#!markdown
The Shore (and MTB in general) is self-inflicting the dissention across the
ranks by the continual segmentation of the sport. Rewind a decade (decade and
a half) and there were two types of bikes - hardtails and soft-tails. Both
were XC-oriented. Then 'downhill' bikes showed up. Then 'all-mountain'. Then
'trail'. Then 'park'. Then 'enduro', 'fatbike', '29'er', '27.5', plus+, and
whatnot. So rather than having the majority of the population show up with
similar bikes able to ride similar trails, the design/technology explosion of
recent years has turned the rider population into a completely mixed bag of
riders, equipment and expectations. Factor in first-world 'me, me, me'
thinking and it shouldn't be surprising that conflict is on the rise.
Oct. 7, 2015, 8:24 a.m. - YVR
#!markdown The Shore (and MTB in general) is self-inflicting the dissention across the ranks by the continual segmentation of the sport. Rewind a decade (decade and a half) and there were two types of bikes - hardtails and soft-tails. Both were XC-oriented. Then 'downhill' bikes showed up. Then 'all-mountain'. Then 'trail'. Then 'park'. Then 'enduro', 'fatbike', '29'er', '27.5', plus+, and whatnot. So rather than having the majority of the population show up with similar bikes able to ride similar trails, the design/technology explosion of recent years has turned the rider population into a completely mixed bag of riders, equipment and expectations. Factor in first-world 'me, me, me' thinking and it shouldn't be surprising that conflict is on the rise.