Occasionally, someone throws a video at me that captures my imagination. The latest was a 30-second short of Candide Thovex skiing a freestyle line that resembles your basic Red Bull Rampage run – until he double back-flipped over a ridge and into oblivion. I was impressed by how massive his line was, but what really got my mind going was how fluid he was from start to finish – on sticks. I wanted to be that guy. When I watch someone hit their line at the Red Bull Rampage, I am equally impressed, but not in the same way.
The Candide Thovex edit.
I don’t care too much for cold weather, or downhill skiing, for that matter, but I appreciate mastery of the form, especially when speed and outdoor sports are the subject. “Mastery,” though, is not a word I would use to describe downhill mountain bike riding.
I know some, maybe
most of you are going to lose your minds after that last sentence. What about Semenuk or Gwin, or any one of the mind-blowing videos that pop up each week? Have I somehow slept through the last 20 years of amazing progression? I have not. Before you grab your well-worn flat shovels to settle the score, bear with me and read to the end.
What I
am saying here is that, as a sport, we haven’t been around long enough to hone our skills or our technology to approach the same apogee that skiing presently enjoys. To be fair, skiing as a recreational sport has been evolving since 1850, alpine skiing since the 1920s. Mountain biking, by contrast, has only been evolving since the late 1970s, and downhill bikes were not readily available until the mid ‘90s, which suggests that we have a ways to go before we reach our full potential.
Kurt Sorge's winning Rampage run has big moves and remarkable flow.
Our sport is certainly not lacking in talent or technology, but I am sure many riders would agree that, at their highest levels, there is a palpable difference between the speed, amplitude, and flow of ski versus mountain bike. When I watch skiers hitting big mountain free ride lines or competing in World Cup downhills, I lean into the action. I expect a clean run. When I watch the Rampage or a World Cup DH, I do so with a measure of anxiety. I anticipate a crash or an equipment failure. The doom filter erodes the experience.
Gold medalist Beat Feuz scorches the downhill at St. Moritz.
So, I get it, downhill skiing is not the same as downhill cycling, but we are not all that different either. We ride similar lines, we share many of the same tricks, and often ride the same mountains. We ride different mediums and use different tools, but essentially, the two sports are joined at the hip. My reasons for comparing the two is to suggest that, unlike snow sports, downhill mountain biking suffers from an identity crisis, which may be retarding its progression.
Cody Townsend owns it.
One of the reasons that skiing has progressed to such a high level is that the sport and its technology evolved in a vacuum. Nobody started alpine skiing because they really wanted to be a motocross racer. Skiers were not burdened by physical and technical limitations handed down to them by cross-over sports, which suggests that their upward progression is open-ended. Nobody knows where the limits are, because there is nothing to compare it to. They still glide on two sticks like their asymmetric cross-country ancestors, but the performance of today’s equipment is insanely adapted to the task. Stable at speed, crazy maneuverable and truly an extension of the rider – all without the benefit of conventional steering, suspension, or brakes.
Danny Macaskill's performances on a trail bike exhibit a balance of skill and flow.
Downhill bikes evolved from cross-country mountain bikes and in the shadow of cross-over sports like BMX and motocross. While all three genres lent us a form of expression, they also imposed limitations upon the progression of the sport. Every aspect of a cross-county bike is still mirrored in the design of a downhill bike, just elongated and beefed up. Slopestyle and freestyle tricks are borrowed from BMX and much of what we see in competition is judged as such. There is not much variation between freestyle moto and Fest - one is a little bigger and more fun to watch. Take away the berms and downhill bikes can barely make it around a corner at speed. The one flat corner on a DH course is where much of the action happens… just like Supercross. Race courses and gravity trails may look tough, but they are also tailored to compensate for the deficiencies of the machines.
Blaine Gallivan makes it look easy.
Mountain bike downhill has become so iconic that it may be impossible for us to conceive that it could evolve in a dramatically different direction, but that is exactly what I am suggesting here. Consider, if you can, how gravity bikes, race courses, big mountain, and freeride would have evolved in a vacuum. Without the influences of cross country, BMX and moto, a downhill bike may have developed into a coaster, without any drivetrain at all. Who knows what wheel size it would have ended up with, or what the tires would look like. I’d love to carve flat corners like a boss. Would it have a saddle? (It’s not like skiers need one). And, there is the question of suspension: maybe less travel, combined with built in flex? We may never know.
Brandon Semenuk's performance in "Raw" transcends the formulaic expressions of BMX.
We don’t know what a real downhill bike could be, because we assumed it should look like something familiar. The same goes for how we ride them. We have yet to discover what freestyle mountain biking could have evolved into because we assumed it should look like BMX, only bigger, and it does. Downhill racing and big mountain looks a lot like we are riding motorcycles without engines, because, except for pedals and a bicycle seat, we pretty much are. It’s no surprise then, that trailbikes have evolved to the point where their descending capabilities now rival downhill machines. Once we figured out the pedaling part, all we needed to close the gap were two-ply tires and a 63 degree head tube angle. Downhill bikes don’t seem so badass anymore.
Candide Thovex takes freeriding to a new level.
Downhill is evolving at a crawl, and more travel and a different wheel size aren't going to provide the breakthrough moment it needs. To master this sport, we need to reassess every aspect of it. It will take imagination and innovation from both riders and designers to distance downhill from enduro – and even more so, to progress slopestyle and freeride out from under the shadow of their seminal influences. It could happen. It could be brilliant. I’d like to see the day when my skier friends post must-watch mountain bike videos on their home pages in January.
Aaron Gwin's style and intensity suggests the precision of World Cup Downhill skiing.
You just can't compare these sports properly.
Skiing is very sensible when it comes to weather conditions or location.
Where is the highly developed equipment here?
Or where is it uphill?
A bike is much more versatile. Can handle lot's of terrains if there are simple trails in a variety of weather conditions.
Two very different sports.
We saw it with Bender - one guy willing to get ragdolled for trying stuff that people said "you can't do that". Suddenly people are able to hit those same drops on their hard tails!
Skiing progresses because people push the boundaries hard enough to die. Do we want that for MTB? I don't know that I do. People risking higher percentages of death or injury in search of the elusive "banger" that will secure or launch their career?
My opinion Jerry's get hurt less on snow vs. Jerry's on the dirt, but then it seems to flip the other direction with advanced athletes, far more snow related deaths, when people push boundaries because snow just sin't as predictable and generally far less safety gear.
I think at the pointy end of pushing the boundaries, the decision on the bike is much more binary than on skis.
People die pushing the limits on skis because of the 100 previous times they pushed the limit and got away with 'failure' without consequence. People don't push the limits as much on the DH bike because every 'failure' causes physical pain.
The relative size of the population of skiers vs MTBers is also a factor, there are SOOOO many more skiers out there at every point on the skills and balls curve that the absolute number of injuries is bound to be far higher.
You only need straight line speed, a jump and commitment.
Regarding what sport hurts more people it's all about speed really. You go a lot faster in snowsports so Impact energy is higher.
While I do ski and did both. While it is harder to back flip a bike than skis, skiing is more dangerous. World cup ski racers get killed on a semi regular basis. World cup mountain bikers I'm not aware of any deaths.
early feb click bait
lowest common denominator.
I can pump natural terrain easier on a bike because of snowboarding. While I see bigger and better free ride lines thanks to mtb.
The other point I think a lot of people and rc included are missing is... look at the things deorfling is doing or any of these other true back country riders. It’s a page directly from freeride skiing and snowboarding and it’s freaking beautiful.
@wideload46 perhaps your perception of skiing as the more versatile sport is caused by the fact that you live in Canada. You guys have a lot of snow and sure skiing is something very more important than here in central Europe.
You just compared Zink's back flips to big mountain skiing. You are among many idiots commenting on this.
Equally you can crash on a bike into soft leaves and get up giggling.
You can easily paralyze yourself in both. I don't get why we have to generate conflict from a position of ignorance (hang on, that's how almost all conflict is created...). It's bad enough having a fake war between skis and snowboards, without bringing bikes into it. More love for all that is fun, less self-affirming point scoring.
Plus even hard pack snow has more give to it than dirt and rock. Combine that with a slippery surface and you can get away with a lot more. If you believe in MIPS as a technology, than snow is a giant layer of MIPS covering the mountain. No disrespect to extreme ski or boarders, I'm as impressed with the accomplishments of them as any other dangerous sport, mtb inclusive.
He gets paid for it while the comments section falls into the endless void of his manipulative traps. ????
hahahaha, good lord you have zero clue. Skiers don't huck backflips off 100 footers. Going that big in general is incredibly rare because its physically impossible to stomp and ride away from a cliff of that size. But yeah keep on posting about something you have no idea about while pretending you do. It really shows your character.
Tell that to someone on the FIS WC DH circuit.
"When a skier does a massive drop they're landing in 10 feet of powder"
Tell that to someone on the FWT.
God damn, who knew there were so many gapers that rode bikes.
youtu.be/6eitvXCqe4E
These are just extreme examples of stuff that happens regularly.
Now I’m not saying any Joey is going to go do that but it can be done.
@lifeofloon - You think its a normal occurrence for skiers to backflip 100ft. cliffs... you are a complete gaper.
Don't worry, skiers know what they're doing. You've just gravitated to the silly stuff, the ski Benders.
Can't argue with south park. The garrison/ trump series might have broken them and the audience though.
I double posted. Still. You are a f*cking idiot.
It wasn't too different to my introduction to mountainbiking (though I did get myself a helmet back then). Literally after less than one km on my bike. "Shall we ride down that?" Steep 45deg bank covered in slimy mud with some exposed roots and obviously some trees to steer around. "Yeah, let's have a go". Sessioned it for a while, crashed every single attempt. "It is not really a beginner section of trail really." "Well I am a beginner, but it was good fun."
Thing is, you can do both activities on several levels (of skill and risk, which are not the same). Obviously I moved on with mountainbiking so I can merely compare my beginnings with mountainbiking to when I first went snowboarding. And it really isn't too different. Both can be challenging, harsh and fun.
If anything can be limiting, it is looking at others and denigrating their own performance. What if runners would go like "Hey, have you seen this youtube video of the Tour de France? These guys go so much faster and longer than we do, we'd just as well stop". And yes sometimes it is good if ones perception of own performance matches reality but very often I see this as counterproductive. So as a kid you may have been building jumps to hit on your bike, skateboard or whatever you ran. It must have felt huge, didn't it? Now what if some freckled teen would have hung on a bench there all the time, recording your attempts. Then rub it in your face and compare it to some amazing edit he's found on youtube (yeah some mixing of time and space here). It doesn't help. And I believe this is actually the thing that limits most teens (and possibly also adults) at learning anything at all. They're so much comparing their performance to the perfect picture that they'd rather not try at all than fail.
However, this seems to be exactly what RC is going like here. "Until you can get even close you what you see in this other sport, there is no reason to be excited about what we see in DH racing." This is not going to get anyone anywhere. The other statement is plain false too. Ski sports don't develop in a vacuum. Many tricks I see there aren't too different from inline skating or waterskiing. Same goes for snowboarding which obviously has a link with other board sports.
The one thing I do agree with is that if some fixed elements are released from the "DH bike" it opens up new possibilities. But let's not forget it is due to UCI regulations that some of these are in effect. Requiring similarly sized (diameter) front and rear wheels, a working drivetrain with at least seven gears... There is probably much more regarding the steering and saddle and stuff like that. And many companies are probably wary to release an expensive new bike that is not even certified to compete in UCI sanctioned events. Liteville does it because they thrive on their good name instead of race results. But many other companies need to have their product showcased at the races hence have no choice but to make something the UCI condones.
TL;DR: Yeah sorry...
@vinay: "comparison is a thief of joy"
Everything is rooted in gymnastics when it comes to tricks. When it comes to just going down the mountain, you can only ride on what's in front of you. In all these sports, everyone's hitting the limit of safety and some are paying with their lives/mobility. Anything can kill you if you hit it fast enough, whether it be snow, water, dirt or rock.
@Waki: quick point about families in ski resorts. It's a traditional and Olympic sport and has been for generations. I know a family who ride park in the summer with their five year old. Who's to say that won't become a bit more normal in the future? You do make valid points though. At equal speeds, dirt is going to mess you up more than snow (no one wears a full face for skiing). But that doesn't mean you can't do yourself as much damage if you really put your heart into it!
I was in Sweden last summer and in several places (Isaberg Mountain, Idre Fjall etc) it seemed mountainbiking really was a family thing. Maybe more on the groomed berms and jumps than the more rocky stuff but obviously the same goes for snow sports.
Yeah awareness of your body and where you are is essential, no matter what your activity. Both my girls have rings or a trapeze (I can switch it whenever they want) in their own rooms, we've got one of these areal yoga cloths in the living room (easily the most fun form of yoga I've done) and a big trampoline in the backyard. No matter what sports they pick up later in life, this will help them if they start doing anything that involves speed and/or jumps.
BTW for what it's worth: mr Seth Morrison
www.lastfrontierheli.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Last_Frontier_Bell_2_Blake_Jorgenson_PS_50-1024x681.jpg
PS. I am a full on Gaper, know nothing about skiing.
As for the helmet in snow, yeah it is probably nonsense. I was surprised at when you crash with a snowboard your board just slams stuck in the snow so you'll learn soon enough that the standard approach of letting yourself roll once to get back up doesn't quite work. My reasoning was that if it grips the edge of board like that, it might also do with the sharp edges of a MTB full face helmet (unlike the bullet-type helmets). But as I said, I haven't experienced anything like that when actually riding snow with a big MX helmet (Sixsixone Flight) so it probably just doesn't happen.
If you are riding a true DH track, then the point is that it requires a DH bike. If your local riding spot, that happens to have a downhill incline, is faster on a trail bike, then it's not a true downhill track.
'Take away the berms and downhill bikes can barely make it around a corner at speed.' - If you had a lot of experience with a DH bike, and experience riding proper DH tracks, then you'd know that on a great deal of 'flat' corners, a DH bike will most definitely be quicker (french alpine DH tracks are the perfect example).
'The doom filter erodes the experience.' - Totally disagree with this. Seeing an athlete push themselves to the absolute limit is an incredible thing to watch. I don't want to see a guy casually stroll to the finish line and win, I want someone who is visibly giving everything they have win a race, they are putting the extra effort in to win and in my opinion, deserve to be rewarded with a good result if they manage to hold it together.
The future of DH is hindered by one thing only - the race tracks. DH bikes have undoubtedly reached a plateau, not to say they won't continue to progress, it just means focus may be put on to smaller advances rather than things as significant as disc brakes or the introduction of suspension. There's still room to grow. If Sam Hill and Steve Peat are saying dh tracks have become boring, I fail to understand why the UCI isn't listening. Yes, it has a huge amount to do with money, tv coverage, etc. But I'd prefer to watch 3 sections of Schladming in the piss wet over every single second Leogang any day. Dh bikes are the pinnacle of the sport, and they should be tested by the worlds best on the worlds hardest tracks. If I wanted to watch guys sprint along a fire road, I'd watch Cyclocross, and I will never start watching cyclocross...
ty.
World Cup DH needs more Champery/Andorra/Schladming type tracks, other wise it will stagnate completely. I don't see much improvement to be made on the bikes(besides suspension) so changing the tracks is the only option.
Back in about 2006 Richard wrote an article in his magazine about how DH bikes shouldn't be allowed on 'normal' trails as they wrecked them. He said they should only be allowed on dedicated DH trails. This was accompanied by a photo of a DH trail - the DH course at Sea Otter LOL!!! I was flabbergasted when he joined PB.
Ahahaha, pls guys, we need to upvote this comment to the top.
This is pure gold!
I always wondered what the heck that guys business was on this site.
Absolutely agree about course design too. Between parks getting dumbed down and more and more people trying to convince themselves they ride a trail bike as hard as a downhill bike hearing people say that downhill is dead or stagnant makes me taste bile.
Downhill bikes, north shore free riding, it captured my attention because it was people doing things that were far, FAR beyond the limits of the bike and previous limits to human performance.
This article is just out of touch with the reality: there's a next step in downhill, right on the horizon, and it's right up there with Bill Brigg's first descent. Downhill has also progressed at breakneck speed compared to skiing. Watch Sam Hills riding 10, 15 years ago vs now and you'll see that things have changed on a fundamental level, and who would have ever thought riding better than a circa early 2000's Sam Hill was even possible.
Love your response, plus n+1
Their is already a huge problem with accessibility to DH riding, it's is not a sport most people can just hop on a bike and do, it is "Exclusive" to experienced riders with good equipment in locations where tracks are available. There are relatively few mountain bikers, of them their are even fewer riders who could or have the interest in riding a proper DH track. Make tracks more gnarly you get less grass roots participation but you will have fun watching the 50 people on the planet who can ride said tracks even if it is just a side show like Rampage.
In my opinion DH is hurting because of it's exclusivity and inaccessibility to more riders not because of TV ratings. Also why enduro took off. Most riders can imagine riding the trails they ride everyday at high speed and competing, very few want to ride or can ride a legit DH track as they stand right now.
We did this in the 90's when riders bitched about tracks not being difficult enough, that is when freeride exploded and numbers and participation numbers at the races when from a few hundred riders per class to less than a hundred total competitors.
Sustainability is being a viable sport not an exclusive extreme side show for 50 people.
Sounds like a quality issue......lmao
PB has some really awesome content, but nowadays I feel like the remaining 95% is just cancer for weekend warriors.
Still a great read and all but I could not resist.
To know where we are going, we must remember where we've come from.
It’s a good thing snowboards we’re able to utilize ski building tech. Helped increase pace of development
The fragmentation of MTB disciplines is actually pretty analogous to skiing. 30 years ago neither had Freeride, Slopestyle or Big Air. Now they both do!
Skis back in 1990 resemble skis now about as little as a MTB does.
Back then ski design was inherited from piste racing: narrow (no float in powder), non-parabolic (harder to turn), with no twin tips (can’t ride backwards). Meanwhile MTBs were evolved road bikes: they had less travel (no float in rough stuff), steep head angle (impaired handling), with no disc brakes (can’t stop nevermind go backwards).
Both sports have evolved massively in the 25 years I’ve spent doing them. I love them both but there’s no way MTB is somehow “behind”.
Exactly.
As i read that article i was crossing his list of points in my mind like "not true, not true, not true..." because literally all the comparisons suck.
Skiing and mtb are so much alike in their progression i´m flabbergasted how someone can be so blind to reality and write that article above.
And for the part about skiing and it´s apparent perfection and mastery.
I think that´s a personal problem RC has. I for one, when watching a high profile downhill racer, am astonished by the mastery with which they ride on the brink of loosing control but manage to tame that wild beast that is their bicycle. As a skier i can appreciate a perfectly carved race turn, but then again it´s a totally different medium. We could do the same thing in dh if we were to ride on paved roads. There goes the perfect cornering technique, no problem at all. The fact that a dh run looks more wild/aggressive than a skiing run is just blinding the author because in reality they both do the same thing, they ride on the edge in order to shave off miliseconds of their run time. The expectation of impending doom probably stems from the fact RC can relate more to the crash element in biking than skiing. For me as a skier, the fact that after a fall the ride will go on until the skier hits a net, lamp post or tree makes for quite the same feeling when watching a ski run. Hitting the deck is as present in skiing as in bike riding and it´s never fun. Also in downhill and especially freeride there was an era when that aspect of riding was strongly marketed as it was basically the whole image of the sport. Tough guys doing seemingly impossible shit on their bikes. RC (just as many other bikers) probably never left that era completely behind.
However i would strongly argue there is a huge difference between athletes in this day and age like Semenuk and the heroes of the past like Josh Bender. Now compare Semenuk and his riding to Bender. There you have your perfection.
Reverse camber in skis actually goes back over a century, more recently it was brought back into the spotlight by Shane McConkey and Volant (the Spatula), Stephan Drake (DPS founder) is credited for making the first modern, production rockered ski. That tech was later adapted by snowboard designers/mfgs.
RC should watch some Freeride World Tour videos and not just highlight reels on facebook.
The faces those guys ride on are often enough generally f*cked up conditions and the riding under such circumstances is nowhere near as perfect in execution as that Candide video above.
The Candide video is only comparable to one of Semenuks recent projects which were all meticulously planned in advance and ridden on specifically designed courses with perfect execution.
As you say, dh racers get it done under all conditions and the media likes to promote this. DH is promoted as wild and raw. It´s also the one thing that makes it special.
In skiing, powder and perfect turns is what inspires the viewers imagination, not hucks to boilerplate that would kill a normal human being, so that´s what they shows us.
That article speaks of a very onesided view on the subject and a general lack of research and involvement.
@RichardCunningham: Downhill skiing is happening on slopes. very very clean, perfectly shaped slopes. No wonder you see them gliding so well. Put some Andorra-sized rocks in their way and see how it goes... No comparison possible for me.
So, how about the difference between Candide tricking skis on sand or grass and Cam McCaul dropping into a snowy Corbets. Why did the skier have so much more flow on dirt and the bike line look so damn janky on snow?
It all comes down to the medium/physics: one glides and one rolls.
so...why didn't Cam McCaul drop Corbets on a frickin ski bike?!
the wheel is holding us back! we need hover bikes. Zero friction machines!
Where do we go from here? We need more participants and more spectators in the sport, ergo more money in the sport and more mountains accommodating the sport at the elite level (think Whistler-- not these halfassed, tired and poorly maintained runs that remain the same year after year). It's always baffled me how mountains get significantly less participation for a sport that uses the same infrastructure in a nicer time of the year.
I think our problem is that we as insiders are turning our backs to DH, favoring enduro out of sheer convenience. Hard to blame people, considering how much bikes cost. Maybe the industry just needs to bring DH bikes to the market at the most entry level imaginable so more people can entertain the purchase of one for each member in their family. The bike industry lacks any vision for the future of mtb aside from e-bikes, so mind that.
And if you're not impressed by a rampage run anymore, the problem is you.
It's tradition that the winning team in curling buys drinks for the losing team. This is true from the lowest levels to the Olympics (my neighbour has the Silver medal to prove it.)
Cheers!
Me:
Do you mean big mountain skiing is not demanding physically or on the equipment?
Where is DH headed? Super G style? Maybe but.....
f*ck that would be boring. Fast yeah.. But, Watching riders all hit identical lines for a few hundredths of a second separating the whole field? High speed wipe outs keeping the blood thirsty arm chair fan happy.
Nope
Give me more tech, more lines, more riders with individual styles all picking their own way down a multiple line track.
Bigger wheels making things faster but straitened out is no the way to go
Enduro monsters like 2018 E29 give you a possibility of having a capable trail bike that will gladly go to a bike park from time to time if you prepare it a bit. But as far as Park Rats go, you have to be insane not to use a DH bike if you can put a dozen of lift assisted weekends per year.
For example..
Look at a set of ski's, or even a skate board or( street) bmx. Yeah they have technology but, very little moving parts. Not a lot apart from weight to factor in on performance
Now compare MTB with wheel size, hub width,3 types of tacky tyre, geo, dropper, carbon ally steel, air coil tune travel
Etc etc etc, the list is endless
All marketing hype for riders to go out an spend £$€ on the latest greatest speed enducing standard.
It honestly makes me laugh.
Sure, felling comfortable on the right bike for the job and if you have one bike for everything an enduro is a good choice but,
MAN mtb marketing is a joke
We ride on rocks managing far more details than skiers. We simply do more than our brains can manage and the winner is often a dude who can deal with this chaos better. Yes if you are a professional runner or swimmer or road cyclist you can dissect every single detail of your movement but we have way more going on in our zone of action than they
Surf = Surfing, skate, snowboard and ski.
Ride : MX, BMX, MTB (and all its guises).
IMO both trains as separate and don't cross over (altho BMX and skate use the same environments). Each train borrows from the other elements in the train and continues to evolve.
Agreed re the brain. Our brain has to process a whole lot when riding. This is why I find riding very de-stressing and you can't think about anything else apart from the task in hand. This is why I find winter riding a good de-stresser as you are also processing grip (mud, roots), ground conditions, gears and shitty shifting. On skis or a board you are only processing the terrain and snow conditions - things we do anyway.
The active use of hands / arms means further involvement of the brain.
And Sam Reynolds Dark Fest updates. Building 60-80ft jumps an saying I think we could easily go bigger........
Riding you need 4 points of contact where as surfing, skiing, boarding and skating you only have 2. It's the extra brain processing that Waki speaks for the extra 2 limbs that IMO makes riding more taxing on the brain.
@WAKIdesigns: mouahaha
Yeah, that might have something to do with the 2ft of pow that freestyle skiiers can land on. And I understand the question of what DH would be like if it developed in a vacuum, but I don't care to know the answer. Look at ski jumping for example. Sure, the athlete has two skis on, but what connection does it really have anymore to the kind of skiing an average joe will do. Neat to watch, sure, but I don't look at it and go "I could do that".
Sure, DH bikes are purpose built race machines, but they still have a direct connection to the bikes that the rest of us ride, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
fast, strong, cheap. pick any two!
“Mountain bikes - Light, durable, cheap - pick two” as if there was cheap hahahahaha
The points he makes are ridiculous and disrespectul as well, trying to reduce the capabilities of todays pro riders to little more than "being lucky to not wipe out on race day" while in reality the difference between a on edge skiing race run and a dh race run couldn´t be any smaller.
He probably hasn´t even touched a dh bike in the last 10-15 years.
And at the end of the day, a bike is kind of a bike. It has two wheels and pedals. I think if you gave a team of engineers a huge budget and two wheels, and told them to get down a mountain as fast as possible, they'd still come up with something like a bicycle. You can imagine that maybe they'd do something like a luge or bobsled if the course was smooth enough to allow it - but it'd still basically be a recumbent bike with a fairing.
And finally, WC DH is frickin' dope. Some of the most exciting racing you can see. And I'm not a DH'er.
Man and machine verses the clock, it's a time tested winner.
And no pedals? That's called a scooter, not a bike. Sure the most talented downhill rider in the world won a race with no chain, but generally there are still parts where pedaling makes you faster. And people still can use a seat to help control the bike even if sitting is a rarity. And how does this even make the bike faster or better not to have a seat? How about we put a motor on it; oh wait. This is all so much non-sense.
If you have an actual IDEA about how to progress technology, then let's here it; don't drone on about some alternate history tale where the first time a bike was thought of was to go down the side of a mountain fast, blast through the gnar, or throw tail-whips and back flips with abandon. The fact is that bike technology is pretty much at its peak. This idea that there is so much more potential on the equipment side of the equation is not based in reality. We've reached the point for all cycling disciplines where only small refinements can be made at this point. That last thing there was to really figure out was geometry, and this barrier was finally cracked in the last couple of years, and has probably swung too far in some cases and will be reigned in a little to the ideal. Anything more radical than a refinement would have to be qualified as a different vehicle altogether. Just look at the things typically discussed: gearbox drive train, electronically managed suspension, electronically managed shifting, lighter & stronger materials, etc, etc; these are all just refinements.
And comparing what you can do on a bike vs what you can do on skis because they are both done on mountains also makes little sense. Why don't we do that for bikes and roller blades? Imagine how more capable roller blades would be if they developed in a vacuum and not in the shadow of roller skates and ice skates. If anything, the existence of bmx and motocross helped accelerate the technical development of mountain bikes.
You phoned this one in dude. But if you are really being genuine about this, go ahead and build something that will be faster down the mountain. You used to build bikes for a living. Come out with something that cannot be ignored as an alternative to the modern downhill bike. You'll make millions.
Shall I add we are debating the opinion of a guy who thinks 180 mm rotors are inherently better than 203 mm ones because they stay true longer?
Asking RC a word about downhill racing is the same as asking me to say what's wrong with chess.
"What I am saying here is that, as a sport, we haven’t been around long enough to hone our skills or our technology to approach the same apogee that skiing presently enjoys."
Yeah, well, assuming that's true, give it time. And if that's the point he's trying to make -- that is, give it time -- then what's the argument?
Some of the other stuff he mentions is like arguing why you can't hit a home run in football. Because that's not the game, man.
Spot on, bud.
As for riders not honing their skills to the same apogee skiing presently enjoys... Have you seen the latest Semenuk video? They posted it a few days ago. That's quite the apogee, in my opinion. What else can a guy do beyond being absolutely brilliant on a bike? That's where the envelope has been pushed. It's way beyond what it was 10-20 years ago. And in 10-20 years, innovations in technology and realization of what can be done will be beyond what it is now.
After having ridden 6” trail bikes and dh bikes at ski resorts the difference is clear. On a 6” bike my body is done by 2pm. The dh bike lets me ride until the lifts close at the end of the day.
Not to mention how fast parts will wear out if you take a trail bike to the ski resorts on a regular basis.
This will generate all kinds of bikes, that will look identical and function the same but will be marketed at different crowds.
Can't wait to get my Downduro bike!
1) The # of people who take up alpine skiing far outnumbers the number of mountain bikers.
2) As stated in the article, skiing has been around literally hundreds of years longer, and at a competitive level, decades longer.
3) the consequences of entry level mountain biking are much higher than entry level skiing.
Furthermore, if spectating DH makes you feel scared or anxious, then maybe, just MAYBE... DH isn't your thing. To those who ride, it's that unpredictability, that unknown that makes it interesting and drives us. NO, we don't want to see our fellow human beings get hurt, but this ain't a game of Hop-Scotch.
What drives DH riders and racers? It’s that search for the elusive perfect run. It’s similar to what surfers describe in that search for that elusive “perfect” wave. If you understand the sport (DH MTB) than as a spectator you GET this. Watching a rider using all of their skills, talent, physical fitness, and cunning to pull out a miraculous save from bobbling it in a tech section, or watching a rider simply operate on another level (Sam Hill Champery ’07, Sam Hill Val di Sole Worlds ’08 until the crash, Vouilloz, Peaty winning Worlds in ’09…) is the true HEART and SOUL of DH.
For some reason you’ve latched on to this rather inept equivalency between skiing and DH MTB. This leads you to ridiculous statements like:
“Would it (DH MTB’s developed in a vacuum) have a saddle? (It’s not like skiers need one). And, there is the question of suspension: maybe less travel, combined with built in flex? We may never know.”
- OK… so, you ARE aware that a seat is ALSO used as a control surface to aid in steering/cornering, RIGHT? Maybe that’s why you’re having so much trouble with cornering.
“My reasons for comparing the two is to suggest that, unlike snow sports, downhill mountain biking suffers from an identity crisis, which may be retarding its progression.”
- I don’t think that DH MTB suffers from an identity crisis so much as you truly don’t understand the sport (DH MTB).
“Nobody started alpine skiing because they really wanted to be a motocross racer.”
- Nobody started riding DH because they wanted to be a motocross rider either.
“Take away the berms and downhill bikes can barely make it around a corner at speed.”
- Sam Hill, Chris Kovarik, Nico Vouilloz, would kick your ass for saying this and Peaty and Minnaar would laugh their asses off.
“Without the influences of cross country, BMX and moto, a downhill bike may have developed into a coaster, without any drivetrain at all…”
- Then it isn’t a “bicycle” at all is it? It’s a f*cking scooter. (*sigh*) DH mountain biking would STILL have a drivetrain. Why? Because technical aspects of the track will inevitably slow you down, because the track isn’t and shouldn’t always be like a glorified bike park – that a proper DH track should have variety: tight technical sections, steep mixed with less steep sections, mud, loam, gravel, rocks, roots, drunk, nude, Aussies screaming at the top of their lungs. These are the things that make it interesting for us and therefore necessitate PEDALS. This is the HEART and SOUL of DH.
“Downhill racing and big mountain looks a lot like we are riding motorcycles without engines, because, except for pedals and a bicycle seat, we pretty much are.”
- OK, so this is a trope often expressed by people outside our culture (DH). “It looks like a moto”, and “HEY, where’s the engine on that thing?” It’s practically become a meme of our subculture. On the surface, they look similar, but in depth they are not. Again, this is another poor comparison. I see a trend here.
“Downhill is evolving at a crawl, and more travel and a different wheel size aren't going to provide the breakthrough moment it needs. To master this sport, we need to reassess every aspect of it. It will take imagination and innovation from both riders and designers to distance downhill from enduro – and even more so, to progress slopestyle and freeride out from under the shadow of their seminal influences…”
- Why the hell couldn’t you lead with this in the first place?! –haha- This is the most cohesive thing you’ve said in the entire article. Totally agree – there needs to be more technical development in our equipment. Eliminating derailleurs would be a good place to start. Clutch derailleurs are the scourge of uninhibited suspension performance. Don’t believe me? Ask Barel. He’ll tell you. Putting a stop to the industry continually jerking off with “standards” would be great too.
“I’d like to see the day when my skier friends post must-watch mountain bike videos on their home pages in January.”
- Christ, you REALLY don’t get DH, do you? This was exhausting.
Bottom line: if you want to improve the world of DH, in the words of Jim McRoy (yes THAT Jim McRoy – Jason’s father): “…it takes someone with dedication… if you don’t give back (to the sport)… it’s just going to die… if you have somebody who has achieved something and can pass that on to the future generations – absolutely invaluable.”
So what is it meant by 'progression'?
Two completely different set of consequences.
Next up: Why isn't ice hockey more like soccer?
First thing I though of was this sort of behaviour from soccer players:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3HebsWpZ1Q
#rollingresistance
As to whether downhill mountainbiking could have grown-up differently or if it could look way different had it not evolved from cross-country. Absolutely, yes. It's taken 25 years to evolve these bikes away from rigid hard-tails, and now the evolution is working backwards: roadies and cross riders are finally adopting disc brakes, carbon frames (of all styles) have greatly benefitted from DH companies adopting the material and pushing it to its limits.
I think your most valid point is about that IF downhill had come up outside of traditional cycling, perhaps frame designs and suspension systems really would be a lot different. Probably. Maybe you should put your engineering hat back on and see what you can come up with?
Board shapes crossed over. Cool, now people don't need a snowboard to enjoy powder. Is there a problem?
The reason why DH is going down right now is because the tracks are getting wider, easier, more bike park. It's cool to do a run or two on these kind of trails but where are the good old trails, sketchy, technical, scary even at low pace ? People are getting into Enduro because it's the old DH we knew PLUS you need to be even more in shape. Enduro is the real reason why DH is going down. DH Riders don't want to ride in slopestyle tracks so they get into enduro. DH is still there, it just changed it's name !
I have skied and raced DH MTB since the early 90's and have seen the sports “progress” Certainly they have progressed if you are judging progression by having ski/bike porn films made every year that blow minds and sell new skis. I have also seen just about every famous pioneer of free skiing die in the last 20 years. Not to mention the endless numbers of amateur skiers who die every year trying to be like them.
Is that what we “need” to have for you to feel MTB has progressed? Are we only going to be happy when our few hero’s are lucky to last a decade “pushing” the sport? Will we only be progressing when Gwin, Semenuk, Zink and MacAskill are dead chasing the limits for our entertainment and to make people feel the need to buy a $10K bike every year? I would rather be talking with these guys 20 years from now about the glory days then eulogizing riders like them every year, like we do in skiing.
Arne Backstrom, John Brenan, Sarah Burke, Doug Coombs, Fredrik Ericsson, Allison Kreutzen, Kip Garre, Jim Jack, Aaron Karitis, Magnus Kastengren, Shane McConkey, Chris Onufer, Jamie Pierre, Steve Romeo, Chris Rudolph, Tony Seibert, Andreas Fransson, JP Auclair...
I just get tired and sad of listing the ski hero's we have lost.
Mountain biking does have it's own roots Richard and you know them. It was the freedom and camaraderie of people coming together through a sport they loved. Sometimes competing, sometimes showing off to one another, but it was original mountain bikers disdain for the the artificial commercialism of other sports. People rode MTB because they loved MTB not to think that they are somehow changing the world risking their lives. Us old timers know that history and remember the sport slowly becoming less of a family of outcasts wanting to be different into a sport following many of the same traps as other sports and this desire to progress at all costs is just another idea stolen from other sports.
Pushing the sport until our hero’s are dying is not progression. If that is the only way to get more riders or sell more overpriced bikes forget it! Mountain biking being a beautiful sport is not dictated by sales numbers or bike porn video segments it should be gauged by peoples love of the sport. I love to ride, my friends love to ride I don't need to feel some forced pressure to risk my life to call myself a mountain biker.
I enjoy being able to run into my heroes from the 90's and talk with them about riding, they still all love to ride. Hans Rey, John Tomac, Myles Rockwell, Missy Giove, Brian Lopes etc I didn't feel like the sport was not progressing back then because these guys weren’t dying. Richard, do you remember how we felt when “earthquake” Jake Watson died? Is the sport only still “cool” when things like that become so commonplace that we get used to it, like skiing?
If you can't get inspired by the sport of mountain biking anymore and it's pace of progression, perhaps that tells you more about yourself rather than the sport. I happen to still have my mind blown watching Gwin, Semenuk, Zink and MacAskill do their magic and would like to continue to watch them for years to come until they are old mentors and ambassadors for the sport.
I have skied and raced DH MTB since the early 90's and have seen the sports “progress” Certainly they have progressed if you are judging progression by having ski/bike porn films made every year that blow minds and sell new skis. I have also seen just about every famous pioneer of free skiing die in the last 20 years. Not to mention the endless numbers of amateur skiers who die every year trying to be like them.
Is that what we “need” to have for you to feel MTB has progressed? Are we only going to be happy when our few hero’s are lucky to last a decade “pushing” the sport? Will we only be progressing when Gwin, Semenuk, Zink and MacAskill are dead chasing the limits for our entertainment and to make people feel the need to buy a $10K bike every year? I would rather be talking with these guys 20 years from now about the glory days then eulogizing riders like them every year, like we do in skiing.
Arne Backstrom, John Brenan, Sarah Burke, Doug Coombs, Fredrik Ericsson, Allison Kreutzen, Kip Garre, Jim Jack, Aaron Karitis, Magnus Kastengren, Shane McConkey, Chris Onufer, Jamie Pierre, Steve Romeo, Chris Rudolph, Tony Seibert, Andreas Fransson, JP Auclair...
I just get tired and sad of listing the ski hero's we have lost.
Mountain biking does have it's own roots Richard and you know them. It was the freedom and camaraderie of people coming together through a sport they loved. Sometimes competing, sometimes showing off to one another, but it was original mountain bikers disdain for the the artificial commercialism of other sports. People rode MTB because they loved MTB not to think that they are somehow changing the world risking their lives. Us old timers know that history and remember the sport slowly becoming less of a family of outcasts wanting to be different into a sport following many of the same traps as other sports and this desire to progress at all costs is just another idea stolen from other sports.
Pushing the sport until our hero’s are dying is not progression. If that is the only way to get more riders or sell more overpriced bikes forget it! Mountain biking being a beautiful sport is not dictated by sales numbers or bike porn video segments it should be gauged by peoples love of the sport. I love to ride, my friends love to ride I don't need to feel some forced pressure to risk my life to call myself a mountain biker.
I enjoy being able to run into my heroes from the 90's and talk with them about riding, they still all love to ride. Hans Rey, John Tomac, Myles Rockwell, Missy Giove, Brian Lopes etc I didn't feel like the sport was not progressing back then because these guys weren’t dying. Richard, do you remember how we felt when “earthquake” Jake Watson died? Is the sport only still “cool” when things like that become so commonplace that we get used to it, like skiing?
If you can't get inspired by the sport of mountain biking anymore and it's pace of progression, perhaps that tells you more about yourself rather than the sport. I happen to still have my mind blown watching Gwin, Semenuk, Zink and MacAskill do their magic and would like to continue to watch them for years to come until they are old mentors and ambassadors for the sport.
None of the sports mentioned are less risky, edgu or enjoyable than the other.
Its pretty lazy to ask why dh bikes borrow from motox. I mean why would getting down a mountain on wheels be anything like riding other machinery at speed over rough terrain?
This article is ascii for the sake of it.
Like seriously, imagine they were still riding long straight sticks with no sidecut. No halfpipe, no slopestyle, no grabs. Onsies!
Downhill borrowed a lot from BMX and moto and has gone on to give a lot of tech to other sports. Road bikes have disc brakes, through axles and tubeless tyres now!
Cross pollination is good.
Downhill racing is exciting to watch because of the doom factor.
Jumps have been getting bigger and the edits more impressive.
Freeride has evolved from big drops with janky style to Semenuk smoothness.
I see no stagnation or identity crisis!
Just need to sort out some of those World Cup venues....
#bringbackschladming!
It was like hell. I know that better skiers could have had more fun, but Kennedy and Bono hit trees and died on skis and I am not a great skier.
Skis can make any open slope feel like a perfectly sculpted trail, and every carve can feel like railing a berm like a pro it is true, but when it comes to chasing single track through the woods and picking lines through rock gardens I'll take wheels.
That being said, if someone wants to design a bike specifically for carving down a slope I'll give it a go.
DH MTB however runs on/over terrain that in a lot of cases, you can't even walk down with out something to hold onto., crazy-large rock gardens, holes, ruts, jumps/hits of every size/dimension/shape, and the condition of the ground on which this stuff is on, can change over the course of minutes from hard pack, to slimy ice'like mud. And where a DH bike gets air, unlike skiing, if you were to hit one of the obstacles at a slower speed(which would simply have you sticking to the ground on a DH ski run), on a DH WC course, you'd eat shit.....MASSIVELY, as WC DH jumps are NOT made to be rolled
If you want to have something to compare it to, try MX/SX, Trials, or Enduro(the motorcycle variety). The vehicles are a lot more similar than a DH bike vs/ skis, and the terrain is a lot more similar too.
Make broadcasting better, let the riders ride.
Correct.
All those things have been done and have been dropped because of their physical limitations.
Even when not considering weight, wide tires on a bike do have their disadvantages, for example in deeper mud where they tend to swim and not grab.
long travel is hindered by the fact that it has to be within the limits of the bikes geometry. You can´t have low bottom brackets and ultra long travel. It turns out a low BB is much more relevant to good ride characteristics, so ultra long travel got tossed aside.
300mm rotors have been done. Aside from some freaks of nature and morbidly obese people, they are simply not needed in most cases and have been dropped due to our collective concern about weight. They could however be brought back and be relevant in some niche cases, i´ll give you that.
Regarding wheelpath. The verdict on whether it is really more efficient is still out. It´s not like there is any real scientific data out there on the subject regarding specifically bicycles. From personal experience i can say that the advantage is nowhere near as pronounced as some try to make it seem. There is however a distinct difference in handling due to that fact that the chainstays do extend under compression which feels weird to a lot of people. So this one really comes down to personal preference more than what is objectively better.
In conclusion, while i hate the industry and their unnecessary forced incremental improvements with a passion, i must say that there really is a plateau for bikes that we have reached. There´s only so much you can do to a pedal bike without making it into something entirely different and that makes that whole argument about "vacuum development" pretty much redundant.
"To be fair, skiing as a recreational sport has been evolving since 1850, alpine skiing since the 1920s. Mountain biking, by contrast, has only been evolving since the late 1970s, and downhill bikes were not readily available until the mid ‘90s, which suggests that we have a ways to go before we reach our full potential".
Skiing may be progressing for far longer than mountain biking but back in the 1920 there were no social media. What I mean is that the actual timeline might be smaller for the case of mountain biking but with social media spreading around the net new lines and techniques and innovation and big balls, the spread of ideas, pushing the limits, and the knowhow created in this much smaller time frame could be equally weighted to the progress made in skiing from 1920's until 1990's.
There are only a a few salient points in this article imo.....the main one being addressed by the very first reply.
I think the content machine at PB might be running low on caffeine/skittles...?
Downhill always had a identity problem. Early 90's was a bit BMX ,mid 90's to 2000's was a lot of MX...but I think it has found it's identity,even if it's not what some people want. It's still bicycles. It always be just bicycles going down hills. Maybe with robots riding them at some point in the future.
1. Exposure: There are so many people out there that still have no clue what downhill mountain biking is. Even Pinkbike doesn't air full DH runs on some tracks, and I don't even know of a single TV station even broadcasts any DH. Compare this to E-Sports. Think about this, ESPN has more coverage of competitive video games than downhill mountain biking!
2. Accessibility: Access to trails, rider classes and group rides can still improve. The entry point of downhill mountain biking needs to be lowered. New bikes, helmets, pads, etc. are still way too expensive for most people. Even trying to find a person or vehicle to shuttle you and your DH bike to the trail can be a chore. Also, if you're a kid who can't drive and doesn't live by a mountain, you are at the mercy of your parent/ sibling/ friend or whoever has time to take you.
3. Technology: New materials and manufacturing techniques will make bikes in the future lighter, stronger, more efficient, and more reliable. I'm still waiting for that mythical gearbox mountain bike that weighs only 10 lbs, with on-the-fly adjustable suspension, silent brakes that NEVER squeal, and dropper post that works 100% of the time
Long and short, DH still has plenty of room to grow and still has lots of untapped potential. Also, obligatory "Freeride ain't dead"
i'm going to throw it out there..... we're better than them.
(I'm not even going to mention the bike type that shall not be named, which is currently stealing away important r&d time.)
!. for true progression of the sport some of the rules need to be relaxed...example...for a bike to be raced in world cup DH it has to be available to the public within a year of it first being raced...(or something like that). So the bikes can never truely progress as rapidly or wildly as we would like. Never again could we have something like the Honda RN01s that come in and wow us and open other manufacturers eyes to something truely revolutionary and mild altering.
and 2...this one is gonna get me hated on but the DH tracks are being dumbed down. Its all about speed these days. Bring back the gnar of old like the truely awesome tracks like Champery and Schladming. Back when tracks REALLY tested the skill of the riders, finding sneaky lines no one else has seen and really pushing yourself Sam Hill said the same thing in a recent interview...hell its one of the reasons he left DH and went to Enduro.
Just my 2c anyway.
Actually bicycles inspired someone to put an engine and go faster, further, you name it. It is possible that this relationship has been reciprocal since then but what’s wrong with it?
Next level is #bigmountainbike !!
As proof, adding Enduro to the mix increased sales of bikes, participation in competition, and general excitement (as is witnessed by the coverage in the media and on forums). As further proof, the video coverage of enduro is brutal. You cant watch enduro from the far side of the planet like you can DH races. 4 cross and Speed and Style races are barely mentioned Does 4 Cross even exist anymore? You wouldn't think so based on media coverage.
Skiing on the other hand has incredible coverage - from the air, from the ground, on the web. Also, skiing has great production around many different disciplines - free ride, slalom, dh, cross, etc. In the mountain bike world we can claim great coverage in DH and major events (e.g. Crankworks), and then okay coverage in other disciplines or non-existant in some.
The more people that watch a sport, the more want to participate, the more chance we continue to see progression. R-dogg watched videos of the Claw and got motivated. Storch watched the brothers McCaul and all of us (whether you like him or not) watched Lopes on TV.
There are a few innovations that hopefully will change this and grow both awareness and participation:
Drones - follow-me technology seems pretty advanced. Why isnt it used in enduro? It would be incredible to watch Rude, Graves, et al from a follow-me shot.
The Internet - turns out, distributing content is pretty easy these days.
In summary - more variation in events and better coverage.
I'm going riding now...
Q: Why are faculty meetings so contentious?
A: Because so little is at stake.
"It’s no surprise then, that trailbikes have evolved to the point where their descending capabilities now rival downhill machines."
- I'm sorry my trail bike is amazing, but once you get on a DH track my DH bike leaves it for dead. Utterly for dead. When did a WC racer last win on a trail bike? Oh wait....
"Take away the berms and downhill bikes can barely make it around a corner at speed."
- What the hell does this have to do with anything? This is literally a function of physics and applies to almost any vehicle with wheels. Isn't that the whole point, that it's meant to be technically challenging!?
I don't understand the comparison to skiing at all. This is like saying "Baseball is in crisis because people play Hockey"
None of these comments are surprising given you've said DH bikes should be limited to DH tracks and that disgusting article you wrote in 2014 basically calling all MTBers to ditch or bail on riders who don't bring spares.
Overall he questions the status quo, and in some ways for good reason. That's never a bad thing. The first step, were his ideas to become real, would be a push for a chainless DH series, and boy wouldn't that be awesome.
When it comes to the straight downhill vs. UCI downhill comparison, there are similarities- both are about getting down an alpine hill as fast as possible, BUT in this respect I think MTB has actually one BEYOND skiing. I love skiing and will watch it, but how many runs in a race can you watch a person blast down a fall line that includes some turns and jumps and steeps, with those being the only challenges to the racer?
By contrast, it would also be rather boring to watch a mountain bike run down the exact same ski race courses. Simply put- downhill skiing gets boring after a bunch of runs on television. Instead, MTB downhill races present challenges to racers in the form of both fall line AND obstacles, and it is those obstacles that form the biggest challenge to the equipment. I am a skier and put very simply- ski equipment on downhill racing courses does not have to be slammed into rocks, tree roots and the differences in conditions skiing typical only require different wax and sharpness on edges. Soft snow, hard snow, or ice- thats about it. MTB downhillers get loose dust, mud, or hardpack.
The challenges of those obstacles plus course conditions for MTB could plainly be seen for anyone who watched Fort William and the mud in the woods last year, or Mont St Anne in a driving downpour.
I would conclude that downhill MTB has jumped past downhill skiing in the "interesting" department because of that, and that snowboarding developed in part because folks were bored going- and watching- racers take the runs down rather open, albeit steep, race courses. UCI MTB downhill should be an Olympic sport- it is very entertaining.
As for the future, the bikes are near their techo-limits. What will make us go faster are the major improvements in safety gear that are about to make us look like comic book superheros and keep our fragile endoskeleton intact.
www.vitalmtb.com/videos/features/Crazy-Fast-Downhill-Vital-RAW-from-Crankworx-Les-Gets,33923/sspomer,2
www.vitalmtb.com/videos/features/Vital-RAW-Redux-Best-of-2016,32823/sspomer,2
Downhill is especially an interesting subject, it's one discipline when pedaling is not the most important function of the bike when bike have always been developed around this primary function. Do we really need all these gears (and could we have tracks designed without the need of pedaling so much). Is light saving that important for DH? What is the function of a seat of dh bike, maybe another shape could be possible (remember the old tioga dh seat). Do we need a seatpost? what;s about a BB droppper? tire pressure control? Ans why do we still have so many flats? It feels better than before but it's far from being perfect..There is still a lot to invent if we accept to challenge the status quo..
WHEN you crash on snow its mostly SOFT!
WHEN you crash on dirt/stone its NEVER SOFT!
Thats the reason why its a difference!
FEST is rad, slope style is not as good as bmx, DH bikes don’t need chains, as Phil Atwil proved leogang is a joke, Semenuk is incredible, hardline is pretty comparable to kitzbuhel.
Skiers and MTB riders of all levels from first time midlife crisis no hopers to Thovex/Gwin/Semenuk grade are having an absolute blast and at the very top of the game the level of commitment, application and execution are very similar and are bleeding across disciplines and down the ability ziggurat.
And btw, the trail is named "Smoked Bacon" not "Otter" or "Otter Drop"
All the money is going in to enduro bikes and 170mm Nomads/Firebirds/Capras/etc that descend better than the down hill bikes five years ago. Lift serve riding seems to be growing but people seem to be buying fewer dedicated DH bikes.
Shimano has essentially given up on Saint. The coming crop of 29er race bikes are going to be so purpose built for racing that an even smaller number of riders will buy them. With few people buying them, the price will be even more expensive and the death spiral begins.
As interest wanes in DH, those that are left are going to take it in new and creative directions. UCI rules might stifle the innovation at first, but creativity and technology will out in the end. DH will end up super niche and even more different than any other kind of racing - motorcycle hill climbs seems to be the be the best case scenario.
A regular DH bike might not make me faster (though it's more fun and forgiving) but in the hands of the right person it's a whole other level faster
On another note, I do disagree in one regard : Skiing didn't develop in a vacuum. There was a period in the 90's-2000's where skiing was HEAVILY influenced by (you guessed it) snowboarding. Hell ,snowboarding may have even saved the ski industry by injecting some much needed accessibility and showing them how to once again capture the a young demographic. A lot of what we see as modern skiing owes its roots to the skater-punk stepchild that was snowboarding in the 90's.
What was the question again?
I like watching tennis too.
But really who cares.
Dh mountain biking is awesome and here to stay.
Dirt is massive piece of unmoving sandpaper and pain. You glibly get a couple shots at walking away from a bike as you "progress"
I love it from all angles
Tbh I get you and other than the majority of the other commentors I think comparing it to skiing is a great Idea. I also think that the current limits of mountainbiking are much tighter than those in skiing mostly due to the tracks. Building an mountainbike trail is much more effort than just having one Candide Thovex using a whole ski resort the way he interprets it himself. And I am not going to start talking about the crazy spins they do wherever they can or the size of the jumps they are easily floating over. It sometimes seems much purer and simpler than mountainbiking. Just look at the equipment, you named it before.
But it has also been mentioned in the comments that bikers may be a bit more hesitant due to the crazy risks of injuries. I probably do not have to go over this again as everything has been said about that and I certainly can agree with it.
I just would like to mention that mountainbiking is still a beautiful sport. People seem to forget that you think that as well, which you certainly do. And it does not have to be a bad thing that it is a mixture of several sports.. it simply took the best of them all
I might contradict with myself if I say that we should not compare things in that way while Ive said before that I liked your comparison. But that is not what I meant. I still think it is a good comparison. But I am of the opinion that we do not have to look at other comparable sports and underprice MTB.
We can simply enjoy it as it is and no matter how fast it is progressing or not it certainly is one of the most fun things out there. You can let go of any worries about the sport.. just ride and even if it was the most stupid end simple thing ever.. if it is as much fun I will never stop doing it for sure.
This certainly is no complex evaluation but I think this is enough, as simple as it is. And it certainly is beautiful in it's simplicity.
@RichardCunningham
You all sound like a bunch of Bi?ches seriously
I would love to see his reaction to this! :-D
As well as BMX and MOTOX, Trials as it's influence too....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQuCJLlxyZo
"The doom filter erodes the experience.'
I've never seen it put to words before, but that is my feeling while watching mtb