# Sad situation or do you disagree with me?



## olineman (Oct 8, 2009)

So, I live in the Houston area... Not exactly the MTB Mecca but there are a few places along bayous and creeks down here that offer some places with minor elevation elevation change that have been enjoyable to ride at those times you don't have a couple of hours to devote to riding. Having a bit of an issue with what seems to be a current trend here as the number of MTB converts are on the rise.
Here's the sad situation, seems that a local, newer trail (6 years or so) has been kidnapped by a local group of gnomes. For years this trail was sort of a bandit trail that weaved it's way through thick trees with good flow and a few fun quick up and downs. If a vine hung to low, you ducked if a tree had fallen across the trail...sweet, something new to hop! If that fallen tree had been to large to hop, you built a ramp. You see how the story develops.
Well, now that's not the case. The new folks that have come to "improve" the trail seem to want to chop more trees down than any beaver ever could! They have flattened out many of the old drops and climbs you used to have. Any voice to the contrary has either been ignored or is flamed in the name of "safety"! They can't keep new people out at work parties because they run them more like drill sargents and made it to where many people won't join them a second time. Personally, I bailed 30 minutes into my 2nd one before I broke someones jaw.
I enjoy MTB in part because of the terrain that you both see and have to dodge. It seems that there is a growing trend as our sport continues to "grow" that people coming onto the dirt from the pavement and concrete seem to want to clear trees, flatten out natural features, remove all technical features and become concerned about how may watts they average each lap.
I was wondering if this is just a regional thing or something many of you are seeing happen in other areas.


----------



## BikeIntelligencer (Jun 5, 2009)

:cryin::cryin::cryin:Well the trend in MTB trail building is definitely "flow" which to some of us old timers translates as "freeway." Wd have to know more about orientation of builders -- IMBA? --- but yeah I'm sad.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

I have heard that this is a problem in many areas. I agree that mountain bike trails should have tech features and not be just all smooth dirt. That said I don't see a purpose in having a log laying across a fast section. I would keep the log on a slower section. Maintenance is good to keep a trail in good shape but turning it into a dirt sidewalk is a mistake.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

It's everywhere, and it's lame. 

Funny thing about people feeling they need to smooth out trails everywhere these days is that supposedly with all the tech 'advances' such as larger wheels, they should be able to rip through and over stuff like a few logs withoutany issue. Isn't that exactly what everyone keeps saying big wheels excel at? You'd think it would be a bunch of old guys on 26"ers that keep pussifying everything, but that doesn't usually seem to be the case IME. I think everybody wants to ride like a roadie and never get out of their saddles, and care more about stupid Strava times than actually learning how to RIDE a bike. instead of just pedaling one.


----------



## olineman (Oct 8, 2009)

Well, thanks. Not good that this concept is spreading.

I don't dislike roadies but I wish they'd understand that part of riding is actually riding off road and not cutting down every tree within 2 feet of the trail. Surprised these guys haven't brought a dozer out there yet.

Then there's the Strava thing...


----------



## jim c (Dec 5, 2014)

olineman the situation is everywhere and slaphead is thinking off the mark. Us old guys love the natural terrain and techy **** that slows you down. Most of us rode dirtbikes back-n-the-day and if you couldn't ride it you walked it. 
Two things; sounds like you got a real ramrod taking charge who can't listen to (and take) advice. Then there is the fact that flow IS fun and many of the trails that 'they' fixed here ARE a lot of fun. It is different sure but now we are flying into corners and drops (FUN) where we used to approach much slower.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

It's tough. I know the area you're in, though not the particular trail. If you don't use logs, you don't have ANY technical challenge.

There's a trail local to me that's VERY popular with the xc racer crowd. Lap times have been compared there since before bike GPS. The trail is in a floodplain to boot, and the only elevation change comes from an old levee through the area. To say that the area is not technical is no joke. However, folks have found ways for technical features to coexist with the fast flowy stuff. There are some pretty substantial drops built from the levee out of logs. Where you crest the levee, the drop is near the top, and you hit a nice transition. The technical lines are usually the more "direct" lines, and the nontechnical lines tend to curve around the tech stuff and flow for those who want that. When I ride there, I tend to ride most of the tech stuff.

Rather than completely emptying the tread of tech stuff, have you talked to the crew about having technical alt lines. Either within the existing cleared corridor, or even creating additional lines off of it for the tech? Doing that isn't usually a problem here. When a tree falls, we tend to cut a narrower passage through it, and off to one side, we will allow for a log over tech spot.

I understand the need to keep a wide corridor, at least. Especially if your trail is fast and/or two-directional. If two-directional AND fast, it's a huge deal. Some of the busiest local trails have been made one-directional for bikes because of the speed, sight line, and traffic issues. Where traffic is lower, and speeds are lower, we have more two-directional trails. But a wide, clear, safe corridor does not have to mean the trail itself has no technical aspects to it.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

slapheadmofo said:


> It's everywhere, and it's lame.
> 
> Funny thing about people feeling they need to smooth out trails everywhere these days is that supposedly with all the tech 'advances' such as larger wheels, they should be able to rip through and over stuff like a few logs withoutany issue. Isn't that exactly what everyone keeps saying big wheels excel at? You'd think it would be a bunch of old guys on 26"ers that keep pussifying everything, but that doesn't usually seem to be the case IME. I think everybody wants to ride like a roadie and never get out of their saddles, and care more about stupid Strava times than actually learning how to RIDE a bike. instead of just pedaling one.


It is not a "wheel size" issue.

People are wanting bikes with more and more travel (5"-6.5").....but then they only want smooth flow trails. Doesn't make any sense. Look at the jump line trails at the bike parks....they are looking more and more like concrete bmx tracks. When I am chasing guys down, catching them, and passing them on the DH on a SS...the trail does not require 6" of travel.

We have a local trail at one of our local county parks that has some nice fast flowy/swoopy/banked/serpatine turns....everyone always said, "we want a flowy trail"...so what happens? Most people cut a straight line through the turns.

Bottom line is, trails are being dumbed down to the lowest denominator.....beginners.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

mtnbikej said:


> It is not a "wheel size" issue....


No, it's definitely a rider issue. Just saying, with the purported advantages out there these days, of which big wheels is supposed to be one such major game changer, why the hell are trails getting more boring and less challenging all the time when you think they'd be getting tougher to keep up with the tech? And WTF is with so many riders being too lazy/unskilled to learn to pull off a basic bunnyhop at speed? If you've gotta slow way down for a little log, your handling skills suck and your PR (or whatever the hell you're trying to prove out there) should reflect it.

Every time someone pulls a log or rock out of our trails that was meant to be there, we replace it with a bigger one. Eventually the sidewalk riders get the point and either learn to deal with it or go somewhere that is more in line with their skill set. And it's definitely not just the beginners out there messing with stuff.


----------



## jim(tm) (Jul 2, 2008)

Do these douche funnels have any kind of claim to the land? Why not form your own group and put the technical stuff back in?


----------



## olineman (Oct 8, 2009)

@Harold
Oh yeah, several people have tried to have that discussion about alternate routes to no avail. I've been on a lot of good trails that have had both technical and flowy routes side by side. That is really part of what makes them good trails.

In all honesty there are a few people that are the "stewards" and live very close to the trail that are there almost daily and really do take good care of the trail itself. The problem is that because they live close by and it is the only place that they seem to MTB, they seem feel the right to dictate everything about the trail. Unfortunately and sadly they are a bunch of squirrely dudes that have made it as to where no one wants to work with them for long. 

On the plus side, the roadie crowd seems to be very a more "trendy" bunch and hopefully the MTB thing will pass and we'll have less hassle. I hate that I have to say it that way but that's how I see it. I'll just drive a little further and ride elsewhere until then!


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

To be fair, the guys dedicated to building trails typically build what they want. Some new 13 year old that wants to start riding may have a difficult time riding the same rough trail that a 30 something guy with massive thighs can ride. Where should that kid go? Getting a new rider excited to ride on pavement shouldn't be the only option.

For an analogy consider this: I actually would prefer everyone use Linux instead of Windows. Linux forces the user to understand their computer more than Windows (not always these days tbh). A computer user should understand terminals, command prompts, drivers, packet routing, etc. This is in the same vein that I believe everyone should know the basic mechanics of how an engine, transmission, brake sytem, etc. work if they are going to operate an automobile.

Forcing riders new to biking to use a technical trail is like forcing someone to use Linux. Yes, it will make them better if they suffer the challenges until they are masters, but how would you feel if you didn't have a Windows alternative to Linux? Linux would be made pretty stupid pretty quick; some distros have been.

The only solution to the problem of tech trails being dumbed down is to make sure there are dumber trails nearby for people to ride. If they are running a trail, get permission to build a techy trail somewhere if you can. We live in a democracy and therefore it's the middle of the bell curve that gets what they want on public land.

I have the opposite problem where I am. There are plenty of trails for advanced riders, but few trails easy enough I can convince a friend or family member to ride with me unless they are shuttled, and then the downhill scares them to death.

Get more trails built, and realize that if they are on public ground they will be dumbed down to maximize public use. If you had a voting constituency whose tax dollars you were using for trail maintenance and construction would you serve the top 1%? For every $5000 bike there are 50 wal-mart specials.


----------



## jim c (Dec 5, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> No, it's definitely a rider issue. And WTF is with so many riders being too lazy/unskilled to learn to pull off a basic bunnyhop at speed? If you've gotta slow way down for a little log, your handling skills suck and your PR (or whatever the hell you're trying to prove out there) should reflect it. .


As per my post above, with the "flow" changes to our trails I now find myself flying up on techy bits a whole lot faster than I use to. Not only have my bunny-hops improved, but now we get air off log-overs that for years I just rolled up and over.
I always *****ed to the trail volunteers about making it easy enough for 10speed riders. When done right however, speeding up a line can end up making for a lot of fun. I also felt I had to up my bike so last year I went from 100mm SC Blur to 134mm Kona. The new stability makes flying off logs and rocks a bit easier. Guys like MTBJ who fly around on rigid SS my hat is off to you.


----------



## onlycrimson (Nov 11, 2008)

The only "solution" that trails around here have are to split lines in some areas to a race line and the other a tech line.


----------



## BobbyWilliams (Aug 3, 2004)

If you can ride your bike one mile without having to walk at least twice, cross at least 4 or 5 stone walls and logs, roll over countless boulders, smash up your pedals, attempt a couple endo 180's to make the climbing switchbacks around trees with a 1 1/2 foot radius turn, and "swim" your wide enduro bars through a narrow gap between trees then what your riding is not a mountain bike trail, its a dirt road. Which is fine, dirt roads can be fun especially if they are pointed down hill.


----------



## DethWshBkr (Nov 25, 2010)

olineman said:


> View attachment 986854
> View attachment 986865


Make sure you buy a 29er with at LEAST 160mm travel and a set of 65mm wide rims for that trail!

Or a road bike.....

Throw some crap in there! So what if you need to get on the brakes? I thought everyone's Shimano brakes were the best in the world, they should be able to slow down for a log easily. I have no arguments with decapitators and bar snaggers being cleared, but on the ground - it's good stuff.

I won't deny the "flow" stuff is fun in it's own right. It's fun because it is EASY, which means you can go fast with minimal effort.


----------



## sooner518 (Aug 1, 2007)

as someone who likes rocky, tech trails, that would drive me nuts. glad i dont live there and have to put up with that


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

If those trails are being built with the express purpose of giving little kids on Striders somewhere to ride, then they're great.

If they're meant to even approximate mountain biking for anyone that's ridden a bike more than a handful of times in their life though, as said above, I'm sure glad I don't live there. IMO, grooming trails to that level is like lowering the nets at public basketball courts. Better to feel good about yourself than to actually BE good I guess.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

Speed makes everything smaller (it literally does according to the theory of relativity). I prefer fast challenging to slow challenging as bigger obstacles become doable. More trees will fall, more rain storms will wash it out, the sanitizers will get bored with it or move away. Most current techy trails were either originally cleaner than they currently are when built, or the original builders weren't all that concerned with the quality of their work. I have a hard time believing there were originally fallen logs that weren't removed when the trail was first built.

One of the reasons to get the local authorities involved in trail building is that you can tell people who modify the trails they aren't allowed to and actually be correct in so doing. Otherwise you're just another idiot trying to tell people what they are and aren't allowed to do and somehow what you want is better than what they want. MTBR will agree with you here, but the people involved probably aren't on MTBR. This isn't the place to look for objectivivity when it comes to biking.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

Are there any ORV parks nearby? I used to ride one somewhat regularly and it was a nice change from the manicured mountain bike trails.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

It's better to have a lowered hoop for a kid to learn to shoot baskets into when they can't throw a ball ten feet up to the spec height, than it is to tell them to stop pretending to be "good" until they can. There isn't a standard rider here and exclusion mentalities don't help the sport, or any sport. Mountain biking should be full of teenagers with free time, but it's instead the domain of 30+ year olds reliving their childhood having forgotten what it was like to be a kid. Dumb trails are necessary, but so are advanced trails, pump tracks, dirt jumps, etc. To hate on easy trails is not far off from being a bigot. The world is big enough for every type of riding, but beginners aren't going to build trails before learning to bike so someone has to do it for them. America used to be all about building a better future for the next generation, now it's all whiny selfish brats.


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

Why not determine who owns/manages the land and work with them?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> To hate on easy trails is not far off from being a bigot.


Please. 

If dirt sidewalks were a necessity to get people riding, then there wouldn't be any riders in the entire northeast US.

And again, I don't see it's the beginners that are pushing for or buiding these trails; it's experienced riders that just feel they should never have to break cadence to get their asses out of the saddle, or ever have to come across a section of trail that reminds them that they aren't as good as they like to think and might still have to get off their bikes or have a little trouble clearing a section now and again. They just want to sit there and pedal. Meh- I ride with kids pretty regularly myself, including my own, and they call stuff like that 'old man riding'. They'd much rather ride something more interesting IME.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

If they just want to sit there and pedal, why isn't that an allowable thing? Why have you decided that they shouldn't be allowed? If it's public land, they are the public. They don't have a voice here, so I'm being the devil's advocate as I hate people being picked on that can't defend themselves. I wouldn't ride a flat boring trail myself either, but that doesn't mean the trail isn't worth having around. "old man riding" is a bigoted phrase and does cross the line. Glad you're teaching the kids that elderly people are lesser people and their trails are therefore lesser trails. Good job. 

Criticize the trail if you like, but insulting the people using it is bad form. I'm assuming you did instruct the kids that forming opinions of that nature will define them as bigots and be an obstacle to them in the future? None of the "old men" I know that ride do so on wimpy trails. The first time I rode Slickrock, there were two men in their 70's that just finished the loop portion. I had a pleasant conversation with them and aspire to be like them someday and they proved to me that you can bike until you're almost dead if you keep it up. But hey, the older people in worse health shouldn't have trails catering them either, right?

Edit: My opinion of people mad at trail dumbing, is that they aren't very different from people who'd want public roads built like racetracks because they have a sports car and want to use it to its potential. They don't care what other people are driving or their skill level, they just want the world to serve their specific desires. If you want something specifically tailored to you, you have to go build it yourself. If you want trails to be managed to your desires, you need to work with a private property owner or a government agency that will impose strict rules on what the trails should, and shouldn't be. Don't get mad when the tragedy of the commons is the commons you want to use.


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

I'm grateful that the trail builders at my favorite local trail don't make any accommodations for beginners. The attitude is that "there are plenty of other places where beginners can go, if you want to ride here, HTFU or ride somewhere else." as a beginner, I was offended and thought that there should be go-arounds for technical features. However, it was the closest trail system by bike from my house by about 4 miles, so I rode there more often than not. I spent a lot of time, my first year of riding, being pissed off. At first, my anger was directed at the trail builders, but in time, my anger was directed at the trail itself. If I couldn't clean a log, a rocky, rooty climb or if I crashed and got hurt, I became more determined than ever to master those obstacles. A funny thing happened along the way: My skills developed at a much faster pace than my friends who didn't ride there, MUCH faster. 

Neutering technical trails to make them more accessible for beginners doesn't help help them become better riders, it helps them become mediocre riders.


----------



## BikeIntelligencer (Jun 5, 2009)

I woulda thought it'd be the opposite. Linux: nice clean lines. Windows: spaghetti hairball trails.


Coldfriction said:


> For an analogy consider this: I actually would prefer everyone use Linux instead of Windows. Linux forces the user to understand their computer more than Windows (not always these days tbh). A computer user should understand terminals, command prompts, drivers, packet routing, etc. This is in the same vein that I believe everyone should know the basic mechanics of how an engine, transmission, brake sytem, etc. work if they are going to operate an automobile.
> 
> Forcing riders new to biking to use a technical trail is like forcing someone to use Linux. Yes, it will make them better if they suffer the challenges until they are masters, but how would you feel if you didn't have a Windows alternative to Linux? Linux would be made pretty stupid pretty quick; some distros have been.
> 
> ...


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

You don't even need to know how to use a keyboard to use Windows. Or even read for that matter. Windows is WAY dumbed down computing.

EDIT: I learned to really mountain bike by hiking. How does that sound? For every Gigantic, there are 20 kids that just didn't do anything with bikes after the bullies kicked them off the trails. Not the road to a better world, especially on public land.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> If those trails are being built with the express purpose of giving little kids on Striders somewhere to ride, then they're great.
> 
> If they're meant to even approximate mountain biking for anyone that's ridden a bike more than a handful of times in their life though, as said above, I'm sure glad I don't live there. IMO, grooming trails to that level is like lowering the nets at public basketball courts. *Better to feel good about yourself than to actually BE good I guess.*


wait...isn't that the American Way recently? Everyone gets a trophy :skep:

I feel like around here (Central Ohio), they will build the flow tril around the tech-y stuff. Granted, we are not at the level of the Southwest, but the trials here are good. I like it b/c if /I want to ride hard one day I can, and then take the flow channels the next


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

Only people who care about measuring each other care about trophies. One of the most effective ways to keep slaves submissive is to remove any sense of self worth they might have. Some cults and religions have done the same thing. Giving everyone a trophy in a competition ruins the competition, but competitions should structured against peers of similar skill level if they are to help kids progress. Does forcing everyone to ride the Red Bull Rampage to decide who is a "true" mountain biker sound like the way you want the world to be? Trying to build self esteem in kids is not a bad thing. Trying to build a new generation of riders is not a bad thing. Selfishly wanted all trails to cater to you is a bad thing. I suppose if we aren't to allow progressive accomplishments, all sports should be done away with in favor of the Olympic Games and other international top tier competitions. Everyone deserves to be valued for their unique contributions to society. I know the 'murica way is to step on others to get to the top, but life doesn't have to be that way.

Edit: What I'm saying is that people who only want techy are as bad as the people who only want an unpaved sidewalk. Make room for everyone and respect the differences no matter what you're doing.


----------



## rockdude14 (Jul 7, 2006)

This should be taken up between you and the land manager and the current group maintaining the trails. Ultimately its up to the land manager to decide what they want it to look like.

Maybe there's no trails around that are easy and they are trying to fill that gap. Or they aren't any trails around and they want it accessible to more people. Every trail is different and trying to meet different needs.

I really like technical hard trails but for the most part log overs are pretty annoying features. They usually aren't that hard and just force you to slow down. From what it sounds like I'd prefer a fast downhill instead of one broken up with a log over.

In the mean time expect the people actually doing the works's vote to count a lot more than just yours. So find a lot of people that agree with you and get them to contact the manager to try to change their minds. Than be prepared to start doing all the trail work that's needed.


----------



## RiceBrnr (Oct 13, 2014)

Your trail has been "Strava Douched". Nothing you can do but get more people than they got and take it back. Common around here is to "Sally line" around techy section but sounds like their not into compromise. Welcome to the world of politics.


----------



## David R (Dec 21, 2007)

onlycrimson said:


> The only "solution" that trails around here have are to split lines in some areas to a race line and the other a tech line.


This. Doesn't take much to build an alternate line off to the side that is a bit more challenging.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Guys, don't forget that this is in Houston, TX. No rocks for miles. Soil is coastal and floodplain sand and clay. Terrain is flat. There is only so much you can do for technical features.

Logs and roots are about it. And logs rot quickly there, fwiw. 

Getting alt lines installed with log overs and skinnies will probably be the extent of tech features unless the land manager can be convinced to allow some constructed lumber stuff, which is probably unlikely.


----------



## H0WL (Jan 17, 2007)

olineman said:


> So, I live in the Houston area...
> Here's the sad situation, seems that a local, newer trail (6 years or so) has been kidnapped by a local group of gnomes....
> 
> The new folks that have come to "improve" the trail seem to want to chop more trees down than any beaver ever could! They have flattened out many of the old drops and climbs you used to have. *Any voice to the contrary has either been ignored or is flamed in the name of "safety"! **They can't keep new people out at work parties because they run them more like drill sergeants and made it to where many people won't join them a second time.*
> ...


It is immediately obvious that trail that screams "Go FAST!" into a blind corner with no vegetation thinned out to see oncoming riders or hikers is bad trail design. In fact, "go fast" is a huge problem on bi-directional multi-use trails with heavy vegetation.

Just to note that cutting the margins of the trail helps keep down the green briar, poison ivy and the horrible plant with the velcro seeds (Beggar's Lice = Torilis arvensis). With the spring rains this year, vegetation is growing at warp speed here in Central Texas. It's very hard to keep up with it and trails can be slowly closed up without some major lopping/weed eating intervention.

That said, the fact that people don't continue to contribute to trail maintenance because the trail stewards are overbearing is a very, very bad sign. You definitely don't want to run off your volunteers.

In this type of trail, tech features could be easily incorporated into the trail margins, like log features, low skinnies and similar, so a passing rider can go screaming fast or pick up a little tech on the side. If they are worried about safety, having side challenges that actually sharpen riders' skills are very useful.

Edited to add some unasked advice that you can feel free to ignore:

I'd strongly encourage you to start reading about trail design, perhaps get a loaner copy of the IMBA Trail Solutions Handbook, perhaps others can make suggestions on useful reading, suck it up and start going to trail work days on a regular basis and start a dialog with these guys to see what their vision is and why they do what they do. With time and experience, you may be able to begin to insert some of your own ideas into the trail design. Sometimes trail stewards are obligated to carry out the wishes of the land manager, rather than being allowed to implement their own ideas. However, you won't know that until you get a little deeper into the process. (I'm not disallowing that there can be difficult personalities involved.)


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

I started riding in middle age and slowly developed middling technical skills on the rocks and roots of hilly middle CT. Now that I'm registered for medicare, I wish there were some easy flow trails to be had. I'd think of them as senior discount trails. 

My $.02: When the terrain allows, I think there should be both hard and easy trails. However, I don't think existing trails of one type should be made in the other. If there's a need for new trails suiting a different riding style or ability level, the those that want it should work to get it built.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

OP, as a rider in the DFW area I feel your pain. I've only been riding for a little over two years but in Texas it definitely feels like XC/dirt roadies outnumber the riders that like technical trails. The fact that most of the state is flat as a pancake doesn't help things much. I haven't ridden in Houston yet but they seem to have a good number of trails so I'd say give all of them a try and only stick to the ones that you like. If all else fails, a weekend trip to the hill country, DFW, or Tyler is another option.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

matadorCE said:


> OP, as a rider in the DFW area I feel your pain. I've only been riding for a little over two years but in Texas it definitely feels like XC/dirt roadies outnumber the riders that like technical trails. The fact that most of the state is flat as a pancake doesn't help things much. I haven't ridden in Houston yet but they seem to have a good number of trails so I'd say give all of them a try and only stick to the ones that you like. If all else fails, a weekend trip to the hill country, DFW, or Tyler is another option.


Tyler's trails have a nice combination of flowy and non-technical, as well as chundery and rough. There's also some pretty eroded sandy slope that could use repair/rerouting because that stuff disappears fast and if you don't address it shortly, you can be left with a pretty serious mess.

Nacogdoches has a cool trail system on the SFA campus that I helped with. The terrain doesn't allow for much techy stuff, but rocks were imported for some rock gardens, there's a downhill flow trail with some berms and jumps, and there's even a short loop with some elevated lumber features. A nice variety for less than 10mi of trail. It's been a few years since I rode there, but it's a cool place. Plus, there's plenty of rocky tech in Austin and the rest of the hill country.


----------



## Havinfun (Mar 18, 2015)

My road bike is a single speed (spesh Langster), and if I can ride it there then it is a road ride that happens to be on dirt. It is not MTBing, to me, unless you either need suspension or you are one of those crazy rigid riders who hate their kidneys. Nothing wrong with road biking on dirt, but it sure is not MTBing.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Thinking about it, I of all people shouldn't be so judgmental about how people build their trails, particularly when you take into account all the local scene and terrain factors. There could be good reason to clean up a particular spot if it works with the overall flow of the trail. In general, I believe mtn biking is more fun with some bumps and rattles, but I'm sure ripping down a trail like that at mach chicken would be pretty fun too. If that's what the builders were going for, you can't really argue too much with the guys doing the work.


----------



## terrasmak (Jun 14, 2011)

I bet these are the same people who would cry if you rode on the trail when wet and made it not perfectly smooth like asphalt. 

I like that the Vegas trails are pretty raw, upkeep seems to be removing the crap people install to dumb down sections.


----------



## provin1327 (Mar 31, 2013)

You guys know trails being built aren't only for mountain bikers right? You cant build a multi use trail with only your needs in mind. Im not for trail sanitization but not every trail is going to be a mini DH run...

I get that the trail was being modified by mountain bikers, different strokes for different folks.

With the above said, yes I am sad when tech features get moved or destroyed.


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

David R said:


> This. Doesn't take much to build an alternate line off to the side that is a bit more challenging.


It takes even less to htfu and learn to ride the features.


----------



## olineman (Oct 8, 2009)

She&I
That has been attempted but at this current time to them they have someone in place and that someone has caused the issue.


----------



## olineman (Oct 8, 2009)

DethWshBkr said:


> *Make sure you buy a 29er with at LEAST 160mm travel and a set of 65mm wide rims for that trail!
> 
> Or a road bike.....*
> 
> ...


:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Exactly! There was "crap" before but it all has been moved "at least 2 feet from either side of the trail"! :eekster:


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

rockdude14 said:


> In the mean time expect the people actually doing the works's vote to count a lot more than just yours. So find a lot of people that agree with you and get them to contact the manager to try to change their minds. Than be prepared to start doing all the trail work that's needed.


While I broadly agree, there is sometimes the problem of not believing any work needs to be done at all. If there's a group that loves to do work, and that same group also loves smooth trails, then you're in the position of trying to get them to stay home and not do any work at all, and leave the trails as they are, and my experience is that just doesn't seem to work out well.

The trails in the OP's photos look nice to me though. I wouldn't mind having some like that to ride.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> If they just want to sit there and pedal, why isn't that an allowable thing? Why have you decided that they shouldn't be allowed? If it's public land, they are the public. They don't have a voice here, so I'm being the devil's advocate as I hate people being picked on that can't defend themselves. I wouldn't ride a flat boring trail myself either, but that doesn't mean the trail isn't worth having around. "old man riding" is a bigoted phrase and does cross the line. Glad you're teaching the kids that elderly people are lesser people and their trails are therefore lesser trails. Good job.
> 
> Criticize the trail if you like, but insulting the people using it is bad form. I'm assuming you did instruct the kids that forming opinions of that nature will define them as bigots and be an obstacle to them in the future? None of the "old men" I know that ride do so on wimpy trails. The first time I rode Slickrock, there were two men in their 70's that just finished the loop portion. I had a pleasant conversation with them and aspire to be like them someday and they proved to me that you can bike until you're almost dead if you keep it up. But hey, the older people in worse health shouldn't have trails catering them either, right?
> 
> Edit: My opinion of people mad at trail dumbing, is that they aren't very different from people who'd want public roads built like racetracks because they have a sports car and want to use it to its potential. They don't care what other people are driving or their skill level, they just want the world to serve their specific desires. If you want something specifically tailored to you, you have to go build it yourself. If you want trails to be managed to your desires, you need to work with a private property owner or a government agency that will impose strict rules on what the trails should, and shouldn't be. Don't get mad when the tragedy of the commons is the commons you want to use.


I've built all sorts of trails, and with one other guy am responsible for building, maintaining, and managing about 15 miles of trail in my town. It runs the gamut from flowy and about as smooth as you're going to get in NE to nice techy stuff strewn with granite, roots, and tight squeezes, and even a pumptrack and kids/beginners riding area. Not only does my 'bigoted' 10 year old ride almost daily, my 71 year old dad also rides and does even more trail work than I do. He has no interest in building or riding sidewalks either.

You have a lot of opinions as to how other people should do things for someone that has never built any or taken care of any trail yourself.


----------



## Vegard (Jul 16, 2009)

Dirt roadies is what they are, feed them to Sauron.


----------



## streetskidder (Aug 22, 2010)

Can't stand logs in trial and bunny hopping so 80s









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## David R (Dec 21, 2007)

Gigantic said:


> It takes even less to htfu and learn to ride the features.


No ****, but not everyone thinks like that. I love riding (and building) technically challenging trails, but I also like having somewhere I can take my wife who I'm trying to encourage into the sport without terrifying her. To me that trail looks like an entry level sort of trail (the kind that the only real challenge is the speed you're riding it at), having a big log lying across what would otherwise be a fast flowing section doesn't seem like a "feature" to me, it seems like a hazard. Trails need to be build with consideration to the people who ride them. If it's a double black diamond run then go for your life, make it as gnarly as possible, but if it's an easy flowy open trail used by all levels of riders then it's a good idea to have alternative lines around the more technical bits.


----------



## BushwackerinPA (Aug 10, 2006)

Trail surface should be left alone in most caes. Head catcher and handle bar snagger and things to improve vision sure these can be good things.

With that said not all flow trails are beginner or easy.

There is a trail at Norwich University in Vermont that is steep, and while easy to ride is actually really hard to ride fast or well.

Orange Trail Mountain Bike Trail, Northfield, VT


----------



## DethWshBkr (Nov 25, 2010)

I think some of the response here is also with the tone set by the first comments below the pictures. 
"Go fast" and "Speed just went up".

It's like they are happy that they can go faster now, because the trail has been swept. This indicates to me it HAD some challenge to it, but no longer. If those guys are happy that they will now be faster on the trail - they had some work to do. No rider I know of, who wants to "Go Fast", welcomes trail sweeping. No beginner rider who sees that trail will be thinking "aw yeah, I can haul fanny into the berm now!" 
Those comments come from someone who welcomes easier trails to go faster, then feels like they are a hardcore mountain rider. Unfortunately, it fits the same theme you see online a lot. Smooth road bikeable trails, with wide sweeping corners, and everyone has a virtual orgasm over it.


----------



## tomikazi (Jun 12, 2013)

I remember a time, when trails were barely maintained and all mtb's were rigid. You needed a pretty deep bag of skills to get down most any trail without HAB/dabs/falls. I was a teenager and nothing was gonna stop me from gaining these skills. I spent hours doing sideways hops up and down curbs, riding off benches, over "landscape rocks" at parks, etc. Eventually I made it all the way down trails without stopping... on a raleigh beach cruiser with gold anodized rims. Yes, it was the early 80's. 

With the bikes nowadays having 6" of travel, and overly maintained trails, I feel as though the skills I was so proud to have gained as a teen are going the way of the blacksmith. I do understand progress, but to me it is sad that most people these days will never understand the glory of making it down a truly gnarly trail, on a truly not gnarly bike. 

We didn't have many worries about clueless clowns(the ones with there stuff spread out on the trail while having a snack) on our trails, they didn't make it far. 

Safety?? I think these new bikes and sanitized trails make it a lot easier for new riders to gain confidence, and get into a situation their skillset isn't ready for.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

To be fair to the guys who want more suspension on what seems like a smooth trail see this video: 




What obstacle broke the bike? A simple grade change in the trail. What seems smooth at slow speeds may become suspension worthy at high speeds. Suspensions are meant to reduce forces inherent with high accelerations and smooth out those accelerations. They aren't just for bumps, rocks, and logs. Speed introduces a whole different kind of technical. So maybe don't hate too much on the guys on longer travel bikes on trails you don't think they should be on. Making a trail faster can make it more of a challenge in a different way, maybe even making a different bike a better choice to ride it.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

I like variety. Sometimes I like a super- technical trail and sometimes I like a fast, smooth, flow trail. I've lived in places that had one but not the other and eventually I started to long for a change of pace. 

OP, is there enough open space where you live to have both styles?


----------



## Havinfun (Mar 18, 2015)

Whomever earned the right to build/maintain the trail gets to steer in the direction they want to steer it. However, it is not MTBing if it is smooth. It is not MTBing if your average road bike can ride it with damage.


----------



## DethWshBkr (Nov 25, 2010)

Coldfriction said:


> To be fair to the guys who want more suspension on what seems like a smooth trail see this video:
> 
> What obstacle broke the bike? A simple grade change in the trail. What seems smooth at slow speeds may become suspension worthy at high speeds...Speed introduces a whole different kind of technical. Making a trail faster can make it more of a challenge in a different way...


No one is doing 120 mph on the trail shown. 25-30 max.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

So you don't think speed changes the desirable suspension on a bike until you're trying to break world records? 25-30 mph changes a trail's features when compared to riding it at 5-10 mph all the same. Higher speed = more suspension desired generally, not specifically regarding the trail discussed here. People complaining about what other people do makes me want to defend those other people for some reason whether or not I agree.


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

BobbyWilliams said:


> If you can ride your bike one mile without having to walk at least twice, cross at least 4 or 5 stone walls and logs, roll over countless boulders, smash up your pedals, attempt a couple endo 180's to make the climbing switchbacks around trees with a 1 1/2 foot radius turn, and "swim" your wide enduro bars through a narrow gap between trees then what your riding is not a mountain bike trail, its a dirt road. Which is fine, dirt roads can be fun especially if they are pointed down hill.


tell that to the guys who first started riding klunkers on the fire roads on mt tam.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

tomikazi said:


> I remember a time, when trails were barely maintained and all mtb's were rigid. You needed a pretty deep bag of skills to get down most any trail without HAB/dabs/falls. I was a teenager and nothing was gonna stop me from gaining these skills. I spent hours doing sideways hops up and down curbs, riding off benches, over "landscape rocks" at parks, etc. Eventually I made it all the way down trails without stopping... on a raleigh beach cruiser with gold anodized rims. Yes, it was the early 80's.
> 
> With the bikes nowadays having 6" of travel, and overly maintained trails, I feel as though the skills I was so proud to have gained as a teen are going the way of the blacksmith. I do understand progress, but to me it is sad that most people these days will never understand the glory of making it down a truly gnarly trail, on a truly not gnarly bike.


Not to play the "old Geezer" card, but...

I have been sort of thinking the same thing as I read this thread. I enjoy riding the maintained trails around here (Central Ohio) b/c I don't feel like they are too sanitized. I also enjoy riding the non-official trails just off of paved bikeways where kids, fishers, homeless people, teens looking to make out etc sort of blaze their way to the river or forested areas. These trails remind me more of the "old days" of just riding into the woods "between the trees" and reacting to what came up. I did all of this on my 1981 Mongoose Supergoose. Even now, I still ride the same bike, or my ancient Trek 830 from the 90's on the same paths.



tomikazi said:


> We didn't have many worries about clueless clowns(the ones with there stuff spread out on the trail while having a snack) on our trails, they didn't make it far.


and we were the clueless clowns...but then quickly learned technical skills, how to ride safe, AND trail etiquette by being out there. Learning "within the environment" rather than on-line.



tomikazi said:


> Safety?? I think these new bikes and sanitized trails make it a lot easier for new riders to gain confidence, and get into a situation their skillset isn't ready for.


I remember a day when speed was not as important as finishing the trail without having to get off the bike. Since I have been doing research for the past 2 years on getting a new bike, I feel like beginners are steered towards the bike riding and reacting with the comfort of a car. Lighter parts, stronger parts, bigger wheels, more aerodynamics encourage faster riding, or the ability to execute things with more speed are more prevalent in the advertising of the activity. I know that some of my friends who have purchased new bikes with out doing much research talk a lot about how much they wipe out on trails. "Man, I took that corner too fast" or " the breaks did not stop me quick enough". I ride with them and see them trying to speed through techy stuff before they can really even handle controlled pavement riding. They have been told that "doing things as fast as you can" is the yardstick. The "get bored with learning" how to find a line correctly, or how to get over a log or drop. Safety is almost advertised out of the activity


----------



## David R (Dec 21, 2007)

tomikazi said:


> I remember a time, when trails were barely maintained and all mtb's were rigid. You needed a pretty deep bag of skills to get down most any trail without HAB/dabs/falls. I was a teenager and nothing was gonna stop me from gaining these skills. I spent hours doing sideways hops up and down curbs, riding off benches, over "landscape rocks" at parks, etc. Eventually I made it all the way down trails without stopping...


It was the early-mid 90s for me, but it sounds very similar. Rigid bike, riding on poorly (or not at all) maintained hiking trails with roots, stairs, rocks, ruts, erosion etc. Those technical skills have stayed with me over the years despite the bikes getting better and [some of] the trails getting smoother. Where I live the trails are still pretty much as they were 20+ years ago, hardly maintained rooty tracks bashed through the pine forests and I still love that sort of riding.

But, I also love the fast flowy trails with berms, tables etc that are more prevalant in more populated areas with more riders. Yes it is possible to have a mix of the two but it needs to be done in a well planned way. IMO a single log across the middle of a fast flow trail doesn't suddenly make it "technical", it just spoils the flow.


----------



## misterbill (Aug 13, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Meh- I ride with kids pretty regularly myself, including my own, and they call stuff like that 'old man riding'.





Coldfriction said:


> "old man riding" is a bigoted phrase and does cross the line. Glad you're teaching the kids that elderly people are lesser people and their trails are therefore lesser trails. Good job.
> 
> Criticize the trail if you like, but insulting the people using it is bad form. I'm assuming you did instruct the kids that forming opinions of that nature will define them as bigots and be an obstacle to them in the future?


If I am understanding this correctly, slapheadmofo's kids are talking about their dad being old and slow.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

misterbill said:


> If I am understanding this correctly, slapheadmofo's kids are talking about their dad being old and slow.


Me, and pretty much anybody else that rides sitting down most of the time. 
And of course 'old man' when you're 10 means anyone over 30. 
Pretty much every MTBer is old coming from that perspective.

CF, you're a jackass with the 'bigot' crap. You're an old man and you ride old man trails too. Get over it. Anybody ever instruct you that being oversenstive and humorless was going to be an obstacle in your future?


----------



## Havinfun (Mar 18, 2015)

I am oldish and slowish, my riding speed that is, but I would not take my time to ride a smooth trail unless I was trying to get somewhere to take photos. But, I sure would not say I went for a MTB ride. Smooth trails are not MTB trails.


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

Havinfun said:


> I am oldish and slowish, my riding speed that is, but I would not take my time to ride a smooth trail unless I was trying to get somewhere to take photos. But, I sure would not say I went for a MTB ride. Smooth trails are not MTB trails.


what if you live somewhere that isn't rocky, rutted and rooted?

i can understand when you mean smooth "bike path" trails built through parks or rail trails aren't MTB trails, but there are places in california like china camp state park where some of the singletrack is pretty smooth.

i consider those to be mountain bike trails.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

I don't define a trail by who rides it Slaphead, that's the difference that matters. I haven't called anyone a jackass within my memory either. I apologize when I cross lines and I work in a licensed profession. My "oversensitive and humorless" way of being hasn't held me back at all. I stand by what I said in that people who believe they know what all trails should be aren't far off from being bigots. I've heard "humor" containing baby rape jokes, ****** jokes, jew jokes, etc. Am I suppose to believe those jokes weren't bigoted because I am humorless? This is a bike forum, not a comic forum. I'm not the one measuring others here.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> I don't define a trail by who rides it Slaphead, that's the difference that matters. I haven't called anyone a jackass within my memory either. I apologize when I cross lines and I work in a licensed profession. My "oversensitive and humorless" way of being hasn't held me back at all. I stand by what I said in that people who believe they know what all trails should be aren't far off from being bigots. I've heard "humor" containing baby rape jokes, ****** jokes, jew jokes, etc. Am I suppose to believe those jokes weren't bigoted because I am humorless? This is a bike forum, not a comic forum. I'm not the one measuring others here.


Make mountains out of molehills much?

Get a grip.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

I detect some mtb snobbery creeping into this thread. 

"I ride difficult technical trails, and if you don't ride trails like I do then, well, you're not really a mountain biker, are you?"

Too cool for school. Get over yourselves. 

Everyone who gets on a bike and rides on a trail is a mountain biker of one sort or another. And they all deserve trails that match their abilities and aspirations. Removing obstacles from existing trails is NOT cool. Building ANY kind of trails, including flow trails, IS cool. If you want more of the kind of trails you like to ride, get your ass out there and work to build them and maintain them. Pretending you're so cool impresses no one.


----------



## tealy (Mar 7, 2013)

okay


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gasp4Air said:


> I detect some mtb snobbery creeping into this thread.
> 
> "I ride difficult technical trails, and if you don't ride trails like I do then, well, you're not really a mountain biker, are you?"
> 
> ...


I agree with a lot of what you say, but I also think people ought to be honest in their self-assessment. If you suck at something, realize and admit your limitations, specially to yourself. Don't go around attempting to lower the bar everywhere so you feel better about yourself. IMO, a lot (not all, but a lot) of trail dumbing comes from people who are unwilling to either put in the effort to up their game or to get familiar with the taste of humble pie.

For example, I've been trying to get a clue how to ride BMX for the last 6 or 7 years now. I've gotten very comfortable with the fact that I don't have the skills or balls to ever become remotely proficient at it. That doesn't stop me from having a good time trying to learn, but I sure as hell wouldn't go chopping the lips off the local dirt jumps because they're too tough for me. I had to go build an old-man-friendly pumptrack in town just to have a place to ride where I don't feel like I'm way over my head. I also have a lot of fun riding there, but I don't pretend that it's in any way even remotely comparable to what those I consider 'real' BMX riders are doing.

Overly groomed trails seem to fit this same niche to me; yeah, technically, it's mountain biking, just like I guess I'm technically 'BMX'ing when I'm on my 20", but in each case, I see it as a pretty damn watered-down version of the sport. I found I felt the same when I dabbled with DHing for a number of years (to the tune of 200+ lift days). I still would never consider myself to have been a 'real' DHer, because I rode with enough people that were actually good at it to realize that I'm not one of them. I never felt the need to go taking all the challenging sections out of trails just make them easy enough for me though. Again in this case, I built a shuttle trail locally that serves the needs of old and scared mediocre riders, such as myself.

So you see, I personally have no beef with building or riding easier trails. I just don't see the point in pretending that they're not creampuff trails built for creampuff riders, because that's exactly what they are.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

Ideally everyone, regardless of skill level should have trail around they can't quite clean but is within their grasp with a little more effort and practice. Going outside the comfort zone as Slaphead tries to do is the only way to get better and know it. Trail dumming down shouldn't happen ideally, and it's worth letting people who do it know that it is frowned on. Understanding their perspective and the reasons they do it to attempt to accommodate their desires is the way to go, demeaning them is not. Not every location is the same. In much of the Rockies, our trails are old motorcycle, hiking and horse trails that are frequently very gnarly and poorly maintained. An easy trail here could be the most difficult trail somewhere else. You have to live next to a city or a Mecca if you hope to have a lot of variety.

I feel for mountain bikers who don't live near the mountains, you guys have more passion than i do; I would probably switch hobbies. Flatter trails in an already flat area seems at first glance I'll conceived.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> I agree with a lot of what you say, but I also think people ought to be honest in their self-assessment. If you suck at something, realize and admit your limitations, specially to yourself. *Don't go around attempting to lower the bar everywhere so you feel better about yourself. IMO, a lot (not all, but a lot) of trail dumbing comes from people who are unwilling to either put in the effort to up their game or to get familiar with the taste of humble pie. *
> 
> For example, I've been trying to get a clue how to ride BMX for the last 6 or 7 years now. I've gotten very comfortable with the fact that I don't have the skills or balls to ever become remotely proficient at it. That doesn't stop me from having a good time trying to learn, but I sure as hell wouldn't go chopping the lips off the local dirt jumps because they're too tough for me. I had to go build an old-man-friendly pumptrack in town just to have a place to ride where I don't feel like I'm way over my head. I also have a lot of fun riding there, but I don't pretend that it's in any way even remotely comparable to what those I consider 'real' BMX riders are doing.
> 
> ...


hear, hear!!! I sort of feel the same way. I feel like the "everybody gets trophy" mentality is softening things up. People are afraid to admit being new at something.

I am the opposite in that I grew up BMXing, and am now trying to apply some of those skills to MTBing. Right now, I wouldn't even call myself a BMXer anymore either since I am older and less likely to do the crazy stuff I did in my youth. BUT, i would not, and do not get all pissy if a trail is too hard and ask to make it easier. I also don't just try to "force ride" said trail and get in the way of the people above my skill level. I find the trails with the skill set that I am at, master those, and then move up. I practice skills out of the way and on my own, and then try the next level up trail. Many times I have to bail, or take the pass arounds, but that is ok at first.

As is seen in this thread, I think there is stupidity on both sides of the "trail". I think that the demographic on both extreme sides need to get over themselves, educate themselves and share a bit.

If Joe DHer wants to careen down a techy, steep fast trail at 2000mph, then why are they hanging at the local Metro park trails

AND

if Steve Wal-Mart 29er wants to be riding something with flow and not a lot of tech...why are they on the Advanced trail built out on the farm or up in the mountains?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Gasp4Air said:


> I detect some mtb snobbery creeping into this thread.
> 
> "I ride difficult technical trails, and if you don't ride trails like I do then, well, you're not really a mountain biker, are you?"
> 
> ...


I was thinking the same thing, except I wouldn't say it's "creeping" into this thread. The trail snobbery is out in full force.

I'm not surprised by it, but it does frustrate me. A lot of people on this forum live in places where the trails are "bucket list" worthy for riders in a place like Houston (where the trail originally described in this thread is located). I consider myself fortunate and pretty well-rounded in that I've lived in places with bucket list worthy trails AND places where the trails are nothing more than a flat ribbon of dirt through the woods. I also have had the opportunity to travel to bucket list worthy riding destinations. I have experienced the variety of trails out there, partly due to a lack of options. The "if you don't ride the way I do, you're not mountain biking" attitudes are snobbery, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if you apply it to your own attempts to dabble with different disciplines of riding. It's still snobbery that you apply to yourself. It's still demeaning to other people who live in places that don't have your "ideal" facilities.

It comes down to this: those who lead trail projects tend to get more input on a trail design than those who show up to help. Those who show up to help get more input on projects than those who don't show up. Land managers have the most input of all, if the group is doing the work legitimately and legally. In one place I lived, the land manager was the one responsible for cutting out every log and smoothing out all of the trails. Some mtb riders started building illegally out of frustration. Those who were working to stay legal and legitimate had to work hard to educate the land manager about what many mtb riders want, to at least allow logs and other technical features to remain on the trail. In some places I've lived, the land managers have permitted lumber-constructed drops and jumps and bridges and skinnies. Others only permit bridges and elevated construction to cross streams (and in some cases require all stream crossings to be bridged, rather than armored). Where I live now, land managers USED to permit lumber technical features, but new construction has been halted because of a couple lawsuits. Existing features remain, and are maintained, but I expect that if the lawsuits go poorly, all of the TTF's would be removed. Some land managers intentionally want all of their trails to be super family friendly. Some land managers give the builders a lot of flexibility.

I know the environment where the OP lives. Vegetation grows FAST and vigorously. Thorny vines are nasty and VERY common. In fact, I would bet a week after this pic was taken, any thorny greenbrier vines removed from the corridor have new sprouts 3' tall. Given the flatness of the terrain, I find that trail to be too straight. I have built trail in pretty flat areas and it was a struggle to keep it interesting. I used a LOT of swoopy lines to keep riders doing SOMETHING other than just pedaling. I wasn't allowed to bring in lumber, but I was allowed to use native materials found on-site. I built alt lines within the cleared corridor. Log-overs, skinnies, etc. If someone wanted to ride fast, they could. If someone wanted to ride slow and hit all the technical stuff, they could. It was a great place where more experienced riders could take beginners and still have a good time. I was the lead builder there for awhile until I moved away. After I moved, the builders kept a lot of that flavor, though the individual features changed as they rotted away and the trail was rerouted in places to add distance or avoid muddy areas.

I am not a trail crew leader/steward now. I serve a different function in the club I'm in now. Consequently, I provide input when I'm helping on scouting/planning days, or in appropriate occasions on build days. I don't argue with trail routing when the trail has already been pin flagged and we're out digging (though I will make use of rocks or logs in the pin flagged trail tread). Sometimes, my input is overruled. Certain trail stewards/crew leaders are more prone to do so than others. Consequently, I'm more likely to show up to work on trails where the crew leaders will hear me out and actually consider what I have to say before deciding. Part of that has to do with us sharing a similar vision for the trail, but part of it also comes from a place of respect. Certain people have less respect for my trailbuilding background and experience and they like to talk down to me. Unfortunately, that happens more often on the trails closest to where I live, so I'm more likely to travel farther away to work on trail projects run by people who respect me and my input more.

Sounds like the OP is dealing with a similar sort of crew leader. It's unfortunate the way that works sometimes, but some people are poor managers and oftentimes when volunteer projects are concerned, the first one to step up and say, "I'll do it" is the one who leads things, regardless of whether they're good at it or not. The options are either to stick around and push the issue, forcing change from within, or to go where you're more valued and respected as a volunteer.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> I agree with a lot of what you say, but I also think people ought to be honest in their self-assessment. If you suck at something, realize and admit your limitations, specially to yourself. Don't go around attempting to lower the bar everywhere so you feel better about yourself. IMO, a lot (not all, but a lot) of trail dumbing comes from people who are unwilling to either put in the effort to up their game or to get familiar with the taste of humble pie.
> 
> For example, I've been trying to get a clue how to ride BMX for the last 6 or 7 years now. I've gotten very comfortable with the fact that I don't have the skills or balls to ever become remotely proficient at it. That doesn't stop me from having a good time trying to learn, but I sure as hell wouldn't go chopping the lips off the local dirt jumps because they're too tough for me. I had to go build an old-man-friendly pumptrack in town just to have a place to ride where I don't feel like I'm way over my head. I also have a lot of fun riding there, but I don't pretend that it's in any way even remotely comparable to what those I consider 'real' BMX riders are doing.
> 
> ...


I agree with a lot of what you say. ;-)

Except for the creampuff part. "easy trails for non-technical riders" is better I think.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I started MTB at 47 and slowly gained technical skills over the years. You pretty much can't ride in my area without learning to handle rocks and roots and steep hills. Now, eligible for medicare, I yearn for some creampuff old-man trails.

So, hats off to all those who strive and enjoy the punishment of conquering the gnarly stuff. But those who have less ambition, and those who've used up their ambition also deserve a place in the woods. As long as the "creampuffs" respect the trails they can't handle, they deserve not to be abused.


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Gasp4Air said:


> But those who have less ambition, and those who've used up their ambition also deserve a place in the woods.


At the same time, they don't deserve to have every trial modified to suit them, either, which seems to be the onus for the thread.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

Gigantic said:


> At the same time, they don't deserve to have every trial modified to suit them, either, which seems to be the onus for the thread.


Agree 100%, as I've made clear in my posts. There's no excuse for removing obstacles from existing trails. Learn to ride the trail, or find something more suitable. The "get out and build a the trail you wantl" applies to pro-technical and pro-flow folks alike.


----------



## David R (Dec 21, 2007)

Spotted this in the 'One Pic, One Line' thread, perfect solution for the OP;










One fast and flowy line for the speed freaks, one more challenging line for those who want to slow down and practice their trials skills.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

I'd argue the faster flow line is over the log. Great example of something that shouldn't be removed and an alternate line for others. My first thought at looking at it is that the alternate line appears unnecessary, but it is obviously used, so there must be a demand for it. I might use the alternate line riding up if I'm tired.


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

kind of on the subject yet off the subject:

THERE IS NO SHAME IN WALKING!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> I'd argue the faster flow line is over the log. Great example of something that shouldn't be removed and an alternate line for others. My first thought at looking at it is that the alternate line appears unnecessary, but it is obviously used, so there must be a demand for it. I might use the alternate line riding up if I'm tired.


Yeah, faster line is definitely over the log. I like the way that it's approached as the main riding line and the easier line is the B-line instead of the other way around too.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

slapheadmofo said:


> Yeah, faster line is definitely over the log. I like the way that it's approached as the main riding line and the easier line is the B-line instead of the other way around too.


Yes. The end log is the last of three small hits in a row, and is faster than the easy line. It's actually a small little gap from a rock on the backside of the log, maybe about a whole whopping two feet distance to clear. Nothing big, but fun.

Lots of our trails around here have similar, built in from the start. It ends up cutting down on trail braids in the future. And is sometimes a requirement for building something funky/fun in a legal spot - gotta' put an easy go around in to make some of the land managers happy.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

Putting easy bypasses around obstacles is a good way to make trails appealing to more riders, and to allow less skilled riders to pick their battles. But they should be use judiciously. The problem is when go-arounds turn into trail braiding, avoiding every rock, straightening every curve. I've removed many useless braids, sometimes only to have them appear again. Riders who do this have little respect for the trail, the woods or other riders.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

For those looking for a way to increase tech and challenge in a trail that others are rationalizing taking out for speed and flow, look for locations in the trail that a half buried log or bunch of rocks can be used to improve drainage; as in force flowing storm water off the trail. My opinion is that the stability of the trail trumps everything, and it's an easy argument to make. This might not apply to the OP's trail as it could be so flat that sheet flow is the only runoff in the area. On some trails I've ridden, water bars and drainage features were the best thing about the trail. While these won't make a trail very techy from my perspective, they give something to bunny hop and lift your tires over on what would otherwise be a featureless smooth trail.

I agree and believe that planning and building an alternate route probably helps reduce the unplanned alternates. I rode a trail a few times a week in Arizona that had a couple difficult rock features I couldn't ever quite clean; I'd lose all momentum and there were rock edges that I couldn't pedal through without some fancy pedaling skills I didn't develop. I walked those features many times. The only instance in my life where I tried to dumb down a trail was when I placed one large rock to give me the clearance I needed to get over the feature. I didn't do it to feel like I conquered the challenge; I just don't like getting off my bike on my after work ride all the time. The next time I rode the trail it was gone and I left it alone after that. One day an alternate route sprung up. I used it all the time and would probably have used it from the beginning if it were there.

I also believe the tech line should be the "main route" and the bail out bypasses should be the slower lines. Reward the effort so to speak. If you can dump a bunch of branches or rocks or something where the braiding occurs, I think that has helped where I've seen it happen, but where I ride most of the time now the rider has no choice but to stay on the trail. Lazy riders don't get off their bikes to move things. Also it might be worth looking at the unintended alternate paths to see if the original line wasn't as well thought out as believed originally.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

So....has anyone searched out the OP's Facebook participants and let 'em have it? Ha.


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> I also believe the tech line should be the "main route" and the bail out bypasses should be the slower lines. Reward the effort so to speak.


The right thing somewhat depends upon the vision for the trail. The larger group where I live isn't interested in techy features. They just want a trail, and we are building one to a consistent vision. There are no obstacles, and the trail won't suddenly change in character as you ride it.

A tiny handful of us would like some features to add interest, and those are best added on alternate lines that are signed so that no one is caught out by surprise. For example, we could put in a 100-foot alt line having a log-over, and sign it with a warning of some sort so that people can choose whether to ride it.


----------



## Coldfriction (Oct 31, 2009)

True that Jonathan, I was speaking to personal preference and how I would do things if it were my vision. To steal from the loop thread, if you can make the trail a loop, even if the lines are parallel and close together, you can have a trail with much more tech riding it in one direction and fast and flowy with some drops or something the other direction and make two user group happy at the same time.


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

Coldfriction said:


> True that Jonathan, I was speaking to personal preference and how I would do things if it were my vision.


The vision thing is important, isn't it? Someone's got a vision for that trail in the OP's post, and similarly for the trail that our group here in Munising is building. We have stayed pretty true to the original design so that the character of the trail is consistent from beginning to end.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

That's not a MTB trail imo. That's more akin to the trail leading to the bathrooms in the parking lot before you actually get to the MTB trail.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> That's not a MTB trail imo. That's more akin to the trail leading to the bathrooms in the parking lot before you actually get to the MTB trail.


If you feel that the trail to the bathrooms isn't worthy of your skills, volunteer to build an alternate path with large rocks, a switchback with a log across it and perhaps a 4 ft drop/gap. Then you can poop with pride.


----------



## HAL 9000 (Apr 4, 2008)

So you want technical in Houston?

*ride faster*


----------



## drag_slick (Sep 24, 2004)

OP, did you figure out who the land manager is yet? Did somebody grant this other crew permission to do what they do?


----------



## jim c (Dec 5, 2014)

JonathanGennick said:


> The vision thing is important, isn't it? Someone's got a vision for that trail in the OP's post, and similarly for the trail that our group here in Munising is building. We have stayed pretty true to the original design so that the character of the trail is consistent from beginning to end.


Vision, that's when I slap my head and say mofo, when I realize I'd failed to see or get the big picture. As I posted before I didn't like the changes when they started showing up on the trails. "Flow" meant dumbed-down for the 10 speed riders. Then I slowly started to see where it all was going as the trail crew (THANKYOU) slowly turned our rough and techy trails into something else. Old Dog here so I remember rigid and what it means when you learn to clear a rock garden or rooty climb, but still it is easy to love fast-n-swoopy. Is fast/swoopy easier? Not if you develop skills to ride a flow section like it should be ridden. Weight transfer used to mean I kept traction between front/rear as needed to keep from unclipping. Now it means coming down on the front just enough to get a few feet of nose wheelie before hooking up for more pedaling. Am I still Mountain Biking? Hell ya! For us here in SoFla the sport is evolving. Evolve: that is what they're writing about in the magazines. I 'get' the frustration when you think' today the kids have it easy'. Try to think of it as you are going to keep-up. They left in many rough rocks-n-roots sections, now we are flying over them so they seem to easy. My focus is to get longer air, turning my old bunny-hop skill into 6' air gaps and clearing the whole section. It's not easy. When you see a rider on a 5inch+ bike don't automatically think "too much bike". It may be someone like me just adapting to our evolving sport, and working very hard to do it.


----------



## HAL 9000 (Apr 4, 2008)

drag_slick said:


> OP, did you figure out who the land manager is yet? Did somebody grant this other crew permission to do what they do?


Advocacy | GHORBA


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> That's not a MTB trail imo. That's more akin to the trail leading to the bathrooms in the parking lot before you actually get to the MTB trail.


trail snob


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

Once the trails are sanitized, the obstacles will never return.
Is it a disservice to the younger riders to deprive them of the ability to develop the skills to negotiate variations in terrain? 
That's how we learned, right? There's no shame in dabbing your foot or walking a section as you learn what works and the next time, maybe you'll clear it - and that's a good feeling.
I'm one of the lucky ones to have multiple types of trails within :40 of my house - Flowy, Mild, and some of the most rocky, rooty gnar in the Northeast (Daniels Road in Saratoga Springs, NY).
It's a double edged sword as I take my 8 & 10 yr old sons to the mild and flowy stuff. They never fall or have any difficulty riding everything there. But they're really not learning anything either. It's just not challenging. I plan to initiate them to the harder stuff when they're 10 & 12. We're all happy for the Father/Son time as that's always in short supply these days but when I get the chance to ride alone or with some of my buds, it's the gnar every time. Hooting and hollering at each other to speed up, GTF out of my way, all that good stuff that there isn't enough of these days as we're all late 30's-late 40's dads with all the trappings of middle class married life. 

And when we're done, we take our dirty, sweaty, tired, sometimes bloodied selves to get something to eat and grab a couple cold ones and talk about the ride. What do you do after riding these sanitized trails? Complain about the one log? Compare Strava times? What kind of bond can you develop with your riding partners there? It's boring. And if it's boring, it's not going to be sustainable.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

houston, we've had this problem....


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

53119 said:


> i know this trail. it is a heavy multi-use trail. i miss alot of the very steep tech stuff that used to spin off this system that dropped into rooted ravine lines.
> 
> "dumbing down" a trail is not happy time but this trail's worst enemy is simply location. constant erosion and most recently a bad infestation to the trees have hurt it badly. i like tech alot and enjoy the fast line over the smooth line as well so it is frustrating to hear people complain about too many roots but natural erosion is a pain to build around. the topography has potential but it would cost alot to build it out to be sustainable. it certainly does not help that it is multi-directional. building features or wanting to create a line is difficult with the soil there. Any potential for drops or step downs is difficult because you have to plan for multi-directional use and drainage on what essentially is a big sandpit.
> 
> not sure who the op is talking about but the guys i know who have worked on the trail miss and wish for tech as well. this park was donated land to the city. it is a sensitive political issue. always has been. there is a new masterplan for this park. so, it will see alot of changes for the users. good and bad it will have to play out.


Thanks for the local intel. Of course, some people are so set in their opinions that they won't care about the particular site characteristics. I know what it's like building and riding trail in a sandbox from my time in east TX. There's really no such thing as sheet flow for a place like this. The sandy soil is so porous that infiltration rates are insanely high. Rain events heavy enough to generate surface flow drop enough water to wash the trail itself away. And considering the climate in this area, rain events of that nature happen on a somewhat regular basis.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

Harold said:


> Thanks for the local intel. Of course, some people are so set in their opinions that they won't care about the particular site characteristics. I know what it's like building and riding trail in a sandbox from my time in east TX. There's really no such thing as sheet flow for a place like this. The sandy soil is so porous that infiltration rates are insanely high. Rain events heavy enough to generate surface flow drop enough water to wash the trail itself away. And considering the climate in this area, rain events of that nature happen on a somewhat regular basis.


i don't know if i have the right trail intel though..but the two main trails in Houston suffer from the exact same thing. mem park being the trail i was speaking to.

somebody wants tech? do what i do. book a flight...
quick fix is bike set up... run a ss/4X set up and take the inside line at MACH CHICKEN on EVERYTHING.


----------



## Durt (Aug 13, 2009)

....


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Durt said:


> No he's just on here crying like the little *itch that he is.
> By his own admission, he went to ONE work party and an hour of another and he's some kind of expert? Whatever.
> 
> What he conveniently leaves out is the fact that this particular trail has quite a few technical features. The bowl area, two separate jump areas, bridges, berms, a teeter totter, a teepee ramp, and more turns and roots than you could count in a year. Some of the "technical" ups and downs, as well as significant portions of the trail, have been washed away in floods, hurricanes, and weather over time. The soil here erodes quickly. The vegetation grows like mad as already mentioned and must be managed or the trail becomes impassable.
> ...


I don't think that attitude will win you many allies. And honestly, that's the biggest complaint I got from his post, was the way he was treated when he DID come to help. Yeah, he had some issues with the construction, but nobody took the time to calmly educate him on any of the issues of the park, and why things were being done in that way.


----------



## Mugochap (Nov 12, 2010)

...


----------



## Mugochap (Nov 12, 2010)

drag_slick said:


> OP, did you figure out who the land manager is yet? Did somebody grant this other crew permission to do what they do?


This is a GHORBA sanctioned trail. So yes, the gentlemen who have *volunteered their time* to be trail stewards have the permission to do this via local parks deparatments. GHORBA is tasked with promoting offroad riding in the Houston area. One easy way to do this is to make the trails more accessible (ie, sometimes easier) for the masses. If the OP doesn't like this, he is more than welcome to volunteer his time and become a trail steward at one of the many trails in the Houston area and help forge the direction of that trail whether it be of the fast and flowy variety or a more techy nature.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

my mistake on the mem prk call. i believe the ops pics were from sugar land and cypresswood. all the systems do have the same problems/issues


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

one thing that i'd like to add to this conversation is that in today's litigious times, land managers might want to dumb trails down to avoid liability issues.

i'm seeing this on a lot of trails i ride here in the bay area that are much easier today than they were even back in 2000.

just a thought.


----------



## philipt (Sep 22, 2009)

That trail happens to be my favorite in the area. It's the fastest, flowyest trail around. There aren't many other places you can two wheel drift around corners. If you find the trails boring then you're going too slow. 

The trail steward being disparaged is a great guy who's passionate and energetic. Interesting fact: the guy who cut the first city-sanctioned trail out there is a BMX guy. Another interesting fact is that a pump track is just a few miles away if you're wanting technical features. One final fact: there's a new section planned that has some interesting terrain with 20 foot drop-ins. Now there's an opportunity to be helpful!


----------



## HAL 9000 (Apr 4, 2008)

philipt said:


> If you find the trails boring then you're going too slow.


Ditto!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

philipt said:


> It's the fastest, flowyest trail around... If you find the trails boring then you're going too slow.


Keeping in mind that trail flow and overall speed aren't even close to one and the same thing, of course.

I'd even venture that building trails that are only fun if ride them at warp speed really isn't doing much more for the average rider than building trails that are only fun when you ride them like a wrestling match/chess game.


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

Smooth, flat trails can be fun and even a relief when most trails in your area are loose/gnarly/steep/exposed/crowded.


----------



## brentos (May 19, 2006)

dgw2jr said:


> Smooth, flat trails can be fun and even a relief when most trails in your area are loose/gnarly/steep/exposed/crowded.


Funny you say that, I'm in Ogden and as much as I prefer our loose/gnarly/exposed trails, sometimes I feel exactly the same way about flat and smooth trails, like those in Riverdale.

I must add, however, that if I come across anyone removing a tech feature from any of our trails (as some have done lately) I will ask them to stop, and will not leave until they do. If they continue to remove it without the authority of the organization that built the trail in the first place, I will physically stop them.


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

brentos said:


> Funny you say that, I'm in Ogden and as much as I prefer our loose/gnarly/exposed trails, sometimes I feel exactly the same way about flat and smooth trails, like those in Riverdale.


Huzzah! I'm not alone! Sometimes my wife says "I really wanna ride my bike today, but I don't wanna do a lot of climbing and bouncing off rocks...". That's what the smooth trails down by the river are for. You can still get pretty squirrelly down there in the Magical Haunted Forest if you ride fast enough.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

We have this issue here and to be honest, since I am not involved in the trail maint/building group, who am I am to complain? We have amazing trails right in the city that are still v. technical but do cater in areas to other trail users/beginners which is fine with me. There have been some sections/features removed but the trails are still plenty fun. When I was a beginner, I never minded having to get off and walk or practice more. There is plenty of #gnar nearby that folks can ride if they need to get their #enduro on. Ride on.


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

here's a typical feature at the Belmont Plateau in Philadelphia:
here's the log pile with my bike for reference, there's no b route, either you ride it or you don't: 













Here's another line at another local park; again, there's no alt route, either you ride it or you HAB:


----------



## rockdude14 (Jul 7, 2006)

TiGeo said:


> We have this issue here and to be honest, since I am not involved in the trail maint/building group, who am I am to complain? We have amazing trails right in the city that are still v. technical but do cater in areas to other trail users/beginners which is fine with me. There have been some sections/features removed but the trails are still plenty fun. When I was a beginner, I never minded having to get off and walk or practice more. There is plenty of #gnar nearby that folks can ride if they need to get their #enduro on. Ride on.


If you have an opinion on your trails you should absolutely tell the people doing the trail work what it is. Tell them what you like and what you dont. If a lot of people say they want it more techy or more flowy or whatever they may actually go in that direction if there aren't other reasons not to. If you start doing trail work its the same thing your vote just gets to count for more. You also start to see more of the things that have an effect that you might not have visibility to before like insurance, how often people are getting hurt in certain areas, number of people using the trail, what the land manager thinks, what some of the higher ups in the mountain bike club think and are planning.

In the end if you actually want your trails to be one way or another you need to start at least talking to the people involved with them (trail workers, trail work group leaders, local bike club, land managers) or better yet start doing work even if its at a different trail if you cant get along with whoever runs this one, make them the best most popular trails in the city and your vote for what other ones should do will count for even more.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

CBRsteve said:


> ...


Are you still typing?


----------



## Mugochap (Nov 12, 2010)

Crankout said:


> Are you still typing?


I had written a note quoting your post about "searching for" with the guys on the Facebook and "letting them have it" but decided against it so I immediately deleted my post.

But, since you asked I might as well divulge...

Since I'm good friends (and teammates) with those folks who posted in the OPs Facebook snapshots and the trail steward, I got a little annoyed that you would suggest doing something so juvenile. My annoyance was exacerbated due to the strong belief that you have no frame of reference for this specific trail, the trail steward and GHORBA itself. But, like someone watching Fox News, you took what you were given as the absolute truth and reacted.

The OP has NOT painted an accurate picture of the trail and the trail stewards and went well outside the bounds of 'good conduct' by posting the names of those individuals to this forum. And your idea of "letting them have it" was just the kind of mistake that can turn molehills into mountains.

Crap.... there goes 60 seconds of my life I can never get back.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

shekky said:


> one thing that i'd like to add to this conversation is that in today's litigious times, land managers might want to dumb trails down to avoid liability issues.
> 
> i'm seeing this on a lot of trails i ride here in the bay area that are much easier today than they were even back in 2000.
> 
> just a thought.


That's the truth. Here locally, just a couple days ago, a newbie bailed on a wooden A-frame and gave himself a seriously nasty broken leg. It was his first ever mtb ride, so I'm told. The structure gets at least 5' off the ground, though it's a simple "roll up, roll down" sort of feature, and it's quite wide, the height is intimidating for many. My wife, though she can ride some pretty technical terrain, avoids it because of the height and consequences. It's been there for years, though. I definitely could see the land manager getting a little fed up with injuries on it (and a couple other wooden structures along the trails) and deciding they need to be removed.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

CBRsteve said:


> I had written a note quoting your post about "searching for" with the guys on the Facebook and "letting them have it" but decided against it so I immediately deleted my post.
> 
> But, since you asked I might as well divulge...
> 
> ...


For what it's worth, I wasn't serious. My 'Ha!' didn't convey that I guess.

However, being juvenile now and again is indeed entertaining.


----------



## Mugochap (Nov 12, 2010)

Crankout said:


> For what it's worth, I wasn't serious. My 'Ha!' didn't convey that I guess.
> 
> However, being juvenile now and again is indeed entertaining.


I completely agree and am regularly found guilty being juvenile... but not at the expense of someone you don't know and someone who is volunteering their time and energy to promote/improve the things that we love.

:thumbsup:


----------



## Mugochap (Nov 12, 2010)

On a side note, I find it humorous that we both have a quote about life in our signatures... though coming from completely opposite ends of the spectrum, they both can be very true.


----------



## misterbill (Aug 13, 2014)

I have spent the last six months either hiking or biking exploring trails looking for the perfect trail. I ride in Nassahegan and the marked hiking trails are unrideable and practically unwalkable(if that is a word). Where I usually ride it is a constant barrage of rocks to ride around. I do a lot of walking uphill, downhill I am always off of the seat and on the brakes, weaving around rocks.

After six months, I finally found the perfect trail today. It was all pine needles, had a few roots, but hardly any rocks. It was one mile out, and a mile return on the Orange Dot Marked trail which is really an abandoned road. Hit 9 mph according to my GPS. 

I hated it. I have no idea why. I only had to stop twice today to catch my breath. I haven't been riding long enoungh to like the technical trails, I cannot figure out why I do not like the trail that I have been looking for for 6 months.


----------



## blackitout (Jun 30, 2014)

tomikazi said:


> I remember a time, when trails were barely maintained and all mtb's were rigid. You needed a pretty deep bag of skills to get down most any trail without HAB/dabs/falls. I was a teenager and nothing was gonna stop me from gaining these skills. I spent hours doing sideways hops up and down curbs, riding off benches, over "landscape rocks" at parks, etc. Eventually I made it all the way down trails without stopping... on a raleigh beach cruiser with gold anodized rims. Yes, it was the early 80's.
> 
> With the bikes nowadays having 6" of travel, and overly maintained trails, I feel as though the skills I was so proud to have gained as a teen are going the way of the blacksmith. I do understand progress, but to me it is sad that most people these days will never understand the glory of making it down a truly gnarly trail, on a truly not gnarly bike.
> 
> ...


^^^This. There's only one place now where I live that still has unmaintained trails. It's in a county park and depending on what lines the bikers take it's constantly changing. This is the place I learned to mountain bike 23 years ago. It still has logs, log ramps, rocks you have to go over, streams with no easy line and you can ride it when it rains and get muddy. I miss trails like this. No rules, no bypasses, and if you don't have have narrow handle bars you're hitting trees. The trails are still real single track, less than a foot wide. People now call it an easy trail because it's natural and small. The newer black trails have mostly man made features. It's difficult yes but not the same. One incline switch back I've been trying to master has been turned rock armored. I got up this switchback the other day in 3 tries. I don't know that bothers me, because it was like my nemesis and now I'll never know if I could have gotten up it when it was hard pack.


----------

