Save the TechI've been lucky to have ridden singletrack all over North and Central America, many parts of Europe, Asia, and even the Middle East, and there's been a common thread shared between most of the locals I've talked to who call those places home: their existing trails are being made easier and easier, and the focus of fresh trails seems to be only on finding the smoothest, most mundane terrain.
The supposed reasons for this aren't difficult to pinpoint. First, more and more locales are going straight instead of building rouge singletrack. That in itself is hard to argue against, especially when funding might be required, but there's little chance of getting funding for your raw, scary line when said funding is only coming because the source of it has been sold on growing the sport by attracting new riders. New riders are, understandably, scared of dying during their first few rides, and search and rescue needing to collect broken riders every other day is generally bad for business. And let's not forget that is exactly what this is... a business.
Trail associations are often (but not always) looking for funding to offset the expenses of trail work, and that funding is usually only going to come for entry-level singletrack that promises to encourage growth of the sport. More riders mean more money spent by riders, of course, which is the ROI of that funding.
Okay, so why can't guys who want difficult, technical trails just go build it themselves? They can, of course, but it's often not that simple anymore. With trail building going legit in more places, the days of wandering off into the bush to build whatever you want are, for better or worse, probably behind us. There are hoops to jump through now that higher powers are involved, so you can't just go put shovel to dirt like many of us used to. And with many trail associations seemingly focused solely on growing the sport by building entry-level trails, or trails that only get approved and funded, it's almost like these associations represent people that don't even ride yet instead of those who have been riding and investing in this sport for many, many years. Why would someone back a group that doesn't even recognize them?
Politics aside, the push for smoother trails is robbing new riders of the progression and accomplishment that's such a great part of our little sport. Worse yet, I doubt this mindset will ever do a U-turn. When something becomes no longer acceptable, easier, or quicker, it rarely reverts back to being acceptable, difficult, or slower; that's just not how us humans work. Soon we'll have a whole slew of riders who've become used to not having their skills challenged, and those riders will eventually be calling the shots years down the road. How do you think that's going to turn out?
Bring the FlowI've been lucky to have ridden singletrack all over North and Central America, many parts of Europe, Asia, and even the Middle East, and if there's one thing that connects riders from all those locations is that we all just want to have a good time on our bikes. And you know what's a really, really good time? Coasting through a set of huge berms and snakey singletrack that delivers flow to riders without them needing pro-level skills.
Mountain biking has long been viewed by much of the general, non-riding public as a dangerous, rowdy sport that costs riders their collarbones on a regular basis. Events like the Red Bull Rampage, along with countless two-minute hucking 'edits,' have people like my mom thinking that I surely have a deathwish. I don't have a deathwish, but I do wish for endless, flowing singletrack that'll have me feeling like I'm surfing on dirt. I mean, who wouldn't have a shit eating grin on that kind of trail? Only a jerk who doesn't support their local trail association, I assume.
I don't need to point out to you how fun a downhill pump track of a trail can be, but I am going to point out why that sort of terrain can only be a good thing for our little sport. You know what people like to do? They like to have fun, and the more fun we can make mountain biking, the more people we'll get on bikes. That's great, but there's a selfish reason for wanting more riders: it should mean that we'll eventually have more trails as well due to more manpower and bigger numbers lobbying for singletrack.
Sure, a lot of those new trails are likely going to be easier than what the 'core' riders are looking for, but a good number of rookie riders will stick around long enough to want more challenging terrain, and that's when we'll hopefully see more of all types of trails, including the scary ones.
As much as I pine for the days when mountain biking was a weird, niche sport that not many people were interested in, those days are long behind us and they ain't coming back. Mountain biking is mainstream because, well, it's a damn good time, and I think we can all agree that more people need to be having a good time out in nature.
Trails that scare the bejesus out of people generally don't make for a good time, however, so let's embrace the flow instead of complaining about the berms that I know put a smile on everyone's face.
Aston Hill I first rode when it was new 20ish years ago gnarly rooty slippery steep, but very short, I still go and even raced there last year. It’s still challenging it’s still fun, the black run with the years of erosion I think just gets harder every year with the roots making big sharp steps in hairpins etc. I’ve heard SO MANY people in recent years say “I don’t ride there in the wet, too dangerous, no fun as struggle to stay on the bike”. It’s generally quiet.
Swinley rammed all the time, every trail surfaced with hardcore kitty litter loads bigger and longer trails than Aston. There isn’t anything at all that’s even slightly challenging, if a root gets prominent from erosion and could become fun it’s cut out or covered back over - so boring. Yet the place is rammed all the time it’s mega popular. I hardly ever go.
The sport has changed its much more about flow and a lot less about technical skill clearing natural obstacles (like diagonal off camber root sections in the rain covered with chalk that are begging. To break your collarbone). I love a bit of flow riding blind and the first couple of times then it gets dull. A positive I guess is I think it’s spawned bigger and bigger jumps to bring the fun back. However that then gets close to dirt jumping and that’s about as far removed from natural trail riding as you can get.
I see guys doing maintenance on parts of trails where they've been beat to shit by years of riding, and I'm like "Why are you fixing that? It doesn't need fixed. You're unfixing it!"
Deliberately dumbing down trails is a different story altogether.
One observation that I've made, rightly or wrongly, is that it seems that now that money is being spent on developing trails, the vast majority is spent on building flow trails, and trails for beginners. The argument is that it will help get people into the sport. Whether that's a terrible thing or a fantastic thing or somewhere in between is another discussion. But when on one hand I see some difficult trails getting shut down or sanitized, and new trails only getting approval if they are suitable for everyone, while approval for smooth trails coming easily, it makes me wonder. There wouldn't be a sport called MTB if it wasn't for the riders who've been digging and spending big bucks on crap bikes for 25 years or more for these beginners to roll into and get the spoils of public funding and costly R&D that created amazing bikes, with zero history in the sport themselves. Seems like someone is getting the short end of the stick sometimes, and it's not those folks who've never lifted a finger to create any part of what made MTB a thing in the first place.
I welcome newcomers, and I welcome a variety of trails. Do they deserve to walk into the sport and get the vast majority of $$ for trails, while expert technical terrain gets marginalized? I feel lucky to live in a place with such great riding, and I am stoked money is going to the trails, but I hope once the beginners get their infrastructure paid for with no effort on their part that some more money can go the the guys who now and over the years have tirelessly built hand built tech for free (when they can get away with it), much of which is some of the most ridden and highly rated in town.
EDIT - you're going to get different responses from different locales and different people. In NV & Squampton it used to be the case that all we had were hard trails. People would start riding and come back bleeding. They'd either get good real quick or give up. That wasn't a real balanced trail system; it was just for hardcores and pretty much nothing for the noobs.
What's interesting is that now there are still some trail systems where its mostly tilted to hard trails (Whistler, Pemberton, Eagle). Meanwhile NV and Squantanamo Bay have built easier trails so people can get into the sport without getting eaten alive. So the beginners rule the blue/green trails of NV and Squamladesh then get destroyed in Whistler and Pemberton trails. I'm thinking of the gongshow of shattered faces coming off Lord of the Squirrels or Happy - Rudys-OSensation. The spike in the SAR callouts of the late season.
ANyhow massive digression but just food for thought. Maybe persuade people to use judgment and critically analyze their own skillset? Nah too controversial
If anyone cannot tell this is sarcasm. This happens all too frequently.
Ride a Norco Range 2016 or a Pivot 5.5 in the slow and techy and you will die from OTB due to high AS/high PK.
Ride the same bike in a flowy, quick trail and you will enjoy the stable and responsive feel of the rear suspension.
In a general way, bikes with low AS/PK behave better in the slow, techy (2015-2017 Kona Process range, Knolly's). But If you mainly ride fast and smooth track then maybe a more responsive bike will be enjoyable.
I am forgetting some.
To me flow is nothing to do with the type of track but how it all links together. Flow is when you ride a trail so well that everything pieces together and you fly through it without any abrupt stops or huge loss of speed.
The "flow trails" are fun though and I like them but I prefer rough natural trails with rocks and roots.
They are also good for beginners, just don't want everything to become a flow trail.
Yes get what you are saying about flow, plenty of old school rough, rocky, rooty, single track trails have ‘flow’ and are the best for it, the really skilled guys make them look smooth.
The way the article was written I took it as talking about the wide, mechanical, surfaced, smoothed, bermed tracks that have become really popular now.
Essentially, machine building techniques make it too tempting to simply smooth out the whole trail and make it uniform and the same as every other flow trail. This doesn't always have to be the case though! You can have a "flow trail" that incorporates the surrounding features and doesn't completely strip the trail of character.
The best examples I know are Knight Ide's trails in Victory Vermont (The Kingdom trail's rowdy neighbor). These trails are a mix of machine built flow, but they do an incredible job of incorporating the natural terrain and not draining the experience of difficulty. The trails are incredibly flowing, but also rough, steppy, and difficult to ride fast. However, a beginner rider could ride most of them at a slower pace very safely.
The issue is, this is HARD TO DO. It takes way more work to put the love and care into creating a flow trail that isn't a uniform ribbon of paved dirt. Hopefully more places will model themselves after Victory, and take up the mantle of tech-flow, or flow-with-purpose, or whatever you want to call it.
I am 100% against cleaning up a tech trail to make it flow better. But in my riding area, there are only a few trails that I can really ride fast that are fun, and those are the trails I want to bring my new riding friends to.
I get frustrated by my trails because they have sections that just stop you in your tracks, no matter how good a rider you are. To me, that's just bad trail design. I'm not opposed to super-tech, trials-esque trails, but if it's regular singletrack with some shitty "can't be done over 3km/h" feature it just annoys me... especially when it's right at the bottom of a descent when you finally have some speed.
A "flow trail" means a certain thing, but good gnarly trails also have flow.
This is far too common. Just because someone back in the day built a poorly designed trail doesn’t mean it should stay that way. It is super frustrating as a builder to look a poor trail layout and not want to improve it. Bikes are so capable these days, and we are riding way faster, some of these trails just were not designed to ride them at that speed.
If you want flow track, then build new lines that are flow track, but don't convert stuff that we have been riding for years to these expressways in the woods. It made me withdrawal my membership from the trail organization. I don't want to empower them to ruin more trails. I'm a little concerned, I have a tiny five or six acre tract by my house that I have some jump lines and big obstacles I like to ride. I've built it up slowly, mostly just shovel and a little saw work. Recently the trail builders came out there and rebuilt one trail, they haven't touched my jump line, yet, but I'm a bit concerned they're going to ruin it.
But I think the skill sets are slightly different. Guys I need to push it to stay with on the fast flow trails, I usually can ride away from when it gets really rocky.
more speed on multi-use trails is the problem
to keep everyone happy, good trail design should have lots of natural speed bumps
Last year following criticism that our main trail, the Kitchener was too tame to be graded red and faced with the unsustainable cost of managing the trail, I made the decision to let it a erode within the scope of red trails and only work on the drainage. I must admit I thought this would go down well especially since the social media voices were complaining that the Kitchener was becoming 'sanitized'.
This meant roots became more exposed, braking bumps more pronounced and on rainy days filled with water. The only work on the trail was to raise it where it had become blown out. The investment focus I thought could then pass to the blue trail, underfunded yet the preference of beginners.
This would I believed would present a real technical challenge, similar to the off-piste, ungraded, local knowledge trails of which there are many miles of despite recent timber harvesting. Sherwood has very little elevation, you have to earn your speed, it is in truth an old school XC kind of trail, it is not the all-mountain/enduro destination many of our 644,000 visitors per year on 160mm travel bikes want it to be.
Anyway, surprise surprise one year on and the dissenting voices are complaining that there is little or no visible signs of trail maintenance and nobody cares about the trails, citing braking bumps and potholes etc. that's despite me and few others spending most of the last year digging out drains or creating new ones. One person who's profile suggests he's hardcore complained there was 'No weatherproofing'.
My point I think, is that there is a generation of 'cyclists' who have only ridden in trail centres or bike parks, the phenomenal growth of trail centres in this country mean you can travel around the country ticking them off your list without ever needing to ride the Peak District, or the Lakes or other types of wild, unmanaged wilderness style rides. This means they have an expectation of groomed, machined trails and they want them maintained to flatter their self image and to do the work for them. The only thing sustainable about this is a low skill level.
Trail centres are the new Golf clubs which attract expensive cars/vans and expensive underused bikes. Is that a bad thing? No not really, the bottom line is is that there are more places to ride with less opposition than before, that realisation seems to have been lost along with perspective.
New York could use some more flow. Park City could use some more gnar.
The only place this pattern fails is when you start riding secret stuff in the Utah Valley. Gnar and skree and death. That is where the real Utah DH can be found.
Show me sometime!!
Maybe it's because I've been riding on hiking trails in the alps, a lot of which are steep, rocky and nasty, or maybe it's because I always really liked the chunky stuff (and have never been a good jumper :/), who knows?,
Anyway, my favourite thing to ride these days is most definitely tech->flow->tech->flow. There's really nothing better than cleaning a really ugly death-grip-steep-loose-bastard section, to be rewarded with a nice wide open rip where you can relax a bit before the next scary section.
Flow trails are fun and have their place! My opinion is that they really have influenced what used to be the standard for a mountain bike trail. They've made them (the typical trails) a lot easier... very few obstacles in the way, and when there are, there's always a "fast line", and the goal is to be at the bottom first. Fair enough. I like going fast too, but some times it is nice to come to a screeching halt and look back at what you rode, saying to yourself: "how did I not just die?"
Huh.. haven't blah-blahed that much on the internet in years..
Now I still believe that sustainability can or even should imply that trails remain technical. Keep the roots in there, they keep the soil together. And keep trails narrow and tight between the trees. Wider empty sections erode more quickly. And keep the descends nice and twisty. Sure a straight line down the hill may imply that people brake less on the descend. But it also allows them to go faster until the point where they feel they go too fast and then hammer the brakes. Which typically is where the braking bumps start to develop because everyone seems to think it is not good to ride these fast.
So yeah let's say flow is a combination of rider and trail. You can build a trail so that a cyclist with minimal skill can find flow. Or you can build a trail that takes some practice and skill to find flow. And the fun bit is to acquire those skills. I'm not of the school that says the more riders the better. I'm not saying less is better. I'm just saying that trails shouldn't suffer from riders with limited skills. Or more precisely. I don't think trails should be built just so that limited skill allows them to go as fast as they would go as if it were a surfaced road. If you're new, sure go ahead and ride something technical. Awkward corners, roots, short steep bumpy sections. You'll be slow but you'll be fine. And you'll learn something. I'd rather see that than get on a trail that compensates for a lack of skill but catapults you up to speeds you can't control, crashes you're not prepared for and still teach you nothing.
@mtbikeaddict : Yeah it is cool but especially for a gravity park I can imagine it can be tricky considering the differences in velocity. It takes some good planning and mapping, but great if they can pull it off. Here it is more kind of an XC trail where we have the technical stuff off the main line. Kind of the opposite of a chicken run .
My current, all-mountain/DH loving self says there's a place in our sport for every type of trail riding. 'Gimme dat rhythm!'
Take Page Hill in New Hampshire. You can ride super hard tech in a trail like "The Dude Abides" and then hoof over to the top of "Shock Therapy" to ride a great flow trail. I love having the ability to ride wildly different styles at the same location, in the same day. Having said that, if anyone were to take the challenging elements of "The Dude Abides" and make it beginner friendly I will drop my chamois and leave a steamer in the middle of that B-line.
Purpose built trails of any style will always have a place in our sport, but I whole-heartedly disagree with beginner lines any time a challenging feature approaches. We, as mountain bikers, possess excellent brakes. We also have feet. If you're uncomfortable riding that sketchy section, grab a fistful of brake lever, get off your bike and walk. We all have (and still do) at some point. The joy of riding mountain bikes lies in overcoming those challenges.
Flow trail is nice for pure speed, trying to clear jumps, etc. It also lets me feel like I'm descending for more than 12 seconds at a time on our 140 feet of elevation gain here in Wisconsin. I like the optional off-shoots and lines that flow trail offers. I think for some regions and land managers it's the best bet. Guessing a lot of people's "gnar" is still machine built, purpose built easy to ride trail (just with some man-made rock gardens).
My little kids live for flowtrail. It's like slightly down-hill graded BMX with safe jumps, max speed and large margins for error. With their 20" wheels, roots and rocks are killer.
Terminology aside, we need all types of trails. Variety is key. Nice, mellow trails can still be fun for experienced riders but there need to be challenging options for riders to progress as well. And dumbing down existing trails is just ... well ... dumb.
That said, how about mountain BMX, as in the Olympic variety.
As someone who spends a lot of time in the woods building trail, I think about flow constantly. No matter what terrain I'm working with. It's a lot of work, but the end result should be fun! Or scary if that's your thing!
Also, these flow trails are sometimes a result of making trails more sustainable. There are more riders now than there used to be. Your secret squirrel tech/ skid trail would be annihilated in a season if it had the same traffic.
Why the F$&@ ride ? Im trying to challenge myself and get into that zone where I’m thinking about the bike/ the steep section, roots tech etc etc and thats about it.
I think this is where rogue traibuilding comes from..complete and utter frustration with dumbing everything down. Or, alternatively a lack of progression..
If you can’t ride it .. watch and learn or take some lessons or maybe have some logical progression or alternate lines.
I’m in no space to ride that 15 foot drop. But this does not mean I don’t appreciate others who HAVE the capability of riding it!! Nor, do I feel I should dictate others riding. Additionally, I find something happens when sessioning stuff .. usually the more experienced guys will want to help the less experienced along as well. It all becomes a social thing ..
End rant
Or maybe a trail so long that no battery lasts that long. But enough low hanging fruit like berries and brambles to recharge the rider.
As long as there are people who want to walk into the mountains, build gnarly trail, and then ride it later, there will be gnarly trails to ride. The sanctioned trials are getting easier, but this area was ultra-gnarly in it's mtb-infancy, to the point where sanctioning that level of difficulty would probably not be very practical. So there really isn't much of a concern, as long as you're willing to find/build the good stuff, and can also put in the time to access it.
Another aspect is that many of the easily accessed "flow trails" degrade into rougher trails with their own unique personality. Although they may not harness the gnarness quite like an intentionally difficult triple-black masterpiece, they become more challenging and fun in a different way.
We needn't worry over here. Plenty of space, and motivated shredders who ride and build.
Trail builders tell us they have to build trail to a width that the fire departments can get their big toys up the hill.
Trail builders get paid.
Fire departments get paid.
Trails get smoother.
Even all the new trail will deteriorate. And at some point, someone won't be able to maintain these new trails to keep their "flow" and all we are left with is bumpy, shallow, unkempt "flow" trails with muddy ruts from all the man made humps and bumps that ride slow and like crap. Then it will be US, the RIDERS FAULTS, for not "maintaining" the flow trails, which we never wanted. And if we don't have dozers, we have no way to maintain THEIR flow trails.
Flow is fun and puts a smile on your face but its the differance between F1 and rallying. Both need to flow. Just in differant ways. Smooth is the ultimate outcome.
Making junior bmx tracks down a mountain is gay. Making Fest tracks down a mountain is rad.
Like Trestle - almost died because the shit is sooo small for the speed. It wasnt fun. Grabbing brakes to not land flat or into the face of the next short ass table.
Kill the flow.
Maybe it's the feeling of comfort that distracts the riders - telling to yourself: "ooww it's just a blue" ... snap while on black or double diamond you're focused and your instincts are maxed.
I grew up riding on motorcycle and atv trails that turned into flow trails in snowmobile season. And while none of those trails were designed to have scary parts (they weren't designed at all), because they formed naturally with no consideration for erosion or sustainability, both uphill and downhill sections rapidly became more challenging as they washed out, bombed out, rutted out, etc., and those parts got really fun really quick! And actually that's what I miss most about those really 'old school' trails.
Now we can't start advocating for making our trails more erosion prone again, but there's a lesson there: let the techy parts develop on their own and use your imagination. You may end up having to find your own tricky ways to ride a regular human being's trail. And there's some reward in that, even if it doesn't look like a terrifying amusement park in the woods.
Being great at everything is rare but people being good at lots of things is becoming more common.
The first double in a 4x track is often about power off the line to hit it fast enough and not the size of the double. Therefore power wins over ability.
Just ride and have fun, whatever it is that you enjoy. (Dh vets Scottish champion just off the skate park where I am a beginner at 43).
Skatepark? Me too, i just got comfy on spines, can’t get my balls together for a bigger air out of the quarter (at least 1,5m above the coping so that it is evident) But I’m getting there
As long as I feel like I'm going fast and flowing over stuff even the rougher sections then I consider this flow. I'm in the zone and as cheesy as it sounds, "I feel one with the trail"....it's kinda like floating/flying and when you see a turn or rowdy section you just charge through it like it was nothing.
If a trail is super technical or filled mostly with tight switch backs and 60% or higher rock gardens then I consider this to be a trail where I can't attain flow for very long.
Yeah, I guess if you asked me I love flow...the feeling I get. It's in my mind the best thing about riding.
I get the feeling that the majority of trails prioritise quantity over quality, but I guess if you have a set budget it makes it difficult.
This is may be the case in Canada / USA, but in Switzerland and Japan where I've done the vast majority of my riding, most trails have been natural hiking or multiple use even horses.
So have not seen a flow trail in the flesh!
= a bit North American centric question?
Cheers
7th, Pipeline and Boogieman are some of the trails that remain technically challenging as they were when built, heck i even love technical uptrack, but so many trails have been dumbed down. Flow is good for new trails to attract new riders, but i want the Shore to remain as challenging as when i moved here 20 odd years ago.
NWA.
Obviously you have not worked to get access to build trails.