Trail Snipers....

[Slimm]

...

yeah, that's my point, stop taking the tech out of the trails and michigan riders will get better.

Actually, that's kind of an interesting thing, this is going to go exactly against what I am complaining about, but at a lot of the DH races I go to the Michigan Riders seem to do pretty well, and we all know we don't have anything like that to practice on much.

Michigan riders who want to get better at 'tech' trails will figure out where such terrain exists and go there to ride. As far as I know, the only thing being taken out of trails around here is erroded fall line POS legacy trail. some folks call that stuff technical, and they are incorrect in that assertion.

At Luton park where i ride a lot, there was a sustainable steep technical section designed and installed a couple of years ago. I wonder everytime I ride through it why there are still leaves on the tread. For all this demand we have around here for 'tech' stuff I would think the leaves from last fall would already be gone, like on the rest of the trail.

The only thing i can conclude is that there were 10 times as many leaves that fell on that one section than everywhere else, or, nobody, except me and a very few others, is riding that section.

[iamkickstand]

How do you define technical?

Because an eroded section of trail that has exposed tree roots and exposed rocks from the surface dirt being washed away is MUCH more technical then a buff section of trail. but then again I don't have a problem with riding something like that, I enjoy it.

Why were the leaves still on the trail? I dunno, maybe those that rode it were smooth enough to not leave a trace?

Anyone have a preference on 29 or 26" wheels?

I mean seriously, I am starting to get the impression that half of you would prefer to ride on a bike path then a mountain bike trail but you don't because you're afraid your friends would make fun of you, so you pave your mountain bike trails.

[Slimm]

How do you define technical?

Because an eroded section of trail that has exposed tree roots and exposed rocks from the surface dirt being washed away is MUCH more technical then a buff section of trail. but then again I don't have a problem with riding something like that, I enjoy it.

...

this notion is a common misnomer. not to belabor the point, but you are conflating hard to ride (even if it is fun) with good technical singletrack.

the way i see it, if it isn't sustainable it isn't good. Even if it is fun

[mr_opjones]

This is hard for him to realize

[iamkickstand]

How do you define technical?

Because an eroded section of trail that has exposed tree roots and exposed rocks from the surface dirt being washed away is MUCH more technical then a buff section of trail. but then again I don't have a problem with riding something like that, I enjoy it.

...

this notion is a common misnomer. not to belabor the point, but you are conflating hard to ride (even if it is fun) with good technical singletrack.

the way i see it, if it isn't sustainable it isn't good. Even if it is fun

oh, ok, so it's only technical and fun if you like it?

please, enlighten me as to what is "technical"

[iamkickstand]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

[b_b]

If you have rode the MCCCT in Kalkaska and the surrouding countys there is a pretty good chance I had a hand in helping to building.

Yep rode that a bunch, but I've rode almost everything in the state lower and upper. My riding buddy has a cottage across from Blue Lake. He switched to mtb's also. Kalkaska trails are an xway now. Sad indeed.

[mr_opjones]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is *beep* about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

[WallEyed]

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is *beep* about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

That sums it up perfectly. If they continue to argue, then they just like arguing or have no idea what the *beep* they are talking about!

[iamkickstand]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

I actually agree with the OP's sentiments. I think removing what little tech we have, and making go arounds for that tech is stupid. I also think when a tree falls, it should stay, it's a naturally occuring obstacle. Beginners should toughen up.

Pot stirring, way too easy around here. And often quite entertaining during the work day

[mr_opjones]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

I actually agree with the OP's sentiments. I think removing what little tech we have, and making go arounds for that tech is stupid. I also think when a tree falls, it should stay, it's a naturally occuring obstacle. Beginners should toughen up.

Pot stirring, way too easy around here. And often quite entertaining during the work day

[iamkickstand]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

I actually agree with the OP's sentiments. I think removing what little tech we have, and making go arounds for that tech is stupid. I also think when a tree falls, it should stay, it's a naturally occuring obstacle. Beginners should toughen up.

Pot stirring, way too easy around here. And often quite entertaining during the work day

you can do better than that......

[xcrdr]

This is an entertaining thread. Folks here are crying the blues because they have to share trails with less skilled riders. This is nothing compared to what happened to the ORV trails in MI. The trails were originally single-track motorcycle trails, but then quads got popular (because any unskilled person who can squeeze their thumb can ride one) and soon enough everything was made wide enough for a small car to fit down (because those unskilled quad riders need a good margin of error you know). One of the reasons I got out of dirt bikes.

Actually those trails were widened for handicap access, which, yes, would be on quads or mini buggies. Wolverine and some trails around Mio are still some decent singletrack but the rest you can drive a bus through.

[mr_opjones]

This is hard for him to realize

your post lack substance, kinda like kate upton lacks hips and butt..

Oh, and what is it that I am failing to realize? That michigan has the opportunity for tech, but the majority don't want tech cause it's too hard?

Non sustainable trails do not equal technical trails, they equal poorly designed trails. Sustainable trails are designed differently depending on terrain and soil type. MMBA helps promote the building of sustainable trails. Land owners prefer sustainable trails over high maintenance poorly designed eroding trails. Technical features have a bypass per request of land owner to allow beginners to use their trail. MI trails have technical features in the trail when they are presented to the designer of that trail. Fast Flowy Fun trails see more traffic/people/money than tight technical trails.

It is rather amusing that you’re going off on this technical feature tangent, when the OP TC is about his technical features that are in his trail getting removed by some yahoo. The trails have technical features in them, given the flat sandy terrain of Lower Michigan there just isn’t that much technical riding to be had. But there is fast flowy fun tight single track to ride, and you’ll be hard pressed to find that in other places.

I actually agree with the OP's sentiments. I think removing what little tech we have, and making go arounds for that tech is stupid. I also think when a tree falls, it should stay, it's a naturally occuring obstacle. Beginners should toughen up.

Pot stirring, way too easy around here. And often quite entertaining during the work day

you can do better than that......

Looks like you really put a lot of effort into it

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cool+starry+bra

[iamkickstand]

mayburry is so fun