Spykr

I raced in the NICA so-cal league for 2 years in highschool, so I thought I'd weigh in. You have kids racing at every skill level, and I mean EVERY skill level. Some of the top varsity guys and girls are already sponsored and could qualify for jr. world cup races, while at the same time, you have kids who are just average riders looking to have fun competing. These guys aren't star athletes or star riders, but they're having a lot of fun, and quite frankly, that's the most important part of the NICA races. Yes competition is a big deal, but at the end of the day, it's the responsibility of the organizers that everyone, or at least the vast majority can make it around the course safely, with fittness being the biggest equalizer instead of the ability to afford a top-end bike or super-crazy technical skill. There certainly are tougher elements added, check out "Marine Corps Hill" for example in the Temecula races in the so-cal league, but in the end, these aren't pro DH races, they're not spectator-driven events, and while competitive, they're not, nor should they be solely about that aspect of racing. NICA MTB racing is about giving both the kids already into the sport, as well as total newbies, a chance to be productive with their riding, learn about the sport, and give back to their local trails (at least that's how it was in So-Cal, with our trailwork days with CORBA). It's a super-rad program, and while I can't say some tougher parts of courses would be cool, I wouldn't say it's necessary. If the program had more funding, then maybe a "Varsity course" and a "JV course" would be doable, but as it stands now, it's really not doable, and even if the money and resources were there, I don't think it's the best move. Part of determining varsity eligibility is the ability to compare times on the same course amongst all the riders, so changing things up with different courses just...wouldn't work. Keep it open, keep is friendly, keep it fun.

In a marathon race, lightness isn't the #1 priority in the bike. It's still very, very important, but when the race lasts 87km, the riders are on there for hours at a time, and as such, the bike needs to be tougher and with a greater emphasis on rider comfort and fatigue reduction. The RS1 is supposed to have better dampening than the SID, better small bump compliance, and a more plush stroke, which makes it a better choice than the stiffer SID, which is better suited to hardcore hammering for a shorter amount of time. Look at the bikes here: they look...normal. They're not ultra stripped down like normal XC race bikes, their tires have more tread, the brakes have bigger rotors, pedals have a bit of a cage or platform around them for greater foot support, many of them are running with bar ends or more ergonomic grips, stems aren't at -45 degrees. These bikes are built for a different purpose: XC yes, but a different kind of XC.