Trail Skill Rating System

[Miranda]

How are trails rated for their skill level?

I've done both trails labeled "advanced" and "beginner". At this point, I need some more beginner trails to gain confidence/skills.

The lbs gave me a listing of other mtb trails. These I could not find a ratings listing (the other two were directly on the park's website with the trail map). It seems like all the hard core mtb folks at the lbs know is the "advanced" trail locations.

Is there someplace I can google to figure out if the trails are a match for me? I did see a couple web sites you could pay for a subscription for information?... but the other was publicly listed for free?

On rating differences between the "beginner" to "advanced" I'm not totally sure how that is determined. They both had the same "stuff"... just one not as steep, or large obstacles. Maybe that's the crux of it?

Thanks
Miranda

[fastdogs]

I'd like to know too. So far I've tried to ride "beginner/intermediate" trails. But some aren't rated- if it says in the description "hilly and technical" I figure it will be too much for me. I have the most problems with real steep hills and loose gravel and rock. Not too much problems with roots and small logs, or loose rocks when not combined with a steep hill. Around here, there are a lot of steep hills.
Another problem- the people who ride the trails may call them a different name than appears on a map. I rode a trail once with an experienced rider (thanks singletrackmind!) and we went on trails called "love" and "rollercoaster". On the map, these are all "grotpeter" trail. So when I tried to ride it again, not knowing my way around, I went to "grotpeter", and ended up walking up the steep switchbacks with loose rocks. It was probably as much walking as riding for me, which isn't too much fun. So I've got a couple of trails that are challenging for me, but still a lot of fun, and I try to ride those as much as possible.
vickie

[Aggie_Ama]

I have that issue, often we ride a trail viewed as Beginner/INtermediate but I find it to be plenty challenging. Of course last weekend I did one with lots of rock gardens and it was harder than the normal trail.

[bounceswoosh]

You may be able to find a guidebook to mountain biking in your area; they often rate technical and aerobic difficulty separately, and give detailed descriptions of the route that may help you decide if it sounds good or not.

One problem is that a trail can change from when it was first rated.

There are a lot of trail sites out there, but their content is sometimes pay-only or just plain spotty.

Here are a couple --

http://www.singletrackrides.com/

http://www.singletracks.com/

I'm not necessarily endorsing them; they're just a couple I've looked at recently.

[bike4ever]

Locally in St. Louis, one of our best sites for mt bike train information is GORC: http://www.gorctrails.com/trails/index.asp They are our local IMBA club.

[TahoeDirtGirl]

I had this problem when I came to the east coast a year ago (omg it's almost been a year!). The first place I found was by word of mouth from some guys at work. It is still my favorite place to ride and I still haven't ridden all the trails, it was the perfect place for me, but it was a fluke that I got it on the first recommendation.

When I wanted to go somewhere different, I started checking out the state park system, and they have some ratings, but not much. Actually none at all. But you get a trail map and just look at it as an adventure. Prepare for the worst is what I always do when I go to somewhere that I have never been.

The next place I checked with was the local IMBA (which is NEMBA in New England) website, which had some ratings but I tell you, what is someone's intermediate can be someone else's beginner or advanced. I found this true with hiking books across the country as well as pretty much, most 'opinion' ratings. Just with opinions, I would take it on as an adventure.

Where are you from? Having ridden many of the state parks in Mass I have to say if you were anywhere close it's a good start and gives you good variety. I would also say go to your local bookstore and look at travel books on biking. Yes, there are some!

If you have other bike shops, maybe go to them. The reality of it is that the bike is selling you a bike, and I'm sure they sell bikes for all abilities. If they can't tell you where to take said bike, then why bother buying it? I found this premise out by accident- I landed here in Mass and went to four different bike shops before finding the bike shop of my dreams. Friendly, can fix my bike and has a staff that can give you trail rides for all abilities. The other bike shops were either 'too busy to deal with me' or they would tell me about a trail and say 'it might be too technical for you'. HA.

Okay that's alot of words for now...

[Aggie_Ama]

I didn't think to say where I actually look. The local area has a site that lists the trails and a rating system. There are actually a couple of local sites with pretty decent descriptions. As a newbie I find most of the ratings are a little higher, for example most intermediate stuff is very hard for me. So I kind of take the ratings with a grain of salt since I only have about 10 trips to the trail under me, I find their easy is still a challenge for me.

[Irulan]

There is no universal rating system, if that is what you are asking. IMBA does have one, but it is not used consistently. Many areas use a relative rating system similar to what ski areas do. This means that the green trails are the easiest ones there, and the black ones are the hardest ones there, but it is as they related to each other.

Like what the other posters say, it's pretty relative to who has made the determinations. I am currently working on a project where we are inventorying trails and designing a map, and it's a real challenge to decided how to rate something. Do we rate it for a visitor to the area, or do we rate it for the locals?

Most rating systems take the following into consideration: aerobic effort, technical difficulty, and risk.

Some areas don't have true "beginner/easy" stuff. We have one riding area that does have a lot of almost flat, buff trails with little to no obstacles which is great for beginners. But the other area ( the one I am mapping) has NO flat trails, and obstacles on everything ranging from slickrock to gap jumps.

Even on your easiest rated trails, IMSHO as a mountain biker there should always be something you can't ride. That's why you keep going back, to try it again and again until you "get it" and have a YAHOO moment.

[TahoeDirtGirl]

I agree on the relativity side...when I came to the east coast, wet roots and rock gardens that last for miles were a big surprise...but we always hear out west about the hills that go on and on and on...not to mention riding between 6,000 and 7,000 feet- that's why when someone asks if the east is easier, I say it's "different". Not good or bad, not easier or harder, just different...

[atombessy]

lots of good points here! Fastdogs makes a really essential one I think, that the trial you THINK you're riding may not be where you actually are...and that's inevitable, some of us are lucky to have reliable trail maps for some areas, and some days you just have to leave early enough to make sure you have plenty of daylight to find your way home just in case......

As someone who regularly rides anything between beginner and advanced with varying success...my best recommendation is try to find someone to ride with who knows YOUR riding style. or if you love "trail A" ask around to look for similar rides. Although I think a part of mountain biking is having those "walked it half the ride" days. If nothing else it keeps you humble and don't let it make you feel bad, that happens to ALL of us. Hiking with 30lbs of bike is a good workout too

[sundial]

Prepare for the worst is what I always do when I go to somewhere that I have never been.

The next place I checked with was the local IMBA (which is NEMBA in New England) website, which had some ratings but I tell you, what is someone's intermediate can be someone else's beginner or advanced.

You are sooooo right. I learned it's best to ask mtb'ers about the trail rather than go by the park rating.

[Miranda]

I had been reading my replies on and off and just wanted to say thanks for the input. I think I like the mentality of you ladies better than some folks I know. Last hard trail I rode, I was getting no where fast pushing my bike. But, there's another day. I checked out those websites, and did ask some more at the lbs. That's a good tip to ask for trail comparisons of ones I know how difficult they were for me personally.

[TahoeDirtGirl]

I have a good case in point on this one. There is a trail that is built in a park called Borderland that was built by the local IMBA chapter. When I read this, I thought of some of the ones I had been on out west that were built by mtn bike groups. I got there and I was dumbfounded. I rode the first few hundred feet thinking "yeah this is great" then it stopped and turned into flatrock and just..no trail. I thought...great...You lost the trail..again (just like someone else said...you might not even be ON the trail) so I started hiking because I was by myself and well, I was trying to figure out where the trail went. So I went and went and went. I found the 'main trail' and rode around according to the map and then got back to car. I went to my LBS later that week and told them how I got lost. Then the proceed to tell me that I WAS on the trail...and I said..."what trail?!"

So like I said before, it's always an adventure. I had to laugh the other day talking to a guy out west on the phone about the trails here. What is the hardest thing for me so far? "Not hitting trees"..."what?" "not hitting trees!"...out west the trees are further from the trail (in most cases) and out here, there are some that I have been on where it's close to no room for your handlebars. See, that is what I mean. Right there that would make it harder...

[stephanie1129]

I also agree that it can be very difficult to determine the difficulty of a trail by looking at topo maps and/or by getting advice from local riders.

I think that difficulty refers to 2 things. Grade and Technical features. The grade of a slope will make the ride a higher intensity ride or a lower intensity ride. So if cardio and muscle endurance are a problem, stick with the lower grades/the less steep stuff, but if you have great cardio but less experience or skill, go with something steeper but fewer technical features. Technical features include rocks, roots, single track, logs, jumps.

Now how do you tell which trails have what? I've found that most good books on cycling trails will have an elevation profile as well as a description of the technical features.

One series I recommend are the Falcon Guide books. I have the Falcon Guide: Mountain Biking the San Francisco Bay Area. It not only has a highlighted map of the trail and a step-by-step description and a easy to read elevation profile, but it also has quick easy to read blurbs about difficulty, trail surface, terrain, seasonal info, dog compatibility, schedule, etc, in the very beginning of each section. I've seen other good books out there, but this one is my favorite.

[Irulan]

I also agree that it can be very difficult to determine the difficulty of a trail by looking at topo maps and/or by getting advice from local riders.

I think that difficulty refers to 2 things. Grade and Technical features. The grade of a slope will make the ride a higher intensity ride or a lower intensity ride. So if cardio and muscle endurance are a problem, stick with the lower grades/the less steep stuff, but if you have great cardio but less experience or skill, go with something steeper but fewer technical features. Technical features include rocks, roots, single track, logs, jumps.

Now how do you tell which trails have what? I've found that most good books on cycling trails will have an elevation profile as well as a description of the technical features.

One series I recommend are the Falcon Guide books. I have the Falcon Guide: Mountain Biking the San Francisco Bay Area. It not only has a highlighted map of the trail and a step-by-step description and a easy to read elevation profile, but it also has quick easy to read blurbs about difficulty, trail surface, terrain, seasonal info, dog compatibility, schedule, etc, in the very beginning of each section. I've seen other good books out there, but this one is my favorite.

Funny, I think Falcon guides stink for the most part. Mostly its for their routes, and the fact that they allow nonlocals to ride a trail system for three days and write the guide. ( this is what happened in my area, the guide is a joke) Don't get me going on the charge for use Trails.com website...

Anyway-

The Kissing the Trail series is really good but that's only for Oregon and Washington

Two kinds of ratings can also be for technical difficulty and fitness/cardio level. Maybe what you refer to as grade?

We are working on map development and trail inventory for a local trail system. Rating trails is a lot harder than you would think. First, it IS relative to other trails in the area, which means we don't have a lot of "greens". Then, you have to put on your "what if I were a visitor and hadn't ridden this trail 100 times" hat, how would you describe it then? It's a good challenge to get it all figured out.