.jpg)
The age old debate; Which is best? Which is safest? Which should students start with? The common argument is that static is better because "you learn more control". Spin is mostly considered to be harder due to the speed and forces generated but the funny thing is that you'll also hear that spin is both "cheating" or "really hard" depending on who you're talking to.
It might be controversial but, in my opinion, it really doesn't matter which you start with as both have positives and negatives and most students tend to prefer whatever they started on originally. Static has in part become the default due to the fact that historically static poles came first and, even to this day, in some places of the world are still found in clubs more often than spin. Yet whole generations of pole dancers are now starting with spin and the world has not collapsed. What we should be analysing isn't what type of pole students are using but how they are being taught to use it. Good and experienced teachers are the most important factor by far. There are many different techniques and skills used across both poles and it's in students best interests to experience a little bit of everything.
Static vs Spin
The idea of static being inherently safer or better for beginners is simply a myth. Static also has some negatives to it that need to be mitigated if pole is to be safe for new students. In order to spin on a static pole we have to generate momentum which requires us to travel out and around the pole whilst hanging off our arms and stabilising other parts of the body. This is deceptively hard to coordinate, particularly for new beginners. It is also hard to use leg grip to support static spins because the harder we grip our legs onto the pole the less we move.
For beginners, who are often taught spins on static pole very early, this can mean they are very quickly having to hold most, if not all, of their bodyweight from their arms. For new students who may not be strong enough, or may not understand how to engage their shoulders, this increases the risk of them hanging off the shoulder joint and injuring themselves. Now, this doesn't mean we don't teach static to beginners. We mitigate the risk. We may not teach static spins very early on until we can see students are strong enough and instead may focus on doing our spins as slides, learning steps, turns, poses and floorwork and slowly building up our strength until students can hold themselves.
Spin pole also comes with a risk and that is that more forces are generated by a spin pole, but it does come with an upside and there is an easy way to navigate this. Again, we mitigate the risk! I don't teach many spins early in my beginners journey focusing on steps, turns, poses, floorwork and slides. When we do start to learn some spins we are focusing on ones that allow us to use a lot of leg or body grip. This takes some of the weight out of the students arms and allows their, usually stronger, legs to support them too. If we are also careful about how we teach students to enter their spins they can usually learn control very quickly and learn not to spin very fast at all.
Can you see a pattern emerging here? It is not what discipline you teach but HOW you teach it.
Another myth about static is that it teaches control but in my experience it is often the opposite. Again, static by its very nature requires us to generate momentum if we want to do spins. It is absolutely possible to generate momentum with control but it is easier sometimes to hide a lack of control on a static pole. On spin it is instantly obvious when there is a lack of control because you will spin insanely fast. Spin students learn a strong isometric hold very quickly and may find it easier to do skills that require this ability.
In the past I have had students move to my studio who have learnt on static originally. Many of them believed they were inverting with control but the very first time they tried to invert on a spin pole they would find they either couldn't or would end up spinning a lot. This is because they were able to use a huge step, swing and a forward motion on static because the pole doesn't move. Again, this doesn't mean we shouldn't teach static but instructors who do will need to be more eagle eyed to spot students who may not actually be as controlled as they think.
Equally I think I probably teach my students to invert on spin a little later than other studios because I need to be absolutely sure they are strong enough to do their invert with control. I don't think this is a bad thing because in my opinion a lot of studios teach invert too quickly. But regardless we mitigate the risks.
I wonder sometimes if this idea of static just being safer and better for beginners comes in part from a misunderstanding about HOW we teach spin to beginners. Static has often been seen as the default simply because static poles came first and even to this day are more commonly seen in clubs. Spin has been seen as the next step. But how we teach a student who has never done spin but started on static is going to be very different than how I would teach a complete beginner on spin.
In fact we don't use as much actual spinning as you'd think, even though the pole itself is on spin. In a recent facebook group discussion I saw a comment about how it's much harder to spot students on spin pole than static as an explanation for why static should be learnt first, but even when my students are inverting on a spin pole they often aren't actually spinning. We only add spin when we are comfortable and prior to that the movement of the pole is minimal.
And this leads to another benefit, my own personal opinion, of spin pole. On static leg grips can be less secure as when we move our body the pole does not move with us and instead we can start to rotate around it which can loosen our grip points. On spin we can simply set up our grip, hold for dear life and our grip stays fairly intact even as we move around, because the pole is moving with our grip! Static pole is certainly more painful for that reason too as it can pull on our skin.
And yet, we can learn to combat that movement on static and develop really strong holds. This whole post may seem like a contradiction and it's because it is. Both poles have positives and negatives. In my opinion they are almost like two entirely different disciplines that need to be taught in entirely different ways.
There are good instructors teaching beginners static and there are good instructors teaching beginners spin: the key is in how we mitigate the risks and whether our syllabus is progressive and sensible. There are inexperienced and downright negligent instructors across both disciplines. There are safe and unsafe ways of using both types of pole.
Ultimately what you'll usually find is that most people prefer whichever they started with!
In Conclusion..
Both techniques come with risks and benefits. It is the instructors job to mitigate and manage those risks regardless of whether they teach spin or static and if they do so successfully they can better protect their students. It is important to note that the causes of injury are complex, and multifactorial, and as instructors we cannot prevent all occurrences. We can only do our best, particularly whilst we do not have a strong and conclusive answer and the quality of instructor training is sorely lacking.
If your students are strong, capable and safe, I guess, who really cares?
Share your opinion: