DavidM wrote on 07/19/17 at 12:02pm:
I can't think of any trail I've ridden anywhere that didn't have some kind of "flow" aspect to it. How is "flow" defined anyway? Is flow associated with the ability to maintain a certain speed throughout the trail with minimal pedaling? That sounds more like coasting to me. At the risk of waxing philosophical , it seems to me that flow is achieved from within & not without.
Flow is generally the absence of technical trail obstacles.
If one's goal in mountain biking is jumping fences, boulders, ridiculous elevation changes, rock climbing, risking a coronary event in the 100 degree heat, meeting search and rescue crews in the back country, destroying their $3000 bicycle in record time, or being a legend among mere mortals, etc.. More power to them. They have plenty of options without insinuating everybody else lacks skill.
Other riders simply have a little more finesse about the sport.
In the context of mountain biking..
This is flow;
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links) This is a lack of flow;
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links) Most certainly the 2nd trail could be considered to have flow on a downhill specific mountain bike, with a rider accustom to riding such terrain, with an ambulance and support crew close by, and with someone else paying for their bikes. But generally speaking, in these parts and with the bikes most suited to the terrain in this area, the 2nd trail is lacking flow.
Talley, where you at? I need help here blaming it on 29'ers at fish stix.