Hi MTBers,

Whitewater kayakers have a well-defined system for rating the difficulty of running rapids. Each rapid on a river is given a rating from I to VI based on its technical difficulty and potential consequences (injury, drowning) of messing up the rapid.

Do MTBers have a well-defined system for rating trail sections? What is it?

Yes and No.

It all depends on the trail builders (and maintainers). There is no "set" system.

Most of the trails I've seen use a color coded system similar to skiing. With Black being the most difficult, blue is advanced, and green is beginner.

Many times Red is used in lieu of Black for the trails.

They do in bc.

But really to take that world wide would require pics and stuff. Difficulty is subjective.

Green - Easy as pie. Usually smooth with no steep climbs or descents. Usually a double track

Blue - single track. Not very technical, no stunts, pretty groomed with roots and rocks. This is typically like most xc courses with lung busting climbs. Can have some basic stunts.

Black - single track. Steep technical descents. Usually nothing that can't be walked. But still very difficult for average riders This is usually a typical dh level type run. A true big mountain experience. Can also have some stunts and skinnies that are highish and narrow.

Double Black - Creme de la creme. High skinny stunts, big drops or REALLY steep lines. This requires, nuts, skills and a good bike.

Thats more or less how bc breaks it down.

I'm not totally up to speed on the lingo, what are 'skinnies'?

Skinnies are north shore stunts. This pic is of a wide one. I would put this at a blue or low black stunt for example.

gotcha,
ta.

There is a very refined system in place.

We look at the trail in front of us and say one of the following:

• "Looks easy enough to me..."
• "Hmmm, there are a couple of ruts/rocks I need to watch out for, this might be interesting..."
• "Damn! That's steep! There's a good chance I might break my a**/have to hike...oh well, here goes!!"
• *looks at friend* "Dude, there's no way I'm doing THAT! You're insane!"

It's very scientific and involves a lot of cataloging of data but, in the end, we have a highly technical classification system ready to roll!!

Hahahaha...thats how I setup my suspension. We sit in a circle and talk about how flexy the bike would be with the shock in this position. Completely scientific. Beer is required though

Hi Maelstrom, Very helpful, Thanks.

Mael, isnt that a ladder bridge?

This is a skinny.

Sure. Doesn't matter to me much. I just couldn't find a good example and in reality they are both based on the same idea.

This is exactly why it would be hard to make a rating system that applied to everything. Everyone has different opinions.

Not really. The pic I showed isn't as difficult as the pic Troie picked. Not difficult to seperate at all.

But yes, one issue I find is people coming out here, experienced in technical trails, then find they are in over their head. Their black diamond is closer to what I consider a blue for example. Especially if they hit the shore, lots of people get smoked by the 'easy' trails on fromme.

The real difficulty would be in creating a national standard. Some people would likely be heavily offended if one was ever implemented.

I saw a guide book from Arizona that rated trails "puck" factor.The gnarlier the trail the more your butt pucked up. Another very scientific method. Guess that puck helps you lock on to the seat.

Maelstrom,

Whitewater kayakers are about as independent and self-reliant as athletes get. They're not offended by national and international whitewater standards. These standards help avoid injuries and save lives.

Many whitewater kayakers are mtb'ers also, as the sports are quite similar. E.g., done in wilderness, need to pick lines, know your limits.

I realize that not everyone is going to be offended. I think a national ranking system would work well.

I think you could do one for xc based trails too. Long extended technical climbs are ranked pretty high here. This has potential (all intrawest sites use ranking systems like this)

Personally, I think its a good idea. Its not hard to define difficulties etc.

Maelstrom,

Let's start a project to do it. If you agree, how do you recommend we go about getting it started?

Al

Ipersonally like the system intrawest uses (stated above)...it is consistent with all other big mountain sports. It makes sense to anyone who has skied or snowboarded. That covers a lot of people

I did our local trail map. I was SHOCKED when I looked for a trail rating system on IMBA and found none. I fell back on the ski system.

One thing to remember about the SKI system though is that it is proportionate to the local terrain. So a small resort in Michigan may have a double black diamond that an intermediate can ride (it's regional). But a double black in Colorado may be likely to demolish that same intermediate rider.

I thik you guys have a great idea.It takes the guess work out when someone ask "how hard is it".I ran into some guys in Pisgah the other day who had kinda gotten in over their heads.

Yeah and likely the biggest difficulty is dealing with resorts that have real dh tracks on them. They are above and beyond most double blacks in whistler for example.

Definately. When you look at garbonzo it is 30 to 40minutes for an average rider to descend. Steep, technical, drops, jumps, steep (I said that already). Its a double black because it is sooooo long. Its tough to come up with a standard system. In my world that track in michigan can't be double black, intermediates can't ride double blacks, they walk 40% of it.

I think, if this was to work, you would have to work from the lowest common denominator (rail to trail for example) and the hardest (north shore, platekill, cali dh racing) and then work inwards.

How do you deal with difficulty based on direction? 18" drop is a lot harder (for me at least) to ride UP than down. I just think back to Austin and Emma Long (likely a single black). I got to the point of riding down everything, but up was another matter completely.

Do you have a different trail rating for each direction? This stuff doesn't apply to other down[hill/stream] activities. Even rock-climbing rating is generally based on one direction.

I guess if it's technical one way, it's technical the other. I guess I'm answering my own question here. An 18" drop is 18" down or up, so be it. Aerobic difficulty should be on a different scale, and not consdered here.

I think the rapid system is standardized because the feds only allow outfitters to guide on a certain difficulty of river. A screwup on a class 5 rapid can easily get you drowned. The same level of peril doesn't really exist for ski or mountain biking.

Thus, one needs a consistent system of grading rapids to comply with the law.

Maybe we need V-chip style ratings for trails. Instead of PG, PG-13, R, X ... etc... We need

* Steep Descent
* Narrow Elevation
* Steep Climb
* Rock Gardens
* Jumps
* Creek Crossings
* etc...

And each warning label would have an international symbol. Dots next to the symbol would indicated the difficulty of each hazard. 1 to five dots.