This is what's right with The Industry®
- Thread starter Jm_
- Start date
Apparently today is the sixth birthday of my trail bike, it's probably not long enough, low enough and slack enough to ride anymore. I should give it away.
However it's not carbon so I don't have to cover it in sunblock before riding, so it's got that going for it.
However it's not carbon so I don't have to cover it in sunblock before riding, so it's got that going for it.
Only with lithium batteries.
He sounds funny
Not sure if this goes into the what's wrong or what's right thread... just see for yourself. Margins for these direct to consumer brands can't be all that bad.
Respect to YT. That's pretty cool. Bike looks pretty solid too.
With him being in the commercial, you think it would be an e-bike.
This is pretty rad. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
https://nsmb.com/articles/try-it-home-sr-suntours-fork-demo-program/
https://nsmb.com/articles/try-it-home-sr-suntours-fork-demo-program/
Thats actually a legit awesome idea. Wish it was that easy to try before you buy on most bike stuff.
Bit late to the party with this, but come on Josh, big part of the reason you quit DH is cos you got injured and lost your mojo. Reckon the whole “save the world thing” as the main reason for quitting is bullsh1t.
That said, would be great to see him back on the DH bike. On a Cannondale DH bike of all things.
Where did he say it was the main reason? I wouldn't bet against it being a genuine reason. Dude lives in wooden bongshed floating on a canal. FFS!
He's openly admitted he wasn't prepared to ride at the speeds required to win WCs and put himself in danger of huge injuriy now the tracks have changed and admitted that he prefers the more technical tracks of old where his skills are better suited. He isn't giving up racing entirely. Just not doing any races he won't enjoy. Hence talking about racing IXS etc.
That was also backed by Peaty in his latest interview and I fully understand that.
I'd far rather watch a WC series with more of the sort of tracks Josh and Hill prefered too. So would Peaty I'd have thought.
Skip to about 5:40 in the video: "...stop racing world cup to have less impact on the planet..." No mention of injury or tracks getting too intense in this particular interview, which seems like a glaring omission when you're talking about your decision to take a step back... No doubt, it helps with the "save the planet maaannn" lizardspeak Cannondale is going for.
Of course, it's good to be environmentally conscious but I'd argue that the difference in his carbon footprint in his WC racing days and his current jibbing world tour is basically negligible.
Wasn't the whole point of Losinj that it was one of the first natural gnarly tracks in the circuit in awhile? I didn't like it from the initial videos to be sure, looked like a tame trail with deathtraps in the form of rock walls built everywhere, but once the race happened it was time to admit it was pretty fucking cool. Did you mean to type Leogang?
in reading various articles, a good portion of what's driving this is redbull. bike park tracks are easier to cover video wise. broadcast coverage for RB was one of the factors in moving to reduce the # of riders in finals. and i can't remember the exact article but it was outright stated that red bull is the reason there aren't more MTB world cups.
Sometimes it’s the finish line space requirements that force your track to suck. Good tracks don’t normally end at a huge parking lot on the beach. Once, I had to leave a section of track empty, where some big jumps were planned, so a 40 ton tv truck could cross.
Maybe Bikeparks think they have more to gain by promoting their region with a WC race? You need to get the town government, tourism board and local bike club motivated to help put it on but someone has to believe in the idea that it will bring tourism through bikes. Red Bull has no influence on that. That’s just someone who likes bikes enough to take on a massive project.
When we did Champery the track was one of the last things to get validated by the technical delegate at the UCI. At that point you are definitely having a race and the track is a detail. The bid you make has so many things you need to provide and the track is important but only a detail. I think people get extra motivated and push hard to get a WC and then they figure out how to make the track work later when they realize where the start and finish need to be. Red Bull comes into the picture a few days before the race to start dragging cables up the hill and they will put cameras from the bottom up and when they run out of cameras or cables then they stop. I don’t think there are any RB conspiracies but more about a very motivated person/organizer behind the venue.
If you want technical and gnarly tracks then it just comes down to an organizer and a track builder who have everything else for the bid and also happen to have a sick track. Then the pros show up and say your track sucks because it’s scary. You have to be strong and shoulder the criticisms for the first day track walk and practice.
Maybe Bikeparks think they have more to gain by promoting their region with a WC race? You need to get the town government, tourism board and local bike club motivated to help put it on but someone has to believe in the idea that it will bring tourism through bikes. Red Bull has no influence on that. That’s just someone who likes bikes enough to take on a massive project.
When we did Champery the track was one of the last things to get validated by the technical delegate at the UCI. At that point you are definitely having a race and the track is a detail. The bid you make has so many things you need to provide and the track is important but only a detail. I think people get extra motivated and push hard to get a WC and then they figure out how to make the track work later when they realize where the start and finish need to be. Red Bull comes into the picture a few days before the race to start dragging cables up the hill and they will put cameras from the bottom up and when they run out of cameras or cables then they stop. I don’t think there are any RB conspiracies but more about a very motivated person/organizer behind the venue.
If you want technical and gnarly tracks then it just comes down to an organizer and a track builder who have everything else for the bid and also happen to have a sick track. Then the pros show up and say your track sucks because it’s scary. You have to be strong and shoulder the criticisms for the first day track walk and practice.
I think there's a been shift within the DH WC scene with Redbull's increasing involvement. Clearly, Redbull are trying to maximise the returns on their investment in an attempt to appeal to riders and non-riders alike. Losinj is a perfect example. The track didn't seem to be chosen on merit. Rather it was a location which looks fantastic when captured with sweeping drone footage for promo videos. But aside from the rock gardens, the track was mostly straight, the hill lacked altitude and who can forget the god-damned tarmac sprint to the finish line. The track was certainly different but not good different IMO. And this also happened to be where the start order fuckery commenced, which was also pushed by Redbull.
Leogang is also not great.
Did you go? Because you have a very different take on how gnarly that course was than any of the riders, team managers, and commentators I heard interviews from. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I need more evidence to be convinced. The riders all seemed to think the track was super gnarly and rad, and pretty much all of the riders who are talking about natural gnar and not bike park gnar seemed to like it quite a bit.
I get that the cameras left something to be desired though - Redbull had more cameras on the final pavement part of the track than they needed to, but I get it from their perspective. They don't know where the drama is going to be most intense, and the finish line is usually a pretty safe bet. The shitting on redbull is pretty weird. The coverage is a significant step up than anything that has ever come before by a pretty huge margin. I liked Rob Warner more on freecaster, but having crystal clear cameras, no drops in connection, about 40x more cameras and 100% better angles is pretty nice.
I think you're mistaken about Losinj being a crappy track, I think the final road section + the trail being a little on the short side clouded your opinion. It would have been cooler if it was twice as long and didn't have the road section, sure, but it was still a pretty major change of pace back to the natural gnar and away from bike park riding.
And, as actual industry insider and extremely talented world class trail builder of a world cup trail that's been used for WC races multiple times to the riders delight BuckoW just pretty clearly stated, Redbull is not in charge of the tracks, the race organizers are, and there are frequently many vying considerations to be taken into account when making a track.
Not to mention, a race at a place like leogang is way more fun to watch than no race at all. I'd way rather bike parks carry the torch than nobody at all, and at this point they're the major spot for people who are passionate about racing and downhilling to hang out. If they're the ones who can actually directly turn a profit from it, if they're the ones who have the drive to make it happen, more power to them. And if they want to use it as an opportunity to showcase some trail they think is really fun, that sounds great. It's brought us some of the best racing footage and most exciting races I've ever seen, despite feeling like the trail is meh. Think about Ern Gwerns chainless run, how fucking cool was that?
I donno, this hate toward redbull seems misplaced. I get liking to watch natural trails more, ala champery, or schladming, or andorra, or la bresse, or any number of other trails, but its not Redbull hosting the race, it's not redbull saying its a bad idea to have gnarly trails. Shit, look at hardline and rampage - those are the only two big redbull bike productions that I know of that redbull hosts, and anybody saying that isn't insane is stupid. Redbull clearly has no fucks to give about the trails - they're in it for views and money, and they think gnarly trails bring views and money. It's about people wanting to turn a profit and showcase how much fun their trails are, and how cool their area is.
this is straight from Simon Burney, the UCI MTB coordinator (on track / venue selection). Not a conspiracy. Straight from the horses mouth.
"Honestly it always depends on who bids for World Cups. We want to create the classics but I still think you need to give other races an opportunity to become a World Cup. Even if we go the same places year after year, like Mont Sainte Anne for example, we still try to encourage the organisers to throw new sections in that keep it interesting.
"I think we had 26 or 28 organisations this year that were interested in a World Cup and I think we ended up with 15 or 16 actual bids for 10 events. There are always new ones but there a lot of people who say I really want to do a World Cup but then they see what's involved and they maybe they don't have enough money or enough people or they don't have the infrastructure or something.
"Where we are now, we're totally limited by television budget. I think from a UCI point of view we could go one or two more but Red Bull have a budget they have to stick to and right now their budget allows us to do 10 events. And quite rightly, they've got production standards that they have to adhere to so they won't reduce costs to add more races. They want to make sure they've got a few good ones rather than a lot with not as many cameras or people or not as good a job."
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/downhills-decision-makers-on-the-future-of-world-cup-racing.html
"Honestly it always depends on who bids for World Cups. We want to create the classics but I still think you need to give other races an opportunity to become a World Cup. Even if we go the same places year after year, like Mont Sainte Anne for example, we still try to encourage the organisers to throw new sections in that keep it interesting.
"I think we had 26 or 28 organisations this year that were interested in a World Cup and I think we ended up with 15 or 16 actual bids for 10 events. There are always new ones but there a lot of people who say I really want to do a World Cup but then they see what's involved and they maybe they don't have enough money or enough people or they don't have the infrastructure or something.
"Where we are now, we're totally limited by television budget. I think from a UCI point of view we could go one or two more but Red Bull have a budget they have to stick to and right now their budget allows us to do 10 events. And quite rightly, they've got production standards that they have to adhere to so they won't reduce costs to add more races. They want to make sure they've got a few good ones rather than a lot with not as many cameras or people or not as good a job."
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/downhills-decision-makers-on-the-future-of-world-cup-racing.html
Actually, yeah.
Great posts, but should someone move these posts to the "What's wrong..." thread?
"Informed" my opinion. The fact that the track was so short, very little line choice (top 40 riders within 10s of each other) and the tarmac sprint to the finish just goes to show that it's not worthy of world cup track.
See JonKranked's post above. Number of world cups limited by TV broadcast budget. Redbull is responsible for said budget.
Not really setting the bar too high there, are we? And it takes a guy winning without a chain to make a venue interesting? Hmm... FWIW, seems like Leogang improved for last year but we all know how much better Schladming is..
So I'm not sure where you got "hate toward redbull" from my post? For the record, I think there' probably been a lot of good with more major sponsors jumping on board with WC DH. Hopefully, a lot of this money is being directed to racers, who have a relatively small window in which to make money from racing. And more cameras on track is always a good thing. That said, just because they are supporting the sport, doesn't mean they are above criticism and scrutiny. Redbull, being a major sponsor, clearly has a lot of influence but I'm not sure if they have the necessary expertise within the MTB industry to use their power responsibly. They were, after all, responsible for the start order fuckup of 2018, which basically killed the suspense for most of the races. And there are less races in the calendar because of them (see above). Personally, I'd rather see more races throughout the year at the cost of less coverage than the situation we have now.
We do, but until we can persuade Schladming to put up the funding etc to host another world cup, it’s a bit pointless comparing them. My understanding is that they’re happier ploughing the majority of their events budget into ski racing at the moment.
Sorry, the "other" thread is wrong. Narrow wide and clutches=dropped chains just aren't a thing anymore for me, whether it's DH races, an endurance race, or hitting jumps, just doesn't happen. Hell, I remember even with guides chains would occasionally jam in impossible ways in chain guides. They got a lot better when E13 got involved and kicked the ass of MRP to make something that actually worked, but I just don't need em anymore. Bashguards, yeah I can see location-specific. It's less of an issue now with smaller rings, but it's not gone.
I use an E13 simply as a bash guard.
i’ve used multiple kinds of narrow-wide rings and clutched derailleurs. in general they worked well but but i still threw the chain too often for my liking. simple little topguide has almost no weight penalty and has ensured no drops.
I've had the chain jam on a NW ring (skipped a tooth) one time when I forgot to readjust the top guide after servicing BB bearings. The chain probably would have dropped without the guide, and that was with X01 clutch derailleur. Haven't had any issue as long as the top guide is set at the proper height.
Terrain, suspension design/settings, etc are also factors, perhaps?
Great if you haven't had any issue with no guide, but I'm keeping mine. I never have to deal with mud in my region.
Terrain, suspension design/settings, etc are also factors, perhaps?
Great if you haven't had any issue with no guide, but I'm keeping mine. I never have to deal with mud in my region.
That's the other thing, we deal with all kinds of mud and there's no way older non-clutch systems would stay in adjustment over 100+ miles in constant crap, huge improvements IME.
Maybe there's some unique thing about the gear combos or spacing that makes you prone to dropping, I have largely avoided tiny front rings and monster rear cogs, I'm "moderate" in that regard, so maybe that keeps the shocks through the system from being excessive, I dunno. I can say that when my chainring starts to get significantly worn it might drop a couple times, easy to diagnose and fix IME.
Maybe there's some unique thing about the gear combos or spacing that makes you prone to dropping, I have largely avoided tiny front rings and monster rear cogs, I'm "moderate" in that regard, so maybe that keeps the shocks through the system from being excessive, I dunno. I can say that when my chainring starts to get significantly worn it might drop a couple times, easy to diagnose and fix IME.