Pinkbike Poll: Is it the Rider or the Bike?
What percentage of your performance and riding skills would you attribute to your abilities and what percentage would you bestow onto your bike?
"It's the rider, not the bike." It would be hard to count the number of times that I have heard or read that sentence in the context of mountain biking, but the truth is that the bike may play a lot larger role in our riding performance than many riders would be willing to admit. Aaron Gwin's recent fall from glory underscores that, at least in the rarefied air of pro DH competition, a different bike can have a dramatic effect on an athlete's performance.
![Aaron Gwin and Mick Hannah stopped by the Fox booth for a last minute discussion.]()
Well, in real life, who cares about the loss or gain of three seconds on a shuttle run? Fair enough, but take that point to the outer margins for the sake of argument - leave your big bike home and shuttle some DH on your 120mm XC/trailbike and then report the results. Sure, top riders can rip DH runs on a 29er hardtail, but it ain't the same game, even for them. In fact, there is a widespread notion that a long-travel bike makes the terrain too easy for the average rider and that every good bike-handler should be sentenced to a year on a hardtail to learn true mountain bike skills. I think that is pretty funny, like forcing someone to eat at MacDonalds for a year to learn how to chew bad food before taking them to appreciate a good restaurant. The point is, if there is a broad consensus among mountain bikers that more suspension and slacker geometry equate to easier bike-handling, then there is an equally large margin of riders who agree that bike does make a sizable difference to their riding abilities.
Chromag Hardtails in action in the Pacific Northwest are strong evidence that a good rider can live happily without rear suspension - and a good argument, for some, that it may be the rider and not the bike. Watch the video:
Testing bikes for a living has afforded me the chance to put the bike-versus-rider theory to task. Few get the opportunity to ride as many different models in the same category, in addition to a variety of bikes from all the realms within the world we call mountain biking. I'd say the percentages are 50/50. I've traded bikes mid-way though rides and watched a mid-pack regular thrash the entire group. I've fallen apart on trail rides, wrestling with an ill-handling bike and then returned the next day on a different mount to ace the entire trail. I've ridden DH bikes for a month, and when I switched back to my five-inch trailbike, spider-manned into the rocks at mach speed on the first technical descent. Evidently I thought I was the reason - certainly not the Giant Glory or the Intense EVO that I had been testing - for my enhanced technical skills. The bike matters.
![photo]()
![photo]()
Arguably, there are thousands of park riders who reap the benefits of long-travel DH bikes - ripping descents and launching stunts that would not not be possible on lesser bikes, given their existing skillsets. Many of those rippers have never ventured into the gravity realm on anything other than a big bike. Consider how much the bike has improved in the past ten years, and then chart the development of riding skills. Both graphs have similar curves - with the glaring exception of Freestyle riders and their hardware. There is no dirt in the air, so jump design and rider skills play the key roles in that genre. Watch the Red Bull Rampage, though, where most of the trails are real and the terrain is sketchy, and you'll see a marked difference in the role that the bike plays in the freestyle equation. Would we be riding at the present level without the enabling improvements that the bike has lent us? I highly doubt it, but that is my opinion. Pinkbike posted this poll because we wanted yours.
Pinkbike Poll Contest
Answer this poll and be automatically entered to win a Profile Elite Hubset
![Profile Eilte hubs]()
Profile Elite hubs feature:
• Six-pawl driver for 204 points of engagement means instant forward motion at the first application of pedal pressure
• Hub body matched anodized aluminum cone spacers with hardened, chromoly knurls to bite into dropouts
• Hub body matched anodized aluminum volcano bolt head covers
• Fits Shimano and SRAM 8, 9, and 10 speed cassettes
• 135 12mm Thru axle, 142mm 12mm Thru-axle, QR, chromoly or Ti, 3/8" bolt on axles
"It's the rider, not the bike." It would be hard to count the number of times that I have heard or read that sentence in the context of mountain biking, but the truth is that the bike may play a lot larger role in our riding performance than many riders would be willing to admit. Aaron Gwin's recent fall from glory underscores that, at least in the rarefied air of pro DH competition, a different bike can have a dramatic effect on an athlete's performance.
Aaron Gwin's debut on Specialized at Fort William did not go as expected. The facial expressions on the Fox team mirror Gwin's as they discuss options in the pits. Mike Kazimer photo
Well, in real life, who cares about the loss or gain of three seconds on a shuttle run? Fair enough, but take that point to the outer margins for the sake of argument - leave your big bike home and shuttle some DH on your 120mm XC/trailbike and then report the results. Sure, top riders can rip DH runs on a 29er hardtail, but it ain't the same game, even for them. In fact, there is a widespread notion that a long-travel bike makes the terrain too easy for the average rider and that every good bike-handler should be sentenced to a year on a hardtail to learn true mountain bike skills. I think that is pretty funny, like forcing someone to eat at MacDonalds for a year to learn how to chew bad food before taking them to appreciate a good restaurant. The point is, if there is a broad consensus among mountain bikers that more suspension and slacker geometry equate to easier bike-handling, then there is an equally large margin of riders who agree that bike does make a sizable difference to their riding abilities.
Chromag Hardtails in action in the Pacific Northwest are strong evidence that a good rider can live happily without rear suspension - and a good argument, for some, that it may be the rider and not the bike. Watch the video:
Testing bikes for a living has afforded me the chance to put the bike-versus-rider theory to task. Few get the opportunity to ride as many different models in the same category, in addition to a variety of bikes from all the realms within the world we call mountain biking. I'd say the percentages are 50/50. I've traded bikes mid-way though rides and watched a mid-pack regular thrash the entire group. I've fallen apart on trail rides, wrestling with an ill-handling bike and then returned the next day on a different mount to ace the entire trail. I've ridden DH bikes for a month, and when I switched back to my five-inch trailbike, spider-manned into the rocks at mach speed on the first technical descent. Evidently I thought I was the reason - certainly not the Giant Glory or the Intense EVO that I had been testing - for my enhanced technical skills. The bike matters.
Thomas Genon rocking the 2012 Joyride at Whistler. Fraser Britton photo
Thomas Vanderham at the Rampage. Margus Riga photo
Arguably, there are thousands of park riders who reap the benefits of long-travel DH bikes - ripping descents and launching stunts that would not not be possible on lesser bikes, given their existing skillsets. Many of those rippers have never ventured into the gravity realm on anything other than a big bike. Consider how much the bike has improved in the past ten years, and then chart the development of riding skills. Both graphs have similar curves - with the glaring exception of Freestyle riders and their hardware. There is no dirt in the air, so jump design and rider skills play the key roles in that genre. Watch the Red Bull Rampage, though, where most of the trails are real and the terrain is sketchy, and you'll see a marked difference in the role that the bike plays in the freestyle equation. Would we be riding at the present level without the enabling improvements that the bike has lent us? I highly doubt it, but that is my opinion. Pinkbike posted this poll because we wanted yours.
Answer this poll and be automatically entered to win a Profile Elite Hubset
Profile Elite hubs feature:
• Six-pawl driver for 204 points of engagement means instant forward motion at the first application of pedal pressure
• Hub body matched anodized aluminum cone spacers with hardened, chromoly knurls to bite into dropouts
• Hub body matched anodized aluminum volcano bolt head covers
• Fits Shimano and SRAM 8, 9, and 10 speed cassettes
• 135 12mm Thru axle, 142mm 12mm Thru-axle, QR, chromoly or Ti, 3/8" bolt on axles
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
who is hottest?
1. mila kunis
2. megan fox
this poll's results would be more trustworthy and 'scientific' than your's poll...
ps. vote...1 or 2???
:P
I think the best test would be to measure the progression of a certain rider. As the first step a DH comp would be organized, 3 runs, the result is averaged time. Target 3 slower guys with similar results that rode older second hand bikes. Preferably riders that live in same town and can train on same trails. Then give one of them a Status, a base Demo to the second and the S-Works Demo to the third guy. All dialed for those guys by a skilled rider/ suspension technician. Then tell them to ride twice a week for, let's say, three months. After that, organize DH comp for them on same track in similar conditions also three runs. If the bike makes a difference guy on S-Works Demo should make the biggest progress.
Another proposal: take those three guys of similar riding level and give them same bikes. S-Works Demo guy gets only a weekend lift pass in Whistler. Status guy gets weekend skills clinic. Base Demo guy gets weekend lift pass and spends the first day dialing his bike with a pro mechanic and pro suspension technician.
i like your logic man, your posts are of interest.
one question though:
let's say that the experiment happens and the guy with s works makes the biggest progress.
is it the bike itself or the psychology of the rider riding that specific bike??
i could be making better progress with the X bike and not the Y, not because it is superior in terms of function, but because i feel better on it.
this thing can't be measured....it is just a stupid poll.
unless we're talking of jumping from an enduro bike into a dh, in a full on dh track.
a better, still not perfect, way to see how the bike affects the results is this:
get 3 dh bikes in a dh track.
program 3 robots to ride them, in the exact same line.
continue the experiment by increasing the average speed by 1-2kmh increments.
the robot that holds its lines and doesn't fall from the bike, is ridfing probably the best bike.
do that for multiple line choices.
ingenious i guess
If the cyclists got a 3 years old mid range road bike for 1/10 of the price of the bikes they ride, they performance would be more or less the same. But let them ride a single speed bike or a 10" DH bike and they won't have a chance.
There are too many variables do determine the exact answer, or better said: this is no exact science. If you want to push your limits, do it on the bike you're used to ride.
And you know all those people who will say, "a great and light bike is more fun to ride than bad and heavy one - period." Well, skills and fitness is what makes riding real fun - bla bla but those two don't exclude each other. Well, you either have money to buy a bike or time to ride a bike... at least in this universe there is an extremely high chance that if you bought a super bike, you suck on it, because you had little time to practise riding - you were busy earning money. Off course you may be broke and suck on bike. So yes you are having 10% more fun than you would on a cheap bike, guy that can ride has 100% more fun than you. Post-purchase rationalization is a bitch...
I am living proof with my freshly bought carbon bike. I suck.
www.pinkbike.com/news/MTB-Sports-Video-Analysis-2013.html
to see exactly how much the extra £ takes you!
But you know... being aware of a right way of doing things doesn't mean you will do the right thing. I honestly think that there is no way that even a 1% of people who buy new stuff frequently will stop doing it after seeing such evidence that low-end bike is nearly as fast as high-end bike of the same kind. We humans are damn right stupid...
There is no hope... everybody hide your conspiracy theories about PB polls, the problem is in our lazy heads.
0%: the rider does it all
25%: the rider does most
50%: bike and rider are equal
75%: the bike does most to everything
Now, if PB would have used 10pct increments, some people would still believe it indeed.
What percentage of it is in our heads?
And on that note...Is it the size of the ship or the motion?
Yes, I had to bring THAT up. No one else did.
The only way would be to have a baseline bike and measure the percentage change if specific characteristics are changed ( geometry, PSI, innumerably more things) and compare them. Even then, variables such as rider, course conditions weather, etc all come into play.
In short, different trails call for different bikes and riding styles?................. DUH!!!!!
"Some questions simply don't deserve an answer" -Richard Dawkins
I put down 50% because I view the rider + bike as a "1/1" or a "Whole". And when you take away one part of the equation, you no longer have the proper definition of a Mountain Biker and any discipline underneath that. One without the other is nothing but just a human vs. a piece of alloy or carbon. It's not to say that the bikes make up so much of skill, but rather bikes define only the MAXIMUM available potential of a rider. Since, a rider with no bike can only run up to, say, 11mph, but with a bike and in skilled hands, the rider AND the bike together can suddenly achieve a top speed of 30-45mph+ and tackle various sketchy terrains at the same time.
This makes sense imo, because a new rider on a pro bike cannot push the bike at all as it was designed to do for Pro racers, but a Pro racer on a lower spec bike can still bring his skill into play and haul ass, but still will not likely go as fast/hard/etc vs. the Pro rider on his specifically fitted-tuned bike. In the end, I'm NOT saying that Bikes instantly give skill to an unskilled rider. As they are like tools for a specific job, and having the right tools for a job is one of the first key steps + actually having a well-experienced master to actually apply the tools are all equally important and absolutely fundamental.
on this one i say it's 50-50 ... a good bike makes a difference, but the rider is the decisive factor.
"Is it the rider or the bike?"
That does what, exactly?
Elite racing/competition, is so far removed from the average riders experience, it really shouldn't be included in the discussion - it's its own topic.
For the rest - its just not that black and white. The video with the hard tails is misleading. It just demonstrates that a couple skilled riders can manage a steep rooty trail on hard tails. Give those bikes to some groms visiting from Ohio or Indiana, and see how they do compared to a full squish bike on the same lines. In their case, it would be the bikes.
My experience is... it depends. Depends on where I'm riding, and what experience I want to have on that ride. I raced the BME Angelfire/Taos on my 29er. A week later I was there with my SX trail sporting a single crown 180 fork, and my dh rig with nice rockshox world cup dual crown. What I found is - I could ride the most difficult trail on my 100mm (rear) 140mm front 29er, cleanly and at a moderate speed. I was able to ride it faster on the SX trail, but I was to really "attack" it on my full DH rig. In my case, it was the bikes.
1) 10%bike for 50% of the riders 90% of the time
2) 90% bike for 10% of the riders 30% of the time
3) 50% bike for 90% of the riders 10% of the time
.
Case in point - I recently picked up a new bike and I was disappointed at how slow I was going, everything felt wrong. Eventually I got used to the bike and after changing up my riding style a little bit I am now a lot faster than I ever was on my old bike. Sure this is possibly growth as a rider as well, but after feeling like I was as quick as I could be on the old bike the new bike definitely had something to do with my speed increase!
The better rider will win most the time because most the time 0.1 of a second does not matter but at a wc level, having a bike that doesn't work for the rider can result in a top 20 rather than a top 5. A good rider will always be able to race a bike as fast as its possible but the potential of that bike might not match the others around them.
Its always going to be the rider who gets the most out of their equipment but the equipment needs to work with them and have the potential the rider is looking for, at the pointy end it does matter that a bike works with the rider when that .1 of a second counts.
It still takes the rider 100% to get that bike to the bottom without a rider the bikes going no where.
So how much do I put down to the bike. Probably 5% or less, in a race that last 4 min you might drop 5 seconds on a lesser bike, albeit that is a big number for a wc it only equates to a 2% loss in performance. The rider however makes up the big jumps and a simple mistake or not enough training will lose you more time than that.
The best WC tracks should be more demanding than a bike can make up for.
No two people are the same , but it should be noted that some bikes or more so setup of the bike, can attribute to an individual "feeling" they're riding better/faster. I'm very anal with the way I set my bike up & maintenance of it. I know if something doesn't feel right, then it plays on my mind when I'm riding.
Riding downhill, I've found three things other than the bike that will make someone a faster rider =
1: Balls. There's no denying it, you need balls to ride & bigger balls to ride fast.
2: Reaction time. I'll admit that I can ride a bike comfortably in most situations, but I know at high speeds hitting shit like I'm in a truck, my reaction time isn't as fast as others. I can run through my head an entire track, every rock, corner & line I "should" take, but my reaction time when in a real world riding situation vastly differs to what's in my head & that leads me to my last point..
3: Mind control. That ability to shut yourself off completely & only focus on what's in front of you is a very powerful thing.
Anyway, enough of my dribble. I really need to get out of work mode & enjoy the weekend!
dh and enduro the bike technology is far more important than slopestyle or even bmx
but rider skill is always more than 50% of the job
slopestyle: 20-10%
dh-enduro: 35-45%
If you're more like me, it's DEF the bike!!
My bike is DEF better at downhilling than I am, but with an Atherton on board, my bike WILL go a hell of a lot faster than I can get it going...............................for now! ;-)
From 3x7, 3x8, 3x9 and 2x10, from steel, aluminium to full carbon hard tails and 1 soft tail all for XC riding. I was faster on a 2x10 carbon 29er than all the other bikes I rode this summer. I would assume that as your skill level gets higher that the percentage would change but in the end the perfect bike with the perfect set-up will always give you an advantage.
Now I am his age, without sore knees, I think I understand what he was getting at. My back has never been good, but without full suspension i would be missing out. The rider ultimately pilots whatever they ride, and great riders can do anything on pretty much any bike; but as you get older, the equipment becomes a bigger factor in your enjoyment. After all, it's not the improvement in fitness and skill that becomes a challenge, but overcoming the vagaries of age at the same time.
To me the advances in frame materials and geometry, along with suspension design are giving all riders an opportunity to advance their skills to new levels and more quickly. For those getting older, the enjoyment and opportunities as a result of these innovations have never been greater.
vimeo.com/32425530
You can see the difference between the klunker and how he rides his DH rig or the double in other videos. such as these:
vimeo.com/50998782
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeHc_Enmjuc
That's why racing is about having the fastest machine, and then having someone who can push it to it's limits. This argument has been had in F1, Rally, etc etc for years.
The bike absolutely matters- it's how much that is the question. Some riders the bike may matter more, others less.
The bike experience exists because I am a giant shock absorber brain; I am the ultimate brain shock!
------
The hardtail question is a different animal, especially as I get older!
And all can be answered with enough money!
There are so many - too many - variables to the open ended question "Is it the rider, or the bike?" - it's not a question that can be answered on it's own.
Fill in some variables, and come back with a revised version.
Keep it up !!!
- last year I visited the bike-parks at Levi and Ylläs on my 150mm trail bike. Levi is more about freeride (wooden stunts, wallrides etc), Ylläs is more about brutal rocks and endless berms. I felt comfortable on my Merida in both parks, there was no trail left unridden because my bike wouldnt let me do it - however for many sections I just lacked the skills to rip them right
- this year I visited THE SAME TRAILS IN THE SAME BIKE PARKS on my 200/170mm Status. It felt exactly the SAME comfortable nearly at every point of the trails, however handling the roughest rock gardens improved due to more aggressive angles and more travel on the rear.
so my take is: because I felt so little difference between two differently oriented bikes on same trails, I would estimate the bike input somewhere at a quarter of overall performance, or even less. But certainly, for 99% of us average riders - hardware matters.
PS: I also own a freeride hardtail, and in my local Estonian woods there is no difference: hardtail, trail bike, full-on susser - it all feels the same.
I guess my point is, that between two decent bikes, that differ in terms of geometry and components slightly, but stay roughly in the same category, changes You feel as a rider are extremely minor.
Having said that, I do not believe that switch between Trek and Spesh has something to do with Gwin's bad luck this year. Hope he can put himself back together.
However when a bike that feels great, but is also fast, is when a bike could be 25-50%. On a bike like that its going to inspire confidence and make the rider at home taking bigger risks.
A lot of it is mental, and a lot of it has to do with whether the rider can adapt, or the bike is suited to a particular style. Riding with my friends I go from one of the guys in front with my 160mm bike, to one of the guys in the middle with my hardtail, on the same trails. Doesnt matter, it's all fun. But in a competitive race scene, I can lose 30 places because my wheelbase is 1cm shorter than what I was used to, and just didnt feel comfortable...
It demonstrates that a mummy riding a V10 makes nothing and a guy with heart riding any bike makes the difference.
For any rider setup tuning and bike can help with confidence, some bikes work for a rider some dont. I had a bike last year I could slay but ultimately I still didnt gel with it, it just felt wrong for me, no matter what I changed, my current frame is not only the best Ive ever had, every ride is a great ride, just love it, you cant measure this in isolation, at Gwins competition level even a change in tires which also has occurred can affect performance, whether its his tires the bike or setup too far away. But for example to set the Demo up like his 9.9 would be a mistake and many make, they are different bikes you must learn the secrets of the frame and setup accordingly, just like a new girl shes not really the same person as your last!
I see it coming down to a combination of your abilities and how comfortable you are on the bike, bike setup being the key for me.
On a personal level - Different bike setups have changed my riding ability. I first got a DH machine that was a frame size two small, old geo, bad brakes, but it got me going and I had fun. However, since changing to a new bike, one that has "better" components, different frame geo and so on, my riding ability gets better each time I go out, simply because I now have the confidence in the bike.
Meh, who care's anyway, you need the bike to go riding and that's what we all love doing eye?
My Bro has a fully loaded Specialized Enduro carbon, which he uses as a Trail bike. He also does alot of DH on his Morewood DH bike. In my opinion, he's a fast and capable rider and he's at a good fitness level.
So, a few weeks back, the Enduro was out of action for repair so he borrowed an 8 year old Orange 5 in order to keep his training up for an upcoming trip to the Alps.
The 5 is a good bike but this one is getting old and in need of a thorough overhaul, it has none of the latest and greatest kit, was a bit loose and rattly, it had a barely functioning rear shock, no dropper post, poor brakes, worn tyres, old school long stem and narrow bars, gears were hit and miss etc etc.
So we hit our local trails with the dreaded strava tuned on (we were training remember!), and guess what? He was hardly any slower on the Orange. We're talking 5-10% slower on the decents, and no difference at all enywhere else.
So what this proved to me is that a good rider will get a good performance from any half decent bike, and beyond a certain point the returns for £££spent on a bike get more and more marginal.
A faster rider will always compensate for equipment differences, up and to the point where the equipment slows him beyond the speed of the next fastest rider. I answered 75% in the pole, where I see the issue as all things being equal, how much difference does the bike make for one rider, in their performance, not in terms of making a slow rider faster?
Try this: time your best effort on your favorite trail. Now, do it again after clicking your rebound lighter 4 or 5 clicks. Time yourself again. You will be amazed. As soon as you are pitched over the bars, or get off line, you lost more than three seconds.
When racing moto, I went from mid pack in moto one, struggling with the bike on a tight course, then raising the fork 5mm and getting my usual top 10 place, 4th that moto if I remember.
A good bike won't make you a better rider, but a poorly set up bike, or a bad bike will definitely slow you.
So with that being said I'd say that it's 70% bike 30% rider.
The large part of that 70% is fit/size/comfort/mobility within the bike it self. But it also goes hand in hand with the riders mental confidence of being comfortable/confident in the those 4 trades mentioned.
i feel my bike sometimes has to meet me half way according to the ridding discipline i choose to use that day. i'm not going to ride dh on an xc bike & expect to get the performance of a dh bike on an xc bike... right?
in the beginning it was mostly bike that gave me confidence enough to push my learning curve to gain the skills i have today. so the more i ride, the more i grow my skills, the less bike it will become, i just won't reach 100% rider.
I know that riding at Willamette Pass (rough, unkempt "bike park") on my 6inch SC Heckler is do able down to the bigger drops and quite fast, but when I rode a Norco Aurum out there, it was a whole different ball game in that all of the many braking pumps were not gone, but muted significantly, the drops became smaller and high speeds much more stable. It was definitely much, much easier.
That being said, with enough handling skill, it's very possible to keep up and rip it on a much lesser bike.
Other places I have had experience shuttling with my friends on DH bikes. That same Heckler has let me keep up with most of them for the most part. One time, when my derailleur was snapped, I even popped over on my fully rigid 1996 kona bike. The course was smooth enough for me to keep up and actually allowed me to enjoy riding it with them on a flowy, fun course. The bike was capable of sending moderate drops (3+ feet) at high speeds, so long as I was willing to perform some skill to allow for the landings not to suck.
When Disorder I/II/III came out, the guy were shredding on pretty much standard bikes with today-wise quite average suspension, some almost without, and they were haulin'!
Today riders are on bladder control/PC/USB/Wi-Fi/Bluetooth frames and forks, that I doubt make all that much of a difference. Things have changed so much, that I find it quite hard to differentiate and somewhat justify the differences between a WC part and a FR part on a bike today, other than the price that is. It's not that much about the bike, as it is about how much the rider's ego wants to have awesome parts on his bike so he has that pro presence amongst the others and feel like a god and ride like a dumbass.
For me the essentials are brakes, cockpit and tires. If I feel comfortable, I don't give a rat's ass what it is. If it's mine, it's sturdy enough and can handle everything I throw at it, nothing more, nothing less.
P.S. I don't know where I went with this one
Need to be chilled knowing your kit works, I had profile hubs on my jump bike and they were mint for 5 years.
wish I hadn't sold it now! want some more of those bad boys for my SLAYER!!!!!
When we first start riding our bike choice is very important , it will help the beginner roll over and down all kinds of stuff that they would crash on without a great bike.
As we progress , the bike becomes less of a factor , but it still helps us out a good amount ( which is why I chose 25%).
At the pro level , the bike is 10%, but when races are won and lost in a couple of seconds, that 10% is more important than the 25% boost that the average rider gets from a great bike.
There are times when I just let the bike figure it out, other times when I know what the correct line is. A great bike makes either choice an option.
P.s. great idea to give away cool stuff for taking polls.
Ask my non-athletic girlfriend who was flying around Sedona and hitting little jumps on her first day on a mountain bike ever! "This bike makes it so easy" she said (Riding a SC Juliana).
The question asks "what percentage of YOUR riding performance would you attribute to your bike?", whereas yours and your bikes performance are two different factors in the terrain you are able to cross and the manner in which you do so.
Nice try Richard...
Biked also happens when the bike, such as one with a old school xc long stem and you hit a jump, then the telegraphic nature of a long stem pre-loads your body into air without the bike. Biked. . .
And anyone who says that they can ride the same trail with the same pace and in the same way with any bike are just lying. Yes, you can ride most trails on any bike, but it will be a pain in the ass to do an XC loop with a 20kg DH bike and you're very likely to case the f*ck out of the dirt jump on which you can tailwhip with your DJer on an XC 20er (again, Martin Ashton wouldn't but none of us is Martin Ashton, it's the same thing as with Gwin and Hill above).
That is pushing it to the extreme, but if you have moderate skills and a capable AM/enduro bike you're sure to leave well behind your more skilled friend riding a hardtail as soon as the terrain gets rowdy (rowdy meaning rocky and all sorts of uneven, not just steep and with jumps a la bikepark). And likewise, you can have all the skill in the world yet there's no way you get even halfway down Champery on an inadequate bike (pro DHers could maybe get down on an enduro/freeride bike if needed be, but grinding their teeth and grimacing all the way down). So yeah, skill matters, and matters a lot when talking about using the proper bike on the proper terrain, but bike is a huge part of the equation.
imo, it would really depend on who/what/where. but in my experience, bike has almost nothing to do with it...
Having said that, once you get a bike that feels right, you go a whole lot faster again.
It's mountain biking alright? Don't make a fkng street drama out of it at the cost of such a great guy. Make sure it stays North Shore not Jersey Shore. Higher the bar
beginners profit least from a top bike, intermediates get confidence boost and pros avoid being limited.
i'm pretty sure that for a lambda rider, a blind test would reveal aleatory results
Namely, does it look like a Session?
yes my bike does the main work on the terrain I ride but then I wouldn't attempt it on a raleigh chopper,the same as I wouldn't enter my washing machine in a formula 1 race
it seems like in some parts he is faster with the old bike, doesn't he!!?
but if u can do something,you may do this on the other bike.But imagine,that you learn flip superman on the road bike...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYS1cu8F4vo&feature=youtube_gdata_player
And if it's a parrot you need a bicycle with extremely short chainstays:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qth3sOPfWA&feature=youtube_gdata_player