PoleVaultPower.com

Hi,

I would like to show you a highbar exercise, taught to my athletes by Christian Tamminga (6th at World Championships 2001 with 5.75meter). I haven't seen this exercise before and I wonder if anybody else has used this exercise with succes.
With this exercise, he says, you can learn the breaking of the hips in combination with a rowing action. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh9krQwb ... annel_page (@2.15).

I use BtB as a bible and rowing seems te be out of the question. So now I'm a little bit confused. Is the above exercise useful for teaching polevaulting or is it needless?

A nice jump of Christian Tamminga (has been coached by Valery Kogan) last year => http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-Eu15tqoo0

Run2Niels wrote: I haven't seen this exercise before and I wonder if anybody else has used this exercise with success.
With this exercise, he says, you can learn the breaking of the hips in combination with a rowing action. ...

I use BtB as a bible and rowing seems te be out of the question. So now I'm a little bit confused. Is the above exercise useful for teaching polevaulting or is it needless?

I wasn't familiar with Tamminga, so I did a little research, and found that his 5.76m PR in 1998 ranks him 110th all-time. http://www.apulanta.fi/matti/yu/alltime/16_Men.html

He also has an impressive 7.32m LJ in 1997 and 15.18m TJ in 1998.

NIels, I would like to comment on several things about your vid (more than what you asked about) ...

Let's start with the last trick first ... as it's the most impressive! From a very slight swing (almost a hang) ... and no back uprise at all ... Chris swings/extends to an almost perfect handstand above the bar! This is the type of athleticism that Agapit has talked about in the PV Manifesto re his 6.40 Model. I have not seen anyone perform this trick as well as Tamminga!

I should point out that in his vault vid, Chris does block out, tuck, and shoot ... presumably by intent. So even tho he has the athleticism to shoot to a handstand from a near-hang on the highbar, he doesn't actually use the 6.40 Model ... or even the Petrov Model ... in his vaults.

With his LJ and TJ prowess, his speed and jumping ability are unquestioned, so I will make the bold assumption that he limited his PR due to his technique. To be fair, he appeared to be injured a lot during his career, so that also limited his PR. If his technique was better ... and if he was healthy ... Chris might very well have been 6.00m+. 6.40m? Dunno.

With that context, you can understand that all of the other drills that Chris is teaching the young athletes in the vid are extremely easy for him to do, but quite hard for the kids to do. There's 2 differences - athleticism and practice. Clearly, Chris has had years of practice doing all these drills, whereas the kids appeared to be learning the drills for the first time.

Now about the other drills ...

First, it's a nice idea to be jumping off the gymnastics min-board onto the rope or highbar. I also noticed that the rope has some spring to it - another nice idea.

I like how he stresses only the top arm in the rope drill. One guy actually tries to push with his bottom hand during this drill, which of course is futile. Chris is speaking Dutch, so I don't know what he was saying, but by his actions, he seemed to be emphasizing hitting the rope (think "back of box") with a tight torso - no stretching into a C of any sort. Here's where we get into the issue of mere mortals vs. super-athletes like Chris. He appears to be teaching them NOT to stretch, but rather to just be "tight" ... with a fully extended top arm. That's his technique, and I'm sure that's how he cleared 5.76m. I'm just not convinced (yet) that kids should be taught this. After all, they can't shoot to a handstand on the highbar from a hang ... like Chris demonstrated.

The next drill is the one you asked about, Niels. It's the "row" drill on the highbar. While I understand Chris' intent here ... and I think the action of inverting/extending on the pole without much swing (per Chris' last trick) ... is close to optimal technique for a super-athlete ... and it's even OK to so-called "row" to get there, I have 2 points:

1. I didn't even see these kids do a simple kip-up. If they can't do a kip, then it's pointless to teach them this "row" drill. Doing kips excercises the right "rowing" muscles just as well as the demonstrated drill, IMHO.

2. In the "row" drill, the body is in an upright position, yet on the pole, you'll be swinging into an inverted position as you row. So while the drill may simulate the arm action fairly well (in isolation), it actually needs to occur in unison with the trail leg action on the pole. I don't think this isolation excercise is desirable. I think it's better to practice the so-called "row" along with the trail leg swing. It's not that hard to simulate this on the highbar (using my Whip Drill), so why not just do that?

I think the lowbar drill is good. It's a lead-up to the shoot-to-a-handstand trick ... and it gets you familiar with your body position as you invert ... to stay "as one with the pole". As you can see, Chris makes it look REALLY EASY, and the 3 kids make it look REALLY HARD! The difference is that Chris has had years of practice doing these types of gymnastic movements. Notice Chris' trail leg action when he demos this drill. If you have a lowbar, this drill should definitely be in your training repertoire.

The last 2 drills are also good ... the swing to a tuck from a hanging position, and the swing to an invert from a hanging position. It's also OK to do this drill with the lead knee up, as one kid did it. I like these drills better than Bubkas.

I just don't like the EXTENSION part of the Bubka drill ... it doesn't simulate a real vault IMHO ... and it emphasizes the top half of the vault instead of the bottom half. The drills shown by Chris here are much better, IMHO.

That's it. Lots of good drills, but I'm not a fan of the "row" drill. Instead, do the "Whip Drill" ... so that your entire body gets involved in the action ... from "arch" to "hollow". This is key for young, inexperienced vaulters, I think. For super-athletes like Chris, I think he's right in NOT arching (much), thus NOT swinging (much). Instead, if you're talented enough to shoot-to-a-handstand on a highbar from a near-hang, then minimize this "elastic stretched" position. If not, don't. Of course, this is an over-simplification ... there's many shades of grey.

Kirk

KirkB wrote:I wasn't familiar with Tamminga, so I did a little research, and found that his 5.76m PR in 1998 ranks him 110th all-time. http://www.apulanta.fi/matti/yu/alltime/16_Men.html
Kirk

(Off topic) I wonder why Steve Hooker's 6.06 jump isn't listed on this page or the page from which this is constructed?
EDIT: That list is outdoor and Hooker's 6.06 was indoors.

(On topic) Wow. That handstand move is amazing.

- master

Kirk, could you elaborate a little on why you believe that because you can do a swing to handstand that you should minimize the stretch position? Is the goal to get to that position or to add the most amount of energy into the pole? It seems to me that if you can get to that position without a big stretch position, then stretching a little further would just make it easier, faster, and longer to add the most energy to the pole .

I really want that gym....

vault3rb0y wrote: Kirk, could you elaborate a little on why you believe that because you can do a swing to handstand that you should minimize the stretch position?

3P0, I can't find the exact quote, but in one of Agapit's threads ... either the Pole Vault Manifesto thread or the Repent / Doomed thread ... I can't remember and I can't find it ... he states quite clearly that to jump 6.40, a prereq is for the vaulter to be athletic enough that he can do a shoot-to-a-handstand on the highbar from a hanging position. He goes on to say that it's a fraction of a percent of all vaulters that can do this trick. If anyone can find that quote, please provide the link. I remember it clearly, but I can't find it.

So it's not what I personally believe ... it's what Agapit believes. My two bits worth is merely suggesting that IF that's the prereq for the 6.40 Model, then Tamminga is one of those elite vaulters that qualifies.

vault3rb0y wrote: Is the goal to get to that position or to add the most amount of energy into the pole?

I think Agapit proposed that the goal is to add energy to the SYSTEM (not specifically the pole) ... and the more direct, the better. I agree with that. His proposal is much more direct (rather than going into the pole and then out again), whereas my Bryde Bend technique was to put as much into the pole as early as possible, then get as much back as you can during the extension vault part.

Knowing what I know now, I would temper my original beliefs with less bend and more "continuous motion" ... but still not to the extent that Agapit advocates. I understand some of his theoretical physics principles better today than I did a year ago ... and they make more sense to me today.

Re chest penetration, I found this quote on the first page of the PV Manifesto page ...

agapit wrote: 4. Chest penetration is a compensatory action that redistributes rather than creates energy in the system. It helps pole penetration, but it does delay pull-push and for this reason alone must be abandoned if a vaulter inspire to ever clear a world record height (for men) or 5.20 (17 ft) for women.

It was almost exactly one year ago when I first started sharing my thoughts about the Petrov Model, the 6.40 Model, and my own technique. At that time, I didn't understand how you could achieve optimal PV technique without SOME chest penetration. I'm still not 100% convinced, but today I understand much better than a year ago what Agapit was striving for in the 6.40 Model.

vault3rb0y wrote: It seems to me that if you can get to that position without a big stretch position, then stretching a little further would just make it easier, faster, and longer to add the most energy to the pole

Today, I"m of the opinion that your need to MINIMIZE the time spent penetrating your chest. Less is more. So in my optimal technique, you should stretch yourself into that "elastic stretch" position (in the C), but IMMEDIATELY pop out of it. In fact, if you're going to err, you should err on the side of less chest penetration - not more. If you're penetrating your chest TOO MUCH, then it becomes a passive action. Since I've seen Isaksson do this (no chest penetration), I know it can be done, so I'm not skeptical of that.

Tamminga COULD do that (judging by his highbar shoot-to-a-handstand), but in fact on the pole, he blocks out, so he isn't a good role model for the 6.40. I'm just saying that he has the athleticism for doing it like Isaksson ... and like Agapit raves about in the PV Manifesto.

So that's why I think doing it "easier faster longer" isn't optimal. Less is more. An elastic stretch to the extreme is too PASSIVE.

Kirk

EDIT: Fixed typo.

Ok i see.... you see it as passive because there is a time during which the pole is bent and you are not swing. That requires a swing as soon as the pole hits the back (probably important to state that this is all theoretical talk and should not be misconstrued by vaulters learning basic technique). BUT if you can stretch BEFORE The pole hits the back, ie a pre jump, even the slightest bit is going to help. That would be very, very difficult to do however. Anyway, i see what you are saying now, thanks.

vault3rb0y wrote: Ok i see.... you see it as passive because there is a time during which the pole is bent and you are not swinging. That requires a swing as soon as the pole hits the back ...

So let's separate my beliefs and understanding of the physics from anyone else's. What I believe is that it's the TIME taken in each vault part that's critical ... time-critical so-to-speak. So it's not the ACTION of doing a full elastic stretch into the C that's bad ... it's the TIME it takes to do this.

My NEW understanding of the CONTINUOUS CHAIN THEORY is that you must keep your body moving on the pole at all times ... constantly forwards and upwards ... or any other positive contributing action as you're "fighting" against gravity. Any pause or slow-down in your body motions gives gravity a chance to pull you down without any resistance. There must always be resistance to this gravitational pull ... you must always be either INDIRECTLY putting energy into the pole ... or DIRECTLY moving forwards and/or upwards.

That's why the time it takes to penetrate the chest must be minimized, and the time it takes to swing must be minimized. Besides the fact that a faster downswing gives your SYSTEM more momentum (energy), it also (a) gets you inverted faster in prep for a powerful extension; and (b) gives gravity less TIME to pull you down.

What do I mean by "positive contributing action"? I included that clause in order to say that the kick-back of the trail leg and the simultaneous stretch-back of the top arm are good, positive contributors to setting yourself up for a quick, powerful downswing. They're not "forwards" actions, and they're not "upwards" actions, but nevertheless they contribute in a positive way to the vault.

Compare this to a soccer throw-in. Moving the ball backwards behind your head before you move it quickly forwards into the field of play might sound "passive" or "non-essential" because the motion is in the "wrong" direction. But if you don't pre-stretch your ENTIRE body ... from hands to toes ... with the ball behind your head ... you're not going to throw it as far. Ditto with the elastic stretch in the vault. My only caution to you if you try this technique is that you must do this super-quickly. A slow, deliberate kick-back and a slow, deliberate downswing isn't going to cut it.

vault3rb0y wrote: ... probably important to state that this is all theoretical talk and should not be misconstrued by vaulters learning basic technique. ...

vault3rb0y wrote: ... BUT if you can stretch BEFORE The pole hits the back, ie a pre jump, even the slightest bit is going to help. That would be very, very difficult to do however.

Good point ... and that's in fact what I did in the Bryde Bend technique. It gets complicated to describe this precisely, but in short, I started my "jump-to-the-split" (i.e. "kick-back") with my trail leg BEFORE the pole hit. Simultaneously (every action has an equal and opposite reaction), my top hand STARTED to move back behind my head ... fully stretched ... BEFORE the pole hit. Thus, when the pole hit, I was already partially pre-stretched.

Now ... you didn't ask about this part, but I think it's important to mention ...

Agapit has commented more than once that he feels that it's dangerous to have your top arm fully stretched, as you could pull you shoulder out of its socket. Other posters have agreed with that opinion. But what I did BY INTENT was to fully stretch the top arm, and use the elastic stretching of the arm ... from say a point directly above your head to a point well back behind your head ... as a kind of "shock absorber". So whilst the pole hits the box, your top arm gets fully stretched behind your head to absorb the shock of the impact. If the pole hits distinctly when your top hand is directly above your head (pure Petrov technique), then the pre-stretch that you and I are talking about isn't there ... BUT ... if you've already started the motion of moving your top hand BACKWARDS ... BEHIND your head ... as the pole hits ... then that's our pre-stretch.

As far as how complicated this is ... I guess I'll have to agree that it's not dirt simple ... since not many vaulters do this ... or can do this ... but from personal experience, I can tell you that after lots of drills and lots of reps over more than two seasons, it's not only possible ... it's optimal technique ... IMHO ... when done QUICKLY!

Kirk