Sounds to me like IMBA simply fails to recognise the diversity of MTB trails. One of the great things about riding is that the experience varies so much depending on where you go. Trying to make all trails the same will always be a pointless, and unpopular exercise.
Why the IMBA hating
I still support IMBA's fight for land access but I totally agree that trying to homogenize and standardize trails on the Shore/BC is inappropriate.
I've heard the opinion from a variety of sources that it seems IMBA has diversified it's focus away from straight advocacy into this trail design/building/etc and there are those who believe that it has been to IMBA's detriment. Focus on what you do well, advocating for open trails, shared use, etc…..but maybe they shouldn't be in the design game, things are way to regionally specific and sometimes that gets lost in the 'need to have universal standards'……
i was at the course, sat through a pointless class, it was sort of a how to build for newbs, if you never picked up a shovel before then it was worth it, otherwise not so much. then we went out into the field where buddy told us his plans, well after standing around for a little while and carrying a few rocks me and my buddy left because we thought the ideas were pointless and were going to ruin the trail, and i guess we were right, and we definatly didnt go back on sunday. he kept saying that every stunt and trail has to match whistler guidelines, whistler trails are actually fun and flowy, unlike the crap he put on that trail.
The Whistler Standard:rolleyes::rolleyes:.
Just because it works in Whistler does not mean it works anywhere else.
Just because it works in Whistler does not mean it works anywhere else.
imo the Whistler Trail Standard is a pretty generic and broad document. I don't see enough detail in it to see how it couldn't work in Ontario as well as it does here.
just curious, but what is your beef with it?
River City Cycle Club - www.rivercitycycle.ca
Comox Valley Mountain Biking - www.cvmtb.com
MY experiences with IMBA are very limited, but I can confirm most of the observations here. When I have seen them in action they built high speed doubletrack over technical, rooty, rocky New England ground. The only challenge to the trail when they were done was not falling asleep while riding it. In instance #2, they cut a new (doubletrack) trail along the banks of a lake where the ground was so muddy it was estimated that the bridgework necessary to cover it all would cost $50,000 - $80,000.
It seemed to me that in my experiences, there was a definite XC bias (that is to say XC=mountain biking) and other voices were systematically removed from the conversation (such as it was).
That having been said, I think that there is potential for the organization and it is better than nothing at all when it comes to lobbying for access issues and the like.
As for "the Whistler Standard" my question is "which Whistler?" The A-Line/Freight Train Whister? B-Line? Goat's Gully? Schleyer? River runs through it? Which one?
As for "the Whistler Standard" my question is "which Whistler?" The A-Line/Freight Train Whister? B-Line? Goat's Gully? Schleyer? River runs through it? Which one?
River City Cycle Club - www.rivercitycycle.ca
Comox Valley Mountain Biking - www.cvmtb.com
The Whistler Standard:rolleyes::rolleyes:.
Just because it works in Whistler does not mean it works anywhere else.
have you read the document? it's actually very broad and general and gives an extremely good baseline on which trails are rated and to the standard each rating should be built to…..
The most of the trails on the north shore (and I'm talking about original trail cut) are technically speaking, shit. Thank god for local builders who so lovingly put their time into these trails to maintain them.
An example of this is during the first World Mountain bike conference held on the north shore, professional trail builders from all over the world went for tours on our trails to see why they were so world renowned and to see the quality. What did they see? Quality rock work and bridgework. But they laughed because most of it was unnecessary. If local builders had just originally cut the trail properly then a lot of the work could have been avoided and we could ride on some dirt on certain trails instead of rock highways.
Cavan
:lol:
i just don't know where to begin…
We don't know what our limits are, so to start something with the idea of being limited actually ends up limiting us.
Ellen Langer
im not exactly sure who has been behind the berms on some of the multiuser trails here on the ssc, but i think there has been some imba influence ..as FUN as it is to ride,to me its been very inappropriate and poorly thought out.
From the sounds of it, everybody just drove to the top of the trail, parked their vehicles there, and went nuts.
I suspect that was the main reason that trail was chosen…easy access.
I would like to thank JohnV and any others who made the right decision to walk away from this shitshow rather than have anything to do with it. As to those who participated, no comment. There would have been much less to deal with if others had been as wise as you John.
Disclaimer. Anything written above this should not be taken literally, its called sarcasm you idiots.
have you read the document? it's actually very broad and general and gives an extremely good baseline on which trails are rated and to the standard each rating should be built to…..
Sorry, I wasn't clear. In theory that is a good idea. however the Whistler standard falls short when faced with the Ontario Liability Standard. And untill that thinking has been challenged there really isn't much point of using the Whistler Standard. All that is being built is glorified high speed rollercoaster track.
At least twice in the last year the CofT has ripped trail features out of the Don based on the innuendo of a lawsuit.
Almost 2 years ago Blue ripped all the Whistler Standard features out based on the rumour of a lawsuit.
In some areas like Ontario I think IMBA needs to spend more time dealing with institutionalized thinking. Like this whole risk and lawsuit adverse issue.
Now, when you refer to rating Todd, Ar you refering to trail difficulty?
imo the Whistler Trail Standard is a pretty generic and broad document. I don't see enough detail in it to see how it couldn't work in Ontario as well as it does here.
just curious, but what is your beef with it?
I think my problem is the people who believe that is the only way to do it. The best builds I've seen out here use a little bit of methods from various places. to suit the situation.
Maybe it's the one IMBA rep I've dealt with who spends more time working on his cranial impaction then anything else that rubs me the wrong way.
MY experiences with IMBA are very limited, but I can confirm most of the observations here. When I have seen them in action they built high speed doubletrack over technical, rooty, rocky New England ground. The only challenge to the trail when they were done was not falling asleep while riding it. In instance #2, they cut a new (doubletrack) trail along the banks of a lake where the ground was so muddy it was estimated that the bridgework necessary to cover it all would cost $50,000 - $80,000.
It seemed to me that in my experiences, there was a definite XC bias (that is to say XC=mountain biking) and other voices were systematically removed from the conversation (such as it was).
That having been said, I think that there is potential for the organization and it is better than nothing at all when it comes to lobbying for access issues and the like.
As for "the Whistler Standard" my question is "which Whistler?" The A-Line/Freight Train Whister? B-Line? Goat's Gully? Schleyer? River runs through it? Which one?
Just to clarify,
What BC calls XC is what Ontario calls freeride.
Forum jump:
