Allright, trials and flatland rules aside. How about some mountain skill levels and some giraffe skills maybe some tandem…some coker?
But most realistically are there any know MUni
Yes, there is a division for giraffe skills. Also ultimate wheel and juggling.
MUni is something else again.
For skill progressions, we have to focus on skills that can be tested, and tested in a way that’s standard no matter what the conditions are. Very difficult to do with MUni. It can be done, but probably not in the same way that we test other skills, such as hops and idling. So MUni will be in a different category.
Distance riding (Cokers) will also be in a different category. Hockey and basketball will be too.
There’s no limit to the number of divisions that can be added to the new system.
I’m not sure when it will be available. We’re doing some field testing now.
Carol
And is there a website where all of these numerous skill levels can be viewed at the users pleasure
I know level’s are nice but i find i ride trials and muni for fun not to get a level i also ride muni to walk the dog. To be honest i did not think trials was about level’s and muni was for freedom.
Ben
level 0 i have never got tested
see your point, I agree for MUni but trials can be competitive quite easily and it would be nice to see your progress and have something to push you on would you not say?
aaron
It’s neat that trials and MUni and other forms of the sport are becoming so much more popular. I like watching the sport grow.
We haven’t posted anything to a web site yet. But if you’re interested in being a reviewer, please let me know.
Email: cettermclean at hotmail dot com
Thanks.
Carol
Minnesota
MUni and Trials are not fun because they are sports, they’re sports because they’re fun. When we get together for a CA MUni Weekend, for example, the main activity is riding the trails, because that’s what we like to do. When we have our competitions, the people who like to compete enjoy that as well, while the rest have something interesting to watch.
In other words, while some people attempt to pass levels and strive to win competitions, MUni and Trials are still fun and free.
Another purpose of levels is to show people what to work on, and a rough order of difficulty to give them a sequence. This is less needed with those skills, but in the area of a flat gym floor, most people on their own need help figuring out what to try next.
i really think that having specific levels is actually a really dumb idea. it is basically taking away peoples creativity as a means to improve their ability of riding. the only reason i progressed so much last yea is because i went out and made up stuff myself, not because there was this list of stuff i should do next. but whatever, do what you want, but imagine if every part of our sport was consumed by levels… nothing would be original anymore becuase everyone would be doing the same thing. honestly, dont make levels, let people naturally progress.
Kevin
The pro/anti levels argument is an old one. Certain truths should be kept in mind though. Nothing in the levels is original. It is a way to quantify what a lot of people already do. “New” stuff can only be made up by one person per item, not counting independent inventions. There will always be room for new stuff! That’s why we have Freestyle and Open-X, not just Standard Skill.
Levels don’t slow down peoples’ progress, they speed it up. Ryan Woessner went from level 1-8 in his first year of riding. Without the levels (ignoring he’s a member of TCUC for a moment), he most likely would have progressed only a fraction of that.
Though Ryan may have concentrated on levels only, he still learned a heck of a lot in one year. But he does other stuff too. Like winning the Freestyle world championship.
Levels are there to take or leave. Just like street luge. Thanks, but I’ll just watch that one. If people want to do it, why should I complain?
Although this is a seductive reasoning, I do not agree. It is easy to use music to find plenty of counterexamples. The best, most creative musicians are the most seriously studied in their art, not the least. This means years and years of studies, scales, arpeggios, long tones, and the like.
The most-creative people have the most tools to work with, are highly skilled with those tools, and apply them in creative ways. A discipline of study in MUni or trials would simply produce thoroughly better riders, not less-creative riders.
alright youve got me… just dont make skill levels for street… you’ll hurt someone.
Definately this is a controversial subject. I tend to agree with the above statements.
I think that the main problem with making MUNi or trials levels that are similar to standard skill levels is that the objectives are totally different.
In freestyle, you ride on completely predictable terrain (flat ground) that is the same everywhere and the challenge is 100% about the moves. This lends itself perfectly to skill levels because the moves can be completely standardized.
In trials and MUNi, you use a limited set of moves to negotiate infinately variable terrain. The types of techniques don’t matter except insofar as they allow you to ride over terrain. In other words, difficulty is defined by terrain, not the techniques. Consequently, the skill-level approach is problematic in that you can’t easily standardize terrain in a meaninful way, nor can you define levels based on technique (because the difficulty of the technique is fundamentally linked to the terrain you are riding on).
In sum, I think it is fundamentally flawed to base a MUni or trials difficulty rating system on either the type of techniques used, or some standardized set of obstacles. Nature is just to complicated for this, and it restricts creativity by forcing riders to ride someone elses problems and not make up their own.
The U-system avoids this problem by exclusively rating terrain difficulty, not techniques. Familiar reference obstacles are given U-ratings so that riders get a “feel” for how hard they are. Once a rider is familiar with these obstacles, they can apply the system to any other obstacles based on how hard it feels compared to the reference obstacles. This is the same approach used by many other rating systems, such as rock climbing or bouldering difficulty ratings, ice-climbing ratings, and river grades for kayaking and rafting.
However, the U-system doesn’t work well for longer trails- it’s too focused on individual moves. Many mountain bike trails use the ski-area rating system for trails (blue square, black diamond, double black diamond), and this works well for MUni too. If you really wanted to get specific, you could say a trail was, say, mostly blue square with a few individual moves up to U3 difficulty.
Kris Holm.
I rode for a couple of years 30 years ago when I had no list and not enough creativity. I didn’t advance very far. I could ride ahead, turn, go off a curb. That’s about it. Recently, I’ve found that list. Its given me a progression of skills that are in a logical building order. I’m lightyears better now than then.
I think for the average rider, the skills lists are good to have up to about level 4 or 5 and some 6 and 7 stuff. When you can handle these basics, then your creativity has something from which to draw.
But tugboat is right after a point. The rider needs to progress through a certain set of skills before he/she can create anything mindboggling. Having an accepted list speeds that process.
After which: Where do you think “dragging the seat out front” came from? Why, its simply absurd.
I think on MUni the same would apply. You’ll have some basic stuff that builds to some tough stuff. Then creativity kicks in. Where do you think “riding along a 3-inch handrail” came from. Thank you danger_uni and the like. Its simply absurd, but it makes my eyebrows raise waaaay up whenever I watch it.
I completely agree.
However, I think that “disciplined study” in this case means learning a toolbag of tricks that can be applied to many situations.
This is highly analagous to, say practicing scales in order to get better at playing a complicated piece of music.
However, I just don’t think it’s useful to simulate natural obstacles to create a standardized, rated learning progression, especially in the case of MUni.
For me, I find this useful:
-
When on a trials ride, always think in terms of seeing and riding lines, not just randomly hopping around.
-
Visualize riding something before you do it.
3)) If you can’t do something, identify the specific techniques that are needed and go away to more basic structures where you can practice these techniques. This would be the “practicing scales” part, and might include: -
rolling and sidehops onto basic square and off-angle surfaces.
-
pedal grabs onto a square edge
-
pedal grabs onto a rounded edge
-
pedal grabs onto a square railing
-
pedal grabs onto a round railing
-
pedal grabs onto a pole
-
hopping over a bar
-
hopping onto and riding a narrow square or rounded railing
etc…
However, I’m not convinced that it would help to rate these things because they’re just a means to an end, which is riding hard terrain, and rating terrain is best done with the U-system in my opinion.
Kris.
in reply to memphis mud: now that unicycling videos are available, we dont need standardized stuff in order to see the possibilities. instead of having a list of saying what skill has a certain difficulty, we can simply watch the video, see the possibilities and decide which skills to learn and build upon in our own style. for example: grinds didnt come about because someone told us to do it. someone saw a pedal grab, and decided to learn that skill and take it to the next level. grinding is now becoming a major part of unicycling at least among the younger ones. i bet if there was a set skill to achieve after pedal grabbing, grinding might not have come about.
anyways, its just my opinion
Kevin - see everyone at TOque!
I agree with both Kris and U-turn. The good of levels I have already explained from my point of view, and U-turn reinforced that. But Kris brings up the problem with MUni and Trials in that it won’t be possible to do the same type of progression as with flatland skills.
Figuring out a level or achievement system for those, aside from general guides like the U system, will be hard. That’s why I have not gottn involved in the committees doing it (except as a reviewer). I don’t know how well it will ever work, but support the people who are trying to figure it out.
I think it’s really interesting to see what’s happened to the standard skills since unicycle videos and also since new equipment has come out.
At unicycle things, there seem to be loads of people who can uni-spin, wheelwalk and glide, but not very many people at all who can do most other high level skills. Some skills seem to have become much easier because people are working on ‘cool’ skills and also because of the new equipment, like 180 hop twist, which has to be the easiest skill out there once you’ve ridden a trials uni for a bit, but is level 7 still.
Joe
I think that skill levels for thingssuch as huge drops perhaps aren’t the best idea. Most of the skills in the regular “freestyle” category are often difficult, but pose little or no danger to the rider. I bet there are quite a few riders who could land 8 foot drops, but don’t fancy getting seriously injured in the process. Doesn’t necessarily make them a worse rider. Also I can’t see too many people wanting to abuse their machine in that way- I know that best riders land really well, but still, it can’t do the uni a lot of good. Another thing is terrain- not everyone has the opportunity to attempt these things and even then, if someone had to post their video tape to the relevant bodies, there would have to be strict guidelines on the angle of the landing and exactly how high the obstacle was.
So it seems that it wouldn’t be a fair way to judge people’s ability.
Those are good points, 1WS. Safety is first, followed by everything else.
The real point of skill levels, or skill progression, is to be a tool for a rider to use to improve his/her skill. They help a person assess their own progress and help a person decide what to work on next. They also encourage a person to develop in a well-rounded way.
It is up to competition to “judge a person’s skill.” In addition, competition tends to be pickier than skill level testing. Skill levels are not intended to be used for rider comparison.
So the levels are for tool development, MUni rides and trials competitions are for making use of those tools.
Here’s another analogy. Two carpenters compete to produce the most beautiful cabinet. This involves planning, execution, and loads of artistic sense. In order to build their cabinets, each has to cut wood, drill holes, and the like.
Skill levels are about helping a carpenter drill better holes, cut straighter lines, and use shellac more skillfully. Skill levels don’t teach a carpenter what beauty is, or how to put all their skills together to produce a cabinet. Carpenter A may drill better holes than B, but that doesn’t mean he will win the contest. In fact, bragging that he has passed level 6 in hole drilling is probably a weakness. However, drilling better holes is one important component of building a more beautiful cabinet.
I think muni levels could be really helpful.