If intelligence was related to the way you speak Birmingham would be a mess......hang on 🧐
Surely the place to ask would be a forum full of ....oh wait a minute
I see where you're coming from but the problem might be in how you phrased the question - your OP made it seem like it was all about how they spoke, ie sounding like a surfer dude = stupid, therefore downhillers are not as clever as roadies who are more articulate. You also mentioned you'd never really watched downhill before so it seems a little bit of an uninformed conclusion
As other posters have said, there's a distinct culture that goes along with certain sports that informs how many in that sport talk - it's possible that if some roadies went back in time and became downhillers instead they'd talk like surfer dudes. Certainly when I worked a couple of seasons in the alps I started using terms like 'stoked and 'gnarly'.
I do think there might be something to the point you make about IQ vs risk taking behaviour, but that didnt really come across in your OP.
Audience and media training... as said above watch interviews with Gwin or Minnar. Also compare these two videos both involving Brent Tippie....
The first one is Tippie in sensible mode... his inside the tape videos are very informative...
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/inside-the-tape-raw-garbanzo-dh-crankworx-whistler-2017.html</span>
The second involves Tippie on Heckers rock and is not safe for work etc.... and probably aimed at a slightly different audience.
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/Just-The-Tip-Hecklers-Rock.html</span>
You don’t seem to have too many radsick types in some of the high adrenaline (I assume) winter sports, luge, bobsleigh etc. Particularly the ski jumpers, mainly because they are all physics PhDs...
Could it it be that these sports (summer sports as well) have less room for expression, hence attract less or more expressive people. Snowboard half pipe vs ski jumper, DHer vs TTist
Plenty of intelligent pro DHers about should you care to seek them out. However...
I have never watched any downhilly-type stuff before.
...that's likely your problem.
Not getting the risk taking equals lower intelligence thing. A lot of big wave riders seem to be very intelligent individuals, same with free climbers.
I thought the main difference was those horrible prottrudpr veins in roadies legs, a sure sign that they'll be dead at 55 of a heart attack definitely not linked to years of performance enhancing drugs 
how times have changed. Nicknamed Le Prof. not only for his glasses but because he passed le bac
[img] 
[/img]
<span style="color: #444444; font-size: 12px;">Not getting the risk taking equals lower intelligence thing. A lot of big wave riders seem to be very intelligent individuals, same with free climbers.</span>
Its very difficult to actually calculate risk if you are thick, those who are thick either give up early or die loudly.
TBH, i found on the road scene, you get a lot of time, both training and recovering, so you either think, or switch off.
They look like Yates' legs, but not in BMC shorts. Yates has had to stop cycling due to his varicose veins.
As someone has said, different sports take different mind sets, and all have their own culture. There is very different training regimes in different parts of the cycling disciplines.
Do what you are good at, sports. work etc.
Look at the social class of the majority of the kids coming through the BC development squads ... there was an article last year, or maybe the year before, that suggested the majority were from middle to higher middle class families ...
@funkmasterp - by"free climbers" do you mean the incorrect usage of solo climbers? Most climbing done around the world is "free" there's only a few areas where aid climbing prevails.
I did a lot of soloing: on rock, snow/ice and in the Alps. Never done to impress and I was always well within my comfort zone even if the climbs were ostensibly "hard".
I think the risk of extreme sport is incorrect. It would be high risk if you rode like this but their skill level is different. Roadies have high risk too but it's less visually spectacular. Risk taking tends to involve a lot of visualisation and thinking ime, rather than blind hope, although that also comes into it sometimes but more the exception.
<span style="color: #444444; font-size: 12px; background-color: #eeeeee;">Look at the social class of the majority of the kids coming through the BC development squads …</span>
Because arseholes over the last 20 years have persuaded the general population that it's not worth even turning up unless you can drop 5 grand on carbon, di2 and deep section rims.
Well done.
(and there are plenty of thick rich people about. Just because you talk with a plummy accent doesn't mean you are particularly smart.)
Just because you talk with a plummy accent doesn’t mean you are particularly smart.)
I don't think they were suggesting that anposh accent means you are not thick but that they may have learnt skills through their life that make them appear to come across in a more elequent manor to a substantial section of the audience. Kind of like having basic media training built from a younger age.
I agree with you on the obsession with equipment front, however I will say racing bikes us always expensive, road MTB whatever, even if the bike is very mid range the travel and spares add up to significant money.
Pretty sure those legs are George Hincapie. He was known for his veinage.
OP comparing apples with oranges, a better comparison would be pro XC MTBer with roadies, but no one watches XC, so harder to judge... Hardline and road cycling are about as similar to each other as rugby and golf.
If you are looking for correlations to try and turn into causation: there’s an article on the front page of this site about crashes and concussion risk; or you could ask if the high caffeine in the associated energy drinks has an effect on interview style!
More likely this is actually the style of interview that each sponsor wants, because their target demographic responds well to it!
Look at the social class of the majority of the kids coming through the BC development squads … there was an article last year, or maybe the year before, that suggested the majority were from middle to higher middle class families …
that is hardly surprising, to compete sensibly you need a half decent bike, kids keep growing, Probably compete in at least two disciplines (at teenage years add in pit bikes or spare wheels etc too), perhaps have rollers, need shuttled all over the country to events and training sessions etc. Even event entries and race licenses are not trivial to a family struggling to make ends meet. Cycling is accessible to people with not much cash, but serious squad type cycling is not so accessible - I suspect it is the same with most sports. Now of course it depends what you mean by middle class, and I suspect quite a few of the people I’ve met at these sort of things would take offence at that - but I’d bet almost all are in employment/self employed (and not on minimum wage) and own (mortgage) their own home. Even just the flexibility needed to get people too /from some events / session means those with less flexible employers will find it hard to manage logistics. BUT I doubt it is any different for the really serious Downhill families either?
I think part of the challenge is the questions being asked. Every single DH run / road race you do and at the bottom there's some journo asking essentially the same 6 questions in varying ways.
How did you feel today?
Tell us about [insert technical feature]
How did you prepare for this event?
What do you think of the course?
How was your competition today?
There's really only so many ways even the most intelligent and articulate sportsperson can answer the same questions day in day out, especially a few minutes after a hair-raising sprint finish or a tough mountain climb (for road racing).
F1 does the same, it comes down to a boring thing about how great the team were, how the tyres held up, a note to say that they loved the circuit, the crowds were amazing blah blah and then something about how close it was with [nearest competitor].
Really complicated subject.
Opportunity is key.
We had some brilliant cricketers in our school, but no school or locals teams to develop their talents. Same with rugby.
I played both in the cubs and scouts and later with work, but North Manchester schools played football to the exclusion of almost everything else. Nobby Stiles was taught to play by nuns at St Patrick's in Collyhurst - an academy of genius disguised as a school and convent.
It goes deep.
Five miles up the road in Oldham it was rugby league - every child was steeped in it and was taught the game in school.
Asian kids everywhere seemed to play cricket as well as football.
I don't think I've met many people up here who play rugby union unless they came from a school that focused on the sport.
I live in Burnley now, a town which is fanatical about football and has the highest percentage of fans and local support in relation to population in the UK. Everyone wears some item of branded clothing, seemingly regardless of gender or class.
Interesting thread.
Isn't it just that they just use different types of drugs?
And trousers.
Wider trousers, wider minds.
And don't forget money. Before Jimmy Hill stuck his chin in, most footballers were payed the same as the fans they shared the bus to the ground with.
Precisely why?
I have never watched any downhilly-type stuff before.
Well based on a sample of 1 you have postulated ...
Now, I am aware that you get the bright and the dim in all walks of life, but on balance – in terms of the IQ stakes – the professional road world seems to top the downhill world by a significant margin.Honestly, am I imagining it? Or is there a correspondence between more thrill-oriented sports and lower levels of education and/or intelligence?
You seem to be implying (through ignorance as opposed to malice) that getting a degree or higher degrees in in Engineering (loads of examples .e. Neil D or Craig M) or Geology (Manon) for example is illustrative of low intelligence.
The difference (from someone did both) tends to be a more down to earth attitide ... I know one female Geologist for example who is averse to mud and grease but most of my female geology and engineering friends and colleages (or male ones come to that) are not.
I remember a day last year I was working with a bunch of engineers ... in fact they were pretty important people in the company I was working in. I had a surprise meeting with the Head of IT... (much lower down the company) and suddenly realised that my nails had grease and I was wearing waterproof shoes not smart ones etc. (like the rest of the engineers I was working with)
The IT guy was wearing a business suit and looked like he'd stepped out of Esquire and sounded like he'd come straight from a speaking for MBA's course....
That's not to say he was less educated or intelligent either.... just that the engineers (and geologists) I worked with don't really put much stock in smooth looks or words... above practicality.
"BUT I doubt it is any different for the really serious Downhill families either?"
You're right. DH's bikes, trail bikes, servicing (suspension etc), traveling to top class DH venues to train/practice/race, accomodation, uplift tickets, entry fees, etc, etc. It's not cheap, I see the level of commitment my friend puts in with his lad. Paying off in results though.
"Isn’t it just that they just use different types of drugs?"
I don't think many DHer's have asthma .
IMHO its target audience....
and probably more money in road so more media types pampering/polishing the product.
You get to the bottom of a descent:
"WOW! Amazing! That was brilliant! ACE!"
An hour later.
"That was really good, I really enjoyed it."
A day later.
"That was a good descent"