I was just reding Rick Siemans article about what he thinks of what he calls"stupidcross".Is he ever right.
The health of off-road motorcycling and motocross is NOT measured in supercross attendance.It is mesured in off-road bike sales,which are twenty(no kidding) percent of their 1973-1983 peak.
I believe it is all this jump happy crap,parents see it and don't want their kids involved.
Rick describes it as "jump,jump,jump,u-turn,jump,jump,jump.Looking at it from a distance it looks rather ridiculous.Does it take a lot of skill?No doubt about it.Good for the sport-no way.
The hourly ambulance runs at local tracks are plenty of evidence for me.
I like to jump.I'll do doubles,some triples.But nowadays,with a big pack of riders around,getting tired,jump faces rutting and changing?No way.Motocross injuries are up,way up,in frequency and seriousness of injury.While the sport will always be inherently dangerous,there's a big difference between measured,calculated risk and just plain dumb.These tracks,for amateurs,are dumb.
d.u.g.
The health of off-road motorcycling and motocross is NOT measured in supercross attendance.It is mesured in off-road bike sales,which are twenty(no kidding) percent of their 1973-1983 peak.
I believe it is all this jump happy crap,parents see it and don't want their kids involved.
Rick describes it as "jump,jump,jump,u-turn,jump,jump,jump.Looking at it from a distance it looks rather ridiculous.Does it take a lot of skill?No doubt about it.Good for the sport-no way.
The hourly ambulance runs at local tracks are plenty of evidence for me.
I like to jump.I'll do doubles,some triples.But nowadays,with a big pack of riders around,getting tired,jump faces rutting and changing?No way.Motocross injuries are up,way up,in frequency and seriousness of injury.While the sport will always be inherently dangerous,there's a big difference between measured,calculated risk and just plain dumb.These tracks,for amateurs,are dumb.
d.u.g.