Can the DH sections be?
The reason I ask is I've got a potential venue would mean using lots of sections of DH courses.
Bike Forum
[closed]
XC racing. How technical?
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Pretty techie up here- more chutes and natural than jumps, air etc.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ruts, rock gardens, drops and hellish root sections? And some big kickers and optional gaps?
Posted 1 year ago # -
i think xc is lacking a technical course, make it RADXC, nichetastic
Posted 1 year ago # -
Kickers and gaps no.
Gotta be rideable on a short travel bike by non dh riders.
Posted 1 year ago # -
There are chicken runs on everything I'd plan on using...
Posted 1 year ago # -
its all mtb!
Posted 1 year ago # -
I built a perfectly rideable section in my local course and there was loads of people complaining that it was too difficult...
I say go for it!!! Its supposed to be technical otherwise we would all be riding on the road
Posted 1 year ago # -
it depends whose rules you are operating under:
our main courses are reasonably technical, we operate under BC rules therefore everything has to be "rideable"
anything that is risky (but rideable)needs appropriate signage
other than that it seems to be pretty open.
this includes drops, table tops, doubles, rock gardens (smallish), chutes (easy), big berms
however:
we avoid anything designated "black"we don't build anything (liability issues)
we are mindful that the majority of riders need to get over it/ round it otherwise the flow of the race is spoiled by walkers
we ensure that we have appropriate first aid cover that can get a rider off any part of the course
in race 1 series 1, 3 racers were hospitalised, first aid seems to get busy when the less mtb orientated fast riders turns up
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ruts, rock gardens, drops and hellish root sections? And some big kickers and optional gaps?
I ride dh to a good standard, and plan on doing some xc racing for the first time this year. Now i think im pretty decent at decending on a little bike with a saddle up my arse (takes some getting used to!) but i would be apprehensive about doing any big kickers or any drops/gaps that wernt neutral on an 100mm xc hardtail.
Go for technical rocks, roots, etc but dont try and make it a slopestyle course.Posted 1 year ago # -
try it on a 80mm HT with flat bars and a seat up your arse, plus zero visability 'cos you are following someone as fast as is possible
but doesn't mean that its rideable for all
Posted 1 year ago # -
...you thinking about Chipshop then Jambo? I was there the other day thinking what a giggle some of it would be on an xc bike! The south west xc series is already going to Abbeyford so i suppose that could be an interesting test of fun lines/gaps/chicken runs versus twitchty xc riders.
The other thing to think about if you put a race on rather than razzing round on a shorter travel bike would be 'rider density' (ie how many racers per km of lap) and overtaking opportunities: an xc course on trails that are technical and fun will nevertheless become boring if you get held up behind slower riders for too long in the twisty bits and can only overtake on the fire roads/climbs. I reckon if you don't go for too many entrants, chipsop could have a pretty funny course in it though.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have wondered about having technical sections and chicken runs but make the chicken runs take 20 seconds or so - so that skilled riders get an advantage. You would need to marshall each section to stop people running down the technical bits - and have some penalty if they did. This would give advantage to the skilled riders but allow less skilled riders to compete still.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Julian - yep. I ride it quite a bit on my five. It's ace and only takes 10 mins to spin back up the fireroad and do it again. You can really pack the runs in. Would turn some of the flatter sections into climbs and use plenty of fireroad to spread people out. Just an idea at the moment but could be a laugh.
Posted 1 year ago # -
This XC race sounds great, but TJ is right try and make the chcken runs so there is a time penalty for taking them, 20 secs if feirce though, but a bit longer would be nice.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Make it as technical as you like, as long as you do a proper risk assessment and mark stuff accordingly. The BC race organisers guidelines very useful, and I am happy to pass you copies of RAs we have done for tehcy XC courses. Use the terrain you have, and make sure you let people know it's techy. It's all about people being aware of the potential hazard, either because it's marked or extremely obvious. If they can't ride it they will get off, so leave a good clamber line. No shame in getting off and walking.
Common sense prevails, don't put a narrow steep windy descent in the first 200 metres or there will be trouble. As Brownbacks says, don't put silly big drops or road jumps in.
IME the worst crashes I have seen have NOT been on technical descents but on fast bermy jumpy smooth sections where folk get a rush to the head and try to fly.
The worst incidents at races I have organised have been to DHers riding XC races on their hardtails and forgetting to slow down !
I fight the good fight for proper technical courses, sure you can put a course through a field with a few corners on it and you get 5000 entries - but thats not really mountainbiking is it ? It's a road race in a park.
I say go for it...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sorry TJ, but laughing at "marshall each section to stop people running down them" I'm afraid that is totally unrealistic and a bit dangerous. Each rider needs to make their own well informed choice when it comes to risk. If they decide it's safer to get off thats fine.
Well meant I know, but I would never ask a marshall to do that, or take that choice away from a rider.
Marshalls are for SAFETY.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Not sure about that myself.
Certainly would be a niché race, but I'm not sure how that would work with guys racing bumper to bumper. Even on the technical'ish bits in classic xc you can pass another rider by going agricultural so I think too many lines would cause bottlenecks. See in general te sort of trail your talking about would be riden in file and not by forty guys all trying to get in front.
So yes you'll have your fans, but myself I prefer something you can pedal your lungs out on with overtaking opportunities at all times.
Not saying you will, but you might loose the young riders, XC purists and the elderly like me.
Edit; though I suppose that's what boundaries are for
Posted 1 year ago # -
The only problem I see with using nice techy sections, is that if the entry to it is blind, there doesnt seem to be a system in place other than some frantic arm waving to slow riders down if there is someone down in the section already.. In motorsport it would be a yellow flag, its not just to say no overtaking its real meaning is proceed with caution, the no overtaking rule is an obvious add on to proceed with caution..
The thing that really seperates the men form the boys in my opinion is real techy climbs, though its possible to claw a little time on nice singletrack and stuff, its marginal. Maybe you want to run the race up some of the chutes!!
Posted 1 year ago # -
Oh yes, and I forgot to add, make sure the course is marked out the day before, even for a small local race, so folk can practice.
The terrain dictates the technicalness anyway, you don't get techy descents without a big old hoary climb first which separates the riders quite nicely thanks. You only get big packs in the flatlands (and at World Cups where you have the 180 fastest guys in the world) where there is not so much to separate riders and they can draft off each other, and it doesn't really matter unless you put a tiny log-jump in somewhere.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Tinsy you can't have a no overtaking rule in an XC race surely, even on isolated sections.
IME when a rider can't ride past because a rider in front is tired or struggling with the terrain they often shoulder the bike and run past.Posted 1 year ago # -
was a downhiller in a previous life - i say not technical enough
remember busa at dunkeld anyone ? that set a few folk greeting cause they would boost up the fire road to be over taken by the guy who were quickish on the climbs but excelled at downhilling - we were sending them down parts of the new and old downhill tracks there.
I Remember bunnyhopping(anyone risk assessed that risk ? ) a few of the guys at the front of the sport field who had fallen on the downhills there (my first xc race) on a singlespeed 29er
Posted 1 year ago # -
trail_rat, busas at inners was wicked. That is how a xc race should look like
Posted 1 year ago # -
What is XC racing supposed to test?
Posted 1 year ago # -
the Brighton Big Dog course was pretty 'technical' but never went anywhere near an official DH run.
I think you have to consider tired people riding it in the pissing rain on muddy tyres.
The shots I've seen of the Wordl Cup XC course 'up north' make it seem fairly technical (albeit that mbuk tilted allthe photos to make it look steeper).
Posted 1 year ago # -
I thought the BUSAs at Dunkeld were awful! The DH course was fine, it was the sh1t climb and the rest of the course that was terrible! I really hate the idea that 'long boring climb/big down/repeat' is acceptable for an XC race, sadly it seems to be the case all too often in Scotland. But that's an altogether different argument!
Hels I don't know why you think marshalling sections is amusing!? I would say it's essential, and think TJs right, you need to try (obviously it's not always going to be possible) to make people ride the techy stuff and walk the chicken run, not vice versa!
I say go for it, as long as sections are appropriately signed and it's realistic that people will be able to ride it at race pace without it totally screwing up the race then go nuts!
Posted 1 year ago # -
having technical sections and chicken runs but make the chicken runs take 20 seconds or so
this type of course design is encouraged but difficult in practice adds a lot to course marking time- so that skilled riders get an advantage. You would need to marshall each section to stop people running down the technical bits - and have some penalty if they did.
marshals are for safety, commissaires for penalties, walking/ running is allowed in BC rules therefore penalties can't be applied
Marshalls are for SAFETY.
definitelyMake it as technical as you like, as long as you do a proper risk assessment and mark stuff accordingly. The BC race organisers guidelines very useful,
I agree, although you don't need to measure things to the metre etcThe only problem I see with using nice techy sections, is that if the entry to it is blind, there doesnt seem to be a system in place other than some frantic arm waving to slow riders down if there is someone down in the section already.. In motorsport it would be a yellow flag, its not just to say no overtaking its real meaning is proceed with caution, the no overtaking rule is an obvious add on to proceed with caution
under BC rules Marshalls all get a yellow flag which means proceed with caution to help manage the dificult sections where there may be fallers or a stopped rider would cause a problem, the "no-overtaking rule" is not required as the risks are different. This is also why the marshal is placed "up course" of the technical section to advise other riders rather than at the bottom to pick them up.
Posted 1 year ago # -
oldgit, I get your point, but I only mean no overtaking if there is already a rider down in the section, and I am assuming a really fast and technical or hazarous bit, not just toppled over in a bit of mud, hence it would be time to bring out the yellow at the entrance to that section, not the full course. Its there as a warning to proceed with caution and not just banzai into it and the stricken rider.
I am all for making XC tough and its nice for a good technical rider to be able to claw a little time back on the wippets. However in my limited experience most fast guys are good technically too.
under BC rules Marshalls all get a yellow flag which means proceed with caution to help manage the dificult sections where there may be fallers or a stopped rider would cause a problem, the "no-overtaking rule" is not required as the risks are different. This is also why the marshal is placed "up course" of the technical section to advise other riders rather than at the bottom to pick them up.
So that in place already?
I have only competed a lowly level, though apparently to BC rules(enough to stop me getting a Vet victory and giving me a 3rd in another overall cat I wasn't contesting in), I didnt see any marshals with flags.
Posted 1 year ago # -
i wasnt suggesting that it was great nick , just saying that the technical downhill caught out alot of the fast roadie boys.
now all we need are a series of technical climbs and it would be reasonable
drumlanrig is a good indication of an XC race course imho !
Posted 1 year ago # -
Agreed, Drumlanrig is good!
I remember the jump at the bottom of the downhill course at Dunkeld where someone had written 'huck it', everyone was avoiding it, I'm a total pansy on a bike, but even I rode it! It was about a foot drop, if that! That was a laugh!
Posted 1 year ago # -
aye that was where the 2 guys crashed into each other and i had t ojump over their bikes
they were gutted
Posted 1 year ago # -
Transvésubienne anyone
Posted 1 year ago # -
Transmaurienne FTW! I did it in 2003, not that technical at all though. (and the French were CRAP on it).
I really hate the idea that 'long boring climb/big down/repeat' is acceptable for an XC race, sadly it seems to be the case all too often in Scotland.
Not in my experience of SXCs.
Posted 1 year ago # -
NJee20 - of course I don't think marshalling sections is amusing you are twisting my words mate.
Just amused at the naivety of the idea of asking a marshall to tell a rider what decision to make at a section. It just isn't practical. "You, you look a bit mincy, ride down this easy bit" "You, the fat lad on a sub five, on you go down the rock steps" "ladies, off the bike please"
We always have plenty of marshalls on a course, especially at technical sections. They can shout encouragement but I don't expect them to give riders orders.
I don't know, I have ridden some races where I think the organisers think marshalls are there to point the way and stop folk cheating. They are there to protect the riders and summon help if needed.
Posted 1 year ago # -
al you should really register at the transvésubienne...
Posted 1 year ago # -
fyrish , laggan , fort william , glentress - thats 4 from 6 in 2008 were pretty much what nick says .... didnt bother me in slightest tbh .... was better than riding at thetford
Posted 1 year ago # -
Warn them in the briefing.
Warn them with signs prior to the section.
Warn them with signs at the start of the section.
Put a marshal there.
Risk assess it....and if you are still worried talk it through with BC if they are sending a race official or are providing your insurance.
We sent people down this without incident!
However, one guy fell off on a flat section of cobbles and broke his arm, another injured himself whilst still on the campsite and a third fell over whilst walking through the "chicken run".
Posted 1 year ago # -
Frysish - that was a great course, hope SXC bring it back one day, now that I am retired to the Fun cat and can take my time up the climbs !
Posted 1 year ago # -
I remember back in the day...ok not that long ago... the last cheddar challenge I think, there was a downhill section that was pretty rooty and rutted (about 300m of 1ft deep ruts with 8" roots in it. It was amazing fun, but all the hardcore XC guys really really struggled on it. Fortunately for me it was the only bit I could do faster than them, so while having been lapped by elite guys on the way up, I re-took them on the way down with a cheer, only to be re-lapped again later
!
Posted 1 year ago # -
Laggan techy...? You're kidding right. Rocky and bumpy YES techy not really not.
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
