[Closed] Bugging me for years

I don't see your point, what do you expect them to do gravitate?

Don't forget that mtbing on the screen always looks a lot less technical than it looks on the bike...

wasn't that course considered to be one of the most technical yet?

i think the video will not do justice to it's severity. you lose far more time crashing than you do taking a more measured approach to a technical section

How can you tell from just this video alone though. I have often seen video footage / photos of places where I have thought 'I could ride that, no probs', but when the reality kicks in, I have chickened it or its taken a couple of goes.

I don't see your point, what do you expect them to do gravitate?

Gravitate? Were you thinking levitate?

I'm expecting them to take better lines down what seems to be a fairly simple route?

Don't forget that mtbing on the screen always looks a lot less technical than it looks on the bike...

Thats very true, however there's plenty of footage of joe bloggs from up the street riding harder things than that, faster and more cleanly. Even some of the STW crew could manage that much better despite being mostly keyboard riders 😉

I'm not, before anyone calls it, suggesting IM any better, I'm just wondering if there are not far more capable riders out there who simply aren't found/trained - which is a shame. It seems the olympics is not a place in which the best is found in our sport, sure you or I might take a second look, but if I'm not mistaken these guys get to check the course out before, and even if not I'd expect them to be top of their game and attack it full on. Looking at that picture they clearly take the smoothest route down the left hand gully and then pootle down it braking, leaving no momentum for the next hill.

I'd take the same line as them if I was on an XC race bike.

Bit blurry to judge the run-out on that drop in the middle properly, but looks like it could be messy.

Watching womens sports is really for friends, family and, er, admirers of the female form. This is particularly true for sports that don't have a deep talent pool of participation like MTBing. The fit bloke at your local club would stomp all over the women's olympic MTB field.

Ooh, I dunno; that looks quite tricky, actually, speshly on a hardtail or short-travel full susser. And I bet it's steeper than that camera angle makes it look.

Those ladies would still kick most of our arses round that course, I'm sure. They are top-level pro athletes. I smoke and drink, and stay up late.

The fit bloke at your local club would stomp all over the women's olympic MTB field.

Bollocks. Unless he was a top-level pro MTB racer.

Taking into account the camera's ability to make most terrain look pretty easy they seem to be making pretty good progress to me.
You could argue that better technique would improve their times, but races aren't won on the technical sections (unless they're doing trials or dh). Plus pushing your skills will result in crashes and injuries and they may well have concluded that the extra risk doesn't warrant the reward.
Or they could just be pussys 🙂

The fit bloke at your local club would stomp all over the women's olympic MTB field.

Garry_Lager - stop trolling 😉 You know that's not true...

Even allowing for the 'flattening' of tv it looks fairly techinical to me and definitely not worth the risk of a crash or a mechanical for the sake of maybe a second.

IMO, which may be controversial, that really isnt steep or technical (you can tell as they're not even back over their saddle very far), the centre of that run is clearly the fastest route - nothing on it is beyond a hardtail and there's no need for more than light brake scrubbage. But I'm nto just talking about this particular bit, it was just the only clip I found on youboob, I'm thinking about the last olympics too where the course was virtually flat and the worst bit in it was a small rock garden which all the competitors approached so slowly that half fell off.

I think these races could be won on technical sections - they clearly have the fitness behind them, theres no question there, but if just one of them had pushed out and rolled the centre line at pace they'd have opened up a good few seconds on each item. I'm particularly bad uphill, im not that fit, but I do gain ground on people on downs (despite not being a flying jumping DH type of person) just because people seem to pick really bad lines and not flow. Since I'm not great, there are bound to be others in the MTB community that are ten times better and really could show these guys how to open up a much bigger lead - this is an area where our country should be streets ahead, and the technical side should be a major part of the race.

Good Lord...

We'll be seeing you in 2012, then?

🙄

time made up on a descent, at the risk of crashing or having a mechanical, will be peanuts when your half a minute or a miunte ahead on a climb surely?
if you want to win XC, u need to be fit, skill makes up no more than 10% of overall speed IMO.
its why mincer roadies are always winning races, when rad gnarr doods like us are at the back, even though we are pulling phat whips?
(and also why Abi Greenway races for charge, but cant mend a puncture, grrrrr)

so, here we have athletes who are the pick of their countries respective xc communities who've trained and raced for years to reach the olympics.

and yet their respective coaches, governing bodies and themselves have not worked out that they might be able to gain a bit of an edge on technical bits and made sure they do a bit of practice on the gnarly bits?

coffeeking should become the gb Cycling xc coach as of now, imo.

Could you do that when your heart rate is around 180 and you are seeing purple spots though?

[i]I think these races could be won on technical sections[/i]

They can much more easily be lost on technical sections, with a puncture, mechanical or crash.

😀 I told you it was controversial 🙂 I'm not saying ditch the fitness side of it, nor that it makes a huge percentage of the time, but if it does make up 10% then thats a LOT in olympic terms surely. I'm just shocked by the fact that they look so wooden and rickety - not at all like you'd expect from someone who's a pro MTBer, more like you'd expect from a pro roady stuck on an MTB for the day?

They can much more easily be lost on technical sections, with a puncture, mechanical or crash.

As answered earlier, yes of course there's that risk but if you have a raised level of skill and training in that sort of stuff you'd expect the risks to be minimised. Granted they do likely do it on paper inner tubes and rims of carboard, but I wonder if thats sort of defeating the purpose in some ways.

I dunno, I just find the XC races boring and road-like in their lack of adventure and technical side and their wooden riders, especially when you see the flowing grace exhibited by some of the DH race competitors (obvisouly not olympic) even on hardtails. Having come from mostly what is apparently now termed "aggressive XC" riding (I just call going for a ride) I just expected something with a little more zing I suppose, rather than an offroad road race.

I wouldn't want to ride that on a race geometry hardtail with 80mm of travel and flat bars (which is what you need for the rest of the course).

This is why olympic mtbing is boring - its just for roadies who happen not to be riding on a road. 😉

[i](you can tell as they're not even back over their saddle very far)[/i]

When did you last see an x/c racer hanging off the back of his/her seat? That's just for d/h wannabees on flat stuff, like me 😉

Surely in an xc race situation you're gonna take the smoothest line, which is exactly what they're doing.

Surely in an xc race situation you're gonna take the smoothest line, which is exactly what they're doing.

I dont think that is the smoothest line, but I suppose thats personal judgement at the time.

I wouldn't want to ride that on a race geometry hardtail with 80mm of travel and flat bars (which is what you need for the rest of the course).

Why not? Maybe I'm lacking in perceptive skills but that particular bit looks like a piece of cake, something I'd not hesitate to attack on my rigid flat-barred XC bike and as I've said from the start I'm far from extraordinary.

And rudeboy - never, Im never likely to be that fit and I'm too old to get into the team I'm sure! This

for example is way beyond me!

Amazing, how you can tell so much, from a really poor quality bit of video footage, taken some distance away from the actual section...

The 'fall-line' would involve some fairly large rocks and probably some airtime - not clever if you want to finish when using ultra-light kit, especially tyres and tubes.

Rudeboy - as I said, from the start if you actually bother to read the post rather than just trying to cause arguments, I'm not just looking at this one - im thinking of all the previous olympic footage I've seen on TV (in considerably better quality etc). I dont have to be on a section to take a reasonable guess at its difficulty. As I have already said I accept the camera does flatten it, but then it flattens all the other footage out there too.

I suppose the trade-off would be needing slightly tougher (heavier) components for a gain in technical ability, maybe the trade-off isnt good enough. Just thought it was an interesting point up for discussion! What sparked the thought was a roadie friend of mine that entered some small local XC races and wiped the floor with the field despite having absolutely zero MTB skills.

XC races at that level are won on the climbs.

I did the World Cup at Fort Bill a few years ago for a laff, (at the very back !) and heading down the big chute thing (Nessie ? the top of the old course) in a line of riders is very un-nerving.

But anyways women I know who race at that level claim it to be very frustrating. No matter how much better you are technically than the rest of the field you will only ever catch the person in front of you, and you can't overtake on the technical sections. If she is fitter she will just come bombing past you on the next climb.

Gunn Rita Dahle flatted in the race I was in, ran to the next tech station, dropped back to about 80th, and still finished on the podium.

And I would agree with the point about hitting that section when you have been riding at 120% of max for 90 mins, although that clip looks earlier in the race as the riders are still bunched. Not as easy as you might think !

P.S forgot to add - I looked at GRDs results in that race, and she would have finished well up in the men's race with those lap times. If you have a local club rider of that calibre I think we would all like to meet him !

If I was in an Olympic event, would I potentally risk it all, or take the safer line that might cost me a couple of seconds.....hmmmm. I think I would play it safe.

I do potentially agree with Garry_Lagers comment about fit club blokes keeping up with the women's XC racers.
I don't know if it's the same for Mountain biking, but when I was younger I used to race for Thames Valley Harriers at 400, 800, 1500m and XC in the winter. One of the guys I ran with was about 4secs slower at 800m than the olympic womens world record, so he would have easily have kept pace in most races with international level 800m runners. And he was 16 at the time, with no proper rigorous training/diet etc. I was significantly slower than him!!

Yup, well aware of the difficulty of racing when whiting/blacking out due to exertion (been there, done that!) but I felt that section was the ideal overtaking opportunity - the whole frustration of bunching and not being able to pass people is true, but that I think is where that section works well, with the option of the centre line.

XC's are indeed won on climbs, but is that only because everyone works the same way? In the XC races I've done in the past I was able to make up 5-6 places on even short descents in the first lap (due to people bunching) and 1 or two in the ones afterwards, but clearly I lost out due to fitness, to the point of being lapped by the leader, then overtaking the guy and several others on a down, then having him storm past me again!) and I thought "if only I was THAT fit and able to do the downs too I would stand a fairly good chance of doing well!". Instead I nearly passed out with my heard rate bouncing off about 200, which is why I no longer race XC 😀

absolon is fluid on the bike; i watched it on tele and he looked slow; whilst being fast.

This is why olympic mtbing is boring - its just for roadies who happen not to be riding on a road

Sorry but i disagree, a few years back when rivington near Bolton hosted the Commenwealth championships we where on a downhill part of the course and some of the riders especially the girl who was representing the UK went down at full speed, when I watched the highlights later on TV they looked like they where braking all the way down which was definately not the case.

Video footage can be very deceptive.

As others have said it isn't worth the risk of losing 30+ seconds if you fall for the sake of gaining possibly 3 or 4 taking the technical lines.

Clearly XC is easy to do, especially when trained in kung-fu keyboard skills as we all are.

I think its all about tactics - taking an easier descent line costs a second or two, but means you can run lighter kit, without damage, saving far more on climbs and non tech bits.

Having said that, there were /are a few in XC racing that seem little more than fit athletes, and less than skilled in the biking area, so bringing me back to agree with the OP, its amazing a few more descending skills are not being displayed on many of those vids.

Hels knows what she's talking about! There are very few tech sections in XC where you could make up many places without risking losing a load as well.

The lack of a fluid look could be to do with having a seatpost right up yer jacksie too.

Thanks matt, what was your paypal address again? 😀

There are very few tech sections in XC where you could make up many places without risking losing a load as well.

That's bloody obvious!

Well, the 'overtaking line' straight down the middle looks to be raised on the up-slope side, doesn't have a smooth run-up, the drop is about 1 metre, and looks nearly vertical. Rather you than me!

In general, top level xc riders are technically brilliant - they don't get to that level without the skills to match. As nearly everybody else has mentioned, watchng it on the screen is far removed from the reality.

Well I for once agree with coffeeking but hey what do I know...

Ooh, I dunno; that looks quite tricky,

LoL @ coffeeking, unless you are a very very fast rider my money would be on you getting lapped in that race by those *slow* riders.

Couple of points I think.

I do think Coffeking has a point with regards to the women's sport. I'd say that participation, focus and takeup of XC mountain biking is not as great as it could be and that will inevitably lead to a lower equivalent level compared to other sports.
Having not seen that section of the course on anything but that cacky youtube vid I can't comment on that individual section. However there was a couple of pro women racers in the SSWC in 07 which I saw racing and even after 4/5 laps they were nailing it. I find fatigue in my upper body really inhibits my descending speed especially on an XC geared bike. As has been pointed out, the bike is a compromise between the up and down bits, with the large focus on the up.
I think this point is important. The sport's been around for a while, and most of the competitors will have competed in hundreds of races. The form of the race will have evolved to suit the conditions in which everybody races under. If more and more technical XC sections are introduced, then you would expect a corresponding step-change in tactics. In this case, people are racing for hours, not minutes every risk must be assessed and weighed.
In a donwhill race seconds gained by taking a high risk corner at speed has a corresponding high level of pay-off. This dictates the tactics of the rider. In an XC race, those same seconds are insignificant compared to the minutes gained on uphill sections, and the large penalties incurred when a puncture or mechanical occurs.

THere's a good book called 'beating the odds' and is about the mathematics in sport. It has good sections on risk, tactics and playing style and gives great explanations of why many sports have the form they do today based on the probabilistic environment created by the rules and conditions of the sport.

I.e. same as what everyone else said.

Si C

Remember me you find lordswood and swinley tricky too no

Shut up you ponce!

Has anyone mentioned that technical stuff becomes much harder when you are pushing your limits physically.

Gravitate? Were you thinking levitate?

Oops yes that's what I meant.

LoL @ coffeeking, unless you are a very very fast rider my money would be on you getting lapped in that race by those *slow* riders.

Use your eyes, I already said that I'd be lapped by them on fitness regardless. Try again 😉

Has anyone mentioned that technical stuff becomes much harder when you are pushing your limits physically.

Yes, we have established that through group experience!

Well, the 'overtaking line' straight down the middle looks to be raised on the up-slope side, doesn't have a smooth run-up, the drop is about 1 metre, and looks nearly vertical. Rather you than me!

What video are you looking at?! **** me there's no wonder you think its hard if any of that looks vertical! They'd have to share the same entry point (as both sides of the top are fairly decent drops right out of a bend) but then instead of Sing over to the side the middle has a few smooth rock projections but nothing remotely vertical. On the contrary the line they take does have rocks across it that clearly have a drop involved.

This just shows why people take different lines I suppose!

Kingtut - 🙂 Levitation could help significantly in this case, but I'm not expecting it to occur in XC MTB anytime soon!

In general, top level xc riders are technically brilliant - they don't get to that level without the skills to match.

I'm sure they are actually better than a lot of people, no doubt, but I wonder just how technically competent they are if they spend most of their time working on fitness and assuming races are won up hills rather than down. I'm not berating them, I'm just curious as to whether they lack technical down skills and could be improved by taking the riskier route with some more training and using them as overtaking places. Course designers rarely build in only one rideable line. Much like with F1 and rally - while I am sure an F1 driver could get round an F1 course in an F1 car faster than a rally driver could, I wonder if both could be enriched by learning parts of the others fields - rather than assuming that because they were good in their area that they cant learn/improve.

What video are you looking at?! **** me there's no wonder you think its hard if any of that looks vertical!

Er, the video you posted the link to - you know, the one with the rock outcrop in the middle of the trail. That rock looks to be pretty steep to me, although I bow down to your superior gradient calculating abilities, especially from such a quality video.

Coffee,

I'm sure they are actually better than a lot of people, no doubt, but I wonder just how technically competent they are if they spend most of their time working on fitness and assuming races are won up hills rather than down.

Doesn't really address my earlier post here, they're not 'assuming' anything, the majority of riders will be experienced racers having been in hundreds of races. They're judgement is based on hard won experience of the top level of the sport. As I intimated, that top level may not be as high as in other sports so they're is arguably room for an increased level of technical skill. I don't think you can base your critique on the sport on small sections of a particular course. I personally don't think you've presented enough evidence that any of the riders you mention DO lack the technical skills. Without it we can't say either way. They're merely riding in a way which they've learnt is the most beneficial for the sport.

Reminds me of a case in the snooker world champs a few years ago. Talented young player thought 'I'll mix this up a bit' and smashed the reds to bits on the break, failing to pot anything. Other player got up and cleared up, frame lost. There's every chance he could have potted a ball and won the frame. A VERY big risk he took.

Looking at many, many snooker frames on TV you could summise that none of the top players can play doubles, take on risky pots etc. etc. Of course they can, bit of a risk if they cock up though.

No I haven't presented much evidence, I wasn't on an evidence hunt and didnt really have time to find it, it was an observation of the sport. It also wasnt a critique on the whole sport, merely pointing out that even on very simple technical sections they seem to struggle. I remember watching what I believe was the olympics before last but could have been something else of similar level (to be on normal evening TV), they had what appeared to be a log crossing the trail, followed by a load of rough cobbly rocks - not one tried to ride over the 4-5" log and rocks, most dismounted and ran over the whole section. This sort of defeats the purpose - i mean it might as well be a road ride. I appreciate the whole risk issue and yes, I suspect you and everyone is right this is why it occurs, but I just feel its a bit of a let-down in the viewing stakes. It's dull as hell even for an MTBer to watch, let alone a non-biking spectator. I dont doubt that what they do wins the races they enter, I just think the races they enter _appear_ to be little more than dusty road rides when you take out the technical content they skip.

Well it seems I'm at odds with most people so I'll accept I may well be wrong in my thinking, but my thinking still stands regardless!

myfatherwasawolf - this is a 1m vertical rock drop followed by a 45 degree slope, taken at a similar vantage point and slightly closer distance to that in the link (my local woods, the guy doing the drop is on a rigid cannondale with very light components, not me), though admittedly no rocks in the run-out, but its a lot different to that in the vid. The trail shape is very similar to the olympic one actually, with the trail coming in from top left and turning through some rocks.
[img] [/img]

Regardless, at no point was I saying anything quantative, I was merely suggesting that the trails look easy enough from the vantage points given and they seem to attack them in a rigid, awkward way and mayvbe they could improve by adjusting that. Not trying to say I have better vision, I have better skills, I am god etc.

Fair enough Coffee, and would have to agree with you in regards to the viewing stakes. XC Racing generally doesn't make very good viewing. This is an important point, if professional sport isn't deemed to be viewable, exciting, spectator worthy etc. it tends to largely die out. This is when you get meddling in the rules and set-up of the sport in order to stimulate participation and spectating. I.e. Table tennis, Basketball (ad infinitum) etc. etc.
To tie this in with the risk payoff thing discussed earlier. The organiser of a race would have to tip the balance of a race such that it is at a level of technicality that there is a significant payoff for hopping the log, nailing the descent blasting the corners. If these conditions existed then a highly technically skilled rider without the higher level of fitness MAY be able to upset the balance and beat the traditional XC racer. This would take concerted effort on the side of course designers and race organisers and the sport may not actually need as shake up at this point. I don't know to be honest.

Using my previous analogy, if you were to play snooker with Mark Selby et al. at the local pub you'd probably see a load of astounding shots that you'd rarely witness in high level competition. Would the same be true if you rode with an Olympian XC rider down the local woods? I'd personally like to think so, but I don't know.

Just briefly skim-read this thread. the OP obviously has no idea what these world standard riders are capable of.

It's an XC race, true MTB-ing IMO, this is where it started before the suspension travel grew and grew so much that Mr Podgy Financial Adviser could suddenly go out and ride technical trails.

Get on a bike with a high seat position, low narrow bars and 80mm of travel. THEN, ride as hard as you possibly can so your vision goes blurry, your body screams in pain and your heart is beating close to max, THEN try and hop/skip your way down a steep technical trail. You'll soon find out how hard it is.

And besides, go watch one of these races in the flesh; you'll be utterly amazed at how technically adept they are.

Plonker.

Doesn't sound like many of you have done much XC racing.

In all the races I've been in, even the local Elite riders are very good technically (and I'm not a numpty). It amazes me that they can ride the stuff they do like they do on the bikes they are riding. Have you been in a race with Becks/Kileen? They are so quick it defies belief up, down and along - and they're not exactly top flight on the international stage.

I've been on the course with a lot of women, and I can usually keep pace with those who turn out to be placing on the podium in Expert. To compare, I'm usually top 20% in Sport (but only because I hammer the tech bits so hard) and I'm a fit-ish club rider. At the road 10 mile TT I've been 9th out of about 30 blokes. I weigh about 85kg and my threshold power is about 330W on a good day. An elite woman I chatted to last year had a threshold power of 270W, but only weighed 55kg! And she didn't place that well IIRC. I do accept tho that most women aren't very good technically. I do wonder why this is the case...

And the argument about being able to keep your bike lighter if you take mincier lines is toss. My bike's almost as light as it can be, without any concession to strength; I'm a bit of a lard arse and I cane it through the techie bits without holding back. It's still fine 🙂

mm - try not to skim read, you do end up looking a plonker. While not able to fly to china to watch the olympics I can say I've seen a couple of races in the flesh (commonwealth games) and competed in some lower end ones so I'm at least partially experienced in attempting technical things while bearly able to stay upright, and have been there at the coal face so to speak to see their skills.

Cheers

Molgrips, so what you're saying is, to counteract Coffekings assertion that women XC racers aren't very good technically: Women XC racers are very fit and light but not very good technically.
I love the way arguments progress on forums, Coffeking, ball's in your court.

I suspect that to some degree I do underestimate their skills (though I'm not totally naive in the situation, thanks for those who assume im a retarded keyboard biker with no grasp on reality!), and I didnt intend to single out women in particular as technically inept, so I'll not comment on that. I'm not sure theres a conclusion here, but the discussion has been fun. Maybe if anyone knows an olympic MTBer personally we could add to the conversation but without I think we suffer from lack of actual real content.

I wasnt trying to say they're totally unskilled though, I was only suggesting that maybe they were very fitness oriented and seem somewhat awkward down technical stuff, and that maybe they could improve that to improive their times. At no time was I saying I am better than them, or claiming to be a biking god - thanks to those who jumped to conclusions 🙂

Not read the thread, my take;

1) That decent is probably a lot harder than it looks.
2) They are riding 20lbs bikes which have to last the whole race, taking unnecessary risks to gain a second would be silly.
3) These girls probably ride 30 - 40 hours a week, although some will be technical, XC races are not won on descents, but injuries are generaly as a result of them.
4) To clarify, the girl that came last in that race would murder anyone on this forum in a race. There's local Crit fast and then there's sponsored fast.
5) The best descender i have seen is a CAT 1 roadie on a ten year old MTB, why? because he just loves riding bikes.

MTT - at least bother to read the thread. 😉

I have now read the thread, my take;

1) That decent is probably a lot harder than it looks.
2) They are riding 20lbs bikes which have to last the whole race, taking unnecessary risks to gain a second would be silly.
3) These girls probably ride 30 - 40 hours a week, although some will be technical, XC races are not won on descents, but injuries are generaly as a result of them.
4) To clarify, the girl that came last in that race would murder anyone on this forum in a race. There's local Crit fast and then there's sponsored fast.
5) The best descender i have seen is a CAT 1 roadie on a ten year old MTB, why? because he just loves riding bikes.

😉

😀 well I suppose you're "allowed" to voice your opinions, even if they've already been voiced!

Molgrips, so what you're saying is, to counteract Coffekings assertion

I wasn't really counteracting it - as you so astutely pointed out; I was merely contributing to the general topic of debate. I said that MOST women aren't so good technically, but the Olympic XC race isn't most women, is it? I can't comment on that specific race since I don't recall it well enough and I can't see the vid at work. However, in the men's races, the top racers are very good technically as well as on the climbs, so I have no reason to assume that wouldn't relatively be the case with the women too.

But you really don't need to beef up your bike to withstand an XC race. Especially not if you're a 50kg woman.

[i]coffeeking - Member
mm - try not to skim read, you do end up looking a plonker. While not able to fly to china to watch the olympics I can say I've seen a couple of races in the flesh (commonwealth games) and competed in some lower end ones so I'm at least partially experienced in attempting technical things while bearly able to stay upright, and have been there at the coal face so to speak to see their skills.

Cheers
[/i]

Don't be so arrogant.

Why not get in touch with the olympic cycle coaches and tell them how to do their job? Now, if some women in the race were riding a line a certain way and gaining time from it, and the others weren't, then those others should consider their tactics. But, if it's the line of choice for them all, there's a reason for it (and everything an XCracer does is to gain time, so I'd stick my neck out and say they are quicker doing it the way they do).

Right or wrong?

I think that the point is the line they're taking will enable them to finish the race quicker overall due to reduced risk of fall or mechanical, not that it's necessarily the fastest route down that section of the course.

To finish first, first you have to finish.

and all that.