[Closed] Giving way etiquette & lack of courtesy

Forget it mate she had a bell!!!

'Nuff said

rang her bell at us in an annoyed way.

How did she do that then 😆

I'd ring my bell and have a rant at anyone I thought was 'scoping new trails' as well, I'm afraid.

Couldn't you just 'ride round for a bit and see if you found any new bits'

[i]it the done thing to give way to riders that are climbing or vice versa.[/i]
Right of way with those going uphill. Unwritten rule, of course.

"I'd ring my bell and have a rant at anyone I thought was 'scoping new trails' as well, I'm afraid.

Couldn't you just 'ride round for a bit and see if you found any new bits"

Excuse me............ We were riding the trail in one direction and they in the other. As they were climbing we kindly got out of there way.

Judging by your comments, sadly it seems that they are not unique and there are other uncourteous idiots out there too.

we're all uncourteous idiots.

just because we're on bikes doesn't make us friends.

it was the phrase 'scoping new trails' I was mocking FM, not your giving way to other riders.

In reality, I'd have said thank you and 'having a good day?'.

As far as I'm concerned no-one has right of way, in any direction. Both should take equal care. If I'm flying down a trail I will attempt to get out of the way of climbers, if I'm climbing I'll attempt to get out of the way of descenders. If everyone did the same there's be no problems. If you choose to get out of my way and step right off the path etc I'll shout thanks, if you choose to stay in the way I'll ride around you as I see fit, or get off and chat.

//tannoy//

sense of humour to FieldMarshall in aisle 6, sense of humour to FieldMarshall in aisle 6

//tannoy//

i thought the unwritten rule was that the rider with the biggest ego had right of way

I'd ring my bell and have a rant at anyone I thought was 'scoping new trails' as well, I'm afraid.

Couldn't you just 'ride round for a bit and see if you found any new bits'

how can you tell the difference ?

Swinley's not waymarked at all, so it's pretty much fair game to ride anything in either direction - for instance I first found the Labyrinth by riding up it (fortunately mid week so nobody else around). For that reason I'll tend to make room/slow down for anyone coming the other way, up or down

"how can you tell the difference"

it's the rolled up MBUK in the back pocket of a pair of jeans being worn with the belt loops at knee level that's the decider, simon.

In the absence of that I'll assume everyone's just out for a ride looking for a bit they haven't ridden before.

what's all this 'give way to those climbing' about?

surely climbing is just getting to the top of the next downhill section, and then have fun blasting down. Getting stopped in the middle of a flowing DH section due to climbing riders 'all over the trail' would annoy me more than having to stop climbing for a minute to allow descending riders to pass uninterupted.

Swinley is funny like that sometimes, I've had/seen more inconsiderate cyclist "incidents" there than anywhere else, I think partly as it's very popular when everywhere else is knee deep in water and mud, and partly, as you suggest; the trails are un-directed. I've seen cyclists coming too fast out of built sections nearly mowing down a runner, had the same "You're going the wrong way, mate" on a section of un-marked trail. Had to ride through bracken around a group of blokes fixing a bike standing in the middle of the trail, they watched me coming along, made no move, watched as I went around them, made no move...It's frustrating, but hey, just let it try not to spoil your day.

I am with Andy - I give way climbing, its an excuse for a rest and a heckle... 😀 and heading DH I wanna keep going...

surely downhilling is just getting to the bottom of the next section of trail, and then have fun riding along, up and down. Getting stopped in the middle of a tricky uphill section due to descending riders 'hooning all over the trail' would annoy me more than having to stop descending for a minute, or even just slow down a bit and move out the way to allow climbing riders to pass uninterupted without having to stop, dab, and try to get going again.

or the rider with the biggest ego has right of way

Jo you just need to be scoping a bit more to get right of way...

Ok, fair point.

Is that why I stop so much? 😆

[i]or the rider with the biggest ego has right of way[/i]

How do you tell? The one that shouts, "Get out of the way, d'you know who I am?"

😀

Scoping is so over. I'd be, like, peeping the fresh trailage out instead. Well, really i'd prolly just shred it straight up, but i appreciate not everyone is as hesh as me.

"[i]or the rider with the biggest ego has right of way
How do you tell? The one that shouts, "Get out of the way, d'you know who I am?"[/i]"

it's "Get out of the way, d'you know who I wannabe?" usually

😉

nope, its the one in the most matching team kit 😉

"or the rider with the biggest ego has right of way"

I thought it was the rider with the largest beer gut as their brakes are likely to be less effective.

enjoyed the ego bit think that is spot on

i find that giving the appearance of being totally out of control albeit at slow speed along with gear that is not fashionable seems to result in people giving way out of caution and perhaps sympathy

quite often ride the flat track/road around Ladybower as its a good no brain workout - now that is a track wide enough for trucks (and buses) and is partly a real road - i can never understand why a significant number of people (not just kids) seem to think it reasonable to maintain a riding line on the right hand (wrong) side of the road - can't all be continentals

"quite often ride the flat track/road around Ladybower as its a good no brain workout - now that is a track wide enough for trucks (and buses) and is partly a real road - i can never understand why a significant number of people (not just kids) seem to think it reasonable to maintain a riding line on the right hand (wrong) side of the road -"

that is an interesting stretch on a busy sunday. Parents with young kids walking along the road in a line side to side when there is a footpath along the edge. They even look offended when you ask them to move to one side.

that is an interesting stretch on a busy sunday. Parents with young kids walking along the road in a line side to side when there is a footpath along the edge. They even look offended when you ask them to move to one side

generally avoid weekends except by going as its getting dark and it is quieter - yes walking to the car in the drive and walking round a shopping mall doesn't teach any road sense and many of the parents are that generation as well

like your trails slightly used and smelling of dead-mans wee?

[img] [/img]

get Scoping, there's some bargains to be had

AndyP - Member

Right of way with those going uphill. Unwritten rule, of course.

Unwritten because it doesn't exist.

Why would you perpetuate such stupidity? Obviously it depends on the trail but it makes absolutely no sense for people who are moving at great speed to make way for those who are virtually stationairy. Try cycling up Fortbill DH and see how many people give way to you.

[i]Try cycling up Fortbill DH and see how many people give way to you. [/i]

Point well missed. Fort William DH has a slight clue in the name. Same as somewhere like Spooky Woods, Glentress, it's designed to be ridden one way and anyone trying to ride up it rightfully deserves abuse.
On a normal bridleway in the woods, a trail which can be ridden both ways, the [b]general[/b] rule is that the descending rider gives way to the ascending one since it's much harder to get going again on a climb than a descent. It's the same in the Highway Code, a person driving downhill should give way to a person driving uphill.

Obviously when riding other factors come into play - if one of the riders is walking/pushing then they should give way to the person riding, regardless of direction.

I think it's great fun playing trail chicken, why would anyone change that? No, seriously!

But looking at it from a boring perspective, it makes more sense for the uphiller to give way, as in almost all situations, it is the most vulnerable and least manouverable that gets the right of way. Supertankers get right of way over anything - they cant stop, sailing boats get right of way over power boats (they can't change direction too easily). The person going down has less ability to change direction/stop, more to lose if there's a crash due to changing lines etc. The uphiller generally just has to dab and continue, and don't give me the "its too hard to get going again" moan - tittle tattle.

Or the person struggling going up has less ability to change direction and will find it harder to get going again once stopped. The downhiller generally just has to slow down a bit, change line and continue, with a little common sense both riders can continue with minimal disruption.

but it's nice to see that my "ego" point has been so nicely proved
😉

this came up when I googled bicycle scope.

utterly irrelevant, utterly fabulous;

[img] [/img]

wtd: yellow fork, must have long steerer.

Or the person struggling going up has less ability to change direction and will find it harder to get going again once stopped.

Going up its no harder to change direction, give over, and there's no need to stop!

The downhiller generally just has to slow down a bit, change line and continue, with a little common sense both riders can continue with minimal disruption.

but it's nice to see that my "ego" point has been so nicely proved
[;-)]

Well that was what I describe as trail chicken, both keep going and try to work round the situation - its the common sense situation.

Ego? Me? **** off! 😆

"[i]Going up its no harder to change direction, give over, and there's no need to stop![/i]"

you must ride easy climbs then

🙂

you must ride easy climbs then

[:-)]

Caught out. IGMC. But in all honesty I dont mind getting off on climbs a) for a break and b) because I know I'd hate someone to screw up my fun descent. Only masochists like climbs.

surely it's just a basic safety thing? If you're going down, you shouldn't just barrel into people at high speed.

and you obviously have less ability to change direction, because you are going slower, if you turn your bars to the left a teeny bit, you'll be on the other side of the trail in a couple of seconds, whereas if the downhilling rider does the same, they'll get to the other side in a fraction of a second, on account of going faster.

Joe

crazy-legs - Member
Point well missed. Fort William DH has a slight clue in the name. Same as somewhere like Spooky Woods, Glentress, it's designed to be ridden one way and anyone trying to ride up it rightfully deserves abuse.

Do you see what I did there?

JoB - Member
person struggling going up has less ability to change direction and will find it harder to get going again once stopped. The downhiller generally just has to slow down a bit, change line and continue, with a little common sense both riders can continue with minimal disruption.

If the person climbing has to give way, they suffer a mild interuption, they can simply resume their climb. If the person descending has to give way to the climber they may have to get off line, possibly crash and suffer a serious injury.

joemarshall - Member
surely it's just a basic safety thing? If you're going down, you shouldn't just barrel into people at high speed.

You may not see or hear them.

joemarshall
and you obviously have less ability to change direction, because you are going slower, if you turn your bars to the left a teeny bit, you'll be on the other side of the trail in a couple of seconds, whereas if the downhilling rider does the same, they'll get to the other side in a fraction of a second, on account of going faster.

Where are all the guys who can "unclip in a fraction of second"? Not all trails have an alternative line which can accomodate someone descending at speed, and someone climbing at the same time.A small input into the bars is amplified at speed and can result in crash, going off line and clipping a tree, root rock stump etc can result in crash. The person climbing is essentially a stationairy object blocking the trail. Common sense alone should tell the climber to clear the trail if at all possible.

joe - I disagree, I reckon its far easier to get out of the way when climbing, when descending you generally have picked a line and paced yourself for that line, a change of line would take a panic and out-of-control situation. Now some may say you shouldnt be going that fast on a dual direction trail, I say "if you're not willing to accept others may be hooning along you shouldnt be using a dual direction trail". Swings and roundabouts, personal opinion. Means nothing, so we should all just get out and ride and take equal care to move aside whether you be climbing or descending,

"[i]If the person descending has to give way to the climber they may have to get off line, possibly crash and suffer a serious injury.[/i]"

you're right, you've made me change my mind, all people going downhill are out of control idiots, a danger to themselves and others and should be given way to at all times

JoB -
you're right, you've made me change my mind, all people going downhill are out of control idiots, a danger to themselves and others and should be given way to at all times

Works for me.

which bit?

[i]Which bit?[/i]

Not the sarcasm bit obviously... 😉

From what I remember there arn't too many technical climbs at Swinley. 😀
Annoying steeper than-you-think ego deflating efforts usually failed (regularly) due to poor gear choice and an even smaller ego. 🙂

note to self; GNARGNAR is dangerously out of control, get out of his way. Unless, climbing, then clearly the vitriol after watching him fire off into the undergrowth, would be worth it.

In the US its quite simple - the climber has right of way. Its posted at the trailhead & everyone excepts it. It certainly makes sense to me as well. If your descending then it's easier to stop & easier to start, not so easy going uphill. Dont kid yourself its the other way round, just ask gravity if your not sure..

A bit of common sense & a little less willy waving is required I think 😉

Oops meant accept - my spelling gone to dog do-do out here!

It all seems to have been talked to death, but here's my two penneth. The main reason (95%) I do the climbs is to enjoy the downhills. Unless it's a particular section of climb I really enjoy to clear with no dabs, I wouldn't have a problem stopping and moving for somebody hammering downhill having the time of his/her life. And even if I was enjoying the climb and the track was narrow, I'd gladly stop and move, I hope others would do the same for me.

So, ups give way to the downs!

gravelrash/everyone else,

The main reason a rider going fast downhill should yield is they are a danger to the other trail user (be it cyclist going up, walker, horse, dog, whatever..) due to their speed. Simple as that.

If you are going downhill fast and you find someone in your path you should NOT continue on at that pace expecting them to get out of your way, you put yourself and other trail users at risk. So if your slowing down a bit to make sure the other trail user isnt at risk, then why not slow down a bit more and go round the person coming up. If the other user moves out the way then fine then go ahead, consider it a kind gesture of the other rider not wanting to spoil your fun, dont consider it their obligation!

Remember kids, you can have fun, but play safe ;0)

[obviously this does not apply to waymarked trail... as long as your going the right way!]

JoB - Member

it's "Get out of the way, d'you know who I wannabe?" usually

"Get out of the way, d'you know who I draw?"... surely?

"same in the Highway Code, a person driving downhill should give way to a person driving uphill"

That's to prevent low powered vehicles stopping and getting stuck going up - you can't push a car/truck uphill. It doesn't practically apply to cycling/horses since you can walk your bike/horse up.
I vote for downhill cyclist has priority, since stopping is more of a hazard.

i guess it all boils down to the OP of "courtesy"

I havn't read all the posts after the ricockulous suggestion that someone going down should stop at speed and give way to the poor soul grinding up. The poor soul grinding up should remind themselves why they are grinding up in the first place.

why, exactly, are they grinding up in the first place?

what if the person climbing sees it as a challenge, and enjoys it even, to make it to the top in one go as much as the person descending sees the going down as something to be enjoyed and cleaned with speed and grace?

either can be pissed when their task is ruined by an idiot coming the other way

[i] RepacK - Member

In the US its quite simple - the climber has right of way. Its posted at the trailhead & everyone excepts it. It certainly makes sense to me as well. If your descending then it's easier to stop & easier to start, not so easy going uphill. Dont kid yourself its the other way round, just ask gravity if your not sure..

A bit of common sense & a little less willy waving is required I think [:wink:] [/i]

I think this guy makes absolute sense. Is this original repackrider?

I can understand, although not really relate to the concept that the pleasure of a good climb is the same as the enjoyment of a descent, but aside from that, when it comes to "safety" surely it is easier and safer for the person not carrying speed to put aside their personal challenge when traveling at 1mph, rather than the individual traveleling at say 20-30mph? An inconsiderate asshole coming either direction is no fun, usually there is a compromise dictated by the trail itself, ie it's pretty ****ing obvious.

And as regards Repacks quote "If your descending then it's easier to stop & easier to start, not so easy going uphill.", that is absolute bollox. Even 30 years ago.

I can agree with this bit though "A bit of common sense & a little less willy waving is required I think [:wink:]"

[i]"If your descending then it's easier to stop"[/i]

Pootle along do we?

Its not always simple to start again on some downs either, though thats the sort of stuff is unrideable uphill anyway

Wow, seems to be a few downhill rageboys here who learned their personal skills shooting people in the back on x-box.

Basic fact of life - if you are operating something that has the capacity to cause injury, then you should be doing so in such a way that you can either stop it or change line to avoid causing injury. You may not like it, but you could end up a very very poor rageboy if you turn some one else into a paraplegic.

Public tracks have the public on them, expect to find them there. Speed is not a fundamental right.

Good manners work wonders in both directions.

Save race speeds for designated race tracks.

Well said epic.

It is far easier to restart downhill. You don't get baulked and have to walk the rest of the descent do you?

Its simple. If someone is rude to you, hit them. It isnt a secret society where all mountain bikers are vetted on entry. There are no stringent initiation rites where we are all 'brothers' FFS. Its a hobby. Someones rude etc- hit them.

Even on waymarked trails, it possible someone could be walking up the other way since walkers have right of way anywhere they like on FC land, where most waymarked trails are built - walker have right of way. Anyone unable to come to a controlled stop on a descent shouldn't be riding there.

Obviously when riding other factors come into play - if one of the riders is walking/pushing then they should give way to the person riding, regardless of direction.

Devil's advocate: if they're pushing, they're a walker and so have right of way 😉

If I'm climbing a trail, and someone approaches from the other direction nearly always at a much higher speed, am I just being obstinate by holding my ground and assuming I have right of way (and the other rider is aware of and adheres to this point of ettiquete), thus putting myself and the other rider who will have more difficulty stopping and making way in danger? It's not in my mind the point that both riders should be able to control their bike, I agree with that, I just don't accept that increasing the risk of an accident in this scenario to uphold a debateable point of principle is appropriate.

I also don't think my drunken rudeness that came through in my posts last night is appropriate either, sorry folks 🙁

By god you lot need to wake up and stop talking nonsense. There is no right of way up or down. Even on a waymarked trail you can't afford to be riding like you stole it, what if someone has had an off and you come flying round a corner and can't stop.

It doesn't matter what way the trail goes, you don't have the right to be a reckless fool. And it's bloody hard to recklessly endanger others riding uphill. We have no right to expect others to get out of the way, but others do have the right to expect not to be put at risk by our riding.

Epic said it all really.

"it's bloody hard to recklessly endanger others riding uphill. "

It's quite easy to endanger yourself and others travelling at speed say around a corner or in a situation where they are being [b]needlessly[/b] forced to scrub off a lot of speed quickly , simply because an individual decides that although they could easily and safely pull over to the side in a fraction of the time with a fraction of risk, a point must be made. Just like the idiots I occasionally encounter at trail centres who think the best place to fix a puncture is in the middle of it, preferably just after the jump/drop that caused it, not off to the side. In a situation where someone has had an off and is lying on the trail incapacitated, the risk of braking hard and the potential consequence of that cannot be avoided. It can in the first scenario. Of course it could also in the second scenario simply by going downhill nice and slowly. Each to their own.

All this thread does is highlight why there are arguments on the trail. No one side is correct, it depends on your personal view. I suggest, as I've said from the start, you just take care of yourself and others and be willing to move if you need to. If you stop to fix a puncture, do so at the side. If you're hooning down a trail and cant see in time to stop, assume you may have to bail into a hedge to not hurt someone else simply because hitting them is going to hurt you just as much, if not more.

You can still ride it like you stole it, I think it's fairly safe to say that most riders DO ride like this when in the flow - thats what makes biking fun, otherwise it's just a mode of transport. For all those who think stopping on a downhill is easier than stopping and starting on an uphill, you dont ride downhill fast enough!

For all those who think slowing on a downhill is harder than stopping and starting on an uphill, you don't ride tricky enough climbs!

🙂

Erm, in reality don't both riders usually just move to the side a little bit so they can pass?

But if I'm heading downhill and come round a corner to see a rider or walker coming up, and it's possibly to late to stop, I don't want him or her to try to move - as they might jump the same way that I've decided to steer.

Simple way to solve it (since the downhill doooods on here think its ok to fly around a corner or whatever at a speed they cant safely stop)...

If your coming down a hill full tilt and you pile into someone as neither of you budged.... and someone (you/them) is injured.... who would win the court case? the rider doing 30mph and not in control of his bike (which your not if you cant stop in time or avoid the other person) or the person who is walking/riding up the trail? pretty simple really, its about safety and being in control.

All this sh*te about it being dangerous to stop going downhill, are you serious???

the idiots I occasionally encounter at trail centres who think the best place to fix a puncture is in the middle of it, preferably just after the jump/drop that caused it, not off to the side

Trail centres are a bit different, but still you expect this sort of thing so you approach with some sense. And as an earlier poster pointed out, waymarked trails are not 'bike only' but suggested bike only so walkers etc. are still allowed on them.

"All this sh*te about it being dangerous to stop going downhill, are you serious???"

Well I think it is [b]more[/b] difficult to stop safely at speed, than when riding at walking pace. That's the point I am trying to make. I personally have always found it sensible and good manners to pull aside when climbing and someone else is enjoying a descent. It's never bothered me at all to do so, and seems like good sense.

And let's not construct a big old straw man with the suggestion that the majority of mtbers that gain their enjoyment going fast down or along a trail rather than slowly "cleaning a climb" or somesuch are either exceptional to the rule "downhill doooods" or selfish riders either. If they were a minority, there would be a much bigger market for hardtails with 80mm travel forks for a start. And if no mountainbiker felt such a sense of self righteous on a trail as to assume right of way let alone put others at risk to make a tenuous point for their own personal satisfaction, then this would never have been an issue at all. I can't imagine it is really at all to be honest, most people have more common sense than that.

at the top of every trail I tend to call out "excuse me please" I then proceed down the trail and upon noticing other trail users I'll exclaim the following "MY BRAKES!! MY BRAKES!!!", I find this often assists people in determining right of way, also if I'm climbing I'm often looking out for any opportunity to stop and put my lungs back in be it a snake/twig, a colourful "what was that bird" or "technical assessment". Allowing other trail riders right of way offers an excellent resting opportunity and if you're quick you can even "snatch a go" on their water bottle! now, who's up for a few rounds of CoD on hardcore mode?

Mr Nutt, I have to admit that when gravity pulls as it tends to do, I tend to take out my huge whab, and smite grimicing lycra types, causing them to construct impractical "rules" and "regulations".

[img] [/img]

Shame I can't find an example of precious lycra smiting...

Well I think it is more difficult to stop safely at speed, than when riding at walking pace. That's the point I am trying to make.

Yes of course its more difficult to stop if your going faster (that applies for going along the flat too) but that has nothing to do with who should give way. If you find it difficult to slow down enough when you come across someone in your way then your going too fast simple as that. Think of it like a car on a windy singletrack road, you wouldnt do 60 round a blind bend would you if you didnt know what was there?

I personally have always found it sensible and good manners to pull aside when climbing and someone else is enjoying a descent. It's never bothered me at all to do so,

Im like this too, i love downhills, hell ive even got a monsterous 47 lb DH bike that go's like a rocket when i dare let the brakes off. But when im going downhill i NEVER ASSUME a person coming up should move first, because if they dont and i plow on regardless then its going to be pretty messy for both sides. If your in control its simple enough to slow down a bit and go round them. And for people who say they cant change line, or there is no other line, or cant slow down... where the hell do you expect the other person to move to then to allow you to fly past? if there is enough room for the person coming up to move, there is enough room for the person going down to go round.

and seems like good sense.

youve got to realise (as shown by this thread) that one persons sense is not anothers, therefore you CANNOT assume the person going down has right of way, if you do you are putting others at risk, so just slow down.

We all know downhills are great fun, and that having a run 'spoilt' by having to slow at some point sucks, but that is no reason to expect others to get out your way when they are out enjoying the countryside too.

if no mountainbiker felt such a sense of self righteous on a trail as to assume right of way let alone put others at risk

If your both entitled to be on the trail, and they are going 4mph and you are doing 25mph (even under control), who is putting who at risk? ask yourself what a court would decide.

Well said Stato.

I will often pull over if I am going uphill - but not always. If its a climb thats a challenge to clean and I am forced to halt I will be walking the rest of the way to the top.

STATO,

The last thing I would do going up or down is assume that someone coming either way should adhere to a code as such. I've always assumed common sense when riding either way, and when coming down I do slow down if someone decides to stand in the middle of the trail. I don't think the idea of a common code is practicable at all though, one reason being that a hell of a lot of bikers don't actually read internet forums and may be unaware of ettiquette created by it's inhabitants.

Personally, If I were concerned what an insurance court may conclude from my regular activities, and were to modify my actions to appease it, I think I would prefer suicide to life.

Of course though I like most people would like my fellow monkeys to show a degree of empathy for others in their actions. Some empathy for me and my friends and family etc for a start.But when I hear self righteous idiots proclaiming some unwritten, impractable and self created law that has no semblence of reality in my experience I will question it.

I do feel that some people are missing the point though. It's not really about gnarly downhillduuuuudes v's "real" mtbers who love to "clean a climb" etc...I'd say it's about people who are willing to accept common sense and reality, v's those that seem to have chosen for the sake of argument an unrealistic and untenable position. I have no time for a selfish bellend crashing into me anymore than I have for a pious cock holding his/her ground in the centre of a trail simply to make a point. I have more sympathy for someone forced into an accident than I do for a person who feels obliged to cause it, and that is what the uphill groundholder steadfast crew are suggesting..

"clean a climb" is quite frankly, a very silly phrase. I'm surprised that TJ even used it!

gnarly!

"[i]I don't think the idea of a common code is practicable at all though, one reason being that a hell of a lot of bikers don't actually read internet forums and may be unaware of ettiquette created by it's inhabitants.[/i]"

well i've been aware of the common etiquette of "Climber Has Right Of Way" long before the internet was invented, and as RepacK mentions above "In the US its quite simple - the climber has right of way. Its posted at the trailhead & everyone excepts it."

"[i]But when I hear self righteous idiots proclaiming some unwritten, impractable and self created law that has no semblence of reality in my experience I will question it.[/i]"

Which side of the argument are you talking about here?
Those in the "Descender Has Right" camp are proclaiming some unwritten, impractable and self created law too

"[i]I have more sympathy for someone forced into an accident than I do for a person who feels obliged to cause it, and that is what the uphill groundholder steadfast crew are suggesting..[/i]"

they are?
no more so than your you are sticking to your side of the argument

JoB, I don't really have a side of argument. I think its stupid to assume that anyone has ingested an unwritten code (or in the case of the trails that repack rider rides a written code. But I don't live in the US, thankfully) before getting on a bike and riding a trail. I think anybody that assumes they have is stupid. I think anyone that causes an accident by trying to make a point going up or down a trail is a fool. I think an accident is more likely to occur by assuming I have right of way climbing a trail than by not assuming I have right of way, and taking the selfless option and stepping aside, just in case.

It would appear that you seem to be sticking to a side of "the argument ". I have no axe to grind, it just seems really , really stupid to force someone travelling faster to slow down when its a hell of a lot simpler to just have good manners and let them enjoy riding their bike. It's much more risk prone to stop a bike at speed than at walking pace, isn't it? Does that concern you?

Mr Nutt. Clean a climb - as in ride it without a dab. How else do you describe it? Its a challenge that gets me up many a climb.

Coffeeking you just put it straight. If I'm climbing (or more probably pushing) I try to be aware of riders coming down fast. I've also had to stop on a great descent for a group of five abreast who were oblivious, and felt mild resentment. Surely manners still exist? And then there's dogs; which I don't have a problem with except they can be like squirrels are when you're driving'