Opinion - It Should Be Hard, Shouldn't it?
The recent push for more and more entry level trails might be great for introducing new riders to the sport, but let's not forget that mountain biking isn't supposed to be easy, safe, or quick to master.
Many of us cut our teeth, as well as our shins, on raw singletrack that invited progression, and taking that option away from new riders just doesn't seem fair. Of course somewhere like the North Shore, a location that pretty much only had insanely difficult trails up until just recently, needs some easier lines down the mountain for those who don't want to go searching through the bush for their shoes after every yard sale of a crash, but the Shore is the exception rather than the norm. So many mountains out there are seeing only ultra-smooth "flow trails" added to their maps, despite the fact that the already existing trails don't go much beyond blue or green on IMBA's rating scale.
The argument for all of these so-called flow trails is usually based around bringing more riders into the sport, which must be a good thing, right? Well, I'm not going to make any friends by saying this, and I fear that it might sound terribly offensive, but why should many of us care if Jim from accounting or that guy three houses down gets into the sport? Bikes are amazing in that they make people happy, and I really do want Jim from accounting to be happy, but I don't want every new trail that gets built to be as smooth as glass, or existing trails to be graded down to the point where they lack any sort of character just so Jim doesn't feel intimidated.
 | It isn't about "getting gnarly" and drinking Mountain Dew - I despise that sort of attitude as much as anyone - and I have no shame in dismounting to walk a feature that unnerves me, but I don't want us to forget that our sport might not be for everyone, so let's not try to make it for everyone. |
 |
 There is a contingent that would like to see many sections like the one pictured here during the B.C. Bike Race smoothed out. Where do you stand? Photo: Dave Silver |
A lot of the rationale behind the latest craze of smoothing and stomping everything flat boils down to money. If I had a Clif Bar for every time someone defended either a new flow trail or the neutering of a challenging singletrack by arguing that more riders mean more money being injected into the sport I'd likely be making a healthy side income from selling them to my riding buddies. But I'd rather give those bars away because I don't give a shit about money, be it in my own pocket or tourism dollars. Yes, I make a living by working in the cycling industry, but that isn't why I ride. I ride because I love it, and I know that it's the same for you. I know that you'd ride regardless of if your local trail association sees that tourism money, receives that government grant, or gets fifty new members next season.
Hell, it seems like most of the money that many local associations receive goes straight towards building the easiest trails that the terrain permits rather than funding difficult singletrack that longtime club members and riders would find challenging. Something is wrong with that picture, but criticizing trail work of any kind is like joking about cancer in that you're likely to offend anyone that hears you. Cancer most certainly isn't funny, but is all trail work good trail work? Is smoother always better? Is there such a thing as over-maintaining a trail?
I'm writing this from Whistler, the location that we're using for the first of three week-long test sessions that will see us ride and rate the latest and most interesting bikes on the market. Now, everyone knows that Whistler is the Mecca of lift-assisted riding - you want to spend all day smashing berms so hard that it feels like your face is going to pull off from the G-forces? There're at least three or four groomed runs that will allow you to do exactly that. Rather test your skills on steep, natural trails with roots as big as a 30ft long anaconda? Whistler has that in spades, as well as everything in between, and the only thing stopping you will be how soon your unsuspecting hands turn into lobster claws permanently shaped around a set of Ruffian grips... you'll know exactly what I'm talking about if you've been here.
Whistler's local Valley trails, those you have to access using your own power, deserve just as much praise - they're rooty, filled with rocks, and it seems like they are either pointing straight up or straight down. There are easier trails, of course, but I don't think I'm out of line when I say that the average Whistler trail, be it in the bike park or out in the valley, is substantially more difficult than most other places in the world, and I say that having sampled more foreign goodness than a single guy on a Contiki bus tour through Europe. The incredibly hard work that the locals have done in the Whistler area has created an amazing trail network without forsaking riders who like to be challenged, and those who are in charge of their own community's trail work should make an effort to come and see it for themselves.
We need to forget this idea that new or less skilled riders should never have to walk or put a foot down. Mountain biking isn't easy, and that's a good thing.
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41888 views
41888 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
"I really do want Jim from accounting to be happy, but I don't want every new trail that gets built to be as smooth as glass, or existing trails to be graded down to the point where they lack any sort of character just so Jim doesn't feel intimidated."
I cant stand it when someone, even seasoned riders want to change something so they can be faster there. The track is designed for us to work to it not the other way around. We need to stop making trails easier, rather we should improve our riding and overcome the challenge. Also we need to make more use of B and C lines for those new riders without downgrading our trails. (Keep in mind B and C lines should never be faster than the A line, that is part of the A line reward.)
This might sounding selfish but I don't own a bike shop nor a bike related brand, so I don't really care... and I don't see many bike brands or shops building trails either so I'm not going to shed tears for them.
Don't get me wrong, I'm always happy to help new riders out, show them around and teach them a thing or two but when it comes to building glass smooth trails all over the place I can't help but to think it's more of a disservice to the sport than anything else.
I feel it is indeed not a sport for everyone. If you don't like roots and rocks, there's always road biking.
What is lacking in the 'balance'of trail difficulty are the more intermediate techy trails ( Pangor comes to mind) that still challenge these two riders without being so intimidating or risky so as to a) allow them to progress or b)allow them to stay in the sport longer.
The issue being discussed here is dumbing down of existing trails or only building easy trails, a problem that seems to be spreading like wildfire when you talk to experienced riders worldwide.
Its the same dynamic you see at gyms. If you belong to a gym you are likely familiar with the influx of new members right after the new year. You show up the week after the holidays and the place is packed with people you have never seen before. The people who sign up with the 'new years special' promo the gym is running, show up for 2 months, never to be seen again after. Then you hear all the regular members complaining about the crowd, and the machines being full etc. Yes it sucks for a month or two but that rush of people signing up at new years is a huge revenue boost for the gym. It keeps the place open and keep the cost down for everyone else. For me I'm happy with the trade off. Those people are subsidizing my membership fee.
Its no different with a bike park or ski resort for that matter. They don't make a ton of money off the season pass holder regulars. They make money on people who show up for a day and buy a day pass, rent a bike etc. Those people are just as important from a business side as the hardcore regular.
There is a place for both and frankly I welcome that as I get older...oh, BTW, there are plenty of 50 somethings that have been riding longer than many of the naysayers have been on this planet, we are not Johnny come lately's and are a big reason why this sport exists as it is today...just not bulletproof anymore, your day will come ;>
Lack of easy trails didn't seem to stop or discourage any of the people that were riding before this easy/flow craze.
And for the record I enjoy flowy trails and I also enjoy natural/tech trails , it's just that about 75 percent of all new trails being built are flow trails .
A bigger worldwide bike scene is cool but for our everyday trail riding it doesn't bring much. Different places, different realities.
I prefer flowly tracks with nice smooth berms and nice long fast table tops.
However, I do understand what people are saying when they say not to down grade the difficulty levels of tracks, since I have done a lot of trail building, and I have designed/built a track for more intermediate/beginners in mind, and still managed to have a decent track with some roughness, but not too rough that it scares off people, and not too steep that it scares people off, and the track was well received right from from our more experienced riders in the state, down to the beginners and intermediate riders.
The important thing, is if your terrain allows it, you need a mix of good flowly stuff, and largely technical stuff, or build two separate tracks if you can, one geared for more experienced riders, the other for more beginner/intermediate riders.
The next problem is, if all tracks are made for the more experienced riders, you quickly scare off new blood in the sport, and once people get full time jobs, families and can't ride as much, you slowly find your club or state for the sport, dwindling in members/riders, and than the sport slowly dies, so it is a fine balancing act of having tracks to attract new riders to the sport, and keeping the intermediate levelled riders like myself in the sport, while trying to please more experienced riders who want to continually challenge themselves.
So to sum up, the main problem, is that we've so far failed to achieve the correct balance, you need to keep attracting new riders/members, and the only of doing that, is having reasonably cruisy trails, than slowly kick up the difficulty levels, and you need to have a 50/50 attention to trail building, the flowy/jump park styled riding with lots of tables for beginner or intermediate riders, and the other focus, on balls out roots steep rock garden tracks with no B C lines, and slowly edge people towards those tracks, now, not all of them will get there, and that's fine, that's where having a good 50/50 focus comes into play, those who want to keep to the flowly jump style riding, can continue doing that, and those who want to challenge themselves, can do that..
Just a thought.
You forgot x1 drivetrains, ebikes and people riding 10" bikes on trails that could be ridden with a hardtail. Are we missing anything?
No doubt all these flow trails boost sales in short travel bikes which are being pushed at us every other second , of course people are gonna want short travel bikes if 75 % of trails being built could be ridden on a skate board.
Not hating on flow trails per say ( i enjoy them too ) but hating on the fact that , at least in the UK , 7/10 new trails are flow trails , where is the progression ?
You've all completely ignored my comment about having a healthy 50/50 mix, the problem isn't having flowy jumpy trails and relatively easy trails for beginners, it is a problem of balancing it out.
Like I said, having relatively easy flowly jumpy long fast table top trails is a good thing for the sport, that way most people can do it, and those who want to challenge themselves (With a 50/50 focus on hard and easier flowy trails) can challenge themselves, and those who want to keep cruising and keep things relatively safe can do that.
What I find annoying, is the elitist attitude towards new riders who want something easier to start on, and than work their way up, or keep cruising. If we don't achieve a healthy balance, the sport will slowly die out, and in Australia we've already seen some dwindling numbers to the nationals and Victoria state dh rounds, while people move off in their life and have more important things, like a family, a mortgage or move on to endurance xc racing where there's an actual sustainable market for it.
And I respect that you're pulling your hand out of your ass and actually building things you want to ride, too many people just ride what a small number of us build, and get angry when its not built their way and leave.
In Australia, it's always like 10 percent of the people doing the hard yards.
What really needs to happen is we need some serious meetings with the governing bodies to properly rate tracks, and set up a real plan with clear goals regulations and guidelines set out, say beginner tracks should be easy with some obstacles but not too hard, and intermediate tracks should up the skills required once more, than the pro lines should be all A lines with minimal or no b/c lines, if you add in b/c lines, they should add 10-20 seconds to your time and should re-route a decent distance from the A line.
Make sure the various governing bodies understand that, on the harder tracks, it should not be neutered and dumbed down so it's less scary, have the beginner/Intermediate jumpy flow trails or downhill tracks, for that, and keep the pro lines hard and un-changed.
Gotta get out there and change the varrying guidelines and regulations with the various governing bodies like MTBA (Mountain Biking Australia) who I think set out guide lines, and get the UCI to change guide lines and allow track builders more flexibility.
Gotta get that balance right, it is crucial IMHO, for the sport to continue to grow..
Leave Trails RAW!
I love the fact that I can ride something relatively easy that I used to think was off the charts. Made me a better rider.
Downhill Mike
Whiteface Mountain Bike Park
Keep it real!
www.downhillmike.com
Viva la Gnar!
"We are trying to make our trails easier, so we can stay in business"
When it comes to bike parks and places that survive on people showing up to ride, that's your answer right there as to why you see a trend of smoother and easier trails. Its tough to sustain a business without expanding the trail system to accommodate more people. If you like taking lifts to the top and riding at these type of parks, get used to there being some easier and more flowy trails. They are a necessity that's not likely to go away.
Some thing like the coastal gravity park is exactly what we need here in the UK , every thing is pretty much dumbed down with regards to proper big bike jump lines , mostly aimed and begginers/intermediates . we are allways promised the big stuff but fail to deliver , which forces you into unofficial trail building to get your fix.
Building safe, fun trails is where it is at. It doesn't need to be dangerous to be fun. It just appears to me that mountain biking has hit a point where those in the sport are almost trying to stop newbies from starting for whatever reason. I see a lot of elitist garbage going on recently. "Man/harden the f up" "only a pussy wouldn't hit that jump" etc.
Funny that the author should mention Whistler. Whistler bike park is internationally renowned for being one of the EASIEST parks to get into riding. Sure, the offer huge jump trails, but also a lot of VERY easy flow trails - which you don't get in Europe nearly as much. You're lucky if there is even a single "flow trail" at bike parks here.
By the way, I came back from "the shore" slightly disillusioned. Sure, plenty of fine trails, but also a lot of really badly maintained garbage. And I'm not talking about any of the "flowy" trails.
To each his own. Like mike says, "our sport might not be for everyone".
Sorry, I totally disagree.
Yes it sucks to be that guy who barely escaped a wheelchair. But 100% that was not the trails fault. Nor the trail builders. It was his own. Perhaps he should have had the sense to have a look at what he was getting into rather than just bombing off feeling totally safe doing what is a totally dangerous sport. No one (at least no one I know) is trying to stop newbies from starting, just getting bored of what is fast becomeing a "lowest common denominator" sport.
You seem slightly confused these "huge jump lines" you speak of ARE the flow trails. The so called "badly maintained garbage" is what skilled riders call "tech" or "a challange"
Please, let DH be saved from the worldwide dumbing down/simplification of everything!
Its one of the few escapes into the "real world" where not all the dangerous things have been smoothed off by scared mothers. Some of us enjoy taking risks and coming out on top. A world with no risks will be a boring world indeed, and we (humans, not just mtb riders) seem to be heading that way fast.
And the "huge jump lines" in Whistler are stuff like crabapple hits and A-Line. Flow trail? B-Line for example. You don't get such smooth trails in Europe in most bike parks - that is what I'm talking about. If you choice in the bike park is either a fire road or a trail like Ladies Only, chances are the newbies are going to skip the fire road. And stuff like ladies' is just too difficult for a newcomer. Those dreaded flow trails teach you a ton of bike control, AND they are so much fun to ride. There is no need to be a dick about them, just accept the fact that Mtn Biking isn't just about hucking to flat. Only having "tech" trails is even worse than just having "flow" trails.
I have my doubts that the Jims are going to stick around for too long anyway - one crash is usually enough to send them scurrying back to the TV - but everyone has to start somewhere. Having a challenge appropriate to your level of ability is always a huge help.
I understand and enjoy a smooth trail also, but why do we have to remove optional/side gnarly lines. Why not have both.
"It doesn't need to be dangerous to be fun. It just appears to me that mountain biking has hit a point where those in the sport are almost trying to stop newbies from starting for whatever reason."
That's the issue. If every trail out there is "brake melting gnar", it's just a shitload of people getting hurt, people getting scared away from the sport, bike rentals falling off, and parks closing. There has to be some moderate/easy stuff for people to start out on.
But the second sentence is the bigger point I think. If you want beginners to stop wrecking the trails, take the time to ride/talk with them, teach them the rules, and help them get better. If good riders never take the time to tell newbies how it's supposed to be, how are they gonna learn what they're screwing up? If Jim from accounting knows that other people actually really enjoy that rock garden, and that he could probably roll it too if he worked on his technique, maybe he won't come back with his IMBA chapter and smooth it all out. For Joe Roadie to 'get' what mtb is all about, one of us might actually have expend the effort to tell him.
I've gotten several people into riding the past couple years, and now we all help trim back brush and rake trails and stuff. Nothing huge but it helps. Sometimes the difference between a newbie doing all that and a newbie coming in and paving stuff over is people like us letting them know that walking around the gnarly stuff is just part of starting out, and it's meant to be something you work on. Not saying you need to spend all your time escorting beginners around the woods, but basically one way to have fewer noobs is to help the noobs to not be noobs anymore. I could give a shit about people pumping more money into mtb, but the more friends you can make on the trail, the more people you have to help when it's time to build/maintain.
Over here it's either no brainer/disabled access trails or steep , rough and natural tech , f*ck all in between , these new riders are just gonna stagnate and get a false impression that biking is some how easy or shit their pants when they encounter braking bumps and root sections.
And to be honest when most people are new they are only in the ' shit your pants and go OTB at any tech feature ' for less than a year.
You mention money coming into the sport as unimportant to you, but without growth in the industry, you would still be sneaking onto illegal trails riding a hardtail with a Panaracer Smoke/Dart combo. You may not even have a job in the bike industry without that money. Creating accessible trails gets more people into biking; that leads to better funding, encourages development of new technology, and gets more people protecting access to our trails. The last point will probably be the most important in the future.
I do agree with you in that custodianship of existing trails is a bigger problem in theory, but it seems like rampaging hordes of trail-nerfing Freds aren't all that prevalent.
Thought-provoking article, though- thanks for that!
TEMPLE
Mountain biking was never an easy sport to get into. It used to take hard work to learn and now there's lifts and shuttling and easier ways to achieve the peak for a run down a hill. I think about trails from back in the day that were horrendously rocky and would love to go back to those with a current bike to see how much easier it would be. Maybe we shouldn't dumb down the trails as technology and advancements in bike design has made riding much more easy than back in the days of friction shifting.
I am lucky enough to live where IMBA has actually built flow trails that are ROUGH as well. Go figure! I'm not a fan of my local IMBA chapter but they did a good job there with the BLM in building a place that is challenging and not really for beginners. Well, not the top half. I can take beginner/intermediates to the lower half though and they have a blast. Who would think you could have rough flow trails??
In theory all these new riders will eventually learn how to ride and start demanding fun trails, but I don't see it. In particular unless shops stop selling new riders XC race bikes. I feel like these new flow-trail seekers are being set up for failure. They go in and say "I fear gnar" and shop says "Oh you prefer smooth trails? Here's an XC bike." Well, everything feels gnar on a twitchy race bike, so they then demand paved trails.
Yea i had that kind of bike when i was 15 year old lawl it rox
Couple other reasons its good for more people to get into mtn biking:
1) Should (in theory) bring average costs of products down because they're produced at higher volumes - see MTX for examples
2) Creates a voice for your local governments to reserve biking as a part of the park use programs - orgs like NSMBA become louder
3) Creates rad jobs for people like you that love the sport and want to throw their lives into it
As long as there is a mix of stuff on the local network/mountain, its all good. Stuff for the Gnar dudes to shred with the DH rigs, AM dudes on the flow/gnar/tech tracks and some gravel tracks for the noobs. Too much of one type of trail is lame.
Local groups shouldn't take down hard trails just to make easy ones. They aren't mutually exclusive as there's not just one type of rider out there. If there was, there'd be only one type of bike.
I learned on Fromme and was thrown to the wolves. Would have been great to cut my teeth on some green or blue trails first. Its easy to forget what its like to learn a new sport.
Skiing/snowboarding does it well. There's a bunny slope with lots of instructors and there's some double black diamonds and everything in between.
People say you should build it like this, or you should build it like this. But at the end of the day, it gets built how the funder of that project wants it built. Its not up to me. Its up to the spec they have given me. And usually that is an intermediate level trail. I rarely ever get a chance to build something at an expert level or something I want to build. Of course I get to use my own creative license and build sneaky hits and the odd high line here and there but alot of it is built to cater to every rider at the intermediate level and above. I try and build 2 trails within the 1 trail. Easy to the average rider but to a full pinner, they will find hotlines, jumps, gaps, things might get abit wild in some other wise easy bits.
The reality of it is. If I want gnar and tech or big jumps, ill go build that for myself and my friends and if people come across it, good luck to them. But when there is money involved, you build what they pay you to build. Its not about dumbing stuff down or making things easier. Its about local communities having funding packages for local recreation and they would rather spend that money on something 90% of riders will use as opposed to spending money on something that only 10% of riders will use because its too hard. And as for dumbing down trails, thats a hard one. I feel like if you give a trail abit of love every couple of seasons, then its gonna have a longer life. Nature will always do its bit.
Im all for the hard stuff though. Sometimes I feel like ive sold out to building flow and intermediate level trails, but it pays the bills and I still get to spend my days in the bush. And if I want gnar then ill go ride that or go build it.
Fromme was pretty rad when I went there last year too. Never rode trails like that before. Was a great day.
You make a living out of trail building?!?!? I didn't know that was possible. Thought it was all pretty much volunteer work. I am so incredibly jealous. Do you work for a big trail center or bike park? Do you need an alternative source of income? In all seriousness, how can I get a job doing what you do???
Well yeah, Thats how I make my living. Its possible. I was very fortunate to be apart of International New Zealand Trail Building Contingent that got contracted to build private mountain bike parks all over the world for a client. From that I have been Trail building ever since, working on those properties, working at a local mtb park and now that im home from overseas im working for myself and have picked up a few solid contacts for work. I havnt had to have any other income. Currently I am working for a local mtb club who has funding to spend on their networks. I guess for me all the right doors opened at the right time and I was able to grab the ball and run with it. If there is a need for it then there will be a job available. You can approach local councils to see what projects they fund, get involved and go from there. heres my face book page. have a nosey www.facebook.com/timhuntertrailco
For me, I'm self employed. I can't afford to get injured. No work, no pay, no play. I've raced in the past in my younger days without care for consequence for life and limb. These days, I enjoy a ride on a nice clear path through the woods just as much. And I apologize to no one for doing so.
The other solution would be to make the races harder, then riders won't have the choice to adapt if they want to win. The catch 22 would be that everyone wants a successful race so if they make it "too hard" then people wont come. I remember being told that in some european regions, the guys have (used to?) to compete in xc, trials and DH to win the overall standing, making complete riders. It's usually not the case in north america and a lot of the NA riders are outclassed on harder tracks when they reach worldwide competition levels so they started to introduce XC riders to trial techniques around here.
As its often the case with racers; if they need to be able to do it to win, they'll learn it.
Explain to me again how this is bad? Why should I want to have to park on a side road and sneak over a fence to find good riding and risk trespass fines? How is it good for me to have no access to trails that help me introduce my wife, kids and friends to greatest passion without throwing them off the proverbial deep end?
This argument has about as much merit as debating whether ski hills should groom runs. How dumb would you sound trying to convince the world to stop grooming their hills or close all green runs?
IMO there needs to be a balance, for every km of easy trail built there should be another km that is difficult. This will satisfy the masses.
The way things are going I foresee more underground building happening. The guys who want to ride something challenging are getting short changed and if the sanctioned associations don't step up to keep them challenged they will get busy and do it themselves.......
And if flow trails are built properly there can be tons of challenge for advanced riders…. maybe not steep chutes and gnarly rock gardens, but hits and gems that novice riders won't even see let alone hit. Look at videos of Half Nelson in Squamish and tell me that trail is a boring ol' flow trail.
As for the notion of km-for-km… I'd love to see it, but it isn't practical. If there is a 1:1 ratio between novice and advanced riders, it makes sense, but as the sport grows in popularity that ratio is going to tip in favour of novice riders and there will be a proportionate number of novice-friendly trails.
And mellow can be challenging … people forget that Whistler A line, arguably the most popular flow trail in the world, averages 6.5% grade or something like that.
An is it just me or do easy/flow trails get haggard very quickly an therefore require more maintenence time? Taking build time away from harder/real trails
We get more rain than most places in the world that are ridden on a bike.
For instance it is not uncommon to get 3 inches of rain in a day. The north shore is classified as a temperate rain forest.
It is amazing that our trails last at all testament to out builders.
But building does play a role. Our local club just put in a short flow section but two of the corners after high speed straights are 90deg off camber flats that would challenge even the most advanced riders at flowing speed… they really should have been bermed so riders could keep their speed around them, instead brake bumps are forming just two weeks after the trail was opened.
Right now I'm in the proces of training my GF to ride big bikes and even she likes rocks and roots so let's not get overboard and just find a nice balance.
Also there already IS money in the sport. New trails are being funded. The sport doesn't have to grow indefinately. I'm happy other people try it and more will but for now the popularity of the sport is more of a case of advertising the sport right and creating a good image. That plus the thing that for most people it's still crazy expensive.
Running machinery, repairing machinery, cost of diesel, an experienced trail builder, etc, adds up.
Obviously I am stereotyping groups of people and not everyone fits in with what I'm saying.
Just my opinion
Parks should have trails from green to black. A good example is Lac Blanc in France. Green/Blue in comination for Beginners Red for intermediate/hobby riders. And the Black jump and DH trails for the shredders and racers.
Combined with a good lift, some shops and restaurants and thats all a good bike park needs to survive.
Difficult tracks a good thing for marketing and good for specators. They are as usefull for bike parks as mellow trails. No one wants to visit a location and say "everything here is super easy for me".
I prefer hand built, steep and techy. But when you're already hauling a dozer, mini-excavator and motorized wheel barrow up the trail, how are you not required to tow behind a mini wood chipper? Mulch that shit, quicker recovery for the forest, instant beautification of the trails.
Half of the battle with trail groups is once a trail get built and rides decently its called done. Unfortunately usually the visual presentation blows, it looks like a bomb went off. If we want to impress other user groups, the forest service, and to open the doors to future building with less restrictions, we need to focus on not only how well the trail rides, but how nice it can look to other user groups (all of our trails are multi use).
We need to make trail art. As it is, it looks like a war zone with a rut down the middle.
Thats what she said…
I do race, I love difficult trails, everyone has to ride them. Making a trail easier in a race doesn't just make me faster, it makes everyone else faster too, but thats a topic for another article… BTW cutting seconds takes more effort (mental and/ or physical), no matter the trail.
Maybe our bikes have become overkill for the trails available to us. Try jumping back on a hardtail or a rigid bike to make that trail more difficult for you. That's where all this started right? Dudes bombing down dirt trails without 150mm front and back.
I agree with Mike this should be hard. It's why we choose to ride our mountain bikes because we're the people that prefer the difficult route not the smoothest. But let's not alienate the people who want to get into the sport because we've been able to improve our bikes and skill set to a point that trails have become too easy for us.
As an advanced rider I often feel left wanting for more technical track.
As an advanced rider I know there will always be faster better riders. That's a given, are you saying that being good but not the best is something to keep to yourself? Knowing your abilities and what you like as a rider is a good thing.
- people changing a trail because it's to hard for them personally. - WRONG
- having a variety of levels of trail for different users, - RIGHT
It's incorrect to say that that it's not important to grow the sport.
Yes, the money does matter. Local businesses as well as national bike companies have donated a lot of money to our trail network here. If they didn't have any business they wouldn't be able to do so ( see XC skiing for how a sport looks if the industry is suffering).
Also, if you have only a very small number of participants, you don't have any political power, so trails and forests get closed to bike use, or developed into golf courses and malls.
First timers might not do trail work, but less skilled, less aggressive low-intermediates do a LOT of trail work, as well as other volunteering like attending meetings and writing grant applications, to get trails built and keep them open.
I have small kids, I want them to be able to start riding of road, on something safe and easy, even with their little rigid bikes.
A point you don't mention is sustainability.
In our town, many trails have been smoothed, not by a desire to make them easier, but because the old roots rocky trails were an erosion nightmare. In our clay based soils with a lack of solid rock it is hard to make a sustainable trail that is not smooth.
As a result our trails have become smoother, so we are now making a conscious effort to build sustainable but challenging trails were the terrain is available.
I just started hitting bigger drops and creek gaps that I knew I was capable of riding but needed to build my courage and believe in myself... if my trails didn't have that I wouldn't be able to progress... and it has a b-line around it for those who haven't worked up to it yet... perfect balance
sure there's a place for trail centres for the new and for instant enjoyment, but there is a certain pull back to those secret spots we made back in the day.
and an analogy can be taken from bouldering. any downgrading of a problem by chipping holds, using incorrect lines and using anything that was not intended to be used on a problem is frowned upon. after all the only person you're cheating is yourself, there's no improvement.
so you can keep your bigger wheels (for rolling resistance and smoothing out your ride) and you can keep your groomed trails, i'll keep trying that hard line until I've mastered it and only then will I feel happy that I have accomplished what I set out to
-I cant build what I would like to!
I have to walk the fine line with a diplomacy cape on me back.
I am trying to build fun and challenging trails (Denmark is flat
We will not stop and settle with Pavements Trails but changes take time
Passion and fun building trails at www.facebook.com/groups/aarhustrailbuilders
Keep digging and stay innovative
However, I do understand what people are saying when they say not to down grade the difficulty levels of tracks, since I have done a lot of trail building, and I have designed/built a track for more intermediate/beginners in mind, and still managed to have a decent track with some roughness, but not too rough that it scares off people, and not too steep that it scares people off, and the track was well received right from from our more experienced riders in the state, down to the beginners and intermediate riders.
The important thing, is if your terrain allows it, you need a mix of good flowly stuff, and largely technical stuff, or build two separate tracks if you can, one geared for more experienced riders, the other for more beginner/intermediate riders.
The next problem is, if all tracks are made for the more experienced riders, you quickly scare off new blood in the sport, and once people get full time jobs, families and can't ride as much, you slowly find your club or state for the sport, dwindling in members/riders, and than the sport slowly dies, so it is a fine balancing act of having tracks to attract new riders to the sport, and keeping the intermediate levelled riders like myself in the sport, while trying to please more experienced riders who want to continually challenge themselves.
So to sum up, the main problem, is that we've so far failed to achieve the correct balance, you need to keep attracting new riders/members, and the only of doing that, is having reasonably cruisy trails, than slowly kick up the difficulty levels, and you need to have a 50/50 attention to trail building, the flowy/jump park styled riding with lots of tables for beginner or intermediate riders, and the other focus, on balls out roots steep rock garden tracks with no B C lines, and slowly edge people towards those tracks, now, not all of them will get there, and that's fine, that's where having a good 50/50 focus comes into play, those who want to keep to the flowly jump style riding, can continue doing that, and those who want to challenge themselves, can do that..
Neither opinion is right or wrong. We must acknowledge that there are different preferences and build trails to support a variety of people. Granted, if only 1% of trail users have a particular preference, they may not see it represented in the trail system. However, I don't think slow-speed-tech trails fall into that category.
I also hate the fact that the level of trails often seems to jump from beginner to expert with little inbetween to play on these days and that chicken lines never seem to ride that well, obviously they shouldnt get you to the bottom faster but it would be nice if a track wasnt ruined by you sticking to your skill level and then said chicken line destroys all feeling of enjoyment on that section of trail
For example:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQmAiuRO9Go
If I don't have to get off and walk at least a few times in a day, the trail isn't technical enough to satisfy my taste for slow speed tech. That just goes to show, some people like trails that are so challenging that you have to bypass features or try them a few times before succeeding. Other people like to never get off the bike.
I too don't care if some bozo in the office shows up. I'm not going to try to convince one to not be a pu55y and take the lycra off. I don't care.
BUT!!!!! If someone shows up at the park and just wants to give it a go, I want to see him or her succeed. That probably means some blue trails and/or some flow trails. They'll have fun, feel like they're getting better, and gain some skills that will help them graduate up to the gnar. But the biggest thing is that they'll start to feel comfortable. That right there is huge.
Instead we just shove pups straight into the storm? Sounds pretty stupid, self centered, and rife with machismo.
I say strava lines because typically trails are cut a certain way and a racing line is typically a different line than what the original intent of the trail was. it just sucks to see every corner cut just to go around a couple rocks or roots. strava has a place and i guess if your into racing then i can see the alure, but shouldlnt there be a suggestion that you have to ride the trail not the easiest way from point a-b? If i remember correctly if you remove all of the taping from a DH race run, everyone will just take the easiest/fastest way down?
And as a Lycra-wearing, Strava-using, hardtail 29er rider–I apologize for all of the a*sholes and posers out there. I dislike dumbed-down trails, Strava lines, and self-absorbed every-ride-is-a-race types as much as the next guy/gal.
That said, sorry to spread the negative vibes! Let's get out and enjoy some trail/spread the love!
I've built one. A 5 year old can roll it. I can manual, pump, gap stuff and it's a flat out a blast. It's taught me about corning harder, pumping/gapping rocks for speed and keeping lose and moving around on the bike to better work the terrain under me. Want to progress? sometimes going back to the basics is the key.
The best part of mountain biking is the puzzle. Figuring out new bits of trail and giving yourself a bit of a scare. Knarly trails are where it's at. Sadly most people are sissies and we will probably keep getting new groomers and the knarl will get hidden deep in the woods. Want burl? Get involved and push for it. Be willing to haul rocks and dirt.
Fast, far, slow, or gnar. It's all trails. As with other parts of life, if you aren't ready to step up to something outside of your comfort level, word harder to progress and attain it. Pretty simple paradigm.
More riders and money benefit you because it causes these facilities to exist - it's been a progressive development, not an instant, overnight, change in the scene. If you're not into the crowds or funding, by all means move to a town where no other mountain bikers exist (and consequently no trails). Enjoy the scene there.
Easier trails keep novices away from the harder trails. Which means the gnarly stuff you enjoy doesn't have novices walking or falling all over the place and blocking the trails. If you are constantly being stopped by lesser riders, then you are clearly not riding the harder trails that you claim you can. There shouldn't be traffic jams on gnarly trails because the experience riders should be making their way through them, right? Logic seems to win over your "stopping 30 times" argument.
As for camping, are you actually suggesting that the novice mountain biker population has expanded so much that they are the cause of all the camp sites to be filled up? Correct me if I'm wrong, but more goes on in state and national parks then just mountain biking. Parks in my area, without a single mountain bike trail, are still always packed. Logic wins again.
The old school tech kept a lot of beginner riders off this trail. Now it's part of the jumbie loop. I do not understand why the trail builders are spending valuable time and money to dumb down the trails when they could be building new ones and fixing up some of the older ones. Please leave something for us to work towards becoming a better mountain biker!!! I don't want to risk injury ridding double blacks just so I can have something technical to ride.
when i started riding in my local trails 9 years ago they were all technical singletrack, you shared the trails with dirtbikes, horses, a few natives and you kinda knew everybody by face cause we were the only people there each weekend.
now there is an imba trail network there and what used to be the starting climb of the mountain is now a paved road. we used to park at the bottom of the mountain and ride up, spend the day riding tech singletrack, then ride down kamikaze style on the wider 4x4 trail until the bottom.
the new trails are just blue and green lines with one "black" trail that has more climbs than downs and they are all pretty much smooth. the place used to be filled with dudes on fullsus or burly hardtail bikes, now its full of guys in skinny, rigid, 29er bikes who look more suited to riding road than mtb.
i find myself one of the last few riding the old trails that are still technical and change with the seasons. then sometimes i ride out further from the trail head just to find some sweet untouched trails.
it was called "tak-tak" trail, which basically means to shake or shaker.
it used to have sections of steep steps carved from the dirt by the natives who also used it to go about, so it was a real challenge to ride especially when it would rain and the dirt got super slick. imagine riding down a steep dirt staircase with a layer of sloppy clay.
those were the days
Living in the Southwest USA, I race/ride Arizona, Bootleg Canyon, So. California and Angel Fire and there are some really fun flowy trails, and some really nasty skill/confidence testing trails and I like them all for different reasons. taking it all down a notch to the lowest common denominator would suck, for everyone. Even the beginners cause they would never progress.
We want variety and challenge. Variety, the spice of life. Challenge, the thrill is a big (very big) part of why we ride. Variety and challenge means no one single type of trail. Many types! Pump tracks in the local urban park. Sweet. Awkward rooty, rock-strewn goodness in the woods. Sweet. Flowy, smooth, double and table-filled goodness. Sweet. Mixed single track with A, B and C lines (Jim from accounting's still not confident enough to air the step-down over the rock patch? No worries, let him take B track around it.) Also sweet.
Danger is one of the considerations that is shaping the approach of the IMBA and other trail designers who are in direct conversations with Land Managers. What both sides should bring in focus (and no doubt often are) is that challenge and dangers are very largely independent metrics. A foot-wide plank elevated 30 feet above sharp rocks is "easy" but very dangerous. Trail design is getting more and more conscious, but also -- this is the worry being highlighted in the opinons here -- too timid about challenge.
Also, Jim from accounting has recently been studying how Nico Lau hits switchbacks....no wait, that's the rest of us. The sport is evolving. Skills are improving. (Front-flipping Crabapple hits!)
The real element of tension between minimizing danger, bringing in new riders and providing challenge must not be resolved at the expense of challenge.
Btw if you don't like the trails (no maintenance, they are really shitty here) then build one for yourself (that's what i did) and maintain it.
There is also the preservation of natural space that occurs when trails are built. I'd rather see land used to build trails (no matter what skill level they're for) than it go to building a mall or parking garage.
A) Walk it
B) Practice it
C) Don't ride the trail
Too freaking easy. Jim is an adult and should think like one. If it's over your head then don't do it. If the sport intices you then you'll work at CONQUERING it. Not work hard, dumbing down anyting you can't ride!!!!
This sport is all about Progression. May it be going faster, more skilled on tech stuff, or more stronger on climbs etc.
My wife don't do much tech but she loves to progress in speed in climbs and the semi smooth trails. She doesn't feel like she needs to progress in the same manner as I do. So she don't ride the trails I'd perfer. Where I like to Conquer ladder stunts, Jumps, tech lines and tough steep trails.
So build your flow lines, I don't care, I may not ever ride them. But leave the tough ones out there that's been there a long time.
As for building new trails I agree don't leave us stranded, the riders who strive to progress in the nature of the sport of conquering tough section or a tough trail, at least have a future plans for us guys to keep our stoke too
I said "You realize we're making the trails better, right?"
They just didn't get it... I guess I mistakenly thought everyone was looking for the same thing when it came to good trails.
I still like the classic/old school routes, hiking or game trails that turned out to be great for riding; off camber corners, eroded death ruts, rock gardens, root fields... riding should feel like an adventure and sometimes it should be scary...
The other problem with IMBA/flow trails is that they homogenate the riding experience, the local colour of trails is muted, everywhere starts to look the same, berm..... reverse grade... berm... flowy bit... berm.... awkward corner just when it was getting fast.....
I'm aging and was spending a lot of time the last few years having fun on the amazing new flowy (for here) stuff like Power Slave, Grand Emphorium in Robson, multiple Rossland trails and weekend trips to Silverstar as my kids grew but now that they are teenagers and their friends are starting to ride we are doing more and more steep stuff again and it's nice to be home...... old school is my school.
To which my reply was -"I don't think that your bridge is going to last very long." And to my astonishment I was correct!! What are the odds?
Mr. Levy you may drink really really really bad beer, but your opinion on the subject of sanitizing trails for the masses is spot on. Hell, if anything the cycling worlds need to deflate a bit. On a nice day (not raining) you can hardly even ride some of the trails around the Seattle metro area due to all of the bikes!
If you want to build new trails - fine, but working to old ones to death for the sake of "family friendly" is just wrong (IMHO).
The only thing I remotely take exception with from this article is that trail associations are focussed mostly on tourism dollars, number of members, or grant money. As someone actively involved in the local club, I actually think it's the opposite: most people involved in an official capacity are simply involved because they absolutely love the sport, and want to show other people how great it is such that they can enjoy it themselves. Greater club numbers, tourism dollars, and grant money are all just positive by-products of this that help leverage for more facilities, and consequently create more enjoyment for all.
Take your first ride on something smooth and see how fun it is, then something a little harder and so on.
If you don't like the challenge then enjoy what you do like and stay on the smooth path. Don't f@ck it up for
the rest of us who like to have a challenge.
www.pinkbike.com/u/topsog/blog/Technical-Trails-and-you.html
By Safe, I don't mean dumbed down, I mean if the trail is falling apart such that the consequence of falling is great for even the most experienced rider can be dire, or if its a rutted mess such that water is constantly running down the trail or puddling. Fix It.
BUT when you are in an place where the amount of riders increases the trail WILL become easier.
Best example is Boogiman on Seymour.
It was always classified as a DIFFICULT trail. Don't ride it unless you can ride it, so people come and figure, how hard can it be? I'm going to ride it, then they realize its hard. Walk AROUND the stunts, if you have one or two people a week doing this, then whatever, but now you have 100's riding Seymour a week, now you can have 50 people who think they can ride this and can't, so they too walk around, next thing you know you have an established ride around.
Work has been done on this trail but IMO the work was needed since things were falling apart and there was too much water on the trail. But the ridearounds are in and now a part of the trail.
Is this bad? Well I think its human nature to take the easy path, if the easy option is there people will ride it.
What is protecting the whistler trails from being dumbed down is that WINTER closes them every year so people aren't riding them when its really wet so water is mostly off the trails, also its relatively dry in Whistler so water erosion isn't as much of a factor as it is in North Vancouver.
I think its a numbers game, the more people that ride the easier trails will become.
I live in NM, and we have rock, lots of rock. I wanted to try mountain biking, and purchased a hardtail bike because of the cost of entry. I made it two seasons before I gave it up. Most of our trails are tech, and the fun to work ratio just wasn't worth it for me. I spent the next 3 years riding BMX. But as I'm getting older and fatter, I thought I'd try the mountain bike thing again. I saved and was able to purchase a used full suspension bike (a good one, did my research) and I'm fully back on board with the mountain bike.
But I do not have great confidence in my ability even though I'm pretty stable on a bike. The most fun for me is to go fast, but I'm not blowing through that rock garden at full speed.
That being said, having all trails sanitized is not something I want either. Sometimes flow trails are fun, sometimes tech trails are fun. But I there needs to be both. I have a few co-workers who might ride a bike, but without putting then on a $4K bike, the tech trails around here would just be a frustration.
At 50yrs old and still riding trail and dh rigs, I have seen and ridden the bikes from full rigid to the current phenom whizz bang rigs The other thing that has changed since I was just a sperm cell in chucks is the decline of the gritty stubborn youthful determination on the LARGE SCALE that was once the norm when I was young. Today most folk (especially here in the spoiled U.S.) demands a out, a easy way, a entitled shortcut (mo-flowy).
I agree with Mike Levy. If the trail is too sketch, walk it, or learn to ride sections until they all come together and you can ride the whole line. Otherwise get an accounting job next to Jim and a PS4 and work your virtual warrior skillz instead.
Let some sections rut out, get full of space nuggets and let the roots come to the surface.
If you can't ride it go ride elsewhere.
Better yet take some time to improve your skill set and figure out how to ride the rough stuff.
Gnarly trails should be left gnarly.
I shattered bones in my left foot like dropping a teacup on concrete back in 2010.
Mistake in a rock garden.
Four screws, one titanium plate and 4 months off the bike.
Not once did I think about asking to have that section of trail "made easier" or "flowed out"
I just went back and figured out how to do it right.
Also, gnarly trails should continue to be part of any trail associations master plan.
There is too much carting to beginner trails for all and fast/flowy/jump/PB dubstep edit trails right now.
Reality is 90 percent of the riders out there are never going to do massive back flips or supermans while riding.
Why are all new trails catering only to that jump style or XC Strava time trails?
I love me a good jump trail like Jedi Mind Trick, Rockstar and Pipedream up a Silver Star.
But lets not forget about the gnar.
I'm not saying we should go back to old school, tight cornered, slow speed, wheelie drop, skinny riding trials.
Been there done that.
Borrrring.
But lets not forget to build some wide arch cornered, fast rocky/rooty, steep shoot section trails too.
Trails that will scare you once in a while, make your a**hole pucker up.
Don't be afraid to push yourself out of your smooth sailing comfort zone once in a while people.
All types of riders, all types of trials, all of the time.
More riders is a good thing, it means more people stoked on trail, more money for local associations to build more trails (including more technical and difficult trails), also means more vollies to help build and maintain trails. All trails need maintenance.
Over maintaining of a trail is the result of a bored builder stuck fixing some other line, that maybe could have been put in a better local to allow more fun, to roll down a rock face, or increase trail length. Instead this guy is stuck filling holes. With government trail regulation making it more difficult to get trails approved, we might continue to see more of this.
More people to the sport they say . AND I SAY FOR WHAT GOOD ?
Are the bikes or parts any cheaper ? NO in fact quite opposite.
Are there more gnarly ( adrenalin = fun = ) trails for experienced riders Who actually put a much more to the community and biking itself ???
NO In fact their trails are being torn down because their trails are get known with more and more riders coming on them. And because a rookie Jimmy who seen too much NWD trying to do a backflip on 5ft gap jump is suing everyone for his own stupidity and risk. Every officer and city puppet waving yelling Liability, Liability .
Are the bikepasses cheeper, lineups smaller, ?
And we can continue .
I don't have anything against beginner. Everyone used to be one . And I support most of them .
But can someone name me why is everyone trying to bring MASSES in to the sport ?
Racing stands out of this topic as because of racing tracks are definitely not getting more user friendly .
So Why the masses ? Why are masses better for biking ? I
@poah: I was up doing stages 5 & 8 the other night, awesome - if somewhat peanut buttery after the rain!
my son Lewis (9) face planted on BBB so even the easy stuff can cause issues for the young and skilless lol
Besides the price of a capable machine will keep "Jim in accounting" out of OUR sport more readily than any trail.
steep tech/gnar trails are for mtb's
THANKYOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This needed saying.
I must say most of the articles I have read from you are very very good. You seem an intelligent guy, and you clearly enjoy a bit of philosophy/soul searching.
Keep it up. MTB needs more people like you. 9048590348503498593486534756 +props