How are the Trail Levels determined?

[Rebecca]

I am a newcomer this past spring to the mountain bike scene. I have rode Lebanon Hills, Battle Creek, Terrace Oaks, MN River Bottoms, Lutsen, Hillside and some other trails. I am curious as to the determining factor on what makes a trail Easy, More Difficult and Most Difficult. I am finding that the "Most Difficult" trails are the easiest for me to ride. ?!?!?

:banana:

[manual63]

So you think the XX-Loop at Leb is easier than the Intermediate loop?

YOU ROCK!!!!!!

[Rebecca]

I have biked all the trails at Lebanon except the XX trail. I will be attacking that trail this evening! :-) After spending a weekend at Lutsen...I am ready!

[manual63]

The only warning you will get from us is to take the first lap easy so you don't encounter any unexpected areas.

Once you do an easy lap, then blast through it!

[Rebecca]

Thanks for the warning! :)

[Mateo]

I think at least at the "ski lodge" trails, the most difficult rating is given to the trails with the most speed, usually straight down the mountain... The intermediate rating is usually the more technical, but slower paced trails.. So the middle rating seems harder in a "technical" sense, but is actually less dangerous..

Also sometimes a trail is rated on aerobic level instead of technical level...

It would be cool to have a standard rating everywhere...

Lebenon is one of the few trails that seems to be labelled correctly!

[gopherhockey]

I believe part of the rating system, at least at Lebanon, involves labeling trails as they stand vs. others in the same park. Obviously our XX loop (or double black diamond) is by comparison probably an intermediate trail when compared to some of the stuff they do in other areas.... but, the XX is a level harder than the X, which is a level harder than the intermediate etc.

Overall I think Lebanon is very accurate even comparing to most other places - other than I probably would change XX to just X.

As far as trail building, we usually have certain limits to the amount of "grade" allowed in any certain trail. You would not find, as an example, a long 12 degree incline on a beginner trail even if you *could* put on there.

It is an interesting topic for sure - I do wish there was more of a standard for this.

[Trevize1138]

There's not even a "standard" for grading downhill ski resort runs (green, blue, black, double black ...) so why should mountain bike trails be any different? :)

In Montana, a double black diamond ski run means "Even if you're a good skiier, you could get seriously hurt on this run" but in the midwest it means "Even if you're a good skiier, you'll encounter mild difficulty with this run." :laugh:

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Trevize1138

In Montana, a double black diamond ski run means "Even if you're a good skiier, you could get seriously hurt on this run" but in the midwest it means "Even if you're a good skiier, you'll encounter mild difficulty with this run." :laugh:

How true!!

[Tetreves]

Originally posted by Trevize1138
There's not even a "standard" for grading downhill ski resort runs (green, blue, black, double black ...) so why should mountain bike trails be any different? :)

In Montana, a double black diamond ski run means "Even if you're a good skiier, you could get seriously hurt on this run" but in the midwest it means "Even if you're a good skiier, you'll encounter mild difficulty with this run." :laugh:

I was going to point this out, but Chris beat me to it. Well put!

I agree that Leb is "correctly" labeled, but again, only against itself, and only somewhat against other trails in the area. But the X loop at Leb may only be intermediate in the Rockies, and the expert mountain bike trails in Iowa would be a "bunny trail" to some of us!

I feel that because of this wide variance in trails, terrain, and local riders' skills from one region to another (both nationally and internationally) will prevent any type of standard from ever arising.

Ride with caution on any trail system you're unfamiliar with.

-ed

[KleinCrazy]

For those who want to know,

There is a somewhat accepted grading system for technical, North Shore type trails, it is graded from category 1 - 5. At this time our XX loop at lebanon Hills falls in the 3 category.

If anyone would like to see this standards let me know and I'll post them.

They were written by the groups responsible for building the North Shore trails

[Mateo]

That would be interesting to read....

[Don Youngdahl]

Originally posted by gopherhockey
I believe part of the rating system, at least at Lebanon, involves labeling trails as they stand vs. others in the same park. Obviously our XX loop (or double black diamond) is by comparison probably an intermediate trail when compared to some of the stuff they do in other areas....

John has defined the basic dillema in grading trails for any activity, anywhere.

I'm firmly in the camp that believes trails should be graded relative to other trails in the immediate area or in that park, rather than some absolute standard that encompasses the whole country. Relative difficulty for that park is the most useful to the majority of trail users. When I go to a trail (X-C ski or MTB), I want to perhaps do a loop on the easiest trail to warm up, then move to an intermediate trail, and perhaps I'll try the hardest trail, or maybe stick to the intermediate if that's all I want that day.

When an expert hits an area with limited time, he likely wants to hit the hardest trail in the park. If a global standard is used, everything might be just green or blue, and he won't know until he skis or bikes it which is the most challenging stuff.

A global uniform standard is simply not useful to the majority of users, in my opinion.

Don Youngdahl

[manual63]

This is all fine and dandy and a rating system is good to a certain extent. But I do want to bring up the fact that you can not rely on it. The rule I go by is to take any unknown trail slow and easy the first time through so I know what to expect. I've come across surprises I didn't expect many times.

I think there should be a better on trail warning system. Leb has little signs in some parts, but I rarely see them. I think it would make more sense to warn people while riding the trail about what's ahead and not just post what the general level of a trail is.

[zerpy]

Originally posted by manual63
This is all fine and dandy and a rating system is good to a certain extent. But I do want to bring up the fact that you can not rely on it. The rule I go by is to take any unknown trail slow and easy the first time through so I know what to expect. I've come across surprises I didn't expect many times.

I think there should be a better on trail warning system. Leb has little signs in some parts, but I rarely see them. I think it would make more sense to warn people while riding the trail about what's ahead and not just post what the general level of a trail is.

This is a great idea! I could have used a sign the other day "Warning: attempting to jump rocks may cause you to leave trail careening out of control and hitting that tree -----> " :crazy:

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by manual63
This is all fine and dandy and a rating system is good to a certain extent. But I do want to bring up the fact that you can not rely on it. The rule I go by is to take any unknown trail slow and easy the first time through so I know what to expect. I've come across surprises I didn't expect many times.

I think there should be a better on trail warning system. Leb has little signs in some parts, but I rarely see them. I think it would make more sense to warn people while riding the trail about what's ahead and not just post what the general level of a trail is.

You kind of contradict yourself with these statements.. but it brings up the exact point we always struggle with.

If we tell people its an "expert" level trail, should we then have to warn them about every little rock in the trail? Or should people generally know if it is "expert" that they shouldn't be hammering through it until they know the trail.

A good example is the double log drop in the "XX" trail. That one seems to get people. If we put a warning sign up, where would it be... if it was before the logs (like one is now) that doesn't really say there is a double log drop. If one puts it right at the log drop it is too late. And a warning about a large drop in the trail doesn't mean as much whe you have passed other warnings for things that seem much easier to ride. (i.e. people stop seeing the warnings and don't take them seriously)

I guess I like to make a best effort to put up yeild or warnings signs where we can, but not litter each obstacle with them. A good general sign at the trailhead should really be enough - and perhaps some kind of general informational sign at the parking lot stating what kinds of things you may encounter on the trail.

The other thing is that in a trail like the XX you will find the most dangerous things are the ones that we don't create. A tree down, a rock disloged etc. These should always be something we watch for - even for those that have ridden the trail 100 times before.

It is a good topic though - it definitely shows why standardization can be so difficult.

[Rebecca]

I had no idea that this topic post would go on past a couple replies. Thank you Men! You have really helped me out! The best advice, one of which I do follow - go slow through the trail the first time!

[SPR]

Originally posted by gopherhockey
A good example is the double log drop in the "XX" trail. That one seems to get people. If we put a warning sign up, where would it be... if it was before the logs (like one is now) that doesn't really say there is a double log drop. If one puts it right at the log drop it is too late. And a warning about a large drop in the trail doesn't mean as much whe you have passed other warnings for things that seem much easier to ride. (i.e. people stop seeing the warnings and don't take them seriously)


Why not use warning signs as they do in NORBA races. I believe they use down pointing arrows to designate drop offs. And then the number of arrows (1-3) indicates the severity with 3 being the most severe.

[manual63]

I would suggest a simple picture of a drop or whatever the obstacle is. It's easy and cheap to do these days with color printers and some lamenating. Not as in a photo, but like simple drawing like some road signs. Also a danger number rating of some type.

Leb might not be a good example, but other trails which are longer and riders might not know as well.

Think of the safety thing when you talk to the county. They would be impressed and maybe would allow more difficult stuff....like teeters, if we can have a good warning system with possibly a danger level of 1-5 or something.

Just ideas to help make things better for our future.

[gopherhockey]

Big yellow sign with a guy doing an endo over a double log drop.. now that would be a cool thing to have. Would be both informational and kind of comical at the same time.

Our "don't ride wet" sign could be a big yellow sign with a biker hanging by his neck.

Seriously though, I wonder if IMBA has any kind of proposed signage standards for this type of thing.

I agree that the more the better as far as warnings and land managers is concerned.

A very good topic...

[manual63]

Thank Rebecca for this one........:)