The problem with sports where there is fear involved (like mountain biking) is that when there is a scary obstacle coming up, many people fall into a defensive position. They will back away from the scary stuff, and bring their elbows and knees in. This makes it really hard to handle a bike down technical stuff.

If you instead learn to get yourself into an "attack" position, where you force yourself to go in staying centered on the bike, with your elbows up and knees out, you will be far stronger and have much more control over the bike.

Attack is simply a word that invokes the feeling of what you are doing on the bike.

Poised and committed to overcome all obstacles.

How'd I do?

Disappointingly correct.

Also a specific posture on the bike, weight centred, off the saddle, arms and legs pre-bent, etc. etc.

Ideally, you want neither fight nor flight mode. A calm, controlled, committed state of mind is much more powerful. Knowing when to elevate the level of concentration and commitment is vital, but that's not the same as going into "Attack" mode.

Sometimes still shots of downhill riders are misleading – if it's a fast section they may merely be head down in an attack crouch for aero reasons. Plus, even if they are in an "attack" position, doesn't mean they are full of aggressive thoughts inside their helmet.

Attack is simply a word that invokes the feeling of what you are doing on the bike.

Careful, you are in danger of going against the new trend of extreme literalism that seems to be appearing on STW 🙂

Attack ATTACK attackattackattack AAAAAAAAAAAAAtack

I like that word. What's wrong with it? What's a better word then for those times you give more than you've got to challenge the terrain?
Tora Tora Tora what about that.
Plucky.
Furrious.

Interesting that 'attack' is a word that I don't think Jedi uses when he's coaching – IIRC he uses word like 'relaxed' and 'soft locked'. All in all it's much more calming and confidence inspiring to think about being relaxed and soft locked when approaching a section than to be attacking it.

Attack – the "attack" position is common usage is it not and I can think of no other way to describe it.

Looking in my dictionary gives "vigorously apply oneself to" as in " he attacked his meal with gusto"

It also has a use in music.

so IMO the word attack has a place in MTBing but is often overused.

Oops – how did I get logged in as that?

singlespeedstu – Member

To be fair I can remember the term being used to describe riding by the likes of Tomac and Herbold "Back in the Day" so it's hardly a new phenomenon….

And even further back in the day it was a term used by the great David Bailey*.

* clicky

YES, the attack position is regularly mentioned in technique books, DVD's when associated with motocross it get's a bit more complicated when you introduce standing attack and seated attack there is a section in "moto fundimentals" where Josh Coppins explains it nicely. Virtually perfect form for standing attack can always be attributed to the recently retired Stefan Everts:

Iain

glenp – Member
Ideally, you want neither fight nor flight mode. A calm, controlled, committed state of mind is much more powerful. Knowing when to elevate the level of concentration and commitment is vital, but that's not the same as going into "Attack" mode.

Sometimes still shots of downhill riders are misleading – if it's a fast section they may merely be head down in an attack crouch for aero reasons. Plus, even if they are in an "attack" position, doesn't mean they are full of aggressive thoughts inside their helmet.

utter bollox!

i'd like to meet a person who has complete control over their adrenal glands (fight or flight).

very few, if any, DHers on the WC circuit would go into the 'attack' position for aero purposes – the stills you're seein are probably from the rider absorbing rocks, drops etc with their limbs. if there is a non-technical section that would warrant this they're gonna be pedalling.

Well, thank you for your considered opinion. 🙄

Ideally, you want to be in neither fight nor flight mode. That is a correct statement, based on thousands of hours of coaching experience, and valuable advice. Blind aggression is not useful when you need to focus and be in control.

thepureist – that is one of the reasons for my thread. I prefer just to ride the section that is in front of me. The ground is a lot bigger and stronger than me so there is not a chance in hell I'm attacking it.

jesus…you're a skills coach 😕

And?

More accurate and useful terminology might be to be assertive, show focus, commitment etc.

Edit. That MX pic is a very good example. The bike and rider are fully committed, but the shoulders and elbows are relaxed and the whole head is facing where he is going next. Attack is not a word that springs to mind looking at that picture, whereas control and focus are.

just suprised that's all! most of the stuff i've read that you have written sounds confused and a bit off the mark.

More accurate and useful terminology

Would be the universally accepted terminology of the last 20-odd years.

Confusing the 'attack body position' and 'attack mode' (eg a state of mind/mood)… That is ridiculous.

Obviously, when a rider hits a 'drop off', they will also fall asleep, yes?

Ooh thanks Oldgit, I'm going to listen to some PiL, that'll do it 🙂

Well, all I can ever recall reading from you is reactionary, confrontational and downright rude. Be nice, if you do disagree, if you made the effort to do more than exclaim bollox.

To be honest I can't see what you find so controversial anyway. Sporting performance that requires coordination and dexterity is not best enhanced with high adrenaline aggression. Racing drivers, for example – if the "red mist" comes down they over-drive and shred the tyres at the very least, probably crash. Although the effect appears from the outside the be "attacking" what is actually going on inside the head is more of a controlled and assertive way of thinking.

Confusing the 'attack body position' and 'attack mode' (eg a state of mind/mood)… That is ridiculous.

I don't agree. I would say that I get asked this about once every other session – very frequently. Also very common is the misconception that what a rider feels they are missing is balls and "attack" mentality, whereas what is actually happening is that thy are clouding their thinking, rather than having a clear and simple focus.

Joe – It's not universally accepted. I dont accept it, nor do a a few others on this thread. It's a stupid term and may well be one of the reasons so many riders have utter crap technique.

Lets use climbing as an example. If you were to try and attack a climb and try and rush up it you would end up missing holds and fall off. However, a calm considered approach will get you to the top if the route is within your capabilities.

glenp: I assume this is a wind up…?

Riding in the 'attack' posture has absolutely nothing to do with the "red mist" or "high adrenaline aggression". It is merely a way of effectively distributing your body weight in order to maximise control in unforeseen circumstances. Is it only the word that is common.

I repeat my earlier point: Does a drop off cause you to drop off to sleep, due to the common word use? No. So why should the 'attack' posture have anything to do with an aggressive mindset?

I thought this was a commonly used term for being slightly back, out the saddle, cranks level and with arms and legs slightly bent – ready to ride a technical section.

You might disagree with the semantic overtones attached to it, but it's hardly WTF material.

So is it a term for being in the wrong position on the bike?

I thought you were winding me up Joe. Attack position is a commonly used term, yes.

But it is also not a very useful one and is commonly misunderstood. As chakaping says, the position should be one of relaxed control – attack doesn't sound like the best word to use to me. Attack sounds stiff and steeled, braced for impact.

Drop off doesn't mean go to sleep any more than riding your bike means shagging it.

i love the attack position 😀 read the sign at Kirroughtree and rode the red and black shouting "attack, attack, attack" at every obstacle 😀 much fun was had

ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXPXHK7I1iQ

Perhaps you could supply with a dictionary of your MTB 'Newspeak' then Glen…?

No more attack position, no more lock-on grips (they actually bolt on), no more singlespeeds (they can go any number of speeds), etc etc etc.

I'm leaving this idiocy, for the real world. Goodbye.

Joe. God knows why you've got your frillies in a twist. I didn't even start the thread, I merely agreed with the OP that it is a puzzling term.

To be honest I can't see what you find so controversial anyway. Sporting performance that requires coordination and dexterity is not best enhanced with high adrenaline aggression. Racing drivers, for example – if the "red mist" comes down they over-drive and shred the tyres at the very least, probably crash. Although the effect appears from the outside the be "attacking" what is actually going on inside the head is more of a controlled and assertive way of thinking.

this is what i mean, you say a lot without actually saying anything…hence why i am suprised that you are a skills coach because surely your job is to break down and convey to your punters complex (to them) skills and manouvres.

Attack sounds stiff and steeled, braced for impact.

if someone mentions 'attack position/mode' to me i probably would primarily think of a big cat stalking some antelope in the african plains. in a calm, relaxed state, focused and ready to pounce.

I always tailor my delivery to suit. If speaking to you peachos I'll be sure to make it simple enough.

You do understand the distinction between assertive and aggressive? Or have I lost you there?

no, could you please explain?

You'll work it out.

Think this is done – must do some work.

Cheers

Great thread. Want to see a race between Glenp and Peachos please. Peachos can adopt the attack position, Glenp can meditate his way down waiting for Peachos to rip a Rubber Queen and crash to his well-earned death.

When and where please kids?

there would be no race 🙂

Ho ho. Peachos is thinking I must be as slow as his grannie, whereas I'm thinking it would be unfair to race a child.

Time and place then please?

haha…i'm a child for thinking you make no sense!? i presume he lives down south rocky, which is a shame really!

I think more STW arguments should be settled with a race. And when I say more, I mean all.