Talk:Fosbury Flop
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Sensationalist language
"At this point in history, almost all jumpers use the Fosbury Flop. Dick Fosbury revolutionized high jump as anyone knows it and made one of the largest impact in this sport ever."
This sounds like amateur writing.. no sources are cited for the proclamation that "almost all jumpers use it", and the reference to having made "the biggest impact in this sport ever" is not put into perspective. Needs a clean-up by someone who actually knows about high-jumping (not me) :) EuroSong 15:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
No. Although the quality of the writing could certainly be improved, the truth of the statements put forth are essentially indisputable. Even a peripheral sports fan (like myself) knows about this, and it can easily be corroborated.Semblace 22:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that the statements are untrue. I'm saying that the writing needs to be more moderate, more factual, and if possible to cite sources. OR... something like "Before year XXXX, the average height of professional jumers' jumps was 2.5 metres - but after Fosbury invented his manœuvre, this was increased overnight to 2.8 metres by people who utilised the new move. This brought about a revolution in the sport, and since that time, every jumper has jumped using this method, since it was evidently superior to the old method".
- Or something like that. As I said though, I know practically nothing about high-jumping, so it should be written by someone who actually knows these details. But I can still see that the language as it currently stands sounds sensationalist and without facts. Not that I am disputing the facts, see? EuroSong talk 21:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The discussion could also use physics to explain why the technique is more efficient. It allows the jumper to clear the bar while the jumper's center of gravity does not. I expect that this technique allows the jumper the greatest flexibility in manipulatingthe location of the center of gravity. The first jump technique I learned in grade school was the scissors jump. Using that technique it clearly forces a jumper to accelerate their center of gravity well over the bar such that the body can clear it. The western roll technique was better but not as efficient as the flop. --Rocketsci55 13:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Factual error
I'm not sure the truth of these statements is 'essentially indisputable'. Fosbury did not invent the style of jump although he popularised it. This from the official Olympic Website backs up my contention...."unbeknownst to Fosbury, the first person to use the flop technique was actually a jumper from Montana named Bruce Quande, who was photographed flopping over a bar in 1963". Please note, I'm not saying he deliberately made false claims, merely that he wasn't actually the originator.
Factual error? Not really!!
Can anyone find any proof at all, such as an actual copy of the photo showing Bruce Quande going backwards over the bar in 1963? My guess, Quande may simply be an urban myth, and the jump and photo may never have occurred. Without that evidence, it's clear that Fosbury alone should be the acknowledged originator of the technique that bears his name.
[edit] Back vs front facing down
Just wondering why curving over the bar backwards is better than doing it facing down. Isn't the back more flexible forwards? I'm sure there will be a good reason, so adding that info may improve the article. EdX20 03:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
BACKWARDS Vs FORWARDS OVER THE BAR:
The typical landing attitude in the Flop is that the shoulders and neck hit the mat first, with the chin tucked into the chest. Then the back and hips impact the mat. The jumper often ends up with his knees up towards his chest looking up at the sky. If you try to perform a similar landing from a face down flop, you will injure your neck and back. (Try bringing your feet up behind you to touch the back of your head!)
In a front dive the jumper has to basically somersault over the bar in order to turn completely over and land on their back. This involves even more rotation over the bar (or "flipping") than the Flop does, arguably using more energy and taking more time.
In the Flop the lean away from the bar prior to take-off (delivery) causes the rotation ("flipping") over the bar. The knee and arm/shoulder drive produce rotation around the vertical axis to complete the already partial presentation of the back to the bar produced by the curved approach. In order to perform a "face down flop" you would have to thrust your drive leg (and arms/shoulders) backwards at take off. This is enormously less efficient and less productive than driving these masses forward in the existing direction of travel. In the flop momentum of all the body parts is efficiently resolved through the drive leg (ie force into the ground changes the direction of existing momentum -try polevaulting without a slot in the ground or an inflexible pole!)
If accomplished, such a move would allow a face-down layout over the bar, ending in a dangerous face down landing as described above. Once laid out over the bar, the only way to accelerate rotation is to bring parts of the body (=mass) closer to the centre of mass. Think of the way a gymnast "tucks in" to speed rotation in the somersault and opens out to slow down rotation. Tucking in while face down over the bar is going to involve bringing knees and elbows in towards the abdomen. While the elbows might miss the bar, the knees are going to cause problems! In every other style but the flop the trailing leg causes contact problems with the bar and the face down dive is no exception.
Interestingly, in my experience, kids who are used to mucking around, diving onto mats and who attempt to dive over the bar work all this out in their heads quite quickly and end up turning more sideways to the bar, doing an arm-leading straddle, head before hips over the bar, similar to some of the great jumpers of the past!SlipperyJim (talk)SlippeyJimSlipperyJim (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- See the Rocketsci55 entry at the top of the page to learn why the Flop is better than the forward roll. On the other hand, the Fosbury Flop apparently requires a better padding. I remember seeing a big poster in the Winter Stadium in St. Petersburg (then Leningrad) Russia in the early 70's: "Because of the risk of injury, the execution of Fosbury Flop is strictly prohibited". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.132.52.103 (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
The Eastern cut-off is inbetween the scissors and the flop and is taught as a progression towards the flop. It starts off like the scissors, including straight line approach, but the athlete lays back flat out, pretty much parallel to the bar, without much chance to arch over. It has many of the disadvantages (such as landing on your back if unlucky!) and few of the advantages of the flop. When you start to produce rotation around the axes without having run a curve appraoch, you begin to approximate a flop style, although the twisting stresses on the joints can be enormous and cause injury. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SlipperyJim (talk • contribs) 21:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] You tube link removed.
1 link removed - TV advertisment footage - No clear indication from clip information/ uploader profile , that uploader has rights to the footage or is associated with the advertiser or production entities responsible for the footage Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
