Видео

I agree the plant is fractionally late and Bubka is slightly "under" as a consequence. The vault in its totality is successful and the inversion to the 2nd take-off projection from the recoiling pole is technically very efficient and effective. The 1/2 helical screw displacement into the push-off from the pole demonstrates Bubka's gymnastic mastery of this phase of the vaulting process.

Yes, Pacers were around in the 70s. I started in '78, and they were already around.

The vaulter I believe is Alexsandr Averbukh.

they know also what nature of someone is :) that means if someone has a funny run because they are short in the back: the coach does not try to change his run because it is like it is.

joebro391 Joebro391 I do not agree. Technically this is an outstanding performance. Yes, it is not one of his highest jumps but I contend it is technically sound and an advance in the evolution of Renaud's pole vault technique! Also check out his 6.04m performance at the European Championships Prague 2015!

It has nothing to do with this being "only" 5.80. This is not a technically sound jump from him. There's too much delay in his jump. If you watch the full contest from his most recent meet where he jumped 6.04, you can see the difference in his 5.70 and 5.90 jumps to his 6.04 jump and 6.17 attempts. There's much less delay at 6.04 and it leads to a much bigger jump. Here, there is delay and passive phases that are no good. Bad example. -Joe

joebro391 Mmmh? Where are the passive phases and delays to which you refer? I still don't agree the jump is a bad example of Renaud's evolving technique. I have studied the 6.04m jump (and his others) and I think you are not taking into account the pole rating difference possibly used by Renaud in his successful 2nd attempt. In his 1st attempt the pole appeared of insufficient stiffness in relation to the location of the standards. I don't know if he changed "up" the pole stiffness rating for the second attempt which I agree is a technically better vault than his 5.80 vault. The increased apparent speed and continuity could, be attributed, in part, to stiffer pole selection which offers greater resistance at the initial phase after take-off and consequently an increase in angular velocity about the top grip axis. Just some food for thought! Renaud has been working hard to reduce passivity and delays as is evident in performances so far this year.

John Gormley he definitely went up pole on his second at 6.04. Look at this jump. When the pole tip hits the back of the box, he just hangs there, pushing on the pole. TERRIBLE. On his 6.04 make, as soon as the pole tip hits the box, he's working his arms and already going up the pole. What he does on this jump is what most people refer to as "driving", a passive phase. -Joe

joebro391 How can "driving" be passive? I think that "terrible" is just an opinion which tells us absolutely nothing. I won't try to change your perception but I do not believe you really understand what Lavillenie actually is doing on this video or on his successful 6.04m vault being referred to. Your conceptual analysis of passivity in pole vaulting IMHO is in these specific cases is NOT what most pole vault coaches would refer to,in Lavillenie's case, as "passive". 6.04m is not achieved by Renaud being passive and just pushing on the pole. In fact, technically he is both "dynamically active" whilst pulling against the pole both hands, especially via his top hand grip. I don't accept your analysis but good to know you don't like the video I put up. Your feed back is interesting but in my viewing misleading. Thank you for your interest.

Yes, he exerts a downward directed push along the longitudinal central axis of the pole. Whilst the push provides some reactive force upwards this creates additional rotation clockwise about Lavillenie's centre of mass as final release occurs. The vertical rise of the centre of mass is due to the vertical component of the vaulter's projection velocity. The horizontal component of the vaulter's projection velocity remains constant following pole release.

John Gormley Just to be clear, his hand is covering the flat end of the pole?

***** No. He exerts the downward force via his top hand which is gripping the tubular section of the pole just below the rim. His top hand does not cover the "flat end of the pole" at any stage in the he entire pole support phases of the vault!

John Gormley Thanks jthos!