Page 1 of 1

Pole bending to much?

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:28 pm
by vaulter870
Is it possible for a pole to bend to low due to a really low or high sail peice? If so are the older pacer carbons built this way because i am having a probublem with my poles bending to low and hitting the side of the pit :dazed: and stalling me out and stopping my momentum. just wanted to see if it something that poles can do. ;)

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:02 pm
by ashcraftpv
i know some poles are built with the sailpieces lower than other brands. I remember Catapoles in the mid 90's had low bends. It may just be a low takeoff angle on your part. Low bends are usually solved by having a proper takeoff angle.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:12 pm
by vaulter870
that may be but from the video i have i am not sure that was it.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:55 pm
by vaulter870
hmmmm well i was just watching neovault and i noticed that on some of tye harveys jumps on that older pacer carbon that his pole also seamed to bend lower then normal. hopefully that means its not my take off angle ;)

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 12:23 am
by rainbowgirl28
The sailpiece definitely effects the way the pole bends, but that athlete's takeoff effects it a lot too.

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:32 pm
by vaulter870
yeah i know. :( has anyone else experienced this?

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:28 pm
by Bonevt
I have this one yellow caterpole, someone told that it has no sailpiece its the same diameter for the whole pole.

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:32 pm
by rainbowgirl28
Bonevt wrote:I have this one yellow caterpole, someone told that it has no sailpiece its the same diameter for the whole pole.


Really small poles have no sail piece, and I think many if not all training poles have no sail piece.

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:45 pm
by vaulter870
well i know thats not my probublem i am starting to think the morei watch my tape that my take off angle is crap. but it was not a good day to begin with so oh well.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:55 pm
by VaultNinja
vaulter870 wrote:hmmmm well i was just watching neovault and i noticed that on some of tye harveys jumps on that older pacer carbon that his pole also seamed to bend lower then normal. hopefully that means its not my take off angle ;)


Pacer Carbons Definetally bend lower than most poles. I have been noticing it more and more at meets. Thats probably why Tye switched to Essx. Those higher sail peices can give you alot of pop, but its hard to get into the pits. If you are having trouble with getting in, and you think its the pole, try some ESSX or Spirit poles if you can.
Everyone thinks that take-off angle is so important. Running off the ground is what is important. Peter McGinnis, and Dave Nielson figured out that most Elite guys have take-off angles around 13-18 degrees not the 30 everyone has been talking about for years.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:41 pm
by swtvault
Pacer Carbons Definetally bend lower than most poles. I have been noticing it more and more at meets. Thats probably why Tye switched to Essx. Those higher sail peices can give you alot of pop, but its hard to get into the pits. If you are having trouble with getting in, and you think its the pole, try some ESSX or Spirit poles if you can.
Everyone thinks that take-off angle is so important. Running off the ground is what is important. Peter McGinnis, and Dave Nielson figured out that most Elite guys have take-off angles around 13-18 degrees not the 30 everyone has been talking about for years.


Right on....My theory on the matter is that the trajectory of your hips while running is 12-15 degrees, and the additional 3-4 comes from your penultimate stride. How did Derek Miles go from a hot and cold 18 footer, to a on the money consistent 5.70 guy? He started hitting the pole more. If you watch old video of Derek he took off a foot outside (also bad in my opinion) and jumped straight up. Watch him move into the pole on his takeoff now. He does it really well. The whole point is that taking off "free" creates slack which causes energy loss, and any redirection of energy causes a loss of even more energy (jumping up.) The whole idea is to store and transfer as much energy as possible, and from a physics standpoint, a free takeoff and high takeoff angle don't add up.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 9:21 pm
by rainbowgirl28
A free takeoff and an out takeoff are not the same thing.