Stop Or No Stop?

[toofasttim]

Stop: Once, debatably twice (couldn't see whether Grimbo stopped at the top of the hill)

No-Stop: too many times to mention.

I would be far more lenient on a clubbie than a pro (who should know better)

Perce, I wouldn't hesitate to five ANYONE!

[bigfoot]

The topic Gizza5 started was "Stop Or No Stop?, Which is more Challenging?" Not which do you prefer, which takes more skill etc.

Look at the video of Jarvis again would it be more challanging for him to do it no stop or not? I think you have the answer Ladys and Gentlemen.

[toofasttim]

That wasn't Perces question. Now go back to harrassing the Koreans .

Which do I prefer? Stop. Which is more challenging? Depends on the section.

In an ideal world sections would be laid out so that they would be a challange to both types of riding. Giving the modern rider to option to "square off" a corner and "zap" the next obstacle or a traditional rider the option of a more flowing line. The real world says the organiser is wet and has to home for tea. Can it be done? Yes, but it depends on the terrain. I think the difficult bit comes when the section dictates that the only way round a corner is by hopping. That is the lazy way for the organiser. But as I mentioned organisers are human too and we all wish we could spend 4 hours laying out one section.

IMO, hopping mostly gives a rider a clearer or more ideal line for the next obstacle and the traditional rider needs to continually compensate because he's always riding a compromise line. BUT hopping is a skill in itself so on balance(!) the two styles probably even out.

Edited June 5, 2008 by TooFastTim

[gizza5]

The topic Gizza5 started was "Stop Or No Stop?, Which is more Challenging?" Not which do you prefer, which takes more skill etc.

Look at the video of Jarvis again would it be more challanging for him to do it no stop or not? I think you have the answer Ladys and Gentlemen.

One topic leads into another and still is a good debate as for you second question good point

[atomant]

Look at the video of Jarvis again would it be more challanging for him to do it no stop or not? I think you have the answer Ladys and Gentlemen.

Ultimately, this is all about Jealousy. Because most of us can't ride like the top boys and never will be able to, we would rather mock their style and skill rather than accept it for what it is. Which is way more skilful than the best of the best 'traditional' skill. I think you have the answer Ladys and Gentlemen.

[bilc0]

Ultimately, this is all about Jealousy. Because most of us can't ride like the top boys and never will be able to, we would rather mock their style and skill rather than accept it for what it is. Which is way more skilful than the best of the best 'traditional' skill. I think you have the answer Ladys and Gentlemen.

Now that was the easy way out Atom

[atomant]

Now that was the easy way out Atom

[frenchie]

I have just driven a round trip of 350 kms to a trial arriving to find it cancelled due to heavy overnight rain making it unridable to the new breed of trials jockies. A modern trial with a classic class, the trial was deemed to slippery, therefore dangerous for the the top two classes of riders to attempt the sections riding under the new modern rules, also concern was given as between the sections it was too muddy there for, the all in one suits might not stand up to it and the rads might get blocked. If you had non stop rules the sections could have been eased and the trial would possibly gone ahead.

Now this is in France, I would hope this would n t happen in the real world of trials, England , but who knows.

In nearly 30 years of trialing the tail is now wagging the dog.

Pretty p....ed off.

Frenchie