Not necessarily. As I said at my local centre the top halves of all the trails are not particularly hard. I regularly session them. It is convenient that sections can be delineated by fire trails. These same trails are much, much harder beyond the second fire trail and I have to admit to being somewhat intimidated by them. I'm simply not good enough for the steepness and degree of gnarl so do not find them enjoyable. Yet
. I will concede that at some centres escape may not be as straightforward.
I would argue that you have two different trails in that instance. Deliniated by a fire road. Name the first one bambi and the second one devils ballsack....Not necessarily. As I said at my local centre the top halves of all the trails are not particularly hard. I regularly session them. It is convenient that sections can be delineated by fire trails. These same trails are much, much harder beyond the second fire trail and I have to admit to being somewhat intimidated by them. I'm simply not good enough for the steepness and degree of gnarl so do not find them enjoyable. Yet
The wild is a great machine. Check the front rotor size. Upgrade to 220 if it is a 200. That will help with controlling speed on steep. Other than that, its just practice. Slowly take on steeper steeper stuff. Grab some armour and full face if you arent already and send it.I ride an Orbea Wild with Shimano brakes and don't have a clue about the rest of that sentence
That's a bit like the old climbing adage "There are only two grades. Them you can get up and them you can't". I am similarly blessed with lack of talent and an abundance of fear. I always, well mostly, felt OK with climbing but that's because I have been doing it since 1964 when there was very little gear. I managed E4 on a regular basis with a few E5's on a good day but didn't manage 7a on sport until I was 70 years old.I found UK climbing grades worked near perfectly for me with a very few under or over grading.
MTB route grades as has been said don't really work with only 4 colours, no chance of giving more info. What about using a + symbol after the colour to be able to divide the colours up to 8 possibly, Blue, Blue+ etc with no -. Green just on it's own, Red like Blue but Black having 3 grades with Black, Black+ and Black++. After the colour grading with it's + or not could be added a number indicating how many features it has that merit the given colour grade. Say up to 4 on the grade colour on it's own with an open ended number for the + and ++ colour grades.
No idea if it would work or how or who would apply it but if it started off at trail centre trails, if they could come to a consensus, maybe it could catch on elsewhere. Most of the riders I know get by on just riding their local trails as they come, we either get down them or not, in my case bottle it due to lack of talent and/or age related pure fear.
No doubt this idea is full of holes I can't see.
I didn't start climbing until 1989 when my mate and I were 35/36, we'd previously spent 15 years paddling whitewater together up here in Scotland. We managed to climb E1 by the end of 6 months then topped out at E3 5c. We couldn't be bothered, having tried, to take the time to do 6a stuff, we basically were happy there at E3 5c just so we could climb anything we tried. Couldn't be arsed wasting time with 6a when we'd get up 5c no bother and get more climbs in. I did manage British 6a though in Chamonix with my wife but that was clipping bolts. My mate still climbs at 73, but me at 72 now prefers MTB. I'm riding stuff now I wouldn't have gone near 20 years ago.
What happens when someone who is happy to ride blue or red trails misses the change in grading half way down? Sounds like a surefire way to involve the discobus to me...
Yeah, its called the squirrel catcher. If you can't make the first feature... dont ride the rest of the trail.
Yeah. Same in nz too. They also separate jump from tech too. As you say some one might be happy with double black tech by not double black jump or vice versa.
You had better not watch the film "The Alpinist" then. I'm a climber height does not phase me in the slightest but watching the guy in this film perform gives me the chills especially on ice.I like the "degree of exposure" element as part of a trail grading assessment. I like it a lot. But once again it's a variable that depends upon the skill and the foibles of the rider. For example, my "foible" is that I'm not too good with heights. This means that obstacles that I would categorise as "dead easy" suddenly become unpassable depending upon either how high up from the ground they are or how close to a very long drop they are. So riding along a foot wide plank on the ground is in the dead easy category. Take it six feet off the ground and I'm not doing it! It would have to be a six-foot wide plank before I'd go up there!
Another would be any trail only just wider than my bars, is once again in the dead easy category. But with a big drop to one side it becomes questionable. If its not too big a drop, I might get off and walk, but if the drop was big, then I would find it so unsettling that I would have to find another way around.
For those who are completely unphased by "working at height", fear of heights is a difficult concept to get your head around. It's irrational of course, but that is why it is so hard to deal with. I can't rationalise it, I can't argue with it, and just manning up doesn't work either. I just feel emotions ranging from uneasy to nausea inducing terror, depending upon the height involved and how long I'm exposed to it.
And the height exposure doesn't have to be real, it can be virtual!
When Thelma & Lousie went over the edge of the Grand Canyon in their open-topped car, I nearly threw up all over the carpet!
Like you, as a climber, maybe former now
, I'm not bothered by heights but watching "Free Solo", the film of Alex Honnold climbing El Capitan had me squirming at times knowing even he could make a mistake.
This guy does the same but also climbs ice solo. Even Alex Honnold is impressed. I've climbed El Cap so share your admiration.Like you, as a climber, maybe former now
My father had zero fear of heights. When I was a kid we lived in a terrace house on a hill. The house had a cellars that was part above ground on one side, so there was a flight of steps to approach the front door. It was an old terrace even then, so the ceiling heights were higher than modern houses. From the attic window, I can remember watching my Dad sauntering along the ridge line in his ordinary shoes. He had his boiler suit on and his usual flat cap. He was carrying a bucket of cement and a trowel in one hand and a ridge tile in the other. There must have been a 45 foot drop on one side and 40 foot on the other. It still gives me the willies just thinking about it.
I agree but my idea would open up more trail to less accomplished riders and be useful info for all. I tried some of my local trails before they adopted the colour grading system but found myself attempting to walk down them as they were too steep for me and returning back up the hill with an EMTB was not a feasible option. The top sections were fine.
The going on forever would do my head in. The longest climb I've done is Centurion on Ben Nevis which is 7 or 8 pitches.Did the Old Man of Hoy, about 400+feet, it did feel like it went on forever.
Not sure what ability gaps, I assume you mean with riders, have to do with grading trails. If you take into account abilities you are, in affect, grading the rider not the trail. Similarly with conditions. These do of course affect the grade but the grade should be for optimum conditions. Getting centres to sing from the same page is a problem but they should not be the ones in the driving seat. Being a climber of some considerable experience and a mountain biker of less experience but nonetheless enough, IMO trails should be easier to grade than climbs and do not require the same degree of granularity.
