Why? The Science of Athletics

240 WHY?-THE SCIENCE OF ATHLETICS should have been made at a distance of 8 ft. 9 ins. (say 9ft.) from the box in which the point of the pole is plan.ted, but the sketch (Fig. 65 below) which the coach has rece1ved shows that the take-off, al– though ·directly in rear of the pole point, was only 7 'ft . 6 ins. - i .. J=41 FIG. 65 This tells him at onee that the athlete is falling on to the bar, because the fault of taking-off too close in is jerking him off the ground and consequently abbreviating his upward swmg: If the sketch shows the footprints as given in Fig. 66 the coach will draw a different conclusion. - - - FIG. 66 The man (who sprang from the right foot) took off at the correct distance of 9 ft. from the box ; but, instead of planting his take-off fopt down directly in rear of the pole point, he put his foot down to the left of the run-way. This would cause him to swing in to the right, striking the pole with his knee or body and retarding his swing-up. Further, at the top of his swing he would be off balance and would "spin", so that although he might clear the bar by a good margin he would swing round his pole and back on to the bar again, thus knocking it down. Fig. 67 takes us yet a stage further in the Inferential study of the conclusions a coach may draw, Reasoningfrom by inferential reasoning, from the marks the Footprints athlete leaves in taking off and landing when pole vaulting'. The diagram in question has been put in to serve a double purpose, in point of fact ;