Can MX be made safer?

Mike

Mike

PR Addict
Can MX be made safer? I think so and the past few weeks have given me more than enough reason to ask this question. Do we really need 100’ triples to identify the best riders? Like many I watched from afar a couple of weeks ago the vigil, and ultimately the death of Austin Mincey. And after reading the online descriptions of last weekend’s ATV National event at Briarcliff I feel that it’s time for a civilized discussion on this topic.
The following links are helpful to understand this latest event, by one account over 50 riders were injured at Briarcliff, at least two lifeflighted.
http://www.gofundme.com/afvhac
http://www.gofundme.com/afy5as
Other motor sports have looked at accidents and made changes to improve the chances of survival of participants. There are races with downforce restrictions, certain tracks have restrictor plates to control speed. Perhaps James Stewart and like can handle these obstacles but should we put a 14 year old BOY on the same, I don’t think so.
This is not meant to be an indictment of Briarcliff, by all account Jeremy put a tremendous amount of work and investment to make last week’s event happen.
 
I think the issues we had were from the speeds reached. The track packed in even more than I expected. From my own perspective, I rode the track in moto 33, I think the jumps were fine. I think it was more of a combination of speed and reaction time by those riders. However, some wrecks were simply racing incidents. There was plenty of riders that were successfully navigating the track. I'm not trying to completely defend the jumps, I'm trying to build a point. Speed is the biggest issue. The speed vs take off angle vs jump distance is a very important relationship.

I would like to see two things in motocross racing. A fun reliable 300-350cc engine across the board, and sound reduction.

Moving forward, we will be making changes to reduce speeds, more back to the old ways. The number of injuries last weekend was very disheartening. None of this is really needed for our normal weekends, the track stays loamier on those days and speeds are down, but for the big races, the riders are generally faster, so we need to look at it.
 
It seems to me the tougher more technical tracks start out that way. 2nd and 3rd gear max. Over time tracks try to draw larger crowds by making them easier. Next step 3rd and 4th gear because the easier a track the faster it gets and the more riders in the "C" class range you get. Speed and less talented riders = higher injury rate.

4th gear on a 450 is not for the less talented riders. Its a recipe for disaster.
 
I don't see what was wrong with Honda Hills? Packed in the riders, and the track was tame. I think the sport has evolved, but not for the good of most people. There are a lot of guys who enjoy and benefit from the evolving track designs, but I personally think a lot more riders are totally being left out because of the designs. Unless you've ridden a lot as a kid or raced in minis, I don't believe there is a lot of leeway for riders just getting into the sport at a C level. For the sport to grow the tracks have to be somewhat tamed down in order for them to get into racing. Otherwise your gonna see them hanging out just riding or practicing. Most people on this board don't hang out at BCs C track very much. They might gander over for a minute, or ride a lap of two, but that's it. I'm there all day, and when I go to Rt62 or New Vienna, I notice this. ALOT of guys who probably would be racing don't. They're on 5 to 10 year old bikes, not as fast as a GOOD C rider, and just trying to have fun. Those were the guys racing C class in the late 70s and 80s. Now they're practicers. You gotta get them involved for this to grow, and they won't unless the tracks they race on are more like BCs C track.
 
I wanna add, It's not necessary for all the tracks to do this, but 1 or 2 in Ohio would be good. I think Dirt Country is OK, and RT62 has options for slower riders on the big triples, just gotta be aware of whos in front and behind you. For the simple argument of having a place for these guys to start racing, I really wish HH would open back up.
 
Agree with above , as a c level rider at best , newbie track skills , and age 33 it's tough to determine when to start racing and where . One of the reasons I like BC , ( c track , woods ) . With that said I take personal accountability very seriously . I don't have much business on anyone's " big track " rolling everything and causing issues. I also sign a waiver when I ride that says I agree to report anything I feel unsafe , or have the option of leaving . Our passion is dangerous , you can't dodge the bullet forever , it will happen eventually . It may sound elementary but the bottom line is if something feels totally unsafe or bogus , make your choice , don't blame others !
 
Regardless of how the track is laid out or built the rider is accountable for twisting/pressing the throttle. I don't particularly like the jumps at beans so I dont go there, others love it.

The thing that really pi$$es me off about the whining about the national.is that its lead by a pro racer who didn't say a word and had no problem after he raced Saturday, then on sunday his buddy who also raced pro class and the first proam moto, without a problem, then goes out and seat bounces the center tunnel and takes a chopper ride to the hospital and all of the sudden its the worst track in the world.

Back on topic, high speed areas too close after the start always makes me nervous on a quad and I tend to lose time on the first lap being overly cautious.
 
Raced High Point Am Day, Second moto was so dusty the first lap you couldn't even see the rider in front of you, let alone what rut you had to pick. That was probably the most dangerous thing I have experienced in a race. With a class of 33 there is no reason to not take a second and toss a little water down.

I also had one bad experience racing at beans last year, but it was more the riders fault. Pulled like third out the start and I am literally right beside another rider going through the first rythm. This dude throws his bike completely sideways, If I would have tried to look cool we would have made contact and then been plowed by the next 8 riders coming.

Some people just need to realize they aren't professional, and its just a hobby. Have fun with it and go home safe. The trophy or points aren't going to pay the hospital for you. The tracks can be made safer, yes. But 90% of the accidents I see are from someone trying to go McGrath on em and pull that mid-air lookover pass.
 
So if I get this right some of you guys say if riders take it easy and dont jump stuff they shouldnt and try to show off on jumps where they shouldnt then racing would be safer?

How about removing jumps that most local riders shouldnt be jumping anyway? Then they cant do the stupid stuff.

Tracks need to be more technical. Slow them down. Leave a couple nice slow AND big jumps in. Add a pro section for PROS to jump. Like Spring Valley did back in the day. If you want to go banzai during a race then have at it in "A" class. The way it was designed to be.

Personally I like the challenge of bigger jumps but I get worried when racing around people I dont trust on them. Comes with age so you young guys wouldnt understand as well.
 
Where are these tracks in Ohio with 100' triples?

Have nothing else to add to this rehashed beaten down topic...
 
Tracks can be made safer, and I brought this up on here in the past. One thing that everyone seems to forget, is a lot of these serious accidents and injuries, are not C riders jumping things they shouldn't.....it is fast B riders and pros. The speed and size of the jumps will get you every time. The human body can only absorb so much impact.

Three weeks ago, I got knocked out briefly for the first time ever. Don't remember the accident at all. But it happened at Dirt Country. Ironic part is, I had just said earlier in the day if someone got cross rutted on the straights it would be ugly, because the track is so fast. I had the front end tuck a little, and it flipped the rear end over and high sided me off at high speed. Still nursing some of the pain from it. Bottom line, I like high speed tracks, but it needs some jumps added back in to slow people down a bit.

Compare some of the west coast tracks to the tracks in the mid west. A lot of them don't have doubles, but have table tops, or step up step downs, etc. They can be jumped half way, or aired out by the really fast guys. I mentioned it on here one time. Why we don't build more tracks like that around here. The jumps seem much safer. About the only track I can think of around here that I would consider having these types jumps would be Malvern.

There is no need for 100 foot gaps though, that are designed that if you come up short, it is not going to be pretty.
 
I would say that beans has jumps designed this way, definitely the two big jumps out in front. They're both step up table tops and they helped me develop more confidence doing bigger jumps. Beans is one of my favorites, I love the natural terrain it offers.
 
A double or triple is supposed to be an obstacle. By definition an obstacle hinders progress. If everyone is jumping it then it is not an obstacle so why have it? Because better riders want the challenge. As soon as a pro jumps it, a b riders thinks he can make it. Then a c rider complains to have the jump rebuild with more roll in and or shallow landing, so they can jump it. Since c riders are always the biggest classes, promoters and track owners build these "safe" obstacles and the cycle continues and the speeds increase. Soon every track starts to look like I75 with a couple rollers.
Lower speed, technical tracks reduce the risk factors plus create better racing. Build one and what happens? A riders want it tougher, b riders think they can do it, c riders wait it rebuild so they can go faster.
And we have not even touched on the crazy mini parents.
Welcome to moto .
 
I agree, speed it the issue. I could not believe the speed the quads were mantaining over the past weekend. Thing is, typically a reduction in speed results in an undesireable negative impact to the "flow" of a track. Yes, I said it. Sure, the purpose of obstacles on a track are meant to disrupt this so called "flow" to some extent, but a track that pumps up and/or takes away from a semi-in shape rider's ability to ride the track and hit the obstacles for more than 2 laps is not good. It's a carefully constructed balance. Not easy to achieve. At times, the deisre to innovate decreases this flow and impacts it negatively. Hard landlings and/or hits are not good. I feel a B/C rider hitting a 2-2-2 nice and smooth with a pro hitting a 3-3 in the same section is the desire for an example.

In the end, can you blame the track for a rider that rides over his head? Really?... Are we trying to be democrats or republicans here? Are we saying let me build a track that you cannot hurt yourself on because you are too damn stupid to ride within your ability or are we saying let's build a track that is challenging and we will leave it up to you to know your limits and what you can or cannot do?.... Yes, I am asking that question. When does the responsibiliy fall on the riders shoulders? I say almost all the time...like it or not. I have never blamed a track builder for my many....too many broken bones and injuries. I choose to ride the bike and twist the throttle...or not. Like it or leave it cowboy...
 
I don't build obstacles for hinderance, I build a track that gives riders a sense of freedom. Kind of like riding a roller coaster. A smooth coaster though, no wooden coasters here. Well sometimes we run the wooden one.
 
I f'ing hate the F word.
It is on the rider 100% of the time. EVERY track owner / promoter allows the riders to walk the track before practice begins. This time is suppose to be used by the riders to site said obstacles and determine the best way to navigate the track to the best of THIER ABILITY.
Some of the hardest crashes I have ever seen have been on perfectly flat straights. Chad Reed may be able to go down a straight, pegged in 5th gear. Jim Normalrider may only have the ability to go down the same straight, half throttle in 3rd. BUT, if Mr. Normalrider brings Lovely Loretta to the track and tries to impress her by going WFO and wads it up. How is that the responsibility of anyone other then the rider?
MX is and has always been a dangerous sport. Accidents will happen and people WILL get hurt.

One more thing... 746, Honda Hills was a hardpacked, cows%*t covered, rock pile, dump. PLEASE do not compare a good track to that location... Even though, I would like to see it come back. o_O
 
Well I don't Think I would of broke my foot of that double wasnt there at briarcliff. Bbbuuuuuttttt.....I decided to jump it lap after lap and an unavoidable riding incident occurred.


Do more injuries occur on four wheels as opposed to two?

And messing up the flow. . . Well Loretta's has terrible flow. Injuries don't seem to be that prevelent and the best of the best is there too. So I don't know.


Everyone complained about ironmans jumps beig ridiculous and difficult to manage even for the seasoned riders. I don't think that facility was ready to hold an event like that. And with rocket robin saying how sketchy the jumps were it doesn't suprise me someone got killed. The track just sounded unsafe.
 
Its not the tracks fault by any means. It wasnt the Ironman track that caused the unfortunate accident either.

My point is if some of the big crazy stuff is removed then we wont have to sorry about giving the average rider the choice. The question from the OP was "can it be made safer?" Yes it can.

A track can be very challenging and fun without the monster jump that is do or die. Big jumps can be made safe as well. I have a 110' jump at my house that isnt do or die and its fun no matter if you do it or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top