New Box Collar Rule Interpretation (USTFCCCA)

[dj]

Anyone be in Winston Salem on Saturday...

Email me

Davidfjohnston@yahoo.com

[Decamouse]

Was at a college meet today -- checked the box collar - took some measurements and photos -- to me it does not meet "all" the requirements that the standard calls for. In fact the ones that I questioned previously appear to still be an issue here. I can not tell if this is one that had a rumored recall or present design - did have the lableing so ?????

I positioned so the opening at the front was the max (23") and it still covered the front intersection of the slide plane (bottom) and the side wall -- if you push it out wider so it does not cover this the front opening is above the max of the rule -- I will be at this site again in two weeks and will futher document so it can be available for the next ASTM meeting.

I took photos but had to officiate so will get there much earlier next time for additional documentation and photos

If the NCAA is going to require it to meet a Rule then it needs to meet the Rule

[Barto]

We had our first competition with the new collar last night. On two different jumps the collar bounced the pole back into the bar after the athlete attempted to throw the pole back. Luckily the official was on top of things and awarded the bar, but this design flaw needs to be worked out. I'm not opposed to a new collar design and I don't find the "wings" objectionable, but this newest design seems more like a prototype than a finished product.

[Decamouse]

I agree the concept and many parts are good - a step in the right direction --- I will also check the opening size to see where it falls acoording to the rule

[Vaultref]

I agree the concept and many parts are good - a step in the right direction --- I will also check the opening size to see where it falls acoording to the rule

Ours measured about 21.5", maybe 22" and over a course of two collegiate and four high school level meets since December 7th we saw no issues with poles striking the front part of the collar. That's good I guess as I did expect to see possibly one.

[Vaultref]

We had our first competition with the new collar last night. On two different jumps the collar bounced the pole back into the bar after the athlete attempted to throw the pole back. Luckily the official was on top of things and awarded the bar, but this design flaw needs to be worked out. I'm not opposed to a new collar design and I don't find the "wings" objectionable, but this newest design seems more like a prototype than a finished product.

Dan C. alerted this site to that potential issue and so far, I have not seen it happen in the six meets since December. My partner and I tried to simulate that by standing on the pit and tossing the pole in all different directions and velocities. We could not duplicate the result of a bounce back.

I'm not sure why.. but we certainly will be watching closely to see if some other factors are involved in the next dozen meets coming up.

What I'd really like to know is how did you find taking height measurements with the back edge of the collar right up to the lip of the box?
We've tried several different devices as is and they all were dang near impossible to use as in previous collar designs.
I finally fabricated a metal lip to attach to the bottom of my laser stick and have some decent success.. Not great, but decent. We had no luck with my partners Gill stick at this point.. However, we're going to try something this Saturday at the NYC Armory to that stick.

personally we both feel something should have been done at the back end to allow that part to flip up for a measurement. Oh Well

[Decamouse]

ASTM Ballot for "Withdrawal of ASTM F2949 Standard Specification for Pole Vault Box Collar" closes on Feb 24th -- I will have a few more meets that I will be at to check/verify/document what is out in the field and does it meet the standard -- I still see photos with the collar covering the front edge of the pole slide/sidewall area - this was pointed out last summer and the manufacturer was aware of this -- The way it is worded you need to check using all the metric and then English -- for the pole slide side wall and pole tip sliding along -- the English will allow the max opening at runway end and thus the least chance of obstruction - also need to verify pole bend cavity
---- Feedback on how they have been used and any issues
---- Do they actual meet the performance requirements (assume manufacture had it tested)
---- Do they meet all the dimensional requirements (especially since NCAA stated they want version with wings)

[VaultPurple]

The collar simply does not work well with most pole vault pits, does not stay in place, and I saw more people come up short at this meet than I have ever seen in all my years being around pole vaulting. The pit continued to slide back. Some pits (especially this one) cover the bend cavity. The officials were able to move it for the most part to the side and way back out of the way because there were no left handed vaulters in the field, but had there been, they would have been in trouble. You also have to move the collar back to get an accurate reading on the crossbar, and as you see from the photo 9 times out of 10 the officials are not going to move it back after doing so. To move the collar you pretty much have to move the pit, which will move the standards, making measuring pretty tough. But the massive amount of the box that is covered is my major concern along with how the mats were sitting in the bend cavity (The photos were after the pit was moved once, it was a lot worse before this!). They were then shifted them to the left so the mat only covered the right side of the bend cavity.

[Vaultref]

That collar does not look like the two I have since since 1 Dec 2013.. that back edge in your picture looks to be to be nearly vertical. Is it?
The collar at the two sites I've been at the edge as the same taper as on the sides. This one one looks really bad!

While we have seen some pit shifting.. we have not seen an collar shifting at either of the two venues.

I also can see the same issue we see.. that pads at the very end of the box overhang into the tapered portion of the collar. I'm not a vaulter, but to me, I say this makes things really bad for those that put any kind of bend to a pole during an attempt.

I've said it in prior posts and I'll say it again.. measuring is a pain in the rear. if anything, that problem needs a fix.

[vaultmd]

I saw the official ones for the first time at the Pole Vault Summit. They are substantially thicker and firmer than the previous ones, which were not subject to an impact deceleration standard. They angled at the back; but many are claiming they are not angled enough because of the added thickness and firmness. Two people I trust have claimed that it has affected penetration. Also, they are causing more problems with pit placement because of the thickness. On the other hand, UCS Spirit has started providing a cut-out area around the space taken up by the new box collar or any other collar for that matter.

[Decamouse]

In the picture you can see the 10-2013 stamp -- which should indicate it is the current -- now to verify it takes a little time and some measurement -- Friday I will check one and document

[Victory Sports]

So will the manufacture of the collar in the pic about take back the old and exchange free of charge... one would hope so... since they are indeed the ones that created it.