2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr.

Peter McGinnis

The pole vault puzzle

Putting the pieces together
Peter M. McGinnis
Kinesiology Department SUNY Cortland peter.mcginnis@cortland.edu

Whats puzzling about the pole vault?

Does a fast approach run guarantee a high vault? Is a free takeoff (or pre-jump) really better? Should a vaulter jump up at takeoff?

2012 Trials Super Clinic

USATF & VS Athletics June 26 Eugene

Whats puzzling about the pole vault?

Should a vaulter land on the heel or ball of the takeoff foot? Is a double leg swing more effective? To row or not to row, that is the question?

Whats puzzling about the pole vault?

When will Bubkas record be broken or will anyone ever break it? Finally - what can be done to make the event safer? Before we continue lets look at the history of the pole vault.

History
How has the pole vault evolved?
Record progression Athletes Equipment
poles landing pits runway surfaces vault box

Wooden Pole Era (1800s)

(heights less than 3.66 m ~ 120) Heavy wooden poles ~ ash, hickory Sod or turned over sod landing pits Grass or dirt runways No box ~ spike or tripod on end of pole

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Wooden Pole Era (1800s)

Bamboo Pole Era (1900-1945)

(3.66 - 4.76 m ~ 120 157 3/4) Lighter bamboo poles
built in handgrips slightly flexible

Sawdust, sand, sod, or wood chip pits Cinder runways Vault boxes introduced

Bamboo Era
1912 ~ 130

Bamboo Era
1912 ~ 130 1927 ~ 140

Bamboo Era
1912 ~ 130 1927 ~ 140

Bamboo Era
1912 ~ 130 1927 ~ 140 1940 ~ 150 Cornelius Warmerdam 1942 157 3/4

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Steel Pole Era (1945-1960)

(4.80 m ~ 159 1/4) Man-made steel poles Bags of shredded foam rubber introduced All-weather track surfaces introduced Metal boxes

Steel Era
Don Bragg
1959 159 1/4 1960 Olympic Champion Last world record set on steel pole

Fiberglass Era
1962 160 1963 - 5.00 m 1963 170 1970 180 1972 - 5.50 m 1981 190 1985 - 6.00 m 1991 200

Fiberglass Era
2000 Womens pole vault introduced in the Olympic Games

Fiberglass Pole Era (1960-?)

(4.83 - 6.15 m 1510 1/4 202)

Fiberglass Pole Era (1960-?)

(4.83 - 6.15 m ~ 1510 1/4 202)

Light and flexible fiberglass poles

1986 Nordic Sport introduces pole with carbon fiber Gill Athletics is now the largest manufacturer of carbon/fiberglass poles

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Fiberglass Pole Era (1960-?)

(4.83 - 6.15 m ~ 1510 1/4 202)

Fiberglass Pole Era (1960-?)

(4.83 - 6.15 m ~ 1510 1/4 202)

Larger latticed foam pits (1984)

Larger latticed foam pits (2008)

Fiberglass Pole Era (1960-?)

(4.83 - 6.15 m ~ 1510 1/4 202)

Performance progression
Bubka Warmerdam fiberglass

Light and flexible fiberglass poles Larger latticed foam rubber pits All-weather runways Vault box modified to accomodate pole bend

bamboo steel wood

Strategy for solving the pole vault puzzle

Empirical data Theory Simulation Experience

Basic pole vault mechanics

Simple pole model Based on work and energy Total energy at takeoff = Total energy at maximum height + work done

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Work and Energy

Kinetic Energy (KE) = 1/2 mv2 + 1/2 I2 energy due to motion Potential Energy (PE) = Wh = mgh energy due to height Strain Energy (SE) = 1/2 kx2 energy due to elastic deformation (stretching, bending)

Work and Energy

Work = U = F d Work done by a force = average force x displacement along the line of action of the force Work (angular) = T

Work and Energy

If energy were conserved Ef = Ei
Ef = Final energy
Total energy of vaulter and pole at maximum height

Work and Energy

But vaulter can add energy by doing work on the pole

Ef = Ei + U
U = Work done by vaulter from take off to max. height

Ei = Initial energy
Total energy of vaulter and pole at takeoff

Work and Energy

However energy losses occur during pole bending, unbending, inelastic stretching, etc

Work and Energy

Total Energy at Takeoff ~ Ei Ei = PEi + KEi + SEi PEi = Potential energy (cg height) KEi = Kinetic energy (velocity) SEi = Strain energy (pole bend)

Ef = Ei + U - Elost
Elost = Total energy lost during vault Final energy = initial energy + work done - energy lost

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Work and Energy

Total Energy at Maximum Height ~ Ef Ef = PEf + KEf PEf = Potential energy (cg height) KEf = Kinetic energy at max. height

Work and Energy

Final energy = initial energy + work done - energy lost

Ef = Ei + U - Elost
[PEf + KEf] = [PEi + KEi + SEi] + U - Elost PEf = [PEi + KEi + SEi] + U - Elost - KEf

Work and Energy

PEf = [PEi + KEi + SEi] + U - Elost - KEf
takeoff on pole

Work and Energy

MAX HEIGHT OF CENTER OF GRAVITY

Potential Energy
TAKEOFF

=
ON POLE MAX HEIGHT

Potential + Kinetic + Strain + Work - Energy - Kinetic Energy Energy Energy Done Lost Energy

Maximize positive elements

Potential energy at takeoff ~ mgh Kinetic energy at takeoff ~ 1/2 mv2 Work done on pole ~ Fd + T
(Any strain energy at takeoff will decrease KE at takeoff, so strain energy at takeoff should not be maximized)

Minimize negative elements

Energy losses Kinetic energy at maximum height

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Energy Losses
Occur during energy transfers and transformations
During takeoff During pole bending phase During pole straightening phase

Energy Transformations

Schade, Brggemann, Isolehto, Komi, & Arampatzis (2006)

Energy Transformations
energy gain

Energy Transformations
energy gain

Schade, Brggemann, Isolehto, Komi, & Arampatzis (2006)

Schade, Brggemann, Isolehto, Komi, & Arampatzis (2006)

Components of a 6 m vault
1.25 m ~ height at takeoff 1.24 m ~ work done by vaulter + 3.51 m ~ takeoff velocity 6.00 m vault

Components of a 6 m vault

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean Fast

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean Fast Experienced

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean Fast Experienced Patient

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean Fast Experienced Patient Smart

Vaulter Characteristics
Tall and lean Fast Experienced Patient Smart Passionate about pole vaulting

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Approach Run
Fast run Accurate run

Approach Run: Velocity

A fast take off velocity depends on a fast approach run velocity.

Approach Run: Velocity

MEN

Approach Run: Velocity

WOMEN

Approach Run: Velocity

MEN

Approach Run: Velocity

Regression equation:
Men: h = 0.61v - 0.085 Women: h = 0.87v - 2.73

WOMEN

h = predicted crossbar height cleared v = approach run velocity at takeoff For height in meters and velocity in meters per second

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Approach Run: Velocity

MEN

Approach Run: Velocity

MEN

Approach Run: Velocity

MEN

Approach Run: Velocity

Velocity over last 5 m of approach run is strongly correlated with crossbar height cleared (r = 0.77 for men, r = 0.83 for women)

Approach Run: Velocity

10.00 m/s Scott Huffman (5.86 m, 1994) 9.84 m/s Sergey Bubka (5.85 m, 1993) Dean Starkey (5.70 m, 1994) Greg Duplantis (5.70 m, 1996) Jeff Hartwig (5.85 m, 1998)

Approach Run: Velocity

8.96 m/s Stacy Dragila (4.20 m, 2001) 8.77 m/s Jenn Stuczynski (4.92 m, 2008) 8.62 m/s Lacy Janson (4.40 m, 2008)

10

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Approach Run: Velocity

Does a fast approach run guarantee a high vault? Noyou must be fast to vault high. but just because you are fast does not mean you will vault high.

Approach Run: Velocity

The effectiveness of a vaulters technique - how much work he or she does during the vault - largely determines the difference in height achieved by two vaulters with the same velocity. As technique effectiveness decreases - the proportion of vault height accounted for by velocity increases.

Approach Run
Minimize forces needed to carry pole by using pole drop technique

Approach Run pole push?

Minimize forces needed to carry pole by pushing the pole?

Approach Run: Accuracy

Approach Run: Accuracy

11

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Approach Run: Accuracy

Approach Run: Accuracy

Approach Run: Accuracy

Most vaulters use a visual control strategy to correct errors in the approach run. Corrections begin at the start of the 4th to last step before takeoff (the 5th to last support phase). Coaches checkmarks should be placed at this step or at the start of the 5th or 6th to last steps.

Approach Run: Accuracy

Approach Run: Accuracy

Use a checkmark at the start of the 5th or 6th to last step.

Pole Plant: Initiation

Pole horizontal Right hand above hip Maintain good sprint mechanics Begins with left foot touchdown

12

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Pole Plant: 2nd to last step

Slightly longer than previous steps

Pole Plant: Last step

Right hand head high Left hand forward, shoulder high Upright posture

Pole Plant: Last step takeoff

Right hand head high or higher Left hand forward and head high Upright posture

Pole Plant: Last step

Upright posture Low knee drive Shorter, quicker step

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Minimize energy losses Right arm fully extended upward Upright posture

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Minimize energy losses due to braking Avoid reaching and overstriding

13

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Should a vaulter land heel first? (American record holder and Olympic Silver Medalist)

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Should a vaulter land heel first, flat footed .? (Olympian)

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Should a vaulter land heel first, flat footed or on the ball of the foot? (Olympic Gold Medalist)

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Should a vaulter land heel first, flat footed or on the ball of the foot? (Olympic Gold Medalist and former world record holder)

Takeoff Foot Touchdown

Should a vaulter land heel first, flat footed or on the ball of the foot? This may depend on the takeoff of the vaulter: Higher takeoff angle heel Lower takeoff angle ball of foot

Pole Strike
Minimize energy losses Heel up and on ball or toe of foot (or off ground) CG and hips directly above or forward of toes Upright posture

14

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Pole Strike
Minimize energy losses Right arm extended upward Right hand directly over toes

Pole Strike pre-jump/free takeoff

Alan Launder (1989) Pre-jump: the vaulter drives up into the takeoff and clears the ground BEFORE the pole plug hits the back of the box Roman Botcharnikov (2005) Free takeoff: Takeoff during which the vaulter does not experience pole resistance.

Pole Strike Pre-jump

Pole Strike Free takeoff

1970s Free Takeoff

1970s Free Takeoff

15

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Research: Timing of Pole Strike

Pole strike occurs later in support phase (closer to the instant of takeoff) for better vaulters while the vaulter is pushing back and down on the runway (during the propulsive phase of force production)

Research: Timing of Pole Strike

Few if any current elite vaulters none in the U.S. are off the ground when pole strike occurs.

Research: Timing of Pole Strike

Research: Contact Angle (Nielsen)

Angle formed by line from ball of takeoff foot to shoulder at instant of pole strike. Backward lean is negative, forward lean is positive.

Data from 2011: tTD = 0, tPS = 0.033s, tTO = 0.125s

Research: Contact Angle (Nielsen)

Positive contact angle - step is on or out - free takeoff. Negative contact angle - step is under - less likely to be a free takeoff.

Research: Contact Angle (Nielsen)

No correlation between contact angle and height cleared Slight positive correlation between contact angle and vault efficiency.

16

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Research: Contact Angle (Nielsen)

Negative correlation between contact angle and inversion angle.

Research: Contact Angle (Nielsen)

Vaulters with free takeoffs vault high with slower approach run velocities, but they dont invert or extend as completely.

Research: Energy (Shade & Arampatzis)

Vaulters varied timing of pole strike Energy change from touchdown to takeoff measured (vaulter energy and pole energy)

Research: Energy (Shade & Arampatzis)

Vaulter energy at takeoff greater when pole strike closer to takeoff Pole energy at takeoff less when pole strike closer to takeoff Gain in vaulter energy and loss in pole energy - no advantage for early pole strike

Pole Strike pre-jump/free takeoff

Is a free takeoff (or pre-jump) really better? Maybe, because it Maximizes pole angle Allows the completion of the takeoff without the pole ripping the vaulter off the ground Allows greater range of motion for swing takeoff leg - greater work done during the vault

Pole Strike pre-jump/free takeoff

Is a free takeoff (or pre-jump) really better? Maybe not, because it Is physically and psychologically challenging to learn Requires a more accurate step placement Requires greater jumping ability Makes inversion and extension more difficult

17

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Takeoff
Maximize potential energy Right arm fully extended Right hand over left toe Upright posture High knee drive

Takeoff
Maximize kinetic energy Minimize energy loss Takeoff angle ~1719 for men ~18-20 for women Minimal pole bend

Takeoff
Should a vaulter jump up at takeoff?
YES The takeoff angles observed for elite vaulters (17-19 for men and 18-20 for women) can only be achieved by jumping up at takeoff. These angles are much higher than the 3-5 takeoff angles in sprinting.

Work and Energy

PEf = [PEi + KEi + SEi] + U - Elost - KEf
takeoff on pole

Takeoff
Maximize displacement possible in work equation U = Fd + T Max values for d and are limited by body dimensions

Follow Through
Minimize energy losses Maintain upright posture Fully extend left leg

18

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Follow Through
Minimize energy losses Stretch reflex: hip flexors, trunk flexors, shoulder extensors

Follow Through
Is a double leg swing more effective? Maybe. Larger F and T possible in work equation? U = Fd + T

Swing
Maximize work done Whipping extended trail leg Hip flexors, trunk flexors, shoulder extensors are active

Swing
Maximize work done Long extended body Arm, trunk, & leg align w/box 45 degree angle with runway

Swing
To row or not to row, that is the question? Yes paddle. Shoulder extensors are active.

Maximum Pole Bend

Maximize work done Trunk horizontal Left leg has caught right leg Shoulder axis of rotation

19

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Maximum Pole Bend

Minimize energy losses Dont overbend pole 30% pole bend (chord shortens by 30%)

Maximum Pole Bend

Maximum Pole Bend

Maximum Pole Bend

Maximum Pole Bend

Start of Extension - Inversion

Maximize work done Continue swinging towards end of pole Timing with maximum extension velocity of pole

20

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Start of Extension - Inversion

Minimize energy losses Maximum hip flexion Shins on pole Shoulder axis of rotation Shoulders slightly below hips

Extension, Inversion & Turn

Maximize work done Continue swing and pull past top of pole

Extension, Inversion & Turn

Maximize work done Body aligned with pole Right arm close to body Pole still slightly bent

Extension, Inversion & Turn

Minimize excess kinetic energy (too much rotation or horizontal velocity at release)

Bar Clearance
Wrap around bar

Bar Clearance

21

2012 TRIALS SUPERCLINIC Dr. Peter McGinnis

Land Safely in the Pit

Injury Prevention - reduce risk

Improve equipment Educate coaches and athletes Use rules to implement changes

Landing Pit
Increase size Pad standard bases Pad area between pit and box (box collar)

Pad box area

Improve padding around box Replace bottom of box with softer material Replace steel and concrete box with soft box Change rules to allow box collar padding to overlap edge of box

Be safe and have fun!

Thanks to...
Pole vaulters U.S.A. Track and Field U.S. Olympic Committee

22