bikeguide

@EvoRidge: I agree with the both of you. This event is beyond serious. The article suggests that riders are in a position to get the run of their lives or wait a year. I think it's more like riders have a chance of getting the run of their lives and or get the last run of their lives maybe even die. Death is a very real possibility at rampage. Riders should be encouraged by design to sellect the absolute best conditions for their runs. For many of the rampage riders, I suspect that their participation in this even plays a major part in them receiving the sponsorship support and funding essential to their revenue. Therefore I think the riders are in an unfair position to excercise their collective voice even. I've been a professional mountain guide for 15 years. Today I also help large corporations manage risk. Its of my humble opinion that the mountainbiking industry is still young In relation to risk management. The riders are stepping it up every year. What's possible on a bike is still unknown. The number of hazards are always multiple while riding but at this event their consequences are considerably higher than spectators and maybe even some riders appreciate. It's one thing to risk your season/off season, year or carreer for the ultimate ride. It's another thing to risk your life or your ability to walk, talk and feed yourself for an amount of money most of us **make in a year. Make the event bigger want it on TV cool. But let the riders pick their mountain, build their line and ride their line when their ready durning a period of several days. Spectators can make their way.. it be like older school extreme skiing event. Ride when ready and have all the drones, helicopters, camera crews, judges and rescue personnel work together and cover the zones in numbers and through the use of technology. It's more or less fun like any local race with the addition of camera crews and helicopter. **According to an older pinkbike survey

Gee Atherton for world series Enduro Champion?

@WAKIdesigns: do you ever have a positive thing to suggest?

I wish there was live coverage. I know there are challenges do to the climbing. But the magic of TV is that you can run interviews, slam us with adds if you will but figure out coverage!

@ratedgg13: thanks for the historical clarification. Helps bring some context and perspective on why this zone is how it is currently. I've only been in the valley for 10 years or so, transplant from Squamish. So my community influenced perspective is a result of that. Squamish benefited from the awareness of all the challenges and mistakes of the North Shore. I really didn't know that piece of history you shared. I did and do acknowledge the current effort yet maintain that careful planning and resource management that involves the riders of the BowValley and its builders is essential. But I now understand a bit more why things are why they are now, so thank you.

@NelsonSunshine: looks like the picture above might be the high Rockies new trail. ???

Rob is a living legend!

@juicebanger: The trails are reasonably good to pedal and are better than nothing. The signage is terrible the network infrastructure plan is terrible. Trails appear to have no logic, tones of energy and time has been spent building lots of trails that aren't design properly: Long road to ruin..good up ? good down? its a good up if you ask me. Why does it need 4foot high berms, the berms are terrible and they were built by paid workers, was that trail well built? was it a resources and money? XC riding...do we need or do we want the entire nordic centre to provide this style of ride? there have been and continues to have some reasonable development at the nordic centre but given the entire available space i suggest that no real plan that addressed the need of the local riding population was ever truly considered or implemented. The proof is in the discombobulated efforts and the lack of planning surrounding meaningful trail maintenance and design efforts from day one. How much time did soft yogurt take to get its first maintenance? I know that not all trail builders and or organization (volunteer or not) will satisfy all stakeholders. I think Moose is doing incredibly well, i think Bragg is doing great as well. Their trails are always improving and as a network they make good sense. The nordic centre is a waste of potential currently. Canmore has some brilliant terrain and some good trails. Canmore, in general is plagued with a town council that would mostly serve the interests of those that would rather have us not bike in the woods and is challenged by a complicated series of land designations and managers. If CAMBA does not have a clear plan and doesn't make its plan known, the promise of better trails will not suffice in enrolling the community that will truly be responsible for lobbying, supporting and maintaining trails. When companies approach investors or banks for funding they typically have to express exactly what they intend on doing with the funds. I hear lots of asks and feel tones of amazing and exciting inspiration. I am only suggesting that I FEEL like more clarity with the intent and plan needs to be stated in CAMBA's case. We have trails still waiting for legalization, we have a significant trail network in the Canmore area than needs work and signage, that could benefit from a few changes here and there... we are now hearing of various promissory new trails...etc. We just need a strategic plan to maximize our power and effectiveness as a community at renovating, completing, building and maintaining a trail infrastructure that meets the demands of the bulk of its community. Currently the number of vehicles that drive West of Canmore on the weekends is a reasonably good indicator for the current state of affairs. Looking at the Canmore Enduro, given our terrain and the great work that everyone who volunteers for that event provides the event fails to deliver the actual great terrain that Canmore could offer the rest of the mountain bike world.

Precision: More money means more opportunities for better trails. Here is an example for where dedicated money did not produce better trails: The Canmore Nordic Centre. Building trails requires a lot more than money. It takes a community. A community that is capable, able and willing to support the build, the style of build and the maintenance of the trails. I would suggest that the current layout and style of build that is the Nordic Centre today is a result of more than money, its a result of failed planning and community input. Trail builders and not just those willing to pick up tools they should comprise those capable and able to deliver on the input they as trail builders were willing to act in accordance to a community. The first question isn't how much money we need. The question is what do we want and need. Ultimately we want money no doubt. But the leadership should clearly state what their intention is and what will be done first, second...etc.

I agree with the first part of his comment. How the coverage is currently is challenging for increasing the sports understanding (not that it's complicated) and the appreciations for strategy. Maybe drones, cable cams and more sponsorship may help but it might also destroy the adventurous aspect of some of the races. I also don't get his statement regarding the timed uphill. Maybe he was referring to the cut off times ? Is there posted up hill times? I haven't noticed.