The High Jump Approach - Finding Where to Start the Curve
A useful approach mark does more than tell an athlete where to put a foot. It helps them arrive at takeoff with a repeatable rhythm. This guide helps you find a starting reference, test it on the track and decide what to adjust.
The intercept point is the reference used here for the transition from the straight run into the curve. Think of it as a useful checkpoint, not a sudden corner or a spot the athlete must stretch to reach.
This guide is for the curved Fosbury flop approach, not the scissors technique. The curve helps prepare the athlete for the rotation needed in flight, but real approaches need not follow a perfect circle. [1]
Use the mark to support the movement.
Do not change good movement just to hit the mark.
Use the approach your athlete actually runs.
Calculate a starting reference, not a target to force.
Watch the rhythm and the takeoff, not just the mark.
Change one thing, then check the effect.
01 / Find a starting reference
One curve. Two measurements.
Replace the example values with your athlete’s measurements. The diagram shows how to measure out from the near upright. Need help with an input? Use the measurement guide below.
X / Parallel to the bar
Example estimate
Y / Out into the approach
Example estimate
All five values are examples. Replace them before setting an athlete’s mark.
Start with your measurements.Complete all five inputs to see a plan.
A starting reference, not a prescribed ideal. The line is a simple circular estimate. Actual steps need not be equal or follow this exact path.
Set out the mark / Tap to explore
Complete the measurements to see the marking instructions.
The field card includes your diagram, inputs and a simple observation log. It opens as an HTML page that you can print.
Explore: how much can a small measuring error change the mark?
A precise looking result is only as useful as the measurements behind it. Change the possible error below to compare three estimates. This does not change your main plan.
| Step length | X (m) | Y (m) |
|---|
Largest change from your estimate
…Add your measurements first.
This shows sensitivity within the calculator, not a confidence interval, an acceptable error band or a prediction of how the athlete will run.
Optional detail: what the calculator assumes
In plain language: the model joins a straight approach to a circular curve and uses your mean step length to space the contacts. It estimates a place to begin testing. It does not establish the best technique for an individual athlete.
The straight part is assumed perpendicular to the bar. The curve has a constant radius and equal contact spacing. Actual approaches can change radius, step length and speed. The diagram represents contact points, not a measured centre of mass path; its replay does not reproduce running speed. The research cited in this article has not validated this calculator.
Important change from the earlier calculator: the input is now the angle of the line joining the final two contacts, not foot orientation. The geometry has been changed to match that definition. Do not reuse an old shoe angle without remeasuring. The along bar and out from bar offsets remain on their corrected axes.
Show the calculation
n = step intervals after contact 0; s = mean straight contact spacing; β = final step angle to the bar; a = takeoff offset along the bar; b = takeoff offset out from the bar. Angles below are in degrees.
δ = (90° − β) / (n − ½)θ = 90° − nδR = s / [2 sin(δ / 2)]X = R(1 − sin θ) − aY = R cos θ + bδ is the turn between successive equal steps. The final chord sits half a step angle from the final tangent, so β = θ + δ/2. This distinction is why simply changing the label in the old formula would not be enough.
Distances use centimetres internally, without rounding before calculation. Results are displayed to the nearest centimetre for convenient set out, not as a claim of measurement accuracy. The software accepts 2 to 12 steps, lengths from 1 to 1,000 cm, offsets from 0 to 1,000 cm and angles from 1° to 89°. These are software limits, not coaching ranges. Combinations with a final tangent parallel to or turning away from the bar, or an intercept beyond the near upright towards the far upright, are outside this layout and are flagged.
02 / Measure the athlete in front of you
Five inputs, without the guesswork
Start with several comfortable, representative approaches or jumps at the same intended approach intensity. For a simple field check, record three attempts and look for a repeatable pattern. This is a suggested coaching procedure, not a validated testing protocol.
New to the flop? Establish a safe, manageable approach with a qualified coach first. Use the calculator once there is a pattern to measure, rather than building a beginner’s run around the example numbers.
Measurement guide / Tap an input
Know what you are measuring.
Input 1 / Step count
Contact 0, then count to takeoff.
Choose the contact you are using as the transition reference. Call it 0. Count each following contact, with the final count landing on the takeoff foot.
In the example, 0 → 1 → 2 → 3 → 4 → 5 means five step intervals and six contact locations. A left to right contact is one step. A full left to left cycle is two.
Coach’s check: use the same counting convention every time. The example’s five steps are not a universal optimum. Do not force a sudden turn at contact 0.
Illustrative five step example. Not the athlete’s measured path.
Input 2 / Mean step length
Measure each gap. Then average.
Use video to identify each contact from 0 to takeoff. Choose the middle of the shoe at first ground contact as your field reference and use it consistently for every point.
Measure the straight ground distance from one contact point to the next. Add these distances and divide by the number of gaps. Do not measure a curved tape line and treat that as the same distance.
The original U bend drill can help you practise the measuring process. Check any drill estimate against full approaches before using it to set a mark.
The example averages 200 cm. The individual gaps are not equal. Our shoe centre field convention is not identical to every research protocol.
Let the tool average my measured step lengths
Enter your measured gaps to calculate the mean.
Do not coach equal final steps just because the model draws them. The 2017 men’s World Championships report described different final step patterns, not one pattern of progressive shortening. [3]
Input 3 / Final step angle
Join the last two contacts.
Find the contact just before takeoff and the takeoff contact. Draw a straight line between the same reference point on each shoe. Measure the angle between that line and a line parallel to the bar.
Ignore where the toes point. Shoe orientation, the direction of the last step and the upward angle of takeoff are different measurements. This calculator uses only the second. [2]
Use ground measurements where possible. An oblique phone view can distort angles; a sketch on top of uncorrected footage is only a rough estimate. Keep the camera clear of the approach and do not climb equipment to obtain an overhead view.
Measure the yellow line between the contact centres, not the long axis of the shoe. Diagram is illustrative.
No angle tool? Use two ground measurements
From the next to last contact to the takeoff contact, measure the change parallel to the bar and the change towards the bar. These are the two sides of a right angled triangle, not takeoff offsets from the upright.
Enter both distances to find the angle.
Inputs 4 and 5 / Takeoff location
One contact, two distances.
Use the same middle of the shoe reference at first ground contact. Set your origin at the ground point directly below the centre of the bar’s near end, not an arbitrary corner of the upright’s base. In the diagram this is labelled “near upright”.
Along the bar: measure towards the far upright, parallel to the bar. Out from the bar: measure at right angles into the approach area. Both describe the same takeoff contact.
Use the athlete’s observed location from representative jumps. There is no age based preset here: a published elite distance is not automatically appropriate for a developing jumper.
All distances are measured on the ground. The upright base and mat edge are not interchangeable with the bar reference.
03 / Take it to the track
How do you know the mark is working?
Judge the whole approach, not simply whether the foot lands near the intercept. In a study of seven elite male jumpers, successful and unsuccessful attempts could follow similar paths but differ in timing and takeoff execution. [2]
Arrive in rhythm
Does the athlete reach the reference without reaching, chopping steps or visibly slowing to find it?
Continue smoothly
Does the transition flow into the curve without an abrupt turn or a late scramble to reach takeoff?
Take off confidently
Is the takeoff location repeatable, with a controlled jump and safe landing? What does the athlete feel?
Suggested field routine
- Record a baseline. Observe three representative attempts before changing the approach. Note the starting routine, intercept, takeoff location and rhythm.
- Set out the estimate. Measure X, turn 90° and measure Y. Use a flat, permitted marker. Do not lay cones or measuring tapes where the athlete will step.
- Compare a few attempts. Keep the task and intended intensity similar. Ask: “Did that feel smoother, the same or more forced?” The attempt count is a practical example, not a test standard.
- Adjust one thing, then recheck. Record the change and its effect. Keep an existing effective approach when the calculated mark makes it worse. The calculator does not overrule the athlete.
A good change improves the approach.
Hitting a new mark is not enough on its own.
04 / Observe before you adjust
What are you seeing?
Choose the closest description. These are coaching prompts, not automatic diagnoses. A takeoff problem does not always need a new starting mark.
Look beyond the intercept
What changes on the curve?
Compare the approach after contact 0. Look for differences in path, final step spacing and the time taken to reach takeoff. Check the video before moving the start.
Start earlier in the approach
Is the build up repeatable?
Check the starting stance, first movement and acceleration. Note differences in effort or conditions. Recalculating a curve will not explain why the athlete arrives differently each time.
Protect the movement
Has the mark become the task?
Ask whether the athlete is looking down or altering their steps to touch the marker. Review its position and how you introduced it. Do not ask them to stretch or brake simply to make the numbers fit.
A mark is only one part
Do not assume the start is wrong.
Compare the timing, takeoff posture and clearance as well as location. A repeated path can still lead to different outcomes. [2]
Put it into practice / Illustrative case
The mark is right. The rhythm is not.
A developing jumper reaches the new intercept on all three attempts, but now shortens the last steps awkwardly and says the jump feels rushed. What would you do first?
Build the approach
Let them explore. Then record it.
Allow the athlete to find a comfortable build up into the curve. Once a useful rhythm emerges, record the starting mark, starting foot and first movement rather than leaving every attempt to chance.
For developing athletes, prioritise a manageable approach that they can repeat. Review the marks as their approach changes with growth, confidence and training. Record conditions too, rather than automatically moving a mark after one different attempt.
These are practical coaching suggestions. The calculator does not determine the full approach length.
Before you start
Keep the setup safe and legal
Check the surface, landing system and clear space with a suitably qualified coach. Keep people, cameras, tapes and raised markers out of the running and landing areas. Do not use a new mark to force an uncontrolled takeoff.
The 2026 World Athletics rulebook allows one or two supplied or approved approach markers. Where markers are not supplied, adhesive tape may be used, but chalk and similar substances are not permitted. Confirm the organiser’s requirements and current rules. [4]
Training aids and competition markers are not automatically interchangeable. Follow the venue’s requirements in training too.
Evidence, experience and the model
Keep the distinction clear. Research informs the explanations. The measurement routine, troubleshooting prompts and case are practical teaching suggestions. The calculator is a geometric estimate. Neither elite observations nor a calculated mark establish one ideal approach for every athlete.
What the evidence tells us, and where it stops
Curves do not have to be perfect circles. Tan and Yeadon combined a theoretical model with observations of two elite male jumpers and described a tightening curve towards takeoff. That helps explain a role of the curve, but two athletes cannot establish one ideal radius or progression. [1]
Elite athletes can use different patterns. The 2017 men’s report described both longer then shorter and shorter then longer final step patterns. It is a description of those performances, not a prescription for every jumper. [3]
Location is not the whole story. Nicholson and colleagues compared one successful and one unsuccessful attempt at the same height for each of seven elite men. Timing and takeoff characteristics differed. The small, male elite sample limits how confidently those observations can be applied to juniors, women or other levels. [2]
There is no universal target established by these sources. They do not validate this calculator or settle an ideal step count, takeoff distance or curve shape for everyone. Use their insights to ask better questions about your athlete, not to copy an elite template.
Sources and calculation notes
- [1] Tan, J. C. C. and Yeadon, M. R. (2005). Why do high jumpers use a curved approach? Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(8), 775–780. Theoretical model and observations of two elite male jumpers.
- [2] Nicholson, G., Epro, G., Merlino, S., Walker, J. and Bissas, A. (2024). Differences in run-up, take-off, and flight characteristics: successful vs. unsuccessful high jump attempts at the IAAF world championships. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, 1352725. Seven elite male jumpers; one paired comparison per athlete. Table 1 distinguishes step angle from takeoff angle.
- [3] Nicholson, G., Bissas, A. and Merlino, S. (2018). Biomechanical report for the IAAF World Championships 2017: High Jump Men’s. IAAF. See the coach’s commentary, pages 26–27, on differences in final approach steps. Author uploaded copy.
- [4] World Athletics. Competition and Technical Rules, 2026 edition. Technical Rule 25.3.1, markers. Rulebook hosted by NACAC. Check the World Athletics technical information page and event organiser for amendments and local requirements.
