Winter sux
in [ATVs]
|
Prev: For Sale`
Next: Clutch basket repair
From: Jeff Deeney on 23 Jan 2008 16:29 "CrashTestDummy" <FBRADFORDremove(a)tx.rr.com> wrote in message news:v09fp3taomk6341u3i8qk5tklnl5jm23fp(a)4ax.com... > I can't picture you stuffing anyone... intentionally. Busted... I didn't say intentionally, did I? Right after the crash(tm), we found a cave to hide in. Other than the rabbit we had to dispatch, it was a comfy hiding place. http://home.comcast.net/~jldeeney/pictures/cave.jpg -Jeff-
From: The Real Bev on 23 Jan 2008 23:09 CrashTestDummy wrote: > <bashley101+usenet(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>I grabbed the guy's arm as we got off the lift and he just barely made >>it off without falling. Fortunately there was a Patroller at the top, >>and I asked him to keep an eye on the virgin. I have no idea what >>happened after that, but it was no longer my problem. >> >>Why do guys do that? > > What? Go skiing with advanced skiers their first time out? <g> Drag virgins to the top of the hill and turn them loose. You knew that :-) > I think, in my case, the problem was that I learned to ski when my > brother came up to visit one year when I was about 14. I had spent > about 9 years of my life in Oregon by this time, but my brother never > moved from the Dallas area. He was working for Placid Oil at the time > though and took routine trips to Colorado and New Mexico to go skiing. > > Anyway, when he came to visit he'd already researched the area and > knew where the nearest ski area was, so off we went. He spent some > time teaching me to snow plow, and we made a few runs on the bunny > hill. Then we got a trail map and rode the chair lift to the summit. > > This was at a little place called Anthony Lakes (eastern Oregon), > and there's a real nice stair-stepped run called Broadway that's much > longer, but not much steeper, than the bunny hill. We took that run > and I had very little trouble skiing it. A couple of wipeouts, but I > was really getting the hang of this. Which was good, because after > that run my brother retired to the lodge to drink alcohol and watch > snow bunnies the rest of the afternoon while I continued to practice > in the sunny, but freezing cold weather. > > So, my first experience wasn't appreciably different than that of > my wife's co-worker, really. I guess I figured that's how everyone > learned. Daughter said "Let's go skiing Friday" (she'd done it a couple of times) so I got all the books I could find out of the library. Worked out fine. Decades later I took a lesson, but the guy was such a rotten teacher (and cut the class short because there were only two of us in it) that I demanded my money back. If I'm a rotten skier it's because of my general clumsiness, not lack of technique. > I think, if I were to teach my kids to ski, I'd have to do it over > a two or three day weekend. I could tolerate a full day or day and a > half of instruction and practice knowing that I'd have time to solo > later. I may end up teaching my grandspawn, and I'm not sure I should. I guess I can show them how to do a snowplow and a stem turn and MAYBE a parallel turn, and if they're still interested they can go on from there by themselves. People say "If you aren't falling you aren't learning." I did enough falling when I was dirt riding to last me a lifetime. I say "If you fall you learned something wrong." -- Cheers, Bev 666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 "I wish I had more time to seek out the dark forces and join their hellish crusade." -- Clarice
From: CrashTestDummy on 24 Jan 2008 14:28 On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:06:09 -0500, "Dean H." <moto(a)groove.calm> wrote: >"CrashTestDummy" > >> I think, if I were to teach my kids to ski, I'd have to do it over >> a two or three day weekend. I could tolerate a full day or day and a >> half of instruction and practice knowing that I'd have time to solo >> later. > >Get them morning lessons so you can get your fix while the instructor >teaches them by the book and the conditions haven't been beaten down. >Then cool down with the kids in the afternoon and add your wisdom to what >they learned in the morning lesson. >If they get tired early, you already got your runs in. That's a great point, Dean. And undoubtedly the way to go. >It's a great family sport except for the insane (last time I checked) price >of lift tickets. > You got that right. Which is why finding a less popular area is often worthwhile. Fred Bradford - CrashTestDummy fjbradfordREMOVE(a)tx.rr.com
From: CrashTestDummy on 24 Jan 2008 15:05 On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:09:53 -0800, The Real Bev <bashley101+usenet(a)gmail.com> wrote: >People say "If you aren't falling you aren't learning." I did enough >falling when I was dirt riding to last me a lifetime. I say "If you >fall you learned something wrong." I would amend the original to read: "If you aren't falling you aren't pushing yourself." Which is a little different. You may or may not learn while pushing yourself. I mean, you still have to possess the associated ingredients to advance. If you're terribly out of shape, for example, pushing yourself to the point of falling is more likely to result in injury than advancement. After not riding for over a decade I was very rusty when I first got the RM. Still, I could've went to a local riding area and puttered around all day without crashing. And if I were content to ride at that pace I could avoid crashing about 99% of the time. But it's partially because I remember how (relatively) fast I used to be, that encouraged me to recover some sembalance of my former self. So the pace picked up and crashes became somewhat more frequent. But as a result, I *have* recovered some of my former speed. Enough to keep up with the typical group of current riders anyway. In fact, I'm at the point now where I believe the biggest hurdle in further advancement centers mostly on my equipment and, secondly, on the amount of time I'm able to spend riding. I was definitely faster on Jim's modern GG 300 at Brushy Creek than I was on my old RM, despite not being overly aggressive on the borrowed bike. And I also noticed that on the second day of riding things were clicking better. I dare say that even folks like Deeney, Harrell, Baxter, Everett and Keith, if they wanted to go Mike Lafferty/David Knight/Juha Salminen fast, would begin to incur more frequent crashes as they strove to advance toward that level. But when they can ride at the pace they do already (with infrequent crashes), and have little desire to qualify for an enduro national, why push themselves any further? They're probably still improving anyway, just at a more casual pace. But generally speaking, I agree that falling doesn't automatically equate to learning. Basically I suspect that, at the upper novice to intermediate level, a more aggressive rider (who may crash more frequently) probably advances quicker than the same rider who "plays it safe." And it this level, that can be a pronounced improvement. These are just my humble opinions though, and subject to error. Fred Bradford - CrashTestDummy fjbradfordREMOVE(a)tx.rr.com
From: Mike Baxter on 24 Jan 2008 16:03
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:05:04 -0600, CrashTestDummy <FBRADFORDremove(a)tx.rr.com> wrote: >On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:09:53 -0800, The Real Bev ><bashley101+usenet(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>People say "If you aren't falling you aren't learning." I did enough >>falling when I was dirt riding to last me a lifetime. I say "If you >>fall you learned something wrong." > > I would amend the original to read: "If you aren't falling you >aren't pushing yourself." Which is a little different. You may or may >not learn while pushing yourself. I mean, you still have to possess >the associated ingredients to advance. If you're terribly out of >shape, for example, pushing yourself to the point of falling is more >likely to result in injury than advancement. > > After not riding for over a decade I was very rusty when I first >got the RM. Still, I could've went to a local riding area and puttered >around all day without crashing. And if I were content to ride at that >pace I could avoid crashing about 99% of the time. But it's partially >because I remember how (relatively) fast I used to be, that encouraged >me to recover some sembalance of my former self. So the pace picked up >and crashes became somewhat more frequent. But as a result, I *have* >recovered some of my former speed. Enough to keep up with the typical >group of current riders anyway. In fact, I'm at the point now where I >believe the biggest hurdle in further advancement centers mostly on my >equipment and, secondly, on the amount of time I'm able to spend >riding. I was definitely faster on Jim's modern GG 300 at Brushy Creek >than I was on my old RM, despite not being overly aggressive on the >borrowed bike. And I also noticed that on the second day of riding >things were clicking better. > > I dare say that even folks like Deeney, Harrell, Baxter, Everett >and Keith, if they wanted to go Mike Lafferty/David Knight/Juha >Salminen fast, would begin to incur more frequent crashes as they >strove to advance toward that level. But when they can ride at the >pace they do already (with infrequent crashes), and have little desire >to qualify for an enduro national, why push themselves any further? >They're probably still improving anyway, just at a more casual pace. > > But generally speaking, I agree that falling doesn't automatically >equate to learning. Basically I suspect that, at the upper novice to >intermediate level, a more aggressive rider (who may crash more >frequently) probably advances quicker than the same rider who "plays >it safe." And it this level, that can be a pronounced improvement. > > These are just my humble opinions though, and subject to error. > > >Fred Bradford - CrashTestDummy >fjbradfordREMOVE(a)tx.rr.com Define crash. I rarely crash anymore, but I do fall. Being short sucks in the gnarly stuff. I can run with the top guys in my district for a little while. One mistake and they are gone or I wear myself out really quick. I plan on riding a National Enduro this year just south of Reno, NV later this year. Tim Harrell rode my old gasser there with Me, Tami, and Eric. We had a good time. It's going to be a fast enduro. You don't have to qualify and that's a good thing. I figure that there is more time to be saved in the slow tight stuff than the high speed trails. So I concentrate on being faster in the slower trails. Falling down at 10 MPH is usually better than falling at 45 MPH. I brake late, choose a line and fight to keep the front end planted long enough to get the bike turned and then I'm back on the gas. Usually in the highest gear my 300 will pull. I can down shift and hammer the throttle, but I am just a mid-pack A rider that doesn't race much anymore. I'll leave the heroics to the top guys. Mike Baxter |