GRV: Lavillenie - From Stall Swing to World Record

[KirkB]

... From the very beginning he has made every effort to increase and not inhibit the natural rotation the pole wants to take. From that balled up position, as his COG passes by the pole, the forces of physics takes over and the rotational speed of the pole greatly increases, bringing the top hand to his feet. Its not so much that the rotation of the pole adds significant energy to his swing (although I still contend that its much easier and much safer to invert on a rotating pole) but, that Lavelline takes full advantage of that rotation in positioning himself to cover the pole. Pehaps A better, easier and possibly even safer way to cover the pole. Another paradigm shift.

SAFER?

The underlines are mine. The rest is all bunk.

These ideas of PVDaddy appear to have been plagiarized from Air-Strike, with just enough extra spin to make it totally JUNK SCIENCE!

[side-by-side vids of RL and SB]

Did you make that? It's very neat. ... Again, nice work.

By his silence, PVDaddy is taking credit for these vids. This is plagiarism at its worst!

Kirk

[Wan]

Let's be back to the subject...
I was wondering and looking at what was not discussed here for now...
Look at this excellent views of latest jumps of RL, and express yourselves about of a sort of inverse bending during the plant with the high hand pushing up, and the low pulling down... (clearly done on 5.94 m and 6.01 m tries)
http://youtu.be/tQ73lMw0pFg

601 Aubiere 02222015.jpg (74.68 KiB) Viewed 16262 times

P.S. : you complained about lack of stats about RL but now you have : https://www.facebook.com/94190594793/photos/a.10151667190859794.1073741826.94190594793/10152825338089794/?type=1&theater

[charlie]

There is definitely NO PRESSING DOWN with the left hand, if he did he would be shot back the runway about 50ft.!!!!

[willrieffer]

Pre plant reverse bend happens sometimes. It's just a reaction as the tip hits the bottom of the box. Left arm only shows a moment of bending in the mid.

9.87m/s if correct is quite fast. Now he needs to jump higher...

Will

[PVDaddy]

Kirk:

These ideas of PVDaddy appear to have been plagiarized from Air-Strike, with just enough extra spin to make it totally JUNK SCIENCE!

I do a great deal of research from a variety of sources. Yes I did get some of my ideas from Airstrike so what? These words are entirely my own.

Two drastically different techniques for covering the pole. Bubka swings his take off leg all the way to the top of the pole. His legs continue to climb skyward and here too he must battle the forces of gravity in his swing. Lavillenie is not even trying to get his feet to the top of the pole. His legs do not continue to climb skyward. He is only concerned with Balling up. In fact in the process of balling up, his feet actually move down some (look at the grid). But here too he is taking every advantage even in the balled position to keep his legs and COG under the top hand. Of equal importance, From the very beginning he has made every effort to increase and not inhibit the natural rotation the pole wants to take. From that balled up position, as his COG passes by the pole, the forces of physics takes over and the rotational speed of the pole greatly increases, bringing the top hand to his feet. Its not so much that the rotation of the pole adds significant energy to his swing (although I still contend that its much easier and much safer to invert on a rotating pole) but, that Lavelline takes full advantage of that rotation in positioning himself to cover the pole. Pehaps A better, easier and possibly even safer way to cover the pole. Another paradigm shift.

Kirk, you are perhaps the most Jealous, rudest, politically driven and closed minded Petrovite I have ever met! You seriously need to see a Psychiatrist!

[PVDaddy]

Kirk, I want to remind you of the post you made on this thread on Feb 5:

I'm taking the high road.

This post was made by PVDaddy who is currently on your ignore list.

There, PVDaddy is back on my ignore list. Enough said.

Kirk

I have had enough of your rudeness Kirk and I am happy to call you the Hypocritical, shallow minded JERK that you truly are!

[PVDaddy]

Oh for the record Will (Since Kirk seems to be going out of his way at every length to mock me and to make false accusations and assumptions) when you ask "Did you make that?" I thought you were referring to my post and not the Vid that PVstudent had previously posted on this thread (I thought that was understood). I did make the post and yes it was entirely my own words.

[KirkB]

PVDaddy, you can call me all the names you want, but I won't stoop to your level.

It doesn't change the facts that:

1. You are plagiarizing other peoples' work. When Will refers to "footage", he's referring to a vid. How could anyone misunderstand what is meant by "footage"? And I wouldn't be too quick to plagiarize Air-Strike, since their theories have also been debunked.

2. Your theory about RL intentionally steering to the side is bunk, and is downright dangerous if anyone should attempt it.

I try to ignore most of your posts, PVDaddy, but when you say something that's DANGEROUS (steering to the side), or discourteous to the original author or downright ILLEGAL (plagiarizing), then I won't hold my tongue.

This is the high road.

Kirk

[PVDaddy]

Jerk, fitting rymes with Kirk. Kirk the Jerk! Here's the link included in that post https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrQWsMa ... e=youtu.be

Check the name under it. while your at it JERK, check out Lavellenie between 83-102 moving his top hand to his feet. Note the movement of his arms through the shoulder.

YOU AREA JERK, KERK!

[charlie]

You people need to take up nitting! Your missing some CHARACTER!!! This comes from a vaulter that has been in the game for 60 years and CURRENTLY been an ALL AMERICAN for 42 YEARS IN A ROW and has had 60 HS State Champions in the LAST 6 years. These champions also did not come from clinics or camps(they train HERE) Be KIND to each other!!!!!

[PVDaddy]

I could go into great length to quote a LOT of dumb things Kirk has said over the years but that is not why I'm here. It takes to much work. It takes away from the discussion. I just love learning and want to understand the best way to vault on a flexible pole? I have been told by many, that the Know it alls, of the B to B Book and the PB method, their controlling all and abusive nature have driven many away from this site. I really do enjoy discussing and exploring the mysteries of the flexible pole and TRYING to understand it? How we impact it? How it impacts us? What are things we can do to effect the pole? Better yet, What are things we can do to effect the pole so that it will return in such a way to effect us the way we want it to? That is were I have been attempting to drive this conversation. I am looking at the differences the pole path takes with a low gravity swing and comparing that to the pole path of a high gravity swing. They do not take the same path or at the same rate and I am certain the path they take and the rate at which it occurs has an impact on the vaulters swing and what they must do to optimize it? Immediately After plant, the pole will lean to, rotate to and bend to the opposite side direction of the vaulters top hand. This effects the plane of the swing and steers it in that direction. It is not in a perfectly linear direction with the runway. In order to maximize your swing with the runway and your trajectory (The Crossbars), the vaulter should redirect the swing in the opposite direction toward the top hand. This will not cause the vaulter to swing into the standards Kirk! From my observations this effect of the swing path is more prevalent on a low COG swing path than a Higher COG swing path and that the low COG swing requires a greater deal of correction. This makes sense as the pole is leaning to, bending to and rotating to the opposite direction of the top hand more and at a greater rate. Lavellenie positions himself to take advantage of the poles counter clockwise rotation as it brings the top hand around to the feet. If you look, he assist in the speed of its rotation through a forward motion of his arms to his feet. It is all very complicated but in my opinion understandable. Like Will has stated and I also agree, there are almost endless possibilities within a set swing frame window. Everything has not yet been discovered and Guess what? NOBODY is yet an export! That is a fact. The two drastically different styles used to achieve the WR bare that out. Right now,the shorter, slower man with the slower, low swing path and the faster more complete pole rotation is the one on top,? Owe and he's a Tucker Kirk, so how can you say there should never be one!? Don't answer. Please don't talk to me. JERK!

[KirkB]

I could go into great length to quote a LOT of dumb things Kirk has said over the years but ...

... Don't answer. Please don't talk to me. JERK!

Nothing is achieved by name-calling. It only makes you look bad. And there is no reason to flame me.

I have no objections if you just ASK QUESTIONS on this Advanced Technique forum. But don't plagiarize other people's work; and don't offer any unproven theories that could cause safety issues with young aspiring vaulters that want to emulate the WR holder. And don't keep flogging a dead horse with theories that have already been debunked.

If you followed those simple concepts, then I would not even have to remind the readers of this forum to take your rants and theories with a huge grain of salt.

I've explained it before, but I will explain it once again (for the benefit of Advanced Technique forum readers), since you have never vaulted higher than 10-6, so you cannot possibly appreciate how a vault with a bending pole follows the Laws of Physics from first hand experience. And you CANNOT reverse-engineer vids of WR holders frame-by-frame and know the vaulter's intent; or distinguish between cause and effect. You don't have the experience to do that ...

First, I will quote Will:

As a thought experiment, if the vaulter just came down on the pole from above and bent it as a spring, the angle wouldn't matter. It could be anywhere in the 360 degrees. But they aren't. Hmmm...

This is true. The direction of the force in this experiment is straight into the box. This is directly down the chord cylinder. So as you say, the direction of the bend would be random.

But the vaulter approaches from the runway, and bends the pole not from above, but from the direction of his approach. And the pole bends in a predictable direction --- first directly forwards (towards the pit), and then off to the side of the bottom hand (left side for a right-hander).

Also, Will notes that the corner of the box may impose a counter-acting force; preventing the pole from further bend to the side of the box. I don't disagree with his observation, but I think we should ignore that detail for now. It complicates the physics; and it's only true for bigger bends on lighter poles (which maybe should be avoided anyways). So let's keep it simple here, and ignore that detail.

So what's different from Will's experiment? A few things:

1. Every pole has a prebend. This dictates the direction that the pole bends easiest. In Will's experiment, there is no prebend (so the direction of the bend would indeed be unpredictable. But if there was, that's the direction the pole would bend. The vaulter has chosen to grip his pole so that it will prebend DIRECTLY FORWARDS --- towards the pit. No, not a little off to the side. Directly forwards!

2. Immediately after takeoff (on a good vault), the vaulter has his body and the pole perfectly aligned with his path down the runway. His hands are also BOTH directly in line with his body --- they are not to each side of his CoM (as would be the case if he were swinging on a highbar). At this point, it would actually be impossible for his hands to be anywhere else but directly in line with the plane of the force (unless, of course, it's a bad jump where he gets flung to the side, resulting in not landing in the middle of the pit). THE PREBEND PLUS THE DIRECTION OF THE VAULTERS FORCE WILL BEND THE POLE DIRECTLY FORWARDS.

3. DJ has often mentioned (in commenting on Mike Tully's swing technique) that he would:

... bend the pole into a high bar... and do a giant off the top ...

This is a good analogy of what actually happens. As the vaulter swings, he's putting more and more of the CoM force on his bottom hand (and less on his top hand). Somewhere in the first half of the swing, the force on his bottom hand approaches the force on his top hand, but never exceeds it. Then (somewhere in the last half of the swing -- prior to pole release), the force on his bottom hand recedes (down to zero).

4. As the force on his bottom hand approaches the force on his top hand, the pole is (as DJ and Tully say) "turned into a highbar", with hands now separated to the left and right of his CoM. And I can honestly say --- from first hand experience that vaulting like Bubka, that's how it FEELS. I contend that this happens without any cognizant or intentional action on the part of the vaulter. It happens due to the physics (the forces) I've just described. The movement of one hand becoming beside the other hand (rather than above/below it) is a natural result of the force of the vaulter on takeoff being applied to the pole, with his inertia causing his body to continue to go directly forwards. The vaulter stays "square to the pit" (his inertia causes this), which means that the shoulders need to stay square, which means that the pole is pulled off to the side --- NOT BY ANY SPECIFIC ACTION OF THE VAULTER, BUT BY HIS INERTIA.

Will, I'm sure you could explain this in better Physics terms.

Immediately After plant, the pole will lean to, rotate to and bend to the opposite side direction of the vaulters top hand. This effects the plane of the swing and steers it in that direction.

False, true, true. It doesn't LEAN; it does rotate; and it does bend that way. The question you need to ask is why. But I wouldn't use the word "steer", as you're already using that word (in other posts) to infer an action by the vaulter.

It is not in a perfectly linear direction with the runway.

False! See above.

In order to maximize your swing with the runway and your trajectory (The Crossbars), the vaulter should redirect the swing in the opposite direction toward the top hand.

False! The inertia causes the pole to move to the side; the vaulter doesn't steer it to the side; and doesn't NEED to steer it.

This will not cause the vaulter to swing into the standards Kirk!

How do you know this? What is your experience when you've tried this? Before you jump to this conclusion, grip your pole at 15 feet and TRY IT (a 10 foot grip won't cut it). Once you've tried it, THEN you have the experience necessary to make your assertion. But I take no responsibility for your injuries!

Kirk