great that he had too much potential energy available on the top of his jump to utilize it. Hence the some time out of control body postures during clearance. With a slightly softer pole the amount of potential energy available would have been reduced and he would of had a more textbook flyaway as seen on the cover of BTB. If given more time could Bubka had learned to time things up. MAYBE, but we will never know its all assumptions. Unfortanate his career was cut short due to injury.


Just my two cents!

JKSvault
PV Beginner
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:34 pm

Unread postby JKSvault » Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:35 am

Yet some how Mack's technique is superior.

How would one go about defining superior technique? Could it be described as fully exploiting one's abilities with limited waste of energy in order to achieve a desired result? If that is an adequate definition, then Mack's technique IS superior. But, if you look at my previous posts, I have said nothing about Mack's technique being superior. What I said was Mack is more efficient than Bubka.

I believe it is a safe assumption that one could compare two vaulter’s based on the numbers from their respective PR’s- for true efficiency of a given vaulter’s technique is likely achieved when the vaulter jumps their best.


The vaulter who can not only put more KE into the system to begin, but maintain as much or efficently keep that energy in the systerm will in the end have the greatest potential energy available for the flyaway.

ADTF Academy- This is exactly what I was trying to describe. The vaulter uses his/her speed to transfer kinetic energy into the pole. At the point of maximum bend, this kinetic energy turns into gravitational potential energy (the force needed to overcome gravity) that the vaulter must use in the most efficient way possible. The law of conservation of energy states that energy can never be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another. In this case, a vaulter wants to maintain as much of the GPE as possible in order to attain maximum pushoff- exactly what ADTF Academy said.

This is where my argument was derived. A vaulter who transfers less KE into the vault, yet achieves greater GPE (a larger pushoff) must be more efficient in the air. Bubka carried more KE into the plant, yet achieved less GPE (BASED ON HIS 6.15 JUMP).

Well said, ADTF Academy, you were able to put it into words better than I was able to. :yes:
Last edited by JKSvault on Tue Apr 10, 2007 12:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “Pole Vault - Advanced Technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests