MTB Races getting too Technical?

[hboli4]

To me too technical is when I'm pushing my bike for an hour instead of riding it during a 70km for example. This is fine if its only me and I've only got myself to blame as my skills are lacking, if its the whole race I think its a bit much...I'm not into mtb to race though so I can't complain, only do races as it gives me a chance to ride where I've never been, nothing beats the feeling of being outside on your bike!!!

[Mecnic]

Even the die hard mountain bikers started somewhere.

[Robrider]

 

 

I am refering to the fact that the general sosial rider is starting to find it too difficult.

 

Don't we want to grow the sport?

 

I do every race possible and have at least 10 close friends that also try the sport. Most are getting reluctant to enter as they don't enjoy it anymore. Who is losing? The sport.

 

By the way' date=' it is related to the shorter distance where you will find the newcomers and the sosial people. The people that starts with a R4k bike and out to enjoy it and admire your skills.

 

I have noticed a decline in participation at some events.

 [/quote']

 

 

I think they should start with half marathons until they are proficient. I have had many begginer friends due half marathons and they cope fine, so I don't think those are too technical. I dont think you should change the races to fit the people. Its a tough sport, but thats the appeal.

 

[Ratty]

What got me hooked into mtbing, was a race I did where the long route guys were flying past us.  I was a newbie and very nervous on a technical section and even got off to walk the one corner and then I watched how the other guys went down it and the fun they were having.  I'm now the one that flies down.  It was a challenge and a goal for me to be able to go that.  I think if the races had all mostly been jeep track, I wouldn't still be cycling.

 

As others have said, choose your races.  Normally the descriptions are fairly accurate.  There is so much variety out there.

[jugheaddave]

I think most races are not technical enough.

 

If you don't want technical, go get a road bike!

 

end of!!

 

[scotty]

I agree to some degree and no i wont stick to the road cycling as i enjoy off road although i suck at technical stuff. IMO there should be a balance, i wonder if races like Babbas lodge which is one of the easiest would be so popular if it was made extra difficult.

[stewie911]

I'm with Mampara on this. When your struggling with a marathon, then you don't want it to be all technical as distance and endurance is your challenge.

 

For shorter races I want them as technical as possible. If I want to beat guys with my speed skills, I'll do a road race.

 

[BrendonMyb]

couldnt agree more with what everyone is saying

 

get a road bike if you want flat boring surfaces. Those that are complaining youll probaly find are fun riders & dont take riding all that seriously & probaly just do it to geta little excersize into their schedule

 

This is why we bought MTB's not so ?

 

I say keep the technical stuff

 

most of us like it a lot

 

have to admit though, soft sand & grass tufts arent cool at all esp on my HT. that can be done without on races imho

 

but hey...... if thats the way it is then......take it in your stride

[hagar]

MTB in South Africa grew extremely fast over the last two years!

 

?

 

The general feeling of most riders I spoke to (middle to end of pack) is of the opinion that race organizers is getting it wrong. They are making races too technical.

 

?

 

You would have had a wonderful experience during a specific race in 2009' date=' just to find the "new" route for 2010 being too technical.

 

?

 

Fact is that 90% of MTB riders only get to train on offroad once a week and maybe get some minor technical routes once a month. To expect all to hit the same technical stuff as pros becomes rediculous.

 

?

 

Take the MTN series as an example: People that have done both the 75 and 50 at Clarens vowed never to do it again!!

 

?

 

The general suggestion is to make the normal Marathons and Half Marathons fair to 90% of riders.

 

?

 

Leave the serious technical stuff for areas within the Ultra Marathons and for XC.

 

?

 

You present the riders, please express your opinion and also think about the sosial riders that will not be hub members.

[/quote']

 

 

 

Good example was the Argus MTB race this year 90 % of the field walked in some places and sat under the vines drinking juice !!! yes make it technical but not unrideable for the average MT biker . I agree 100% with you

[whattingh]

In SA we have a wrong mindset. As soon something is to difficult for a number of people we say oh lets make it easier. That is why our school system is a mess. They had to start langauge class for first years at some universities cause the standard coming for the school was just so bad the students can't write proper reports.

 

There is plenty mtb races that has almost no technical bits.

 

Also another problem I have seen alot is people get friends to start mtb but does not help them skill wise. There is some BASIC stuff the beginers do not know the friends does not tell either. COME ON people help your friends impove.

 

 

[River Rat]

Man check the testosterone on this thread......

 

As a noob I have no frame of reference in terms on whether the events are too technical or not. But it would be useful if there was some sort of technical grading reference for the different races.

 

The canoeing fraternity not only grade the rapids but also the rivers. Rapids are graded 1- 6, 6 being the life threatening whilst rivers are rated A, B or C. C being the easiest with nothing more the Grade 1 and 2 rapids.

 

Having something similiar for MTB events would certainly help in terms of determining which events I am ready for.

 

Anybody else have the same need?

[messenger]

beggs the question - who have you been talking to...?

 

There is only one problem with the technical sections....  the people infront of me!!!!!

you gonna go down sooner or later - but you'll be better next time!

[Canaris]

This depends on twothings:

What is technical?  Technical is a much used term, but what is it?  Rocks, lose shale, baby heads, snaking singletrack, fast decents, unclimbable hills?  Just because the route is rocky doesn't equate to technical.  Most noobies call everything unridable, technical.  Technical= technique=skilled  bike handling.  ie if it is too technical you need to brush up on your skills, (manuals, track stands, cornering, decents, climbing, bunnyhops, ext).   A smooth singletrack with a roots section, a dropoff, and some switchbacks can be classified technical.  (Groenkloof has some technical sections)

 

 

 

What is the purpose of the race.

Most technical = Downhill

least technical=enduro

 

In between are

XC,marathon, ext.

 

Always remember the longer the race the less technical it is going to be.  (Unless you go for the quarter and half marathons which are for umh noobies, but then don't brag about placing well).  If technique is not your stuff then get fit and ride the crater cruise, transbaviaans and 24 hour lap races.

 

THe exception to this rule of thumb is any race in Sabie where there will always be a rocky decent or four with a washed out rut running across the road big enough to swallow a bike, but then that is Sabie.

[Me-rida]

I am also a new rider and the idea of grading makes sense to me.

However all the races I have ridden have had a description of what to expect and I picked my races based on that.  They seemd fairly accurate.

For me it is a case of setting your expectations: If you enter a race above your level, expect to suffer and maybe walk but learn from that.

I do agree if all rides are to technical there may be beginners who are scared off, but at the same time if all rides are to easy the top guys looking for challenges will start leaving the sport as well?

[Canaris]

Man check the testosterone on this thread......

 

As a noob I have no frame of reference in terms on whether the events are too technical or not. But it would be useful if there was some sort of technical grading reference for the different races.

 

The canoeing fraternity not only grade the rapids but also the rivers. Rapids are graded 1- 6' date=' 6 being the life threatening whilst rivers are rated A, B or C. C being the easiest with nothing more the Grade 1 and 2 rapids.

 

Having something similiar for MTB events would certainly help in terms of determining which events I am ready for.

 

Anybody else have the same need?

[/quote']

even a grading system has its poblems.  In PTA Groenkloof is seen as entery level, with very few mtbkers even considering to call it more than slightly technical except for that little bit at the back, or that dropoff into the river, ext, but generally a noobie can do it with a bit of guidance, prodding and support.  Fountains is seen as maybe challenging and KLapperkop is there for hill training.  Dial your skills on these three routes then you should survive most things. 

In Joburg they have a BLACK route at the MTN bike park, and the only thing difficult at Northern farm is to finish your ride with your bike in your possession. 

Mostly, portage is acceptable over technical stuff, so long as you walk off the trail.  (Ettiquette, you don't walk all over the green in golf, so why walk on the best lines on a mtb route?  get out of the way, furthermore, especially in Groenkloof, if you can't ride on the trail, don't make new ones, get off the bike and carry it around the technical bit, stop destroying the berms and technical sections, especially the root sections- rant over)

 

The best way to get better is to

"Shut up and ride!"

[Shakes]

There is a MTB Marathon Series being staged in Queenstown; It's called H.O.M.O MTB Series...  Try this one.