All

That was my concern as well. I don't have anything against the man made stuff, I just worry that its going to lead to alot of guys riding the same line like you said. When you put in a couple of massive features it becomes a case of everyone feeling they have to hit those and it turning into more of a course. What I've always loved is seeing these guys do big tricks like 360's on difficult, natural, and gnarly lines. Even though these features are huge its much easier to pull the big tricks on a wooden run...

I kind of agree. These features are bad ass but I just hope they don't go overboard. I always kind of liked the fact that there was no 'course' so to speak. Just an area where the riders could do whatever they want. If they add to many features I might lead to everyone having to hit them in order to score well, which would lead to alot of similar lines and more of a 'course' feel to the event.

I've heard that comparison before but it's not quite the same. In the NFL the regular season is directly related to the superbowl since you have to win in the regular season and playoffs just to make the superbowl. I get what you are saying though and I think a more accurate comparison might be golf where wining one of the 4 majors each year trumps most other accomplishments outside of the majors. But golf I can understand because the majors are generally staged on the toughest courses and feature the very best field of players worldwide. Seems in downhill...

I agree it was bad form for TWR to downplay the worlds, but I do agree that winning the overall cup is probably a better determination of who the best rider is. I'm not doubting how important and how recognized winning the world champs is, I just don't get why exactly that single race carries so much weight. I just started riding and following this stuff a couple years ago so I don't know the whole history. Have the world champs been around prior to there being a full world cup circuit? That would explain alot.

It's just hard to buy that Gwinn would make an excuse like that. The guy simply just doesn't have anything to prove. Everyone knows he's the best in the world. Plus like someone pointed out it wouldn't be worth throwing a sponsor under the bus to do so.

I agree with that as well. I only started mountain biking and following this stuff a couple years ago and always found it odd how much weight was placed on this one race. I mean to me winning the overall series, being consistent on a variety of tracks for a full season is what truly determines the best in the world.

Thats pretty much what I meant. I realize there was alot of research into just how to make bikes out of Carbon, but it hasn't yet spawned any real now bike technology. What I mean is like some new radical design that was never possible due to the limitations of aluminum. Like some sort of linkage that may have worked great but was too heavy in aluminum or something of that nature. Like what kind of new design ideas will be opened up due to this new material. Like i said in my original post these new carbon bikes are...

I agree with everything you are saying and I think you made the same general point as me actually when you said the design was already working well, so why change it. And I agree with that and that was kind of my point really. That these carbon bikes aren't really breaking a ton or new ground in terms of design and technology as some people make them out to be. They simply just found a better material to make the bikes out of it would seem. The use of Carbon isn't opening up any radical new designs or anything...