Athletics Outstanding Performer---The Vaulting Pole

By Dave Nielsen, Head Track & Field Coach, Idaho State University

    We thought this comprehensive piece by ISU coach Dave Nielsen was well worth reprinting as a standard reference for all who have to coach and deal with pole vaulting.
It is adapted from Pole Vault Standard, Vol. 9, No. 1, Summer 2002.

    Some day the meet's "Outstanding Performer" should be awarded to an object instead of an athlete. The modern vaulting pole is noth­ing short of incredible in scope of what it is required to do. While "outstanding performer" is said as tongue in cheek, this track & field implement is truly unique in both its effect on performance and the varied relationships with the athlete using it.
    No other piece of equipment in athletics has changed an event as dramatically as the vaulting pole. I have always marveled at the functioning of the pole and been at a loss to answer numerous seemingly simple questions regarding this implement. When listening to conversation and reading advertisements I frequently sense more conjecture than truth but I seldom have a basis for argument, save personal experience.
    I have observed athletes and coaches alter poles to enhance performance. I question the return on doing this and worry about safety and the invitation to a liability suit for some unsuspecting coach. Armed with questions and an abiding interest I have sought answers. The following is the result of my study.
    My questions range from basic to advanced. After digging into the complex and intricate detail, I have determined that I am neither a materials nor structural engineer and since I do not manufacture poles (or have the inclination to do so) my bank of knowledge needs to be at the basic level. The following answers to common questions are geared to a basic and informative level.

HOW MUCH DOES A POLE WEIGH?

    Poles come in many sizes. Vari­ables of length, stiffness, diameter, and material all affect the weight of the pole. Resting flat on a scale they are really quite light with more than 90% of poles falling within a range of three to six pounds. However, because of the way a pole is carried near one end, the "leveraged weight" of the pole is substantially more. Table 1 compares poles in regard to the previously mentioned variables.

    The measurement of a pole's weight at 90 degrees was obtained by placing a resistance 6" from the top of the pole, the fulcrum (resting on a scale) at the point 15" down the pole from the resistance, and the remainder of the pole positioned unsupported and parallel to the ground. This same type of concept was graphically and more intensely displayed in a Gill Sports catalog where they measured the dynamic increase and resulting extreme force required to stop a pole as it drops from a vertical position through parallel. Hopefully the athlete will time the planting action so that he/ she does not have to either carry the pole at 90 degrees for any great length of time or, worse, stop the pole just before it drops into the planting box!
    Technical challenges aside, poles are remarkably light for what they can do. Using one of the poles above as an example, this thin object less than four pounds (pole) stopped a 140-pound object (Stacy Dragila) traveling about 18 miles per hour and then assisting to propel her over a bar 15 feet off the ground! This is a remarkable piece of equipment.

HOW LONG CAN A POLE BE? HOW LONG IS THE LONGEST POLE EVER MADE?

    There are no rules on pole length, only practical applications. A very short pole would obviously defeat the purpose of using a pole. But the longer a pole is, the more awkward it becomes to carry. This is due to weight, leverage, angular inertia (swing or drop---rotational resistance), and air resistance (how about carrying any 17-foot stick around on a windy day!). Grip height and corresponding pole length is a function of the athlete's physical qualities: standing/reach height and running speed, techni­cal abilities, skill running, planting, taking off the ground, and the stiff­ness of the pole and the athlete's psychological disposition. Further consideration by a wise athlete is efficiency, i.e. the return on the grip height-noting more or higher is not always better.
    I called the patient folks at both UCS Spirit and Gill Sports to answer the question: "What is the longest pole ever made?" To the best of my research, the longest pole that was made for use was 5.5 meters (18'0.5"). Who had the highest grip? I am not sure, but Lane Maestretti (UCS Spirit) recalled Sergei Bubka gripping 17'4" in practice but de­cided the trade off between grip height and efficiency was not good enough and competed with a lower grip.

WHAT ARE POLES MADE OF?

    Modern vaulting poles are made of dual directional fiberglass cloth and some (i.e., Pacer Carbon) include carbon fiber cloth. These materials are impregnated with a resin which is activated by heat in the manufacturing process. Once activated the combination of the resin and cloth form a composite material with remarkable properties. The cloth fibers make the poles very strong under the tensile (pit side of the bend) and compressive (runway side of the bend) challenges of vaulting.
    The two kinds of fiberglass used are E-glass and S-glass. S-glass is approximately 1.3 times greater tensile strength than the E-glass, is slightly lighter, and is much more expensive. Carbon fiber, still more expensive, possesses nearly four times the rigidity as compared to fiberglass and therefore to make the same stiffness of the pole much less material is required.
    Less material resulting in a lighter pole is a tremendous edge for the use of carbon fiber in poles. But this benefit can become a detriment. With less material a small nick can easily become a broken pole. Some of the older vaulters may remember Nordic Sports "Featherlite" poles. These poles were a great experiment with carbon fiber but unfortunately their lack of weight was overshadowed by their lack of longevity!
    The Gill/Pacer engineers have done a remarkable job of experimenting with these two materials, combining the material assets to produce a record setting product.
    Typical values for tensile strength of fiberglass and carbon fiber is very similar although surprisingly the carbon fiber has about 2/3 less compressive strength than fiberglass (Jones, 1999). It is important to note the difficulty in comparing the two materials since, even though similar, they have dif­ferent properties.
    The inevitable question, "which is better?" is difficult if not impos­sible to answer. The men's world record (Sergei Bubka) was set on an S-glass pole, 2008 Olympic Cham­pion Steven Hooker uses a carbon, and former women's world record holder Stacy Dragila set her marks on an E-glass pole (e.g. 15'9" WR vault in 2001). Current women's world record holder, Yelena Isin­bayeva, used an S-glass pole and two of the three women medalists in the 2009 World Championships used carbon poles, and the list goes on. All current manufacturers pro­vide a safe and reliable product­--right off the shelf. The differences in "feel" are a matter of personal preference. So the best answer to the question is, flit's the athlete not the pole that jumps high."
    I remember the 1972 Olympics where Bob Seagren (silver) and Jan Johnson (bronze) did such an awesome job competing when a last minute ruling forced them (and others) to switch from their "unfair advantage" to older poles and, as I understand, not the right size. To walk away from an egregious fiasco in a pressure-packed Olympics with silver and bronze medals is a testament to the qualities of these men as athletes and competitors. One of those" old timers" reminded me it was a time when "men were men" ---heck with the glass!

HOW MUCH DOES A POLE COST?

    As might be expected, pole cost varies with the size of the pole and with consideration to the amount of material and type. The least expensive "competition" pole (non-trainer) retails at about $230.00. The cost of poles for most athletes lies between $350.00 and $650.00 depending on size and manufacturer. Elite level men may use poles with a value in excess of $650.00 per pole due to type and quantity of material.

DOES A POLE WEAR OUT WITH AGE?

    All materials wear with age and use. The good news is that pole vaulting poles have a very long life. The length of the life of a pole in practicality is more dependent on its care than the number of times it is bent. Poles that are dropped, nicked, kicked, scratched, walked on, or banged into metal objects will have a shorter life than those receiving better care. An example of pole life is an old brown Browning Silaflex Skypole (pre-1970) which is still in my team's inventory. The pole has been used almost every year and through 2002 was still being used with regularity. Poles are expensive but offer a great value calculated in cost per use---in the example above, much less than a penny per vault! A little care and this investment goes a long way.

WHY IS IT AN ADVANTAGE TO USE A POLE THAT BENDS?

    Three advantages to using a pole that bends are:
      1. Kinetic energy from the run (and succeeding actions) can be stored and retrieved for use later in the vault sequence.
      2. When the pole bends the effective length is reduced making it easier for the pole to rotate to a position more forward (toward/through pit). The distance traveled vertically is lessened in the early stages of the vault allowing the pole to roll forward until the energy is retrieved later in the vault at which time it is redirected vertically.
      3. The bending of the pole allows the athlete some cushioning as the change in direction is not as abrupt.

HOW IS A POLE CONSTRUCTED?

    The answer to this question can become very specific and further may open up a "can of worms" on performance theory. The following will be kept in line with the original premise of basic and simple (which is where 99.99% of all coaches and athletes should be!):
    Poles are manufactured by wrapping a glass or carbon fiber material which has been impregnated with a binding resin around a heated pole called a mandrel (a metal bar or axle around which something is machined or cast). The mandrel is heated and as the wraps are made, the heat "melts" the resin and the material takes shape around the mandrel.
    There are three basic wraps. First the pole is wrapped like a candy cane with strips or strings of material. This is done because the directional nature of the material makes the poles very strong longitudinally (e.g. Y axis) but not in regard to width (e.g. X axis). Without the wrap the pole "tube" tends to become more oval than round. The wrap gives the pole "hoop" strength (Figure la). Regarding poles taken past their limits and breaking, early poles (construction without this wrap) had the tendency to splinter whereas modem poles tend to break in segments.

    The second wrap comprises the main body of the pole. It is a rectangular piece of material the length of the finished product and is the next piece wrapped around the mandrel. The size of the body piece and the mandrel are primary determinants of the pole's strength.
    The "sail piece" gets its nick­name due to its shape. A more precise description is trapezoidal. When rolled around the mandrel more of the material is located in the middle region of the pole. A pole is meant to be flexed between two fixed supports, i.e. top hand and bottom of the pole (butt plug) and, therefore more strain energy is concentrated in the middle of the pole. Figure lb. demonstrates this principle using arrows (scalars) representing magnitude of stress (principle only).
    Shape and position of the sail piece determines shape (regularity) of the bend. Figure 2 provides an example of this. If the shape of the trapezoid is such that the thickest part is closer to the bottom than the top of the pole then there will be proportionately less glass in the upper section of the pole. The force acting on the pole remains as observed in Figure lb. Less material means less resistance and therefore there will be a greater magnitude of bend higher up on the pole and conversely, less down lower. What is ideal? A circular (even) bend? A bend concentrated higher or lower? These are subjects to debate and for the manufacturers to experiment with. Further, other adjustments to sail piece configuration can alter the feel of the pole, e.g. smoothness, dampening, sense of timing. It is comforting to know that the key ingredient to success is the vaulter. It is his or her skill and not the pole that is the most important element (sound like a broken record?).
    Finally, a little more material is wrapped around the bottom four inches or so to reinforce the bottom of the pole, around the tip, where the pole contacts the box.
    After all wraps have been made the pole goes into an oven to be further heated and cured. If the mandrel is placed in an upright position in the oven, the pole will come out with little or no pre-bend (banana shape). Since initiating a bend requires energy, manufactur­ers have found a way to assist the vaulter by making the poles with a slight pre-bend. Resting the poles in the oven horizontally instead of vertically causes the mandrel to flex slightly and therefore the pole comes out slightly bent and is a superior prod­uct. This pre-bend also makes it easier to find the natural "soft side" of the pole as determined by the sail piece.
    There is a one very important point to recognize. By studying Figure 2, it becomes obvious that by cutting a section off of the bottom end, characteristics of pole bend can be changed. The flex, corresponding resistance to bending, shape of the bend, and the "feel" of the pole (much because of the way the pole rolls to vertical) all change when this is done. Does it help? That is open for debate, however it is important to be aware that any athlete or coach who cuts off the bottom (e.g. 6") of the pole becomes, in essence, a manufacturer by altering the pole. Further, remember that the manu­facturer has built reinforcement into the bottom section to keep damage due to normal use to a minimum. WARNING: COACHES YOU RISK BEING HELD LIABLE SHOULD AN ACCIDENT OCCUR AND YOU HAVE BEEN PARTY TO ALTERING A POLE! (Note: Trimming a 1/4" off the bottom when the tip fails does not fall into this category.)

HOW MUCH DOES A POLE BEND? WHAT IS THE SHAPE OF THE POLE BEND?

    Poles typically bend between 120 degrees and 160 degrees in competition. However, for some this may be misleading. For years the standard of a bend of 90 degrees was considered the descriptive norm. If the bend was much greater than 90 degrees, it was time to switch. This may be an issue more of semantics that actual degrees of bend.
    For example, the 90-degree mark could be considered a reflection of the position of the handle than the bend and not the actual degree of bend. If the position of the top of the pole is markedly pointing downward when pole is at full bend then it is time to consider switching poles, lowering grip, or assessing technique.
    The accompanying figures assist in understanding the nature of the pole bend. Figure 1b. defines the shortened length and stresses on the pole when bent; Table 2 compares the shortened length with the resulting degrees of bend; Figure 3 displays poles at different degrees of bend, position, and angles of viewing. Figure 3 is of special importance for the coach to recognize variables such as position of viewer or pole distort perception. Answering the original question of "how much bend?" two examples come to mind. Sergei Bubka and Mike Tully (former American record holder) were reported to have a shortened length of 71.7% (Grabner, p. 60, NSA 1997 #1) and 67% (Maestretti, 1986) respectively at full bend. The figures above translate to approxi­mately 155 and 170 degrees of bend respectively.

    The magnitude of pole bend depends on pole length, diameter, and material. There are poles that have the capability to touch end to end, an amazing 360 degrees! Two simple principles involved are coined as the "yardstick" and "fishing pole". Grab a yardstick at the one foot and two foot marks so that your hands are a foot apart. Now bend it noticing that it is rather stiff here and doesn't bend much. Now grab each end and try to bend it. It is much easier to bend and seems to bend more. Since the material didn't change, neither did the degrees of bend per unit length. That bend is cumulative and in the example of the yardstick---if bent at one foot yields 40 degrees of bend; grabbing the ends (three feet) will bend 120 degrees.
    The fishing pole analogy concerns diameter. The tip end of the fishing pole is thinner and bends quite easily and quite a distance in relation to its length. Farther down the pole (toward the reel) the pole's diameter is greater and bends less. Some of this may be due to an increase in material but much of it is due to the diameter of the pole. Given two rods, poles, or pipes of equal length and equal material the one with the greater diameter will be stronger and stiffer. Conversely, the one with the smaller diameter will bend more per unit length. This principle was originally used to "weight" rate poles based on grip height. The lower one holds on a pole the more rigid it is like a heavier weight pole. Where this is true, it is important to note that the pole is not able to bend as many degrees before it will break (yardstick principle) and the shape of the bend and point of breakage will likely be different.
    The appropriate degree of pole bend is dependent on the vaulter. Consider the example of two twin athletes, 5' 10, good speed, but one an experienced vaulter and the other a beginner. Whereas the experienced athlete may hold 15' 9" and bend it 160 degrees it would be an error for the beginner, holding 11' 6" on a pole, to attempt to bend his pole the same amount.
    For the beginner to bend the pole the same magnitude as his experienced counterpart, the whole nature of the takeoff would change and resulting focus would become pole bending not height. A keen difference here becomes the angle of the pole as determined by the height of the vaulter's reach and the distance the vaulter is from the box at pole plant! takeoff. Elite men, with effective high grips, exhibit an angular relationship of about 30 degrees (angular distance between pole and runway at takeoff). Figure 4 displays this relationship. Both athletes have a reach of 7'2" and takeoff is similar. In the example, note the top hand moves forward and upward at an average of 20 degrees until the pole is 30-degrees from vertical as determined by the line from the bottom of the box to the top hand. At this point the athlete holding higher will have the pole bent approximately 150 degrees whereas the athlete with the lower grip will have the pole bent a mere 75 degrees. For the athlete with the lower grip to bend the pole the same number of degrees the athlete must take off in such a manner that the top hand remains at the same height when reaching the last 30-degree mark---a very flat takeoff!

WHAT DOES THE WEIGHT RATING AND FLEX NUMBER MEAN ON A POLE?

    The weight rating and flex number for poles is a way to assess the amount of energy the pole can store and the rigidity of the pole. This serves as a guide for choosing a pole. The weight rating is based on experience with the amount and type of material used, the diameter and construction design, and flex testing. The flex number is a fine measurement of resistance to bend (rigidity).
    The flex number is determined by hanging a 50 pound weight in the middle of the pole equal distant between two supports. The flex number is the distance, measured in centimeters, the weight deflects (bends) the pole after the weight is hung. When comparing same length poles, the lower flex number signifies a stiffer pole. Elite vault­ers frequently use flex number as a guide to pole selection.
    In general, and noting that by definition most athletes are not elite, the weight rating serves as a sufficient guide to proper pole se­lection. Many good young athletes and coaches spend too much time splitting hairs over flex numbers when they would be better served to focus on vaulting. Further it is important to note poles in the lower flex range (stiff, e.g. 13.0) a 1.0 flex number change has a much more dramatic effect on the pole stiffness than a 1.0 flex number change on a 20+ flex pole.
    Weight ratings and flex numbers are specific to the length of the pole. For example, if a high school boy is vaulting with a 14-foot 160-pound pole, is efficient, and has pole speed allowing him to land deep into the pit, he may consider going to a 15­foot pole.
    When an athlete changes lengths of poles it is important to note that the approximate increase in stiffness is 20 pounds per foot. In this example, a pole with equivalent stiffness is a 15-foot 140-pound pole. If the young man is 150 pounds his better choice is to try a stiffer 14-foot pole.
    Regarding flex numbers, I will use my former athlete, Stacy Dragila, as an example for pole selection. She vaulted on a 13-foot 170-pound pole most of the time when vaulting from short approach. At times she wanted to practice with a higher grip than the pole allows and she moved to 14-foot 150- and 155-pound poles. The flex number on the 13-foot 170# is 15.7 and on the 14-foot 155# is 19.6 making it appear that the 14-foot pole is noticeably softer. However, considering effective progression, the opposite is true due to specificity of flex and weight ratings to pole length.
    Finally, there is a concern with standardization of weight rating and flex number. For safety, it is important for coaches and athletes to know what to expect when changing poles. The challenge ahead is to find a method of evaluating existing information found on the current poles and cross-referencing information between brands. Unfor­tunately not all brands were marked or tested in the same manner, making current comparisons difficult. "Best Flex" (ala Jan Johnson) was one proposal to address this issue of standardization and safety. For­tunately now there is much better uniformity than there was in years past.

WHY DO POLES BREAK?

    Simply put it is because the pole was loaded with more energy that it could store or could store for an extended period of time. Common reasons include:
      1. The pole is damaged, i.e. nicked, cracked, chipped, and is therefore missing a part critical to support that keeps it in one piece. Poles are pretty tough and durable but it is a fine line. An analogy can be made with an aluminum pop can. The can be tossed around a bit and then turned on end and a large person can stand on the can. If someone lightly hits the side of the can (especially in the middle), disrupting the vertical integrity, the can quickly crushes down.
      2. A pole stressed in a manner that it stays very bent for an extended period of time. For example, an athlete whose takeoff is out too far and flat/low may run into this situation. The pole feels quite soft but the athlete is not getting into the pit. This is a time to alter technique. If not the athlete runs the risk of an untimely pole break and landing in a precarious position and a dangerous spot!
      3. If a pole is flexed in a manner where it is bent around a point located between the two fixed ends and concentrates bending forces at that spot, the pole may fail. If an athlete produces uncommon bottom arm pressure and even worse pulls down with the top hand, the pole is likely to break in the vicinity of the bottom hand. An example of this is bending the pole in the box, pressing hard with the bottom hand---pole breaks, bottom of pole recoils, hits surprised athlete on forehead, athlete left with no pole and big lump on head. (Gee whiz, that sounds like something I did!) Another example---an airline baggage handler pulls a pole half way out of plane, athlete watches helplessly while they grab one end, bounce up and down a couple of times, until the there is no more bounce only a sharp 90-degree angle of the tube. Experience is an interesting teacher!
      4. The pole simply cannot handle the stress applied by the athlete bending the tool past its critical point.
    Of these, the most common source of pole breakage can be traced to one or more of the first three causes than the last one.

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF HEAT OR COLD ON THE POLE'S ABILITY TO BEND?

    always seemed that the pole was stiffer when it was cold. I was told that it was the vaulter that was stiff, not the pole, when it is cold outside. That was an understandable explanation. Then when I heard of others questioning this answer, whether considering vaulting poles or graphite shaft golf clubs, I was unsure of the of the validity of this answer.
    As a result, I did a bit of research and some experimenting of my own. I tested two 14-foot poles, an E-Glass and a Carbon. To secure a gross range of temperatures I used a sauna (150 degrees) and a snowy day in Idaho (30 degrees). My results pointed to a change of about four pounds of stiffness with E­Glass, with the carbon pole exhibiting almost double the variance. However, when I tried to replicate my result, the relationship remained but the numbers changed, questioning the validity of my simple test.
    In review of existing research, Dr. George Jessup, professor at Texas A&M, and his son, Jonathan Jessup, a former Princeton vaulter and computer engineer, raised further questions re temperature variance and its effect on pole stiffness. They measured six 15-foot poles of different manufacture performing tests at 40, 65, 90, and 110-degree environments. Using a crude description, the poles were held by a tool at one end and the other end bent down then released. After release the pole sprung up and down (oscillating) until coming to a stop. The speed of the oscillation and rate of cessation (dampening) was recorded.
    In review, it was noted that temperature had a significant effect on dampening characteristics. As for speed, the authors noted that fiberglass poles were slightly faster (read stiffer) at lower temperature although not significantly. One of the carbon poles (Pacer Carbon) exhibited an inverse relationship and was recorded as fastest (stiffer) at 110 degrees and slowest at 40 degrees!
    The spread of temperature ranging from freezing in Buffalo to searing in Sacramento may indeed have some effect on the flex of vaulting poles. If the difference is no more than one weight, how significant is it? The question possibly deserves further study. However, it may not matter whether it is pole, its fiber, or its resin that is stiff or is loose. It could be the sun, rain, wind, track, or most important the athlete that is a far more challenging variable. The practical answer is that the athlete needs to choose the pole that is best for him or her that day on that jump!
 

HOW MANY POLES DOES AN ATHLETE NEED FOR A COMPETITION?

    One. However, since the pole is a tool that is specific to the application as determined by a particular condition(s) most vaulters want more tools in their tool chest. Conditions affecting "tool" selection include current weather (wind, rain, temperature), current status of the vaulter (physical, technical, psychological), and the planned effort (short approach, full approach). Therefore, many athletes carry three or more poles to a competition, e.g. for a difficult day, average day, great day.

WHY WOULD A VAULTER CHANGE POLES DURING COMPETITION OR PRACTICE?

    Common reasons for a vaulter to change pole during training or competition include:
      1. To grip higher and needs a longer or stiffer pole
      2. Pole bends too much, athlete lands deep in pit, chooses stiffer pole
      3. Pole bends too little keeping athlete from landing far enough in pit for safety, chooses less stiff pole
      4. Bend OK but vaulter doesn't land far enough in pit, changes (lowers) grip height and possibly pole to match
      5. Changes to the stiffest pole possible because of a belief that a stiff pole makes you vault higher.
    The last reason seems rational and represents a common line of thinking but is worth questioning. Assuming a given takeoff velocity and technical execution what are the advantages of using either a stiffer pole or softer pole, e.g. bend of 130 degrees versus 160 degrees? The softer pole has the advantage of reducing the cord length, storing energy for a greater period of time, and allowing the athlete to travel forward farther into the pit. The stiffer pole accelerates the athlete upward sooner, possibly making timing easier. This is likely to trig­ger either more questions and/ or postulations. Is there a greater amount of energy returned to the vaulter when using the stiffer pole? If "energy in" needs to be balanced with "energy out" where then does the energy go?
    Answers to these questions can be found by observing how the pole directed the vaulter, the resilience of the material, and the techno-psycho relationship. If the softer pole allows the athlete to penetrate far into the pit so that the pole rotates past a vertical position as the athlete leaves the pole, then "energy in" contributed to added horizontal displacement. In this case, changing to a stiffer pole may be warranted to utilize and direct "energy in" more vertically and less horizon tally.
    The two poles should return approximately the same amount of energy. A small loss may occur due to increase in bend within the material. An example of this is test­ing a ball rebounding from different heights. I drop my dime store rubber ball from 10" it bounces back 3" for a coefficient of restitution of 0.3 (drop height/rebound height). When I drop the same ball onto the same surface from 10' high, it bounces back only 2.5' feet or a coefficient of 0.25. There was a decrease in return due to increase in intensity of the contact. The rubber ball stores, returns, and absorbs the impact energy in both examples.
    The magnitude of return relative to the magnitude of compressive energy exerted on the ball during impact changed. In the same way there is likely the same relation­ship with a pole. That physical relationship, however, is probably small compared to a psychological relationship. In other words, if an athlete moves the pole to vertical, landing in a suitable spot in the pit with standards 40-60 centimeters back, why change poles?
    It could be that for some picking up a bigger pole will elicit a "bigger" effort. Regardless of the rationale, identifying and drawing out the vaulter's capabilities---physical, psychological, or technical---is the challenge and the art of coaching.
    The pole is merely a tool to accomplish an exhilarating goal. Whereas the vaulting pole may never earn the status as the meet's outstanding performer, it will al­ways be one of the most unique and incredibly talented performers in the world of sporting equipment!
    Special Thanks to friends from UCS Spirit and Gill Sports for their information and patience with my questions.

FROM: TRACK COACH 191