|
|
Post by seenvic on May 20, 2010 12:31:26 GMT -5
I've been in the "no need for this" camp since day one.
Then we directionalized (I may have made that word up), the loops for the Summit. Several times it came up in conversation that it is nice to let it hang out without having to worry (as much) about someone coming the other way.
So I started this thread to hear what y'all thought and I don't think I have heard much to move me off the fence on way or the other.
Carry on. Good discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by DK on May 20, 2010 12:53:11 GMT -5
Several times it came up in conversation that it is nice to let it hang out without having to worry (as much) about someone coming the other way. That sounds like an entirely different discussion.  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by JIMMYC on May 20, 2010 13:13:43 GMT -5
I just think the upper trail that runs from the parking lot to the BW that some refer to that as the connector would have to be named so. Two way traffic cannot be avoided on that strech of trail. Personally I lean toward keeping it the way it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on May 20, 2010 13:30:40 GMT -5
I just think the upper trail that runs from the parking lot to the BW that some refer to that as the connector would have to be named so. Two way traffic cannot be avoided on that strech of trail. Personally I lean toward keeping it the way it is. The Connector Trail out of the parking lot ends at the Great Wall Loop. As soon as you get to the GW, you either get on it CCW by going straight, or get on it CW by taking a left. This trail crosses the gravel road and takes you to the Skinny Loop. There is no Connector Trail going all the way to the Brown Wave. The only way to get to the Brown Wave via singletrack is on the Skinny Loop. There are 6 loops at FATS and a few short Connector Trails. No way we are renaming anything out there. If folks think there is a connector trail to the Brown Wave, that's fine. But there will be no name or sign changes to play to this stupidity. |
|
|
|
Post by jtaylor on May 20, 2010 13:54:44 GMT -5
In a perfect world, directional might save a crash. But I would argue to not make it directional because then folks should always be on the lookout. Otherwise, the guy that can go downhill at pro speed because no one is coming the other way will really be hurt because of the person who ignored/didn't understand the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by JIMMYC on May 20, 2010 14:39:10 GMT -5
ok so no name changing, no sign changing but the fact remains to get to and from the BW you have to ride both ways on the Skinny and GW....i guess i'm stupid too, how would that work?
that's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on May 20, 2010 14:43:03 GMT -5
ok so no name changing but the fact remains to get to and from the BW you have to ride both ways on the Skinny and GW....i guess i'm stupid too, how would that work? that's all I'm saying You ride the long way around. |
|
|
|
Post by JIMMYC on May 20, 2010 14:46:46 GMT -5
in this example you have to ride the long way on both trails...humm?
|
|
|
|
Post by seenvic on May 20, 2010 15:25:52 GMT -5
ok so no name changing, no sign changing but the fact remains to get to and from the BW you have to ride both ways on the Skinny and GW....i guess i'm stupid too, how would that work? that's all I'm saying. You are correct about the GW and Dustin is correct about the Skinny. To get to the Skinny and BW, you gotta get on the GW Loop. The short section of the GW Loop would have to run both directions all the time if riders wanted a short way to get to the Skinny Loop without having to ride 7ish miles around the GW Loop CCW. But the Skinny Loop would not have to run both ways all the time. It would never have to run both ways. But one would have to ride the complete Skinny Loop and would not have the option of riding the Upper Skinny both ways to the BW. All that said, I doubt the change is made. Good foresite by JimmyC. Thanks for sticking with it long enough for me to catch on. |
|
|
|
Post by oddcouple on May 20, 2010 16:19:15 GMT -5
+1
|
|
|
|
Post by yetichick on May 20, 2010 17:00:04 GMT -5
I am adamantly against it.
I have been to FATS so many times when my vehicle was the ONLY vehicle in the parking lot. I have also been there when the parking lot was full, but I only saw one or two people on the trail. Only once, in 4 years, did I come close to having a collision with someone, and it wasn't really very close. I have met riders coming the other direction, many times, but both of us were riding in a controlled manner and saw each other before there were any issues. We greeted each other, maybe stopped and talked a minute, and then continued on our way. No problems.
I don't want to be told which way to ride. I, while in the minority it seems, like to ride the trails both directions--which direction on which day depends on my mood.
FATS is not crowded enough to warrant making it directional. People get hurt on FATS because they ride above their ability level, NOT because they didn't see someone coming from the other direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by ted on May 20, 2010 21:29:10 GMT -5
Several times it came up in conversation that it is nice to let it hang out without having to worry (as much) about someone coming the other way. Funny enough I was one of those people that said that. Still vote no.  |
|
|
|
Post by dparrott on May 20, 2010 23:21:36 GMT -5
Remember one of the golden rules:
Always ride in Control!
This means riding at speeds you can control including braking for the unexpected whether it be an oncoming biker or pedestrian, large fallen tree, rattlesnake or even a cow. Be on the defensive - not unlike when driving a car. I was going uphill this evening on GW and an approaching rider was bombing down toward me. He didn't see me but I heard him bumping along and was able to pull over in time even though I had the right of way (uphill).
Guess I'm for leaving it the way it is although I'd like to hear some discussion of why and how the directional trails are working at the Canal.
|
|
|
|
Post by ted on May 21, 2010 6:51:07 GMT -5
I am 100% in favor of directional days at FATS. MD I am adamantly against it. A house divided! Excellent Ambassador! |
|
|
|
Post by ted on May 21, 2010 6:55:29 GMT -5
Guess I'm for leaving it the way it is although I'd like to hear some discussion of why and how the directional trails are working at the Canal. Canal is working fine and directional days are justified. Is there really a need for discussion.  |
|
|
|
Post by dgaddis1 on May 21, 2010 7:39:29 GMT -5
Guess I'm for leaving it the way it is although I'd like to hear some discussion of why and how the directional trails are working at the Canal. Canal is working fine and directional days are justified. Is there really a need for discussion. I'd hardly say it works well, I run into people going the wrong way a good bit. It is good to have the canal directional tho, it's so tight and twisty you can be right on someone before you know it. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark Y on May 21, 2010 8:01:57 GMT -5
I related the story earlier of encountering a group on the canal trail who should know beter that was going the wrong way and caused me to fall. I'd say it works well the majority of the time but as Dale pointed out, you have to be prepared for the times it doesn't. Do you think a sign at the midpoint of the Canal trail could be useful since some folks enter that way? It is a trail a lot of beginners use so the Odd/Even reminder at that spot might help, dunno.
|
|
|
|
Post by mhanna on May 21, 2010 8:23:36 GMT -5
I just hate it that Yetichick is so wishy washy on the subject. lol
Should be seeing MD change his opinion any time now.
I do agree with "I don't want to be told which way to ride."
MH
|
|
|
|
Post by bikerpanda on May 21, 2010 10:23:59 GMT -5
I, personally, stop for everyone coming my way. Im usually riding alone so its easier for me to stop, than a whole group. I dont care if I am going uphill or downhill. I have rode Skinny and BW. I see a lot of riders on the way to BW and I do not mind stopping. When I rode BW, there was no one else on that loop. I like the trail the way it is personally. I dont have everyday to ride so directional days, even on the weekends, would not work for me. Im also a noob so my .2 is pretty much null and void.  |
|
|
|
Post by azdrawdy on May 21, 2010 15:50:43 GMT -5
I just hate it that Yetichick is so wishy washy on the subject. lol Should be seeing MD change his opinion any time now. I do agree with "I don't want to be told which way to ride." MH That or Man-Up.  Nevermind. Couches are cold. Opinions are like.... |
|
LIKE us on Facebook 
