THIS IS A SERIOUS POLL WE NEED AS MUCH INPUT AS POSSIBLE!

[Bruce Caldwell]

THIS IS A SERIOUS POLL WE NEED AS MUCH INPUT AS POSSIBLE!

TOPIC FLEX NUMBERS

Currently there is a move by a manufactuer to add additional flex spans to their line, so that each length pole has its on flex span.

1. THeir flex numbers will not match The other brands

2. To adopt their line would mean the other brands will need to switch to their flex spans or place two numbers on the pole.

3. They are the ones stating that there is a problem with Flex numbers and the method of measurment in the industry and are lobbying to use thier spans as the ASTM standard in the industry.

4. Moving from one length to the next by flex number requires you to contact them to facilitate a smooth move or be familar with their unpublished chart.

5. Each size will have its own flex number that will not match or coorolate with the next length pole requireing the coach/athlete to be in the dark and possibly have to start all over again to establish a new understanding.

6. It is my opinion that this may cause chaos in the industry and force a recertification of poles of which I feel will kill the sport.

SOLUTIONS:
1. Leave the process alone and the responsibility of the manufactuer not the ASTM

2. Make the exsisting flex system used by the other 4 companies for over 60 years the standard and force the one company to change back. This would lessen confusion and the risk that old poles may have to be re-certified in order to be used in meets.

3. Move to a standard where there are less spans allowing more lengths to be rated the same providing a better method for coaches and athletes to move to the next length fluidly. (I believe Spirit & ESSX does this now on certain lengths)

[lonestar]

Every company should move to the Best Flex System. It is the "Best" system out there with logical and proportional changes in span from length to length. I've seen all the data and it allows for the best transitions from pole to pole. Even though recertification of poles would be necessary, it would be worth it to get everyone on the same page and eliminate the guesswork.

[Bruce Caldwell]

OK Kris I respect what you have to say and I open this up for your opinion on the matter respectfully.
PLease sell me on the idea! I will keep an open mind!!

1. Tell us how you can move from one length to the other by flex number?

2. How will one be able to correlate that with existing poles in stock?

3. How will they be able to match that to exsisting poles of other brands?

4. Do you feel the need for possible recertification of old poles?

[CHC04Vault]

So really the problem is Older Poles that schools have in stock with have a diffrent flex number to a new one (but would still be about that same)??? If this is the case, couldn't the manufactures Grandfather it in, yes, having so many number on the pole would confuse people, but most vualters who understand pole vaulting would benifit and make pole transition easier. As for recertification...why??? If it is a legal pole before the move, it should be after, sorta like Ex Post Facto Law. The move to standandize a flex number I think would be a great move, but it will take awhile, but in the long run will be safer for the pole vaulting community because many schools do NOT stick to one brand of pole. I personally stuck to a UCS because i didnt want to hassle of figuring out a flex number when i needed a new pole. With a standandized number, transition would be easier and safer, which is what the sport need. Bottom line..Grandfather it in, is that a good idea???

[Bruce Caldwell]

I just spoke to Dan West who I respect as one of the top Gurus on flex numbers.
He has worked for Catapole, Accellertor and Gill,
He says the Best Flex straighten out a lot of problems the 60year old flex system had. And he uses it daily to move from one pole to another.

He was not able to tell me how to move from one length to another length by flex number and was not priviy to ANY FORMULA TO DO SO.

We have a system in the XLOGIC SYSTEM which does not use flex numbers and coaches can move from one length to another smoothly.

NO need to calculate numbers, no need to call any one for a chart or help!
Simple rules at www.therightpole.com allow you the knowledge to move from pole to pole.

[Bonevt]

Can anyone explan the difference between BestFlex and the old way? I'm somewhat confused.

[rainbowgirl28]

Currently there is a move by a manufactuer to add additional flex spans to their line, so that each length pole has its on flex span.

Gill has been doing this for years. As far as I know they always did. The only thing they have done "lately" (and this was a year and a half ago at least) was adjust some of the shorter spans (12'6" and below) to make their spans more consistent between lengths.

Bruce, you don't flex all your different length poles on the same span do you??

If you look at the way poles are flexed, it is impossible to flex ALL poles on the same span. Each length pole needs it's own span. If you flexed all your 13'6 and 13' poles on the same span, the flex numbers would not be as accurate because gripping the same height, you would be in a different position relative to the sail piece.

1. THeir flex numbers will not match The other brands

Nobody's flex numbers match on the shorter poles anyway. Everybody's flex numbers are pretty close on the big poles. Gill did not change their spans at all on 13' and longer poles.

2. To adopt their line would mean the other brands will need to switch to their flex spans or place two numbers on the pole.

Any standardized flexing system would require most if not all manufacturers to make some changes. NONE of the manufacturers want this...

3. They are the ones stating that there is a problem with Flex numbers and the method of measurment in the industry and are lobbying to use thier spans as the ASTM standard in the industry.

No they're not! If you went to the ASTM meetings you would see this. I was there in DC last fall. Jeff Watry from Gill and Steve Chappell from UCS were there. Neither one of them wants a standardized flex chart or system. I know that you and Paul do not want that either.

The reason that any of this came up is because people who are involved with both the ASTM and pole vaulting were concerned about the lack of a standard. Most other sports items and the like have much stricter standards. Right now, anybody can make a pole and label it whatever they want and there is no rule against it.

BUT, pretty much everyone who was at that meeting agreed that a de facto standard already exists. If you buy a 13'150 from ESSX, Gill, Altius, or UCS, you will get a pole that offers a similar amount of resistance.

All we really agreed to in the meeting was that it would be good to have something in place that said all poles being made need to be tested in a reliable, repeatable way. This would not even affect the existing manufacturers, it would just keep someone new from entering the scene and making random poles that were untested and unsafe.


4. Moving from one length to the next by flex number requires you to contact them to facilitate a smooth move or be familar with their unpublished chart.

You can't move from one length to another by flex number with ANY manufacturer. This is nothing new.

5. Each size will have its own flex number that will not match or coorolate with the next length pole requireing the coach/athlete to be in the dark and possibly have to start all over again to establish a new understanding.

That is how it is currently anyway.

6. It is my opinion that this may cause chaos in the industry and force a recertification of poles of which I feel will kill the sport.

Mandatory pole recertification would be chaos and put the sport at risk. I agree! The people who are in favor of this are not rival manufacturers. Other manufacturers agree with you on this point!!

3. Move to a standard where there are less spans allowing more lengths to be rated the same providing a better method for coaches and athletes to move to the next length fluidly. (I believe Spirit & ESSX does this now on certain lengths)

Having less spans only makes it easier temporarily. At some point when you move up lengths, you will have to move up spans. So even if you had the same flex number for 14' and 14'6" poles, you would still have a new set of flex numbers when you go from 14'6" to 15' poles. Having less spans doesn't solve anything, it just makes the flex numbers less meaningful.


Bruce, I am glad that you are so concerned about the future of the sport. Please come to the next ASTM meeting so that you can voice your concerns to the right people. I personally really want to see you there. The committee would definitely benefit from ALL manufacturers being present. YOU can be there and cast a vote where it will make a real difference.

[rainbowgirl28]

I just spoke to Dan West who I respect as one of the top Gurus on flex numbers.
He has worked for Catapole, Accellertor and Gill,
He says the Best Flex straighten out a lot of problems the 60year old flex system had. And he uses it daily to move from one pole to another.

He was not able to tell me how to move from one length to another length by flex number and was not priviy to ANY FORMULA TO DO SO.

He does what everybody else does... uses the weight ratings as a guide. Gill recalibrated their flex chart to make this as easy to do in the 12'6 and smaller poles as it already was in the 13'+ poles.


We have a system in the XLOGIC SYSTEM which does not use flex numbers and coaches can move from one length to another smoothly.

NO need to calculate numbers, no need to call any one for a chart or help!
Simple rules at www.therightpole.com allow you the knowledge to move from pole to pole.

You use flex numbers too. Everybody does. The only difference between XLogic and BestFlex or anyone else is that you make all your poles in 2.2 lb increments instead of 5 or 10 (or 20!) lb increments. Personally, I think that is awesome. I wish other manufacturers would do 5lb increments or less in ALL lengths.

Here's the advantage to XLogic... if you want to move from one length pole to the next, you know that the weight rating has a pretty narrow range of flexes, making it more reliable to use weight rating to move from one length to the next.

If you were using Best Flex to move from an 11'6" Pacer to a 12'6" Pacer, they only weight rate them in 10lb increments, so you could end up with a bigger gap than anticipated. That's where calling the manufacturer with flex numbers handy can be helpful.

That's only really an issue with shorter poles though (12'6" and shorter). Everybody makes the longer poles in 5lb increments, and most high school kids would not be able to tell the difference between a 13'150 that is a soft flex or stiff flex.

[Bruce Caldwell]

I value your responses and the oppertunity to answer. AN open forum such as yours is so valuable to the industry so that people can share their ideas and opinions.
I have been open minded from the beginning when Best Flex was first introduced to me in part.
However I am still ready to be sold on the idea, but have not understood it from day one.
With busines judgement aside I want to be sold on it and I have yearn for someone to do so now since 1999. From what I have heard it is the best thing since sliced bread! But I have yet to see anything that excites me?
A little history here
We participated in the very beginning when the USATF, GILL, and ASTM suggested an open shareing of flex charts, info to resolve any problems the industry may of had. We shared our flex chart and then was told to get info back we had to pay for it.

Currently there is a move by a manufactuer to add additional flex spans to their line, so that each length pole has its on flex span.

Gill has been doing this for years. As far as I know they always did. The only thing they have done "lately" (and this was a year and a half ago at least) was adjust some of the shorter spans (12'6" and below) to make their spans more consistent between lengths.

I am not sure when they did it, I just found out today that they did. Changing the flex chart this much without announcing it is in my opinion dangerous and will cause chaos in the industry.

Sounds like if all the other manufacturers are still using the same system and one changes it then this is where you will find that the flex numbers do not match. Bruce, you don't flex all your different length poles on the same span do you??

If you look at the way poles are flexed, it is impossible to flex ALL poles on the same span. Each length pole needs it's own span. If you flexed all your 13'6 and 13' poles on the same span, the flex numbers would not be as accurate because gripping the same height, you would be in a different position relative to the sail piece.

[color=red][b]ONLY MY smallest poles 10â€Â

[rainbowgirl28]

From what I have heard it is the best thing since sliced bread! But I have yet to see anything that excites me?

It's not really that exciting. The original flex charts were made when there were only a few lengths of poles. At that time, very small poles were not made very often and not very important. The addition of girls pole vaulting, and the NFHS weight rating rule meant that initially girls were having a very hard time vaulting on poles over their weight.

Best Flex just went through and made the shorter spans consistent with the larger spans, allowing very small vaulters to be able to jump on poles at or above their weight just as easily as larger vaulters.

am not sure when they did it, I just found out today that they did. Changing the flex chart this much without announcing it is in my opinion dangerous and will cause chaos in the industry.

The biggest change was when they first introduced Best Flex in 1998. I wasn't around then so if it caused chaos I would not know. The only other noticable change they made was a year and a half ago.. again this ONLY affected small poles. There hasn't been any chaos!

If you have a small pole made before this change, and you want to order a new one, it is helpful to call Gill and find out what the right pole would be. Yes, that is a pain. But I think it is cool that they are willing to admit that they didn't get it right the first time (or the second time) and make the proper adjustments. I have watched many well coached beginning girls have trouble getting on a pole over their weight. The new flex chart makes that easier, safer, and fairer.

Again, it's been around since fall of 2003. It doesn't affect you directly, it only affects people who are jumping on short Gill poles. And really it only affects them if they want to buy a new pole.

[i]ONLY MY smallest poles 10â€Â

[Bruce Caldwell]

We need more participates in the poll!!

You do not have to post anything to vote your opinion.

We need to hear your voice on this matter.
Especially if you use Best Flex and have had great or bad results using it. Or if you can explain it more to the readers and me!!

[achtungpv]

The biggest change was when they first introduced Best Flex in 1998. I wasn't around then so if it caused chaos I would not know. The only other noticable change they made was a year and a half ago.. again this ONLY affected small poles. There hasn't been any chaos!

Not quite chaos, but a kid I coached in '98 bought 3 poles (5 lbs. apart) and only two of them were adjusted to the best flex system. Thus, the kid basically ended up with two of the exact same flex poles regardless of system used since the dealer shipped the poles based on just the weight label. If the poles were bought directly from Gill, there wouldn't have been a problem. I'm sure dealers at that time were just trying to get rid of old stock.