Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 303
  1. #1
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    679

    Where does it say...Uphill has the right of way???



    Can some one give me a link to a Federal website stating "uphill mountain bikers have the right-a way over down hill"?

    I just spent 1 hour on google looking for something official and could not fine one website with this rule. I did find lots of Rules of the Trail:

    Sierra Club Conservation Policies
    Off Road Use of Bicycles
    I. POLICY
    Appendix E - Trail User Etiquette and Education
    1. In order to minimize conflicts with other trail users, bicyclists should know and use the established Rules of the Trail: - Ride on open trails only. - Leave no trace. - Control your bicycle. - Always yield trail. - Never scare animals. - Plan ahead.
    2. Bicyclists should know and follow applicable laws and regulations.
    3. Bicyclists yield trail to foot travelers, both animal and human. Yielding trail means: slow down, be prepared to stop; establish communication; dismount when appropriate; and pass safely.
    =======
    MBA Mountain Bike Rules of the Trail (IMBA)
    From Kevin Tisue,
    Your Guide to Mountain Biking.
    The following is the official list of mountain biking rules of the trail from IMBA, otherwise known as the International Mountain Bicycling Association.
    These mountain bike rules are designed to minimize our impact on our environment as well as promote friendly relationships between all trail users by creating a safe environment for us all. By following these rules we help ensure our access to trails in our local communities will continue and hopefully grow.
    Every mountain biker should know and live by these mountain biking rules from IMBA:
    Rules of the Trail
    The way we ride today shapes mountain bike trail access tomorrow. Do your part to preserve and enhance our sport's access and image by observing the following rules of the trail, formulated by IMBA, the International Mountain Bicycling Association. These rules are recognized around the world as the standard code of conduct for mountain bikers. IMBA's mission is to promote mountain bicycling that is environmentally sound and socially responsible.
    1. Ride On Open Trails Only.
    Respect trail and road closures - ask if uncertain; avoid trespassing on private land; obtain permits or other authorization as may be required. Federal and state Wilderness areas are closed to cycling. The way you ride will influence trail management decisions and policies.
    2. Leave No Trace.
    Be sensitive to the dirt beneath you. Recognize different types of soils and trail construction; practice low-impact cycling. Wet and muddy trails are more vulnerable to damage. When the trailbed is soft, consider other riding options. This also means staying on existing trails and not creating new ones. Don't cut switchbacks. Be sure to pack out at least as much as you pack in.
    3. Control Your Bicycle!
    Inattention for even a second can cause problems. Obey all bicycle speed regulations and recommendations.
    4. Always Yield Trail.
    Let your fellow trail users know you're coming. A friendly greeting or bell is considerate and works well; don't startle others. Show your respect when passing by slowing to a walking pace or even stopping. Anticipate other trail users around corners or in blind spots. Yielding means slow down, establish communication, be prepared to stop if necessary and pass safely.
    5. Never Scare Animals.
    All animals are startled by an unannounced approach, a sudden movement, or a loud noise. This can be dangerous for you, others, and the animals. Give animals extra room and time to adjust to you. When passing horses use special care and follow directions from the horseback riders - ask if uncertain. Running cattle and disturbing wildlife is a serious offense. Leave gates as you found them, or as marked.
    6. Plan Ahead.
    Know your equipment, your ability, and the area in which you are riding -- and prepare accordingly. Be self-sufficient at all times, keep your equipment in good repair, and carry necessary supplies for changes in weather or other conditions. A well-executed trip is a satisfaction to you and not a burden to others. Always wear a helmet and appropriate safety gear.
    Keep trails open by setting a good example of environmentally sound and socially responsible off-road cycling.
    ========
    The MMBA has adopted the International Mountain Biking Association's (IMBA) Rules of the Trail.
    ========

    So who is the "who said of the greatest magnitude" that states the uphill rider has the right-of-way?

    thanks
    STL

  2. #2
    cheeseburger in paradise
    Reputation: bluchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    220
    I don't think it's a rule. Just common sense courtesy. It's a courtesy that isn't specific to mountain biking, but has been adopted by mountain biking. Not sure where it all started, maybe with cars on steep narrow roads, or maybe even wagons for all I know.

  3. #3
    e-misanthrope
    Reputation: lagarto grande's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    317
    It's common courtesy - rule or not. I've been riding primarily DH lately, and I still get pissed when some douche fails to yield for climbers.

    Not flaming you - but it's a sad state of affairs when a person looks to rules and regulations to guide their behavior.
    Don't waive your rights with your flags.

  4. #4
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe mañana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,179
    Just think about the effort required to resume riding when your going uphill vs downhill. And the physical effort of going uphill vs. downhill and your common sense ought to steer you in the direction of yielding to uphill traffic out of sheer courtesy.

    (This BTW ought to be respected by hikers, too. Since it takes no effort for them to step to the side for a brief moment while the uphill biker pedals past. Especially on tech sections. Hikers have in my experience showed the worst trail manners.)

    _MK

    Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not just surrounded by a*holes

  5. #5
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    It's bicycle community 101 - and has nadda to do with hiker/equestrian rules or Federal Law... Took me exactly 10 seconds to find the link, copy it, and paste it here.

    LINK

    For the attention defecit disorder types, I quote:

    Quote Originally Posted by IMBA
    "...Be familiar with who has the right of way while on the trail. For instance, a rider going uphill has the right of way, and a rider coming downhill must yield. Hikers and equestrians have the right of way over any cyclist. ..."
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kaba Klaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,673
    I think it is an overall rule of courtesy but not one that is strict. Whenever two chaps meet on a trail both should simply assess for who it is easier to get-going again after stopping/making room. In many cases this is the one coming down - but not allways.

    As an example think of a technical section. I would always stop for the one already in there. Regardless if she/he climbs or decents.

    No excuses in my mind for anybody going too fast to stop. Bombing DH on public trails, racing into blind corners is simply not on. It is gross neglect, borders on criminal behavior and no responsible biker does that.

  7. #7
    Inflexable...
    Reputation: kchri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,901
    If everyone would just start riding double track this would not be an issue.


    IMBA creates rules that are not enforcable but are designed to appeal to riders with common sense...
    Tact is for people not witty enough to be sarcastic...

  8. #8
    Bad Case of the Mondays
    Reputation: Jdub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,005
    Quote Originally Posted by MK_
    Just think about the effort required to resume riding when your going uphill vs downhill. And the physical effort of going uphill vs. downhill and your common sense ought to steer you in the direction of yielding to uphill traffic out of sheer courtesy.
    Well said.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jugdish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,254
    Are you talking about horses or bikers? Only "asshats" hold the uphill line, eh? Seems like there may be more asshats out there than you guessed.
    Gone are the days we stopped to decide,
    Where we should go,
    We just ride...

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    335
    Never the less, I wish it was the other way around. I hate stopping when I am enjoying a great, fast downhill cruise; I often appreciate the excuse to take a break on a long uphill grind. But, the precedent has been set, and I don't see any chance that my preference will ever prevail.

  11. #11
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by BonkedAgain
    Never the less, I wish it was the other way around. I hate stopping when I am enjoying a great, fast downhill cruise; I often appreciate the excuse to take a break on a long uphill grind. But, the precedent has been set, and I don't see any chance that my preference will ever prevail.
    Um, unless you go ride DH on DH trails! Der. Get the best of both worlds - lifts to help you get UP, and no one in the way on the way down...

    Or - go live in a place that ain't so clogged up with pesky people preventing your preference from prevailing!



    Christ almighty, it does indeed suck to have to share... AND be courteous!
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  12. #12
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by glenzx
    It's bicycle community 101 - and has nadda to do with hiker/equestrian rules or Federal Law... Took me exactly 10 seconds to find the link, copy it, and paste it here.

    LINK

    For the attention defecit disorder types, I quote:
    That is kinda what I thought. No real rule...

    If an uphill rider complained to a park ranger or whatever trail official was present. The official would have no rule to enforce. So we are back to "Right of Weight" if you think the downhiller is going to clobber you, you better move. Being dead right is never a good position.

    I for one like IMBA's rule #4 specifically the last sentence.
    "4. Always Yield Trail.
    Let your fellow trail users know you're coming. A friendly greeting or bell is considerate and works well; don't startle others. Show your respect when passing by slowing to a walking pace or even stopping. Anticipate other trail users around corners or in blind spots. Yielding means slow down, establish communication, be prepared to stop if necessary and pass safely. "

    This makes more sense (to me) for bikers going up or down. Every case/incounter is going to be different. Both riders need to get by safely and that should be all that matters.

    STL
    Last edited by SingleTrackLovr; 08-22-2007 at 11:06 AM.

  13. #13
    Your retarded
    Reputation: Nickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,085
    I don't think this topic has ever come up before.
    A trail that’s too difficult wouldn’t exist because it’d never be used. But, trails can exist that’re too difficult for you.

  14. #14
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    That is kinda what I thought. No real rule...

    If an uphill rider complained to a park ranger or whatever trail official was present. The official would have no rule to enforce. So we are back to "Right of Weight" if you think the downhiller is going to clobber you, you better move. Being dead right is never a good position.

    STL
    True - just like there's no real specific rule about accidental stick-in-the-spokes episodes for overtly aggro/ididotic riders...

    Go ahead - make me move.

    neener neener neener.

    Um - in case it's not patently clear, I'm kidding.

    Really though, what's your point? There's no federal "law" so go ahead and blaze away, scattering all the feeble uphill riders in your path? There's a whole lot more holding a society together than freakin' law...


    Though it'd be fun to see who ended up off-trail azz over head...


    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  15. #15
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,028
    Quote Originally Posted by BonkedAgain
    Never the less, I wish it was the other way around. I hate stopping when I am enjoying a great, fast downhill cruise; I often appreciate the excuse to take a break on a long uphill grind. But, the precedent has been set, and I don't see any chance that my preference will ever prevail.
    EDIT - doh. now older and wiser. my previous post was dumb.
    Last edited by thump; 07-22-2015 at 08:01 AM.

  16. #16
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by thump
    I'd agree.. from a trail preservation perspective it actually makes more sense for the uphill rider to stop. Making the downhill person have to brake to a stop (even without skidding) is still more wear on the trail than someone going up just putting a foot down. If I'm on a long climb and see someone ripping the downhill I'll usually stop and wave them by.. Maybe I'd feel differently if I was a diehard spandex "loves the climb" roadie convert, but I usually don't mind a quick break.
    Oh geez, here we go.... all folks that know how to ride a bike UP and downhill must be roadie convert spandex wanker leg shaving sissies....

    "rippin' downhill".... like in yer baggies, bro - after some bong hits and brews in the p-lot with yer tunes blasting? See - Generalizations suck and make one sound less than bright....

    But as Nickle noted - it's all been said and done and beaten to death before....

    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  17. #17
    Just F##king Ride!
    Reputation: Flooredsubaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by kchri
    If everyone would just start riding double track this would not be an issue.
    (Load of BS start)
    We can also ride on paved bike paths that are completely flat. then it will be a non-issue.

    single track trails should only be used by hikers any way, they are the only ones that don't damage the trail.
    (load of BS end)

    why is this even being discussed. It is for overall safety that we are not slamming into each other on the trail at mock speeds and getting people killed.

    I would love to shove a stick in the front wheel of some asshat that is giving cyclist a bad name.

    We all ride public trails. that is why we don't have to pay.

    so claiming there is no rule. Is the same as saying that a horse rider does not have to clean up after the horse. Which I think is a bigger deal then who has the right of way up or down.

  18. #18
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,028
    Quote Originally Posted by glenzx
    "rippin' downhill".... like in yer baggies, bro - after some bong hits and brews in the p-lot with yer tunes blasting? See - Generalizations suck and make one sound less than bright....
    Alright, alright.. I deserved that one. But the comment about the additional trail wear still stands.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    30
    .... I try to yield whatever my position is, depending on if there is a turnout on the trail. MK and KABA's got it right. Just assess the situation and dont COMPLAIN about it... geezo... its like what... 2 seconds! If its the next day and still bothering you.. see a therapist.
    Ok, so maybe it is an addiction.
    The Dire Riders Consortium

  20. #20
    lurkio
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    519
    Not again!!!!!
    We went, earth, sky, earth sky, earth skyambulance

  21. #21
    enlightened.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,494
    I just push people out of my way. Quick and effective. Leaves a lasting impression.

  22. #22
    Mutha Flippin'
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    6
    First off, I always respect other trail-users, and try to warn and accommodate them within reason. But for fun, here are some arguments I can think of from the two sides:

    DH: The encounter lasts longer if the DHer has to stop and wait for the uphill rider to pass.
    UH: It's more effort for me to get going again than for you.
    DH: DH is about the groove. Don't mess with my groove.
    UH: I get satisfaction from cleaning the trail, so stopping for you messes with my groove.
    DH: Physics says it's easier to brake the slower you are going, so you brake.
    UH: I have the right of way.
    DH and UH: blah blah blah

    Personally, I think the people who ride up or down like they are in a race and get all freaked out when they're inconvenienced with yielding need to chill the flip out. I'd love to bomb the shite but the fact is- it's a two way trail, so deal with it.
    Don't let yesterday use up too much of today.

  23. #23
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by glenzx
    But as Nickle noted - it's all been said and done and beaten to death before....
    Not all posters have been a member of mtbr since 2003-04 like you two.
    It maybe an old topic for you, its not to me.

    With the exception of a few personnel attacks I think the answers, opinions, and discussion posted to my question have been great.

    If you find this topic old or boring, why post? why even open my thread?

    peace,
    STL

  24. #24
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    Not all posters have been a member of mtbr since 2003-04 like you two.
    It maybe an old topic for you, its not to me.
    First off, I've been kickin around here for much longer than THAT! pffft. Late 2003 is when they last changed mtbr.com forum format and server(s) I think.... so us old pharts appear to have been members since only then. There was life even before THAT! Not that I had one - or have one now, for that matter...

    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    With the exception of a few personnel attacks I think the answers, opinions, and discussion posted to my question have been great.
    I haven't read any personal attacks here, yet - it's all good. I'd watch out for athalliah though!

    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    If you find this topic old or boring, why post? why even open my thread?
    Old topic? yes. Means there's been a LOT of dialogue already. Boring? No! Us guardians of trail user righteousness have to keep fighting the fight, or risk having a few proverbial bad apples fahk it up for everyone else... you know, that ed-u-macate the young-ins and newbies thing and all.

    I simply speak from experience. Rippin' high speed descents ought to take place only where you're 100% sure you're 'clear', in that if someone - on a bike or horse or on foot - approaches from below, you can stop without skiding, and without crashing and yield the trail.

    IF they happen to be generous and nice enough to yield to you, you know what? It's still worth slowing down and saying "thanks". And if you absolutely must hammer a descent with no interuptions, come out and race, or ride at designated DH trails.
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  25. #25
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Speaking of mentorship, that crazy 'search' function is nifty!

    LINK to results page of mtbr.com search for "trail etiquette"... the SoCal one near the top is especially humorous!
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  26. #26
    That's what she said
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    200
    Old topic? yes. Means there's been a LOT of dialogue already. Boring? No! Us guardians of trail user righteousness have to keep fighting the fight, or risk having a few proverbial bad apples fahk it up for everyone else... you know, that ed-u-macate the young-ins and newbies thing and all.

    I simply speak from experience. Rippin' high speed descents ought to take place only where you're 100% sure you're 'clear', in that if someone - on a bike or horse or on foot - approaches from below, you can stop without skiding, and without crashing and yield the trail.

    IF they happen to be generous and nice enough to yield to you, you know what? It's still worth slowing down and saying "thanks". And if you absolutely must hammer a descent with no interuptions, come out and race, or ride at designated DH trails.[/QUOTE]


    Well said.

  27. #27
    Ride 2 Work, Work 2 Ride!
    Reputation: thebigred67's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,471
    I stop going uphill due to the fact that I love running fast downhill and know that others do too. Plus I can always use the break when climbing.
    "Don't give up, Never give up!"

  28. #28
    Inflexable...
    Reputation: kchri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by glenzx


    I simply speak from experience. Rippin' high speed descents ought to take place only where you're 100% sure you're 'clear', in that if someone - on a bike or horse or on foot - approaches from below, you can stop without skiding, and without crashing and yield the trail.

    I

    Ya, this always happens...
    Tact is for people not witty enough to be sarcastic...

  29. #29
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    679
    I couldn't agree more.
    High speed descents belong at the ski resorts. Not on public land.

    STL

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    High speed descents belong at the ski resorts. Not on public land.
    Huh? Can you justify that opinion? I can just hear all the guys lined up to ride Jones Park/Sandy Wash/Porcupine/Zippety/where ever gasping over that.

    IMO, just ride at whatever speed the conditions allow. If there is a trail that is a favorite for downhillers, and there is an alternate way to get to the top, ride the alternate way and let the downhillers have their fun. If you are riding up and some dh'er acts like they own the trail b!tch at them (in the 1.5 seconds they are in hearing range). Above all, be flexible and don't insist on ruining other people's fun just because it is your right.

  31. #31
    3327333
    Reputation: edemtbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by glenzx
    ....ed-u-macate ....
    What the...?

    Don't be dragging me into this imbroglio G, I've NEVER macated, never ever! And I always ride uphill, in both directions. So give way, scatter yourselves as you bomb the downhills and I split the echelon with my relentless uphill struggles.

    I'll shut up now. Athallia, you now have the floor again

    Ed

  32. #32
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by edemtbs
    ...I always ride uphill, in both directions.
    YOU and me both, buddy!
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  33. #33
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,851
    Quote Originally Posted by BonkedAgain
    IMO, just ride at whatever speed the conditions allow.
    That sort of sums it up... but wait!

    Quote Originally Posted by BonkedAgain
    Above all, be flexible and don't insist on ruining other people's fun just because it is your right.
    Fun. That's a tricky one, that fun-thing. Fun is all in the eye of the beholder - so let's just stick to common sense and etiquette. Fun, for me not only is rippin' that descent (r, or climbing it like Ed!), but spending 2, 3, sometimes 4 hours climbing 5k - 6k feet to get there.
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  34. #34
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,028
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    I couldn't agree more.
    High speed descents belong at the ski resorts. Not on public land.
    I think it's worth clarifying there's a large difference between "high speed" and "out of control". A noob running old v-brakes on a hardtail might be out of control doing 10mph down a rocky trail. I like to hit the downhills with some nice speed, but I'm looking well down the trail and have never had issue coming to a nice smooth stop using the 2.5 tires and 8 inch rotors on my Uzzi.. I pedal all 38 lbs of that bike up and around the trail b/c I want to enjoy any technical feature or DH that I can. There isn't a one-true-speed-limit, it's about riding within your limits and keeping it safe. If you can't do that at high-speed then keep your fingers on those levers.

  35. #35
    Inflexable...
    Reputation: kchri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr
    I couldn't agree more.
    High speed descents belong at the ski resorts. Not on public land.

    STL
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha....

    There are so many more people at the ski resort than there are on the bike trails.
    Tact is for people not witty enough to be sarcastic...

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timroz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    339
    A few years ago there was a group of really angry hikers hiding in the weeds next to the trail in Pineridge open space waiting for bikers to come by so they could jump out in front of them and get hit - then complain to the city trails department that the bikers were not yielding trail. Seemed like a good way to get bikers banned from what they wanted to be hiking only trails. We are starting to sound a lot like them. So keep this argument going and we'll end up with a hell of a lot more hiker only trails (read - possible closure at Monarch Crest trail). How about we all yield to everybody (except rattlesnakes - push them off the trail with a big stick) and focus on keeping all trails open both ways for all bikes.

  37. #37
    lurkio
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    519
    oh God!!!
    We went, earth, sky, earth sky, earth skyambulance

  38. #38
    enlightened.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,494
    Quote Originally Posted by edemtbs

    I'll shut up now. Athallia, you now have the floor again
    That's a good idea because I was about to shove you off of it

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,127

    I'll yield to a downhill rider

    I say a downhill rider, I don't encounter downhillers much. Sometimes I am suffering and like a break. When I'm in a groove climbing hard I don't like to yield and expect someone riding downhill to see, appreciate it & yield. Mostly its not a problem as my rides are not the shuttle types anyway.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    11
    ok, letting an uphill rider go first is just right, and everybody should do it, but when i let a dude go, i usually never hear "thank you" or "have a nice ride/day", that's also a common courtesy, but i see lot of xc dude's have a problem lately with that. Instead of "thank you" i can hear grawwling/stupid comments, or nothing, and that does not help the whole dh/xc situation. Common on guys if a guy going downhill yelds you, what hurts to say something nice, so the person going downhill fells like he did a good thing letting you go ;/

    I think it is an overall rule of courtesy but not one that is strict. Whenever two chaps meet on a trail both should simply assess for who it is easier to get-going again after stopping/making room. In many cases this is the one coming down - but not always.
    DH: The encounter lasts longer if the DHer has to stop and wait for the uphill rider to pass.
    UH: It's more effort for me to get going again than for you.
    DH: DH is about the groove. Don't mess with my groove.
    UH: I get satisfaction from cleaning the trail, so stopping for you messes with my groove.
    DH: Physics says it's easier to brake the slower you are going, so you brake.
    UH: I have the right of way.
    DH and UH: blah blah blah
    Exactly, because everybody is the "most important" person on the trail and he deserves everything ;p

    There isn't a one-true-speed-limit, it's about riding within your limits and keeping it safe. If you can't do that at high-speed then keep your fingers on those levers.
    Hell ya, everybody comes out to ride trails for one reason, to have fun. As somebody said, a person can go fast and still be in control, and know what to do in certain situations


    How about we will show more respect to everybody, have more trust in other riders, and just be nice to other users of the trail, because the trails are multi-use, and they are build from every bodies money. But probably this will never happen

    My .02 cents

    Peace

  41. #41
    icanseeformiles(andmiles)
    Reputation: Rm80Co's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    241
    Well, it's not like this topic has been done before.

    In Colorado, it all goes back to state laws for driving on the roads. Colorado law states that the downhill driver always yields to the uphill driver (usually applied under slippery conditions and single-lane jeep trails). It used to be one of the questions always asked on the written DL test.
    Quote Originally Posted by MB1
    To differentiate riders by the type of surface frequented is IMO the height of foolishness.

  42. #42
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by thump
    I think it's worth clarifying there's a large difference between "high speed" and "out of control". A noob running old v-brakes on a hardtail might be out of control doing 10mph down a rocky trail. I like to hit the downhills with some nice speed, but I'm looking well down the trail and have never had issue coming to a nice smooth stop using the 2.5 tires and 8 inch rotors on my Uzzi.. I pedal all 38 lbs of that bike up and around the trail b/c I want to enjoy any technical feature or DH that I can. There isn't a one-true-speed-limit, it's about riding within your limits and keeping it safe. If you can't do that at high-speed then keep your fingers on those levers.
    That's what I ment, thank you thump.

    To the sages of mbtr (guardians of trail user righteousness) sorry if this topic opens an old wound or is old hat for you. There are many new members (myself included) here that might not know the issues we all face.

    Before someone posts the usual "why don't you use the search" well, this is a forum for active discussion and maybe I don't really care about what the conclusion was in 2004.

    Great Discussion, thanks everyone for joining in. As a newbie to mtbr I am a more informed and considerate rider thanks to this website.

    STL
    Last edited by SingleTrackLovr; 08-23-2007 at 06:07 AM.

  43. #43
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,551
    A lot of it comes from the jeep trail rules of the road, downhill yields to uphill because it can be so difficult to get going again. Of course one size doesn't always fit all in that situation; it might be easier for the uphill driver to back down to that wide spot 50 feet below than for the downhill driver to back up the road 100 yards to a pull out.
    In mountain biking I've always yielded to the climber, While it might be easier to stop when going uphill as opposed to downhill, it's much harder to [I]get going again[I] when climbing, than it is to resume your downhill ride. Not only do you loose your momentum, you loose your breathing rhythm, etc. All you have to do to regain your downhill momentum is take your fingers off the brake. I guess that if the climb is nothing but a detestable necessity to be avoided when possible your priorities will be to maintain your DH “flow and “adrenaline rush”. There’ nothing inherently wrong with that, but when you’re sharing a single track trail with various users going in various directions, there are going to be problems.
    IMO, one of the negative impacts of big bikes, shuttling, and general DH/FR style of riding is that it puts so much more emphasis on the downhill experience than the overall ride/loop/cycling experience of traditional XC riding. IMO when one puts such a disproportionate emphasis on haulin' ass on a 35 lb. + bike with 6"+ of suspension on trails that have two way traffic of different users, it's going to lead to conflicts with the other folks you share the trail with. If you are going so fast that you increase your impact on the trail to yield to another user, you need to slow down.
    Thankfully, there is not a lot of trails that are suitable for shuttlers where I live. The DH crowd hangs at Keystone or a few DH only trails, although I did see a couple full on Body armor, full face w/ goggles, big bike guys on the blue river trail about a month or so. A little overkill for what is not a technical or steep trail IMO, I can go 30mph on my weeny 4" suspension XC bike. Only one of the three (the last in line) yielded to me or slowed down. (I was trail running) and I had to jump off the trail to avoid getting run over. Usually though, that’s not the case in Summit Co, most folks yield to the climber, to hikers and horses, most climbers say “thanks” and for the most part, we get along.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    29
    I'll bite.

    The way it *should* work is that whomever has an easier time of stopping and starting should be the one to stop. So if one person has started a technical section, he or she should keep going and the other person should stop and watch. Unfortunately this is a rather vague rule and we need something else to fall back on when it isn't clear who should stop.

    Consider our possibilities: uphill rider has rights vs downhill rider has rights.

    If the downhill rider has right of way, then there is is no reason for them to slow down, is there? That means that if I'm climbing and I can't get my butt off the trail fast enough, we are going to crash. People going fast through blind corners will be scary, and guys that are listening to an ipod while grinding away will get hit for not being fast enough to jump out of the way.

    If the uphill rider has right of way, then the downhill rider is forced to stay in control (i.e. can stop for another rider or hiker) and crashes are generally avoided.

    The 'uphill rider has right of way' rule is less about starting and stopping than it is about not crashing into each other.

  45. #45
    formerly shabadu
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    958
    Quote Originally Posted by derek14
    I'll bite.

    The way it *should* work is that whomever has an easier time of stopping and starting should be the one to stop. So if one person has started a technical section, he or she should keep going and the other person should stop and watch. Unfortunately this is a rather vague rule and we need something else to fall back on when it isn't clear who should stop.

    Consider our possibilities: uphill rider has rights vs downhill rider has rights.

    If the downhill rider has right of way, then there is is no reason for them to slow down, is there? That means that if I'm climbing and I can't get my butt off the trail fast enough, we are going to crash. People going fast through blind corners will be scary, and guys that are listening to an ipod while grinding away will get hit for not being fast enough to jump out of the way.

    If the uphill rider has right of way, then the downhill rider is forced to stay in control (i.e. can stop for another rider or hiker) and crashes are generally avoided.

    The 'uphill rider has right of way' rule is less about starting and stopping than it is about not crashing into each other.
    This is the most logical post in this thread. Gracias.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jugdish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,254
    Quote Originally Posted by zrm
    IMO, one of the negative impacts of big bikes, shuttling, and general DH/FR style of riding is that it puts so much more emphasis on the downhill experience than the overall ride/loop/cycling experience of traditional XC riding. IMO when one puts such a disproportionate emphasis on haulin' ass on a 35 lb. + bike with 6"+ of suspension on trails that have two way traffic of different users, it's going to lead to conflicts with the other folks you share the trail with.

    Well said.
    Gone are the days we stopped to decide,
    Where we should go,
    We just ride...

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    330
    Plain and simple why this is a common courtesy. When you are climbing you need momentum and traction to keep going. If you have to stop you lose all of this. When you are going downhill it is just much easier to stop and get going again. This rule applies to ATV's and 4 Wheeling trails also.

  48. #48
    Your retarded
    Reputation: Nickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,085
    This circular argument sucks. My solution: bolt a javelin to the front of the bike and we'll see who has right of way then.

    A trail that’s too difficult wouldn’t exist because it’d never be used. But, trails can exist that’re too difficult for you.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,228
    damn, i wonder if they pulled it out or left it for the lucky doctor to do it.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    330
    <embed src="http://www.familyguyfiles.com/videos/stewie_loader.swf?id=stewie-gets-glass-in-his-head" width="320" height="260"></embed>
    <br>Now Playing:
    <br><a title="stewie gets glass in his head video" href="http://www.familyguyfiles.com/stewie-gets-glass-in-his-head-video/">stewie gets glass in his head video</a>

    Reminds me of this

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    11
    derek14 - You are totally right, but there will always be a group of people that think they are "the most important person on the trail", and they will never use common courtesy (even if two riders are going that same way, one is faster, slower guy should let him go, usually the slower guy never yields, and that is the rule). But whatever, there are people that use common courtesy and others don't.

    We all have a common interest in riding bikes and having fun on them, so if we are fighting right now, it will probably get ever worse over time (specially look how young our sport is), and this definitely doesn't give us as mountainbikers a good images specially in eyes of people that just got in to this sport or wants to

    Peace

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3

    Colorado State Law

    Don't know of any other states with this, but if you are in Colorado, state law says uphill vehicle has the right of way. I know this goes back to at least the 1960s, so it is pre-mountain bike, but also under Colorado law, a bicycle is considered a vehicle.

  53. #53
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by AgustinGoba View Post
    Don't know of any other states with this, but if you are in Colorado, state law says uphill vehicle has the right of way. I know this goes back to at least the 1960s, so it is pre-mountain bike, but also under Colorado law, a bicycle is considered a vehicle.
    A bicycle IS NOT a vehicle under Colorado law. Get run over and you'll find out the hard way.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    A bicycle IS NOT a vehicle under Colorado law. Get run over and you'll find out the hard way.
    Yeah, you might actually have wanted to check before making that statement. Under Colorado law, a bicycle is a vehicle. Doesn't mean you can't get run over, but you can get ticketed for running a red light, speeding, etc.
    42-4-1412. Operation of bicycles and other human-powered vehicles

    1. Every person riding a bicycle or electrical assisted bicycle shall have all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle under this article...

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmalling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    326
    People who don't yield to uphill riders are the same people who...
    1.Drive in the left lane and pass in the right.
    2.Exit stores using the door to their left at the same time those who follow the social agreement of using the door to right are attempting to enter.
    3.Leave their glassware at the brewpub on the tables when done resulting in the one bartender needing to go retrieve them instead of serving up beer.
    4.Shake hands with their left hand (Yes, this happens)

    With the exception of number 1 in many states (finally!), none of these are FEDERAL laws and thank god for that. If you need laws or written out statements from groups like IMBA or Sierra Club to act civilly and get along with your fellow citizen, then I'm sad to say the struggles I'm sure you face in life are entirely your fault.

    In high school in the 90's in of all places, OHIO, I learned from older riders that the rider traveling uphill has the right of way and we should pull over when descending and yield the trail. Pretty cool that an agreement among trail users such as this made its way all the way to the armpit of America and was shared with teenagers close to 20 years ago and none of us wasted our time debating the merits of this agreement.

  56. #56
    Trail Bomber
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    194
    As much as I hate stopping on a good DH rip, I do. I do, because other rides stop for me when I am climbing. Its a part of using multi-use trails. I have a bike park pass for that reason. I can go ride Trestle, Steam Boat, Angel Fire, and Crested Butte bike parks for free with my pass, and I don't have to stop for hikers or uphill traffic, because there isn't any.
    2016 Santa Cruz Nomad
    2016 Specialized Fat Boy Trail

  57. #57
    MFin' Princess
    Reputation: TVC15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by rmalling View Post
    People who don't yield to uphill riders are the same people who...
    1.Drive in the left lane and pass in the right.
    2.Exit stores using the door to their left at the same time those who follow the social agreement of using the door to right are attempting to enter.
    3.Leave their glassware at the brewpub on the tables when done resulting in the one bartender needing to go retrieve them instead of serving up beer.
    4.Shake hands with their left hand (Yes, this happens)
    YES! I like round numbers:

    5. Enter an elevator before people have gotten out.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    757
    Quote Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
    YES! I like round numbers:

    5. Enter an elevator before people have gotten out.
    Just like:

    6: Eating with your left hand and wiping with your right. I mean c'mon!

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmalling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
    YES! I like round numbers:

    5. Enter an elevator before people have gotten out.
    Of course! I couldn't think of a #5. I accept this addition.

  60. #60
    MFin' Princess
    Reputation: TVC15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by rmalling View Post
    Of course! I couldn't think of a #5. I accept this addition.
    Highfive!

  61. #61
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by AgustinGoba View Post
    Yeah, you might actually have wanted to check before making that statement. Under Colorado law, a bicycle is a vehicle. Doesn't mean you can't get run over, but you can get ticketed for running a red light, speeding, etc.
    42-4-1412. Operation of bicycles and other human-powered vehicles


    1. Every person riding a bicycle or electrical assisted bicycle shall have all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle under this article...

    I'm familiar with that CRS but I'm not sure you are interpreting correctly.

    My understanding is that a bicycle is classified as a "bicycle" under Colorado law and while you have the same rights and duties as a DRIVER, you are not operating a "motor vehicle" by definition, you are riding a "bicycle".

    So yes, a bicycle is a "vehicle" under Colorado law, but NO a bicycle cannot be operated the same as a MOTOR vehicle, nor do you have the same rights as motor vehicles as stated in your first post.

    It's the same way bikes are interpreted in CA. You cannot apply MOTOR vehicle laws to bicycles in Colorado. Bicycles have their own laws.

    This was the compromise in 2009. Bike advocates wanted vehicle status, but settled on this quasi-vehicle status which offers more protection/culpability in accidents than pre-2009, but does not give full motor vehicle status.

    Why does this matter? because when you are involved in an accident with another cyclist, i.e. run over by a bicyclist, legally he/she can be given the status of pedestrian, at the DA's discretion, and any lawsuit against the other rider becomes a civil lawsuit at your own expense. So don't expect the DA to come to bat for you because someone on a bicycle violated a motor vehicle law. That lesson cost me $25K out of pocket...

    Vehicle Finder

  62. #62
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,073
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    A bicycle IS NOT a vehicle under Colorado law. Get run over and you'll find out the hard way.
    OK.

    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    ... you are not operating a "motor vehicle" by definition, you are riding a "bicycle".

    So yes, a bicycle is a "vehicle" under Colorado law, but NO a bicycle cannot be operated the same as a MOTOR vehicle, nor do you have the same rights as motor vehicles as stated in your first post...
    OK. Good got it.

    It's not a vehicle, but it is a "vehicle". Makes perfect sense.
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  63. #63
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    OK.



    OK. Good got it.

    It's not a vehicle, but it is a "vehicle". Makes perfect sense.
    Glad I could help.

  64. #64
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,923
    Uphill has the right of way comes from dirtbikes and Jeeps. They go the same speed uphill or down and their weight makes it hard to re-start on climbs with limited traction. Someone decided to use this same model for MTB and it was a mistake. They go much faster down than up so it's easier for the uphill rider to stop and restart.
    Keep the Country country.

  65. #65
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Lelandjt View Post
    Uphill has the right of way comes from dirtbikes and Jeeps. They go the same speed uphill or down and their weight makes it hard to re-start on climbs with limited traction. Someone decided to use this same model for MTB and it was a mistake. They go much faster down than up so it's easier for the uphill rider to stop and restart.
    It's only harder for the DH rider to stop if they're not riding in control (There are places and in some places, times where riding DH full tilt is appropriate, but almost none of them are on well used, multi use, multi directional trails) and I can't believe anyone really thinks it's harder for a DH rider to restart.

  66. #66
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,923
    It's harder to get back up to the speed you were going. It takes a hundred feet and a couple gear shifts to get back up to speed. A climber who was going 5mph can stop and start with no gear shifts and in a bike length. You don't have to be out of control to need some distance to come to a stop. If you're going 20-25mph on loose soil it's gonna take hard braking and some time to stop. I'm just pointing out where the "rule" came from, why it existed in the moto world, and why it doesn't make as much sense for MTBs. If two riders encounter each other and one can stop in a bike length, then get back up to the speed they were going in a bike length while the other needs 50-100ft to stop and another 50-100ft to get back up to speed who can more easily move aside? Doesn't it make sense for the person who can more easily yield to do it? That's why I alway yield on climbs. There's the added aspect of sound and visible motion. A downhiller riding fast can be heard while a climber is silent. From a distance through trees you more eaily see someone who's moving fast. When I'm climbing I can always hear and see a descender before they see me. I'm often foot down, leaning off the side of the trail already when they first notice me. If you forget that a different sport already had a yieding rule and that some random person applied it to MTB and instead use common sense when encountering another rider it makes it easy to decide what action to take.
    Keep the Country country.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by Lelandjt View Post
    It's harder to get back up to the speed you were going. It takes a hundred feet and a couple gear shifts to get back up to speed. A climber who was going 5mph can stop and start with no gear shifts and in a bike length. You don't have to be out of control to need some distance to come to a stop. If you're going 20-25mph on loose soil it's gonna take hard braking and some time to stop. I'm just pointing out where the "rule" came from, why it existed in the moto world, and why it doesn't make as much sense for MTBs. If two riders encounter each other and one can stop in a bike length, then get back up to the speed they were going in a bike length while the other needs 50-100ft to stop and another 50-100ft to get back up to speed who can more easily move aside? Doesn't it make sense for the person who can more easily yield to do it? That's why I alway yield on climbs. There's the added aspect of sound and visible motion. A downhiller riding fast can be heard while a climber is silent. From a distance through trees you more eaily see someone who's moving fast. When I'm climbing I can always hear and see a descender before they see me. I'm often foot down, leaning off the side of the trail already when they first notice me. If you forget that a different sport already had a yieding rule and that some random person applied it to MTB and instead use common sense when encountering another rider it makes it easy to decide what action to take.
    Stop...just stop...seriously, stop it. Enough! Grow up!

    The rule isn't going to change. Please just follow it so we all don't get kicked off the trails.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ds2199's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    857
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs View Post
    Stop...just stop...seriously, stop it. Enough! Grow up!

    The rule isn't going to change. Please just follow it so we all don't get kicked off the trails.
    ^^^^
    Thank you!

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Lelandjt View Post
    It's harder to get back up to the speed you were going. It takes a hundred feet and a couple gear shifts to get back up to speed. A climber who was going 5mph can stop and start with no gear shifts and in a bike length. You don't have to be out of control to need some distance to come to a stop. If you're going 20-25mph on loose soil it's gonna take hard braking and some time to stop. I'm just pointing out where the "rule" came from, why it existed in the moto world, and why it doesn't make as much sense for MTBs. If two riders encounter each other and one can stop in a bike length, then get back up to the speed they were going in a bike length while the other needs 50-100ft to stop and another 50-100ft to get back up to speed who can more easily move aside? Doesn't it make sense for the person who can more easily yield to do it? That's why I alway yield on climbs. There's the added aspect of sound and visible motion. A downhiller riding fast can be heard while a climber is silent. From a distance through trees you more eaily see someone who's moving fast. When I'm climbing I can always hear and see a descender before they see me. I'm often foot down, leaning off the side of the trail already when they first notice me. If you forget that a different sport already had a yieding rule and that some random person applied it to MTB and instead use common sense when encountering another rider it makes it easy to decide what action to take.
    it's about fkin time someone w/ a brain chimed in on this debate.

    this makes PERFECT sense and, i'll re-iterate, it's much, much easier for the uphill rider to yield. there's no "getting up to speed" for the climber b/c they weren't at 'speed' to begin with. You do not need to be going mach 10 to realize that it takes much longer for the DH rider to stop. apparently none of you understand basic physics and think that some xc rider climbing has any real momentum to speak of.

    be a dick and don't yield to the DH rider, and find out just how much more momentum that person has....idiots.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    27
    I yield to DH riders as I would want the same after climbing 2 hours, etc.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs View Post
    Stop...just stop...seriously, stop it. Enough! Grow up!

    The rule isn't going to change. Please just follow it so we all don't get kicked off the trails.
    are you seriously that DUMB?!?!

    you're the one that needs to grow up.

    he just made an argument that DESTROYS anything you guys have posited as an objection to this nonsense rule of yielding to uphill traffic, yet you're calling him immature b/c he's making the most logical argument?

    Do you even Think, Bro ?
    .....

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Brettster5555 View Post
    I yield to DH riders as I would want the same after climbing 2 hours, etc.
    EXACTLY! people forget that the DH rider on your XC trails likely rode his ass off to earn that descent. so fking let him have it inside of being a dick and making him yield to your strava-sshole KOM attempt.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    EXACTLY! people forget that the DH rider on your XC trails likely rode his ass off to earn that descent. so fking let him have it inside of being a dick and making him yield to your strava-sshole KOM attempt.
    Yes, "rode his ass off" up the hill in his Bro-Truck...

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    are you seriously that DUMB?!?!

    you're the one that needs to grow up.

    he just made an argument that DESTROYS anything you guys have posited as an objection to this nonsense rule of yielding to uphill traffic, yet you're calling him immature b/c he's making the most logical argument?

    Do you even Think, Bro ?
    .....

    Do you really think the rule will ever change? Please, answer the question for once.

    Also, humor us by answering as if we're all sitting in a room with other trail users and land managers. Act like you're expecting other adults to take you seriously, not like you're spewing garbage on an internet forum.

  75. #75
    wanna be
    Reputation: bigmariow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    EXACTLY! people forget that the DH rider on your XC trails likely rode his ass off to earn that descent. so fking let him have it inside of being a dick and making him yield to your strava-sshole KOM attempt.
    So if we take your argument to its logical conclusion, **** all of the other trail users out there on all of the multi use trails, it's all about me and my flow bro! How do you think bikes got banned from most of Boulder city trails? I don't like having to stop and let others through, but I know if I want to keep riding open space, I need to be courteous to others

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sbsbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,179
    " apparently none of you understand basic physics and think that some xc rider climbing has any real momentum to speak of."

    People use this same argument to deny me my right to ride bikes on roadways.
    This is exactly why DH riders need to slow and yield to uphill. I drive a F-250, big diesel, I have a responsibility to drive with greater respect toward other road users because of the size and momentum of my vehicle. In a VW bug, the wash of air won't push a cyclist off the road during a pass, but my F-250 will, so i slow down, and pass with respect to my size and mass. Same for riding bikes, The DH rider can do considerable damage to an uphill rider so they need to ride with greater respect. It is not about who can get going easier, or who can stop easier, it is about respecting other trail users, and operating in a responsible manner. If you can't operate in a responsible manner, take your show to one of the many resorts that allow unrestrained DH riding, and stay off multi use trails. If you want to see our rights to use trails further diminished, keep up the irresponsible riding, and see what the Man does to those that do not share. We do not have a right to use trails, it is a privilege, that can be removed by the man if too many riders do not show restraint and manners toward other users.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs View Post
    Yes, "rode his ass off" up the hill in his Bro-Truck...
    lmfao!!

    I'm going to rock my full face and leatt on xc descents just to fk with you guys..BUT, I'm going to ride really slow and yield to every uphiller just to look at the confused looks on your faces..

    lol

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs View Post
    Do you really think the rule will ever change? Please, answer the question for once.

    Also, humor us by answering as if we're all sitting in a room with other trail users and land managers. Act like you're expecting other adults to take you seriously, not like you're spewing garbage on an internet forum.
    I absolutely think it should change: b/c it's unsafe to force a rider with a massive momentum differential to come skidding to a stop (which can also fk up trails) when the dude climbing can simply step aside w/o any risk on his part.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    I absolutely think it should change: b/c it's unsafe to force a rider with a massive momentum differential to come skidding to a stop (which can also fk up trails) when the dude climbing can simply step aside w/o any risk on his part.
    And.....this weak argument would quickly be shot down by some old lady who likes hiking and looking at birds.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by bigmariow View Post
    So if we take your argument to its logical conclusion, **** all of the other trail users out there on all of the multi use trails, it's all about me and my flow bro! How do you think bikes got banned from most of Boulder city trails? I don't like having to stop and let others through, but I know if I want to keep riding open space, I need to be courteous to others
    bikes got banned from boulder trails due to ignorance and discrimination. boulder NEVER had a downhill scene. the banned the idea of people riding downhill before it ever happened, and based their decision on unfounded rumors and stereotypes that are not supported by the data (and they use trail stats from the 90's).

  81. #81
    Chronic 1st-timer
    Reputation: lubes17319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,367
    Don the costume of your choice; sausage-suit or flat-billed cap, and meet behind the playground at 3:30. Let's get ready to rumble!
    Trailwrecker at large

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,690
    I have come to the conclusions that some people are just dks. Nothing more needs to be said. Wiggs is 100% right. On a multi-use trail, if you are going so fast that it takes 100's of feet to get to that speed again and you need 100's of feet to stop, are you really ridding in control? Really, just think about it.
    On MTBR, the reputation is infamous.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    123
    If the front range had more purpose built directional trails then a lot of trail conflict would be resolved. I understand that this isnt a simple thing. Its been done in other places and works.
    Until the CO front range gets with the times, use common sense and respect one another.

  84. #84
    MFin' Princess
    Reputation: TVC15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    I absolutely think it should change: b/c it's unsafe to force a rider with a massive momentum differential to come skidding to a stop (which can also fk up trails) when the dude climbing can simply step aside w/o any risk on his part.
    If you're skidding to a stop you're out of control on a multiuse trail and owe whoever you yielded to -- late -- an apology. Key word being multiuse.

    I'm beginning to believe you are a troll. No one can be this stupid. If you're not and ride front range trails, I hope we meet one day as I'm climbing and you're descending.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,510
    How can you even consider this an argument? Rules state that you must yield to the uphill rider. You can polish your argument with your flat brim hat all you want but it does not change anything. You are a Bro and Wiggs is an educated human being so what is the point???
    I am going to add yielding to the uphill rider along with politics, abortion and religion to things not to talk about with strangers.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    are you seriously that DUMB?!?!

    you're the one that needs to grow up.

    he just made an argument that DESTROYS anything you guys have posited as an objection to this nonsense rule of yielding to uphill traffic, yet you're calling him immature b/c he's making the most logical argument?

    Do you even Think, Bro ?
    .....

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    I absolutely think it should change: b/c it's unsafe to force a rider with a massive momentum differential to come skidding to a stop (which can also fk up trails) when the dude climbing can simply step aside w/o any risk on his part.
    Not that I expect any of these responses to change your opinion cause no one is ever wrong on the internet...

    TVC and a few others beat me to it but one could argue (correctly) it's much more unsafe to be riding a multi use, bi directional trail in such a way that you can't stop in a controlled manner when an unexpected obstacle appears. And not just uphill bikers/hikers, half of my rides a deer pops up in the middle of the trail. Go to keystone or trestle and you have free reign to destroy yourself with minimal risk to anyone else.

  87. #87
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    bikes got banned from boulder trails due to ignorance and discrimination. boulder NEVER had a downhill scene. the banned the idea of people riding downhill before it ever happened, and based their decision on unfounded rumors and stereotypes that are not supported by the data (and they use trail stats from the 90's).
    Do you not understand that pretty much everything you argue supports those stereotypes? This issue isn't new, it's been around for a long time, Technology has made it easier for bikes to go a bit faster downhill, but the image of adrenalin junkie mountain bikers flaying down multi use trail scattering everyone in their way is not new. It's been around since I started riding in the mid 80s and it's not just a stereotype, there's more than a little truth to it, What you're saying boils down to "get out of my way"

    It's about a lot more than who's having the most fun (as if anyone can actually determine that) it's about safety, sharing with a wide range of other users, respecting the trail and other people.

  88. #88
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    bikes got banned from boulder trails due to ignorance and discrimination. boulder NEVER had a downhill scene. the banned the idea of people riding downhill before it ever happened, and based their decision on unfounded rumors and stereotypes that are not supported by the data (and they use trail stats from the 90's).
    Should little old lady's and kids riding MTB's yield to FlowTards also?

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Liquidmantis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    419
    I was at Lair of the Bear last week and some dude came flying around the corner, going by me at one of the tree chokepoints and narrowly missing me. There were a couple of kids groups out as well (the Avid4Adventure camp) and little guys were all over the trail. I had passed through their group a bit before so I sure hope the coaches had let the kids know they needed to yield to the downhiller that can't even be bothered to check his speed.

  90. #90
    wanna be
    Reputation: bigmariow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    bikes got banned from boulder trails due to ignorance and discrimination. boulder NEVER had a downhill scene. the banned the idea of people riding downhill before it ever happened, and based their decision on unfounded rumors and stereotypes that are not supported by the data (and they use trail stats from the 90's).
    In the eyes of every other trail user a mountain biker descending is a downhiller. Take a minute to reflect on why we now have odd/even days at Apex and odd even weekends at the cone. "I have met the enemy, and he is us" - Walt Kelly
    Mario

  91. #91
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    11,892
    I would hereby like to nominate Jamesm925 the New King Trollmeister. Can I get a second?

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by SkaredShtles View Post
    I would hereby like to nominate Jamesm925 the New King Trollmeister. Can I get a second?
    Seems he's left the room. He probably had to blow off some aggro-bro-steam by stopping at the Denver Dumb Friends League to punch some kittens, followed by a visit to the Cherry Creek Mall to push children off the bacon & eggs play area.

  93. #93
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthonyf View Post
    If the front range had more purpose built directional trails then a lot of trail conflict would be resolved. I understand that this isnt a simple thing. Its been done in other places and works.
    Until the CO front range gets with the times, use common sense and respect one another.
    Directional trails may or may not happen although I'd guess it's a fairly big hurdle on FR open space parks. You're not likely to see many - if any - existing multi use multi directional trails converted to one way trails. Building an entirely new purpose designed trail is probably a more likely scenario and that would take a lot of public support (not just mountain bikers) and willingness by the managing agencies to devote the resources. It's possible of course, but even in the most optimistic scenario, those trails would be few and far between and the large majority of the trail will still be multi use, multi directional.
    Last edited by zrm; 07-22-2015 at 02:02 PM.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by SkaredShtles View Post
    I would hereby like to nominate Jamesm925 the New King Trollmeister. Can I get a second?
    I love how you guys automatically assume that I DONT yield to uphillers (which I do).
    I just think there's no logical argument to support adherence to some archaic, antiquated rule established nearly 3 decades ago in a different era, based on an OHV rule that doesn't make any sense for mountain bikes.

    Why you don't you asshats go ahead and put speed limit signs on the trails and encourage the rangers to come out w/ radar guns like they do in marin county.


    obviously, I'm not blasting these trails like you morons are assuming, but I think the current rule is utter illogical ********.

    it's EASIER for someone going 5mph uphill to yield than it is for someone going 15-20mph downhill (and that's taking it easy).

    the speed differential makes it easier for the uphill rider to GTFO of the way much more SAFELY than it does for the downhill rider, whom you may force to come to a stop in the middle of a rock garden.

    obviously, I'm aware of my surroundings and don't go bombing trails during heavy traffic hours w/ little kiddos buzzing around.

    seriously, when is the last time you saw a hiker on longhorn, bitterbrush, or the canyon link trail, let alone a little old lady?!?
    oh wait, did you bring wifey along to hike while you get your KOM on your Moots fully rigid??

  95. #95
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    11,892
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    <snip>
    Why you don't you asshats go ahead and put speed limit signs on the trails and encourage the rangers to come out w/ radar guns like they do in marin county.
    Errr - there already *is* a speed limit on JCOS trails. And yes, they have occasionally enforced it in just this manner.

    obviously, I'm not blasting these trails like you morons are assuming, but I think the current rule is utter illogical ********.

    it's EASIER for someone going 5mph uphill to yield than it is for someone going 15-20mph downhill (and that's taking it easy).

    the speed differential makes it easier for the uphill rider to GTFO of the way much more SAFELY than it does for the downhill rider, whom you may force to come to a stop in the middle of a rock garden.
    I think one point that is missing here is that you should be slowing to walking speed on the DH when someone *does* yield to you. You know... for safety's sake.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    338
    well no shit...I'm not aiming to crashing into anyone. I just think it makes more sense for the uphill rider to yield when possible.

  97. #97
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    7,848
    @JamesM925

    Do you talk like this in person?

    Like, actually carry on conversations with adults in this manner?

    I can't imagine that working out for you on any professional, social, or personal level. I have to think that the anonymity of the Internet is your best friend.
    Death from Below.

  98. #98
    MFin' Princess
    Reputation: TVC15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    I love how you guys automatically assume that I DONT yield to uphillers (which I do).
    Because this, bro.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    be a dick and don't yield to the DH rider, and find out just how much more momentum that person has....idiots.
    Maybe you really are this dumb.

  99. #99
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesm925 View Post
    ...obviously, I'm not blasting these trails like you morons are assuming, but I think the current rule is utter illogical ********...
    See, that's just the thing. You think the current rule is illogical.

    But you're wrong! Your opinion is based on your selfishness and your own personal worldview. You aren't even considering the consistently offered arguments supporting the existing rule. You think everything should be arranged so that you, a d!ckhead, can have everybody on the trails behave in a way that will let you have your jollies.

    It's like arguing with a two-year-old. Stubborn, loud, wrong.
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  100. #100
    MFin' Princess
    Reputation: TVC15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    See, that's just the thing. You think the current rule is illogical.

    But you're wrong! Your opinion is based on your selfishness and your own personal worldview. You aren't even considering the consistently offered arguments supporting the existing rule. You think everything should be arranged so that you, a d!ckhead, can have everybody on the trails behave in a way that will let you have your jollies.

    It's like arguing with a two-year-old. Stubborn, loud, wrong.
    Quick reply to this message Reply Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TomP again.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •