Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36
  1. #1
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ban bunnyhopping

    the whole point is the transition fun

    maybe make the barriers another one inch higher

    could the WC guys still mostly bunnyhop em?

    there's gotta be a way to mess em up

    I guess I don't mind those who can ride up the crazy stuff like stairs but as some point a run-up will force a dismount -- like if it's after a corner

    I love superfast barrier approaches and I wanna make everybody dismount

    that's the pretty way to go

    this bunnyhopping with catastrophe as the penalty is for the birds
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  2. #2
    coprolite fietsbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW,Oregon Coast
    My Bikes
    7
    Posts
    6,730
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You doing the Race Promo, , course design* and setting the rules then you can choose. if the podium occupants all practiced the barrier hopping and beat you

    because their lap times were lower than yours Its a sportsman ship issue , get over it ..

    * triple barriers , closer together, should do it.

  3. #3
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No, I won't get over it. I'll complain and hope it changes.

    I'd be in favor of more barriers. More running, more better.

    Maybe 1-2" higher barriers would do it, too. I'd hope that wouldn't make the hurdlers trip, though.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  4. #4
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    7,634
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No fietsbob is dead-on. It sounds like you're just unhappy that people with better technical skills can use that to their advantage. Well, that's part of how the game is played and that's part of what makes cyclocross great. Whenever you post your ideas here, you seem unhappy because you had a picture in your mind about how cyclocross works, and it keeps not matching that image. And rather than try and actually learn how the sport works and understand it, you just want it to mold itself to match your mental image. Even though your mental image is not nearly as interesting or cool as cyclocross the way it actually exists. Get over it.
    The Workingman's Honest Bicycle Program - Heady talk about bikes, bike racing, bike racers and bike riding. standarddouble.com/whbp

  5. #5
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Nah. I do like to think of how things could be better. And one way is when cross has more cross. I disagree about hopping being a legit skill and think they should just raise the barriers a bit or add a third and be done with it. Technical skill to me is in the crossin'. And there's plenty there to be had.

    To me the hopping is just too devastating when it goes wrong. When someone attempts a tricky stairclimb or otherwise steep climb they're not going to break bones when it goes wrong. Even steep crazy descents when they go wrong don't cause so much reliably regular wreckage.

    I'm not concerned about me personally. I think I could do it. It's not done much around here anyway. I just don't think people should be tempted into it. No other part of the technique of CX has such consequences. "Oh here's the part where we ride straight at a board and if anything goes wrong we break all sorts of stuff." That's not cross. A dangerous stunt isn't a sporting technique.
    Last edited by JeffOYB; 01-02-15 at 08:50 PM.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  6. #6
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    7,634
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    To me the hopping is just too devastating when it goes wrong. When someone attempts a tricky stairclimb or otherwise steep climb they're not going to break bones when it goes wrong. Even steep crazy descents when they go wrong don't cause so much reliably regular wreckage.
    BS. I shattered my collarbone on a steep ride-down. Many of the worst injuries I've heard of in local cross races have happened on similar terrain. For all the times I've seen people wreck trying to hop a barrier (and I've seen it a few times), serious injury is a lot more rare than a big descent. This "safety" argument doesn't hold water. If you can't hop the barriers, don't hop them. Even when people do, and wreck, it's usually not serious. Ride-downs are WAY more dangerous.

    As for whether hopping constitutes "crossing," your opinion on that means nothing, since you know jack squat about the sport. I mean, you think bunny hopping is a "dangerous stunt," even though serious injuries on 'cross courses are much more common on steep descents, where practically everyone attempts to ride down them and the speed and kinetic energy is a lot higher.

    Anyway, there's no sense in continuing to argue on this. Happily, there's no movement afoot to ban hopping, since such a rule would be both pointless and unenforceable. If you want to keep shopping this nonsense around, be my guest, but don't be surprised if you have few takers.
    The Workingman's Honest Bicycle Program - Heady talk about bikes, bike racing, bike racers and bike riding. standarddouble.com/whbp

  7. #7
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd suggest to knock off the rudeness.

    I'm not saying to ban it by the rules, just raise the barriers a bit or add a barrier -- those seem like good ways to do it. Basically there are ways to force technique, like forcing run-ups.

    Your comparison to crashes on descents doesn't work. Crashes on downhills are a part of riding -- gravity, hills, there ya go. It's not comparable to a risky optional technique.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  8. #8
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    7,634
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    I'd suggest to knock off the rudeness.

    I'm not saying to ban it by the rules, just raise the barriers a bit or add a barrier -- those seem like good ways to do it. Basically there are ways to force technique, like forcing run-ups.

    Your comparison to crashes on descents doesn't work. Crashes on downhills are a part of riding -- gravity, hills, there ya go. It's not comparable to a risky optional technique.
    Making barriers taller is a terrible idea. The UCI-mininum height is already tall enough to make even carrying a bike over them fairly onerous for shorter riders. There's no need to make it worse. And USAC races have no minimum barrier height at all. This is good, because it allows for more creativity in course design, including lower barriers that are easier for riders of more varied skill levels to hop over. Adding a minimum height requirement, even higher than the current UCI height requirement, would hurt course design and make racing less fun for the non-elites, which translates directly to less participation and less money and eventually, fewer races. Having the option for more than two barriers in USAC races is, again, good, but as a minimum it would suck and would, like taller barriers, put more limits on course design and hurt the sport. No good.

    The idea that crashes on downhills are "part of riding" is just baloney. Organizers do not have to include steep ride-downs in their course designs. Many of them, in fact, avoid putting the hardest or steepest possible features in their races specifically in the interest of safety. And riding down a steep descent is every bit as optional as hopping a barrier. It's a perfectly reasonable comparison to make. Racing bikes has some inherent risk involved. Hopping barriers doesn't factor very much into this risk.

    My problem with you is that you think hopping should be banned because it's some overly-risky optional maneuver but you are flat-out wrong on the facts, there. The penalty for a failed hop is NOT that severe most of the time. Even before objections to your anti-hop stance on philosophical grounds, this is sufficient reason to say that hopping doesn't need to be made more difficult or banned. But you are digging in your heels and continuing to say that up is down and black is white. On top of that, your proposed "solutions" are really, really bad for course design reasons. So when I say you don't know jack squat about the sport, I'm not saying it to hurt your feelings or to be rude for the sake of being rude, I'm saying it because ignorance is the most parsimonious explanation for the poorly thought-through proposals you are making.

    Here's a funny thing - there's actually a really simple way to take barrier hopping out of a race: don't include any artificial barriers on the course. While I wouldn't support a rule change banning artificial barriers altogether, I'm totally fine with 'cross races not having barriers. I don't they're an essential element of a good 'cross course, and some of best and hardest courses in the world don't have them. I'd be happy to do a race or two every year that didn't have any planks.
    The Workingman's Honest Bicycle Program - Heady talk about bikes, bike racing, bike racers and bike riding. standarddouble.com/whbp

  9. #9
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To each his own. A failed hop still seems harsh to me despite your say-so. I haven't seen any terrible drops but if they're real bad then, yeah, that's bad, too. I disagree that triple barriers are "really really bad" for design, but there ya go. For sure, have them as an option and if riders in an area are disliking hoppers then organizers can add elements to discourage it. I agree that courses don't need barriers but I do think they need more running and not all the footwork should be up steep climbs.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  10. #10
    aka Phil Jungels Wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    North Aurora, IL
    My Bikes
    08 Specialized Crosstrail Sport, 05 Sirrus Comp
    Posts
    6,731
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I guess, that if Grolby doesn't agree with you, that you aren't entitled to your opinion............. MHO

    "Retirement is the best job I ever had!" Me, 2009


    Specialized Crosstrail Sport - '08
    Nishiki Sport - misappropriated from my youngest son (circa 1984)
    Marin Stinson - misappropriated by my youngest grandson - '01
    "The Beast" - 1990 Schwinn Airdyne (in the basement for winter torture)

  11. #11
    aka mattio queerpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    5,611
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    To each his own. A failed hop still seems harsh to me despite your say-so.
    It might be better to talk about facts rather than opinions about facts. Why don't you search the Cyclingnews archives and come up with a bunch of examples about terrible injuries from failed barrier hops?

    I see crashes in just about every pro race that has fast barriers or sub-40cm barriers, but I can't for the life of me remember an example in the past five years of somebody getting badly injured from a failed hop crash.
    the hipster myth.

    i practice vagabondery.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    580
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    I do think they need more running and not all the footwork should be up steep climbs.
    Barf.

    I do 'cross races to extend my bike racing season. If someone decides to extend the amount of time I have to run in my cycling shoes I'll stop doing CX.

    If you want to run more there's lots of foot races pretty much anywhere you go in NA.

  13. #13
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by queerpunk View Post
    It might be better to talk about facts rather than opinions about facts. Why don't you search the Cyclingnews archives and come up with a bunch of examples about terrible injuries from failed barrier hops?

    I see crashes in just about every pro race that has fast barriers or sub-40cm barriers, but I can't for the life of me remember an example in the past five years of somebody getting badly injured from a failed hop crash.
    The body-slams and face-slams and bike-slams are nasty penalty.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  14. #14
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlyAlfaRomeo View Post
    Barf.

    I do 'cross races to extend my bike racing season. If someone decides to extend the amount of time I have to run in my cycling shoes I'll stop doing CX.

    If you want to run more there's lots of foot races pretty much anywhere you go in NA.
    ? CX is a combo of riding and running.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  15. #15
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You guys aren't winning me over. I think hopping is cool but the penalty is too harsh for it to be a good part of the sport. Kinda like if there was a move where whenever you didn't clean it you hit a tree. Or if there were ditches to hop over but they weren't just moderate gullies where a harsh landing would mess you up a bit, but instead were sharp-edged ravines where you just smashed if it didn't go right. Like jumping whoopdee's can be harsh but it's not like hitting a wall. Well, if everyone loves em then sure I'm outvoted. I might try to work on them myself. They just seem a bit over the top. Especially when a barrer is meant to encourage some running in the first place. A little legging it is more a part of cross than is stunting.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  16. #16
    Disco Infiltrator Darth Lefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Orangevale CA
    My Bikes
    76 Paramount, 02 Hardrock, 72 Super Sport
    Posts
    2,127
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Perhaps you should make barriers to go under
    Genesis 49:17

  17. #17
    coprolite fietsbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW,Oregon Coast
    My Bikes
    7
    Posts
    6,730
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yea , Bike Limbo .. To have to go Under, the pole.. Hire a Ska Band to play at the Race
    Last edited by fietsbob; 01-03-15 at 05:17 PM.

  18. #18
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    7,634
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    I guess, that if Grolby doesn't agree with you, that you aren't entitled to your opinion............. MHO
    Says who? Of course he's entitled to it. And I'm entitled to tell him that his opinion is wrong and formed from the arrogance of inexperience.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    The body-slams and face-slams and bike-slams are nasty penalty.
    Okay, I'm going to have to do some explaining about bike racing here. I'll keep it simple: in bike race, sometimes you make boo-boo. Fall down and hurt face. Is ouchy, but is part of game. You no like, you no make mistake no more, or you no race no more. Is how all of bicycle racing always is.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    ? CX is a combo of riding and running.
    This is why I say that you do not understand the sport and that you have an image in your head of cyclocross that does not match the reality. And instead of accepting that your mental picture is wrong, you've decided that the parts of 'cross that don't match that picture are what's wrong! The arrogance of this is kind of incredible. Cyclocross is a sport where sometimes it is faster or easier to complete certain course sections on foot. That does not mean that the essence of cyclocross is "a combo of riding and running." Running is often necessary in cyclocross, but it is a cycling sport. If you don't have to run in a cross race, there's no reason you should.
    Last edited by grolby; 01-03-15 at 06:08 PM.
    The Workingman's Honest Bicycle Program - Heady talk about bikes, bike racing, bike racers and bike riding. standarddouble.com/whbp

  19. #19
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No, you're wrong. And facetiousness added to rudeness doesn't do you any favors.

    If a feature is dangerous it should be removed: that's why you don't like overly steep drops. Your facetiousness was pointless since I'd already acknowledged that normal racing can be hazardous. What's bad is encouraging racers to ride into a board where if anything goes wrong with their "technique" they're gonna splat.

    Cross *is* about running and riding. Both natural and fake obstacles make it so. Obviously, if you can ride, do so. But I don't think we should encourage hazardous acrobatics. Some tricks are reasonable, others less so. Riding fast at a board goes wrong so often that it's silly to encourage, esp in situations where the actual sport could be highlighted. I've seen courses with hopping-features where a mess-up was less harsh, less likely.
    Last edited by JeffOYB; 01-03-15 at 06:30 PM.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  20. #20
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    7,634
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    Cross is about running and riding. Both natural and fake obstacles make it so.
    No. It's not. Cyclocross, at its best is about choices. Running is one choice. Sometimes it's the only choice. The problem here is that you're wrong about cyclocross but are unwilling to entertain the possibility that you have more to learn from and about cyclocross than it does form you.

    And bunny hopping is not "hazardous acrobatics." It's not that dangerous.

    I also do not dislike steep descents and don't want them taken out of races. I want to get better at riding my damn bike, so I can race better.

    Keep 'cross rad.
    The Workingman's Honest Bicycle Program - Heady talk about bikes, bike racing, bike racers and bike riding. standarddouble.com/whbp

  21. #21
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by grolby View Post
    Keep 'cross rad.
    I'm definitely in favor of this.

    Choices are key, too.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    580
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    ? CX is a combo of riding and running.
    I never said there wasn't any running involved, simply that I wouldn't be interested if there is too much of it. I think most people who race CX would agree otherwise they'd just run.

    Cyclocross is a cycling race with obstacles. Obstacles that you may or may not have to run over depending on the nature of the obstacle, your ability on the bike and the conditions on a given day.

    It's not a meant to be duathlon.

  23. #23
    Senior Member yochris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Fog City
    Posts
    113
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you're worried about injury while hopping barriers, don't hop barriers. Not sure why we need to regulate other people's risk. Besides, the possibilities of injury are plentiful on a cross course, including running the barriers.

    Let's not forget about Joey...


  24. #24
    Senior Member JeffOYB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Williamston, MI "Wee-um-stun"
    My Bikes
    Uh... road, mtb, tour, CX (kludged), 3spd, 'bent, tandem, folder (the fam has another, what, 8)
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlyAlfaRomeo View Post
    I never said there wasn't any running involved, simply that I wouldn't be interested if there is too much of it. I think most people who race CX would agree otherwise they'd just run.

    Cyclocross is a cycling race with obstacles. Obstacles that you may or may not have to run over depending on the nature of the obstacle, your ability on the bike and the conditions on a given day.

    It's not a meant to be duathlon.
    For sure! I didn't imply any ratios. Just that there's running. Should be some. More than just slogging up a steep climb. That's not running. I like 100-150 yds total. I like to see the combo of legging it and re/dismounting making a difference. One set of barriers per lap ain't enough for me.

    ***

    Even the hot dudes seem to modulate their hopping. Even the best often screw up ... and smash hard. Sure, there are worse wrecks, and smashing flat into boards doesn't really send you to the hospital. It's a race-changer, tho, to make that mistake.

    I don't mind risks. I'm just kind of against this one.

    Maybe it's like if courses started including 4-foot huck-drops that most everyone scrambled down over but some started slam-dropping with frequent nasty side effects but if you could clean it you'd gain time. ...Then put a little board sticking up just past the drop to catch chins on. Just seems a little off.

    I like the idea of difficult techniques, stuff to aspire to, that only a few can do. I'm inclined to work at them and reap the gains. But that darn board-smashing... And to have to replace the cool stuff. Well, I'm just not convinced.
    Last edited by JeffOYB; 01-03-15 at 07:50 PM.
    Jeff Potter
    http://OutYourBackDoor.com
    for indie outdoor culture & DIY adventure
    bikes, boats, skis 'n' more ... 2000+ articles since 1994!

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    580
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    For sure! I didn't imply any ratios. Just that there's running. Should be some. More than just slogging up a steep climb. That's not running. I like 100-150 yds total. I like to see the combo of legging it and re/dismounting making a difference. One set of barriers per lap ain't enough for me.
    If that's 100-150 yards a lap I'd have to say it's quite a bit beyond the threshold of what I'd be willing to put up with. A few dismounts per lap is fine, a hill or two sure, but any more than that, or extended sections of barriers that you have to stay dismounted for and it wrecks the flow and the fun for me. I'd be staying away.


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    Even the hot dudes seem to modulate their hopping. Even the best often screw up ... and smash hard. Sure, there are worse wrecks, and smashing flat into boards doesn't really send you to the hospital. It's a race-changer, tho, to make that mistake.
    Then I think your suggestion of raising the barriers by an inch would just make things worse. You'd still have some guys who could clear the obstacle, but way more who'd lose time by dismounting and the obstacle becomes more of a race changer

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    I don't mind risks. I'm just kind of against this one.
    TBH I think you're just overly scared of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    Maybe it's like if courses started including 4-foot huck-drops that most everyone scrambled down over but some started slam-dropping with frequent nasty side effects but if you could clean it you'd gain time. ...Then put a little board sticking up just past the drop to catch chins on. Just seems a little off.
    It's not like that at all. One hop-able barrier isn't a potentially crippling test that only a chosen few can pass.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffOYB View Post
    I like the idea of difficult techniques, stuff to aspire to, that only a few can do. I'm inclined to work at them and reap the gains. But that darn board-smashing... And to have to replace the cool stuff. Well, I'm just not convinced.
    You seem willing to work at it to reap the gains as long as it's not a set of boards that many can reliably hop over 99% of the time.

    If constant dismounts and extended runs are your idea of "cool stuff" that gets replaced I don't really know what to say. I'm not saying that's what you mean but I get that impression.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •