Keith Code

Isolating Riding Barriers We know the bike has limits, we know that we have our own limits. Which of them is our real opponent in the battle for improvement and control? The Route to Control Cornering can be broken down into categories of activity such as braking, steering, finding a line, getting a good drive and so on. All enthusiasts are on a quest for being in better control or becoming quicker or smoother with them. Are there rules we must follow to achieve control over them? For yourself, if you could gain really good control over any one area of riding, which do you feel would be the one that would blow away the greatest number of barriers in your cornering? What comes to mind? The Discipline of Riding A. Riding is a discipline in most senses of the word. It certainly requires us to order things correctly. Right from day one we know the gas must come on before the clutch is released and it remains so forever: The same goes for not chopping the throttle in a slide, making gear changes, braking, steering and so on. Each control sequence has a technical basic and an exact order which governs your conduct towards achieving success. B. Riding inflicts harsh correction on riders who are not obedient to its rigorous demands. Excess lean angle combined with overly aggressive throttle is beyond the limit of a bike's range of operation and it will hurt you. Going fast on cold tires; losing the front on the brakes are two other classic examples. Limits must be well known to stay out of harm's way. C. Riding is truly a discipline because it is its own category; its own branch of knowledge. No other sport requires hand/eye/body/machine control to be so precise. The coordination of our sense of speed, timing, traction, lean angle and location guide us, truly or falsely, and each has a very specialized order-of-importance of its own. Because of its peculiar, multi-level demands, the knowledge/feel required to become successful is unique to itself. D. Riding demands that we order its actions and coordinate them towards an effective result. The marital arts are a great example of drilling individual actions towards a definite result: just like racing, they try to beat the opponent. In both cases though, the opponent is often our own sense of our limits. As we approach and master our limits they become assets we use to coordinate our efforts to ride better. E. Actions, once coordinated, become procedures. These procedures have strict guidelines, even laws perhaps, to make them effective towards a desired goal: make it through the corner; miss the car; set up and carve a clean, stable and smooth line through a set of ess curves. The more exactly we can define these procedures the easier it is to correct our faults. Guidelines or Laws? No one becomes an effective martial artist without strict adherence to basic tenets. Can we become an effective cornering artist without some understanding of the demands of our discipline? To operate effectively in either art requires dedication to their basic principals. We see Bruce Lee or Valentino Rossi make it look effortless and almost natural, almost stylized, and, at its very core, it is. Are there actual laws in these disciplines, as in the laws of thermodynamics or electricity that govern them or just sort of loose guidelines? Can we cheat them if they do exist? Are the top guys cheating these laws or are they good because they rigorously adhere to them? It often looks like cheating doesn't it? Beginner or Basic? Motorcycle riders often confuse basic technical riding points with beginner basics. There is a huge difference. Letting out the clutch without stalling the bike would be a beginner's barrier to overcome. Finding and being able to consistently execute a good line with flawless throttle control are both technical basics. Once the clutch is mastered it becomes a specialized tool for the rider. Slipping it at slow speed, launching a great start, quick seamless gear changes all have their place and cannot be replaced by some other actions to achieve the same results. When the master of the martial arts dojo observes a novice practice the same kata (exercise) his Black Belt is doing, he sees the differences. The overall description of the actions being performed are the same but the trained artist is able to produce the desired result from the form. It's not something that just looks cool. You may roll on the throttle, so does Nicky Hayden, but it is doubtful that the result is the same in anything but the form. Yes, there is a law covering rolling on the throttle. A sub-discipline to the art if you like. Limits, Commitment and Rewards On the bike, we don't argue with traction, we try to sense it: similarly, we don't question a bad line, we see it; we don't debate our speed, it's gut-level sensing of it; we don't quibble with lean angle limits, our own or the bike's, we become familiar or shy of them. When any one of these distracts us too much; our grasp of coordinated riding; our "technique", our form, falls apart. We lose, to some degree, our command over the bike and situation. Certainly, riders wish to feel in command of all of them but often quail and waver in their commitment once they push or approach their own limits regarding them. Bruce Lee had his "two inch punch". It was powerful enough to knock over a very large man. A novice martial artist might not develop that much power with a running head start. For sure it is focus but what do you focus on? When you see Val Rossi completely blow his line without losing a position, what do you say? He's lucky? He has a lot of experience? Brass balls? He's smooth? None of those things bring us to any understanding of how or why he could do it. We can think about the bike's limits: Brake later is easy to say: get on the gas earlier is easy to think: use more lean angle: flick it quicker: get more reference points; carry more speed: go in deeper: don't hesitate with the throttle and get the tire squirming on the drive out: mastering any of these points would make most riders happy but may not be the correct item to crack their own particular key barrier. Which one would yield the greatest possible rewards if you understood it, focused on it and you solved it? Are any of them what you thought of at the beginning? No-Reason Limits Personal limits are an interesting subject. When we ride within them too often the tendency is to accept them. When we try and ride through them it can be a daunting and often far too interesting experience-read that as distracting. Are your limits where your natural ability ends? Not likely. If that were the case, having a breakthrough in riding would require something like going back in time and rearranging your entire life or your DNA code: it's where our inability to maintain focus on technical basics kicks in that delineates our limits and denies us success. We try to run a set of esses faster but we wind up pressed for time and lose whatever smooth we had because our control timing gets blown out. You've done this. We all do well right up to the point of distraction. That is the real limit. Whichever area of riding that was the most distracting would probably yield the greatest benefits if it were debugged and mastered. By that I mean bringing the barrier into sharp enough focus to conquer it. Felt Limits The ever-present problem is our Survival Instincts and Reactions, SRs for short. SR's gratuitously (without reason or justification) kick in and take over the running of our body and in particular the right hand and our eyes. That is the moment we become spectators to our riding. We know this because the throttle went still or off in our right hand for no justifiable reason; we target fixed on another rider and they just smoked us through or out of that corner; we touched the brake when we didn't need to; made an unnecessary steering adjustment, etc., etc. A tight focus on our application of technical basics is required to beat these often destructive survival urges and they can be beat. You can learn to take a punch without flinching. Known vs Felt Limits In ours, as in other disciplines, we have both real and "felt" limits. A skilled rider is able to maintain clarity on which is which. When the real and felt limits intermingle that clarity is lost; the edges blur; riding becomes a sketchy activity and we make errors from the indecision that results from it. The speed may "feel" too high for a section of track. But it may only be too high for the line you took--that was the "real" limiting factor. Simple decisions like, "should I brake or gas it" can get fuzzy. "I could have been in the gas much earlier and much harder". You really know you could have but with the edges blurred we lose our clarity of actions and our ability to coordinate them, we lose our sense of control. The Five The known limits of riding are of great concern to us. Riders always attempt to focus on and carefully balance lean angle against acceleration against traction against line against speed. Each of us does this. It's an ongoing, moment-to-moment effort to monitor those 5 elements- just before; as we go into and through corners. No less than five factors are involved: each one critical to the turn's successful execution. Could your answer lie in your command over one of them? I'm sure you would be happy if just one of them were firmly under your control. Juggling the Five It's a real juggling act to get all five of them right when you're trying to go quick. The discipline of riding demands you maintain focus on their order; intensity and accuracy. You have a flow when you do; you choke when you don't. Which of these 5 points is the most senior? Which one brings all the others into alignment, into focus? Which one can blow the others out of order and out of focus? If you do a flow chart on them, which would come first in the whole process of coming up to and going through a corner? Speed of course. Speed tends to monitor the line you will run, the amount of lean you'll have to use; how quickly you flick the bike; the bike's potential for acceleration, as well as limiting or improving your available traction. While that is true, you could also say that your line monitors them. You could say that the available traction would monitor them all as well. The same goes for the amount of lean you could or should use and how quickly or slowly you get it over. Even the amount of acceleration you might want can limit or modify all the others. So, mechanically speaking, they are for the most part, equal. But the motorcycle doesn't ride itself. It can't juggle the five elements. You do. Limits vs Resources These five factors are both our limits and our most valued resources for executing a corner. They are limits when our feelings overwhelm us and it goes out of balance; resources when used precisely--according to the disciplines of riding and in balance with the real limits. Is the cup half empty or half full is the way we separate an optimist from a pessimist. Is the rider seeing them as limits or resources? That's one easy way to define a rider's ability. Each rider has his or her own subtle ways of telegraphing which mode they are operating in. A trained coach sees it immediately. Most riders operate in limits mode. The master knows at a glance the many differences between a novice and an accomplished Black Belt. A good riding coach may see 5 things wrong with your riding. Which one should he direct your attention to? Would it be more helpful if the coach was able to give you an exact standard by which you could measure improvement or would a general guideline serve just as well? It's a loaded question. Experience or Understanding My original question is unfair. If you knew what was wrong with your riding, you'd probably focus on it and fix it. Which of the five points do you feel limits your riding the most? That would be the way to try and view it objectively. But even that isn't easy. The good advice crowd will normally tell you that more saddle time is the key. Oddly enough, if you look at the schedules of many pro racers you can easily see how a club race/track-day guy on a moderate budget gets more track time. And there is nothing wrong with track time-as long as it is focused towards overcoming the right barrier. Riding Plateaus It's easy to practice yourself onto a riding plateau, you could say barrier if you like. I'll define plateau: When going back to work on an earlier skill doesn't look appealing and the next step up feels too steep, a bit dizzying, like thinking about going into a turn a lot faster than you ever have before-the thought and the action don't come together, you feel stopped-that is a plateau. Perhaps you want to get a better drive but the questions of traction, line and lean angle become overwhelming. It's easy to lose focus and wind up doing it the same as last lap. Clearly, the essential next step for success was missed, unknown or wrongly applied. Otherwise, you would have made some progress with it. Taking one of the five and sorting that out is your only hope. As in any discipline, expert coaching works miracles to help maintain that focus. The Pitch The Superbike School has lead the way for 25 years in isolating and defining the technical points for cornering motorcycles. In that process we invented step-by-step rider training. The first step was discovering that there were steps. We have and you will too. Our coaching staff is for real. They are carefully trained and highly qualified to identify and handle your weak areas. We can and will push you through the barriers: we know what they are; we know what problems you have encountered and have had to deal with and we know what to do about it. Keith Code ⓒ Keith Code, 2006, all rights reserved.

Riders often look for a "technique", some trick, a panacea for their riding ailments that will pull it all together for them. At the same time they look at the bike and all of the technology in it as having vastly more potential than the skills they possess to use it. The evidence for this attitude is that other riders can go quicker, smoother or more precisely than them. What's going on here? The bike isn't engineered and constructed on tricks so it's highly unlikely that tricks will tame it. The robot which welded up your beautiful perimeter frame does not have its own technique, it does not possess skill: it is programmed with the technology of welding based on a blueprint. What is Skill? Skill is another of the great buzz words of riding. Let's define it so we have something to talk about. Riding Skill is: The harmonious interaction of riding technology with machine technology towards a known result. Our bikes are built on technology created by designers and engineers: frame design, radial brakes, responsive forks and shocks, ignition black boxes that meter the fuel more efficiently, etc. Doesn't it make sense that there would be correct "technology" for riding that allows us to access all that potential? How about techniques? Where do they fit into the picture. What is the difference between "technique", "technology" and "skill"? How can they work together? How do they often fight each other? Technology We all want the bike to cooperate with us and sometimes we hope the machine and the technology it is built on will correct our errors or bring confidence but that's not how it works. The word "technology" itself has gotten a little muddy over the past 50 years. We tend to think technology means all the newest gadgets and improvements that come with a computer or a motorcycle. That's a very new use of the word. Factually, it means something completely different. Technology is the practical application of the underlying order or theory of something. The result is a system which organizes, controls or provides access to it. There are technical points to riding; these would fall under the category of our own software. That, along with the different cool devices on your bike, like a Power Commander, both fall into the category of "technology". Cornering Technology Understanding something as simple as straightening out a corner is valuable riding technology. Having a "line" really means: How the rider is organizing and controlling space; the space is the corner in front of him. The straighten-out-the-corner technology organizes that space in its most efficient manner. For example, it allows for a better, more flowing control of the bike; more efficient use of its power delivery systems and gains access for the rider to the bike's best handling characteristics, which in turn improves traction. Using this technology to handle corners has proven itself reliable since the very first motorcycle. Regardless of machine upgrades, it works. Once any procedure is established which resolves problems and yields a consistent result, whether it is riding or machine bits, it can be correctly categorized as "technology". Both riding and machine technology should come together: the bike's technological advances, if they are truly advances, allow you to better control the machine and, in turn, make it easier to straighten out the corner. The bike's technology helps the rider achieve an improved result. If it is correct technology, one compliments the other. Technique "Technique" is different, it sits on top of the technology. It is more how it looks and feels than how it works. A 125cc GP rider straightens out the corners quite differently than the Moto GP rider. Different technique, same technology. The 125 GP bike rider has little acceleration and so must preserve all the momentum (corner speed) he can. The Moto Gp rider wants to get pointed quickly and get his 250 hp to the ground. The form (technique) is different but the function (the technology) is the same. As long as you realize that your technique or form must cooperate with and compliment the underlying technology or function (what result you want and how the bike works) you can make progress in any problem area of riding. Hanging Off. Form or Function? Technique or Technology? A good riding technique is harmonious with and compliments machine technology. We hang off the bike to lower the combined Center of Gravity of the bike and rider. A useful technique. When it is only done for the form or to look cool, the reason for doing it becomes lost and the form becomes counter-productive. Form and function are another way of saying technique and technology. Hanging off really is a perfect example. When we see a rider hanging their butt and leg off the inside of the bike we say they are hanging off; that is the form. But, when we see their head and torso crisscrossed back over the tank we have to take a look at the function, at the technology of it, to determine if it is good, bad or has no effect. In this case, the upper body mass across the tank counters the butt and leg so nothing is gained. Additionally, riders tend to be stiff on the bike in this position. Therefore it is not only counter-productive but actually has a negative effect. Aside from its one saving grace--it looks and feels good to the rider sometimes-it is creating additional problems. There is no machine technology that will maintain the lowered C of G if the rider's technique counters that basic purpose. Barriers Become Tools All of the classic rider barriers follow suit. Finding the limits of traction, lean angle, quick flicking, throttle control, line selection and so on all have very specific uses; very specific ways of executing them; very specific results that can be achieved. Once the rider understands and aligns his technique with the underlying technology these "barriers" become tools to handle exact situations. That rider has achieved a new and very solid level of control. Now we could say he had skill. He is able to align his technique with the technology involved. Riders who rely solely on what they feel from the bike are hard to train. Riders who can recognize, understand and shoot for specific results in each of these areas make rapid progress towards their riding goals. It isn't all technique, some understanding of the underlying technology is needed to bring Feeling, Technique and the Technology into harmony that result in Skillful application. Fashionable Riding Techniques can become "fashionable". Look at the drama and appeal of the "backing-it-in" technique. The underlying principal is sound: get the bike pointed more towards the exit, spend less time in the corner leaned over, put the power down earlier, beat the other guys. On the outside it appears to be a simple and effective idea because it is based on the solid technology of straightening out the turn. This technique feels great to do and looks awesome. Have you noticed it has mainly come and gone? Too much monkey business, too complicated, low results: the form overcame the function: the technique did not really compliment and fully align with the technology. Fashionable Slides Big time hanging the back end out, spinning the tire coming off the corners has gone the same way. The old adage, "You aren't going forward if you are going sideways" came back to haunt those riders once again. Yes, some tire spin is needed for a good drive off the turn and to keep the tire clean, exposing fresh, sticky rubber but too much just looks cool and brings in the spectators but it doesn't win races and could cost you your traction later in the race. Techniques, if they ignore the underlying technology, if they are not integrated and complimentary, are like painting over a dirty, unprepared surface. It looks great from a distance but loses its charm under close inspection. Technique vs Understanding Valentino and Matt Mladin use the same controls we do. When you see novice riding errors being made you see someone who appears to be struggling with the form, the techniques. There is lots of added stuff going on, mainly corrections, like extra steering inputs to adjust lean angle or a variety of braking and throttle inconsistencies. This rider isn't really struggling with the technique, it is the technology, the underlying function of the controls and what the bike needs, that they are at odds with. Making the rider's form better doesn't handle it. Saying you need to be smooth doesn't handle it. Another coat of paint doesn't handle it. The less we understand of the bike's needs and what function the controls actually serve (the underlying technology of it) the more we battle with the form. As stated earlier, most riders honestly believe that learning some cool technique will handle it. It won't. The worst part is that when "technique" without understanding fails to produce the desired effect riders go off on tangents and invent complicated little procedures trying to make things work out. Simple control inputs become involved, tooth and nail battles for this rider. This is true at all levels of riding. The Value of School This is the real reason why training works so effectively. Once you know what is needed and how to produce it your control over the machine is established and you'll move forward from there. When you add to that effective on-track observation and coaching, the corrections you are given make sense. Any technique that brings the rider more in control and more in alignment with how the bike and its technology actually work is a good technique. There is not now and never will be one single technique or one trick, that accomplishes that. We drill 15 different points in our first three school levels. The briefing before each on-track session reveals the key supporting evidence and facts to show how they work; why they work; what will go wrong if you misapply them and how they integrate with the bike's functions, its technology. You'll know what it is and how to gain access to it. Becoming enough of a technician to understand these points is not difficult. In the end the motorcycle has simple demands, simple functions. Even if we don't understand how a shock is designed and engineered we can easily understand what was intended by its creators and how to bring out the best possible results from it. You can understand this technology with little effort, no engineering background is needed. All that is needed is the desire to master the art of cornering a motorcycle. Learn the skills, discover the art. Keith Code ? Keith Code, 2005, all rights reserved.

I wasn't logged in properly, here goes again. Speaking of thinking it through--did any of you read Rossi's autobiography? He goes over just how much he is thinking about his riding during a race weekend. Very interesting stuff. I haven't finished the book yet but that part is in the first or second chapter. Best, Keith

Hey guys, Let me steer you just a bit on this if you don't mind. When you go out with a purpose in mind it is far better than just going out hoping that it will all come together for you. It is lovely to get into the zone on riding. Brilliant experience and makes it all worthwhile. But pulling yourself along with a purpose for the ride, the race, the parctice session, for those of us who don't have MotoGP quality of riding yet, is the way to go. Listen. I've been doing some research. I've come up with 40 different purposes a rider can have for how they set up and execut a line through a corner, they all have some sort of result that riders try for when they ride. Sometimes it is just an intention. Some of them are vague and some are specific. 'To make it through the turn', that would be vague. 'To have higher mid corner speed' would lead a rider towards something they could actually accomplish. 'To go faster', pretty vague. 'To get into the zone', pretty vague. 'To get back on the gas earlier', you could work with that one. You see what I mean? Good advice is just that, good advice. Nothing wrong with it but all too often it just sounds good but doesn't give the rider a real plan to execute to improve. Best, Keith

Like most things, the brake release and the throttle application take co-ordination and drilling to get them in perfect harmony. Just keep it simple, it isn't necessary to invent new procedures and add extra actions at a time when your attention is stretched out as thin as it is at the entry to turns. It will only create more busy work. Whether braking straight up or leaned over, the release of the lever will determine if the transition is clean and smooth or not. An abrupt release will get the suspension moving around more than it should be, that is distracting. If the brake is release clean there should not be any upsetting movement from the chassis--done poorly, there will be and that can be distracting. Getting your right wrist to co-operate and get the throttle on AFTER your lean angle is set is the only way to guarantee a stable motorcycle. That lag is what you need to handle. Half a second isn't long on a stop watch but it is 44 feet at 60 mph. That is 6 bike lengths! Getting the bike full on quick flicked, really snapped into the turn, can be done with no chassis upsets of any kind. You do not have to invent new stuff or be world champion to do this. You do have to pay attention to your brake release and throttle application and once they are in harmony it will work for you. There are some other factors to this but, on a bike that is basically set up OK, these are the two that make the big difference. Keith

Hi Jen, We can't run it in the rain. The problem is that riders trust the outriggers too much and just lean it over too far. It is still a motorcycle and will lose backend traction just like a real one. THat is far less likely to happen in the dry. Riding it in the wet was one of the very first experiments we did with it on the skid pad at Willow Springs back in 1998. We had the water truck come out and put one of us on it. Probably not a fiar comparison to real conditions since it hadn't rained for a while and the asphalt was slimey but we found later that with cold tires and a wet surface it acts a lot like a normal bike. Keith PS: OVer the past few years the weather has been good for us at Sears, we only rained out part of one day and still got all the track time in.

Drop Will, our mechanic, a line mechanic@superbikeschool.com and ask him what he has, I think you are in luck, that we do have some fo the parts you are looking for. Keith

Alex, We stay pretty much with stock settings on the suspension, just a twist here or there but that is Will's job so email him and he'll let you know what the setup is. Tire pressure varies with tires and usage so be specific when you ask him. mechanic@superbikeschool.com is his address. Best, Keith

Here is my nickle's worth. Maximum lean is a tool that you only use when it is necessary. Granted, having it is good and feeling confident with it is good as well but it is not how you want to ride all the time in fact you want to avoid it as much as possible. One thing is for sure, you will never trust the bike until you totally trust yourself. 90% of that trust has to do with how much control you have over your right wrist and maintaining good throttle control at the steep lean angles. Look at your own riding and tell me if you are absolutely postitive your throttle controls is perfect as you approach YOUR maximum comfort zone in lean angle. Here is a point to consider: At 45 degrees lean the load on the suspension is 41% greater than vertical. As you lean it further over the load becomes even higher. The suspension is still lower in its travel from the cornering forces that are created. Your throttle control has to bring the suspension back into its most compliant range. What is the problem? Your instinct is telling you more gas is bad and the bike is saying it needs more gas. Who wins? Keith

Great questions, Riders get used to riding a certain way for lots of reasons, some of which have been sited here on this thread, vision is a good point and it is one of the major reasons riders try and stay high on the bike, it is easier to see. In the end you have to weigh one position against the other and put that up against what is trying to be accomplished with the hanging off riding position. If lowering the combined C of G is the purpose then the upper body across the top of the tank, twisted on the bike, is counter-productive and neutralizes the butt cheek out in the wind, the rider might as well just sit on the bike like a touring rider does. Another reasons riders adopt the twisted position is that they feel compeled to hang onto the bars as it gives them the impression they are in better control. Its just their feeling about it and that is hard to argue with. I worked hard with Roger Lee Hayden on this point. His mechanic was worried about him using too much lean. But to give you an idea of how hard it id to break the habit, it took Roger Lee at least 8 races to begin to get down into the bike and he is a talented rider for sure. What I'm saying is: It is not so easy to change it once it becomes a "habit". It is very easy to see that almost every rider on the planet starts out twisted on the bike (it is one of the easiest ways to spot the novices) so there is obviously some survival instinct that has to be overcome in order to get into the bike in what we see as "good" body position. Best, Keith

When you get into the corner, immediately after you have initiated the turn, get ON the gas. If you're not on the gas, you will continue to transfer weight to the front and tighten up the turning of the bike. JeF4Y's quote. Not so Jeff, at least not unless you have some pressure on the bars and that is quite unconscious for most riders. When you are off the gas in a corner the contact patch is to the inside of the tire's center and is countersteering the bike upwards and wide in the turn. Going off the gas and transfering weight to the front end with the tiniest bar pressure has a pretty big effect and, again, is quite unconscious for most riders. The one thing that does modify this is the rider's body position. The forward and down position seems to bring in more pro-steer (the front end turning in towards the corner and tightening up the turn) in that position but we have yet to discover if there is bar pressure being applied at the same time. Experiments are on the way and in progress to determine this. I am working with Paul Thede at Race Tech and he is building a really great data acquisition system that includes bar pressure and steering head rotation sensors. We will use the data for the Twist II DVD which we are shooting in October. Keith

Agocat, Your spring sag sounds way out of whack but before changing it you need to measure it correctly. You take the measurement with you on the bike in normal riding position. First you take the meausrement of the front and the rear at full extension, then sit on it and see how much sag its got. There are articles out there on setting spring sag. Here is the address from Race Tech with the directions on how to do it. http://www.triumphnet.com/st/acc/racetech/setup.htm Keith

I have never ridden a bike that doesn't countersteer and definitely never ridden one that steers the way Supernought says-- turns in like a car. The idea that little corrections are made like car steering and larger ones are from countersteering is a new one on me. I have heard that over 225mph bikes do steer like cars and then return to countersteering past 275 (I think that was the number). I'd like to know where this data came from Supernought. Where? Keith

You and Valentino Rossi It's not often we are treated to the kind of excitement that Moto GP racing is providing us with today and we see a huge difference in what he can do compared to the other riders out there on the circuit. With Val Rossi we know that the equipment makes little or no difference, he has won on slower and less developed bikes; he breaks lap records on the last lap when everyone else complains about their tires going off and he has the same rubber as them. He's not noted, like some top racers, to maintain any sort of rigorous physical training regimen. What's up with that? I suppose we'd all like to be able to ride like Valentino Rossi. We admire him and then we ride and can't figure out how a Human could be in such command of so many aspects of riding when we are essentially doing the same thing on the bike as he is. You work the same controls that change the speed and direction of your bike as he does. So if it isn't the bike then it must be the man. And if it is the man it is the mind that guides it. If it is the mind that guides it, then the fuel for the mind is the perceptions of the individual rider himself that rules. When we look over the number of perceptions that we can have it is actually pretty staggering. We perceive, line, lean angle, traction, speed and the timing and degree of control application to put them all in some kind of sensible order for ourselves. There is the difference?what is a sensible order? When you pull on the brakes in a set of esses and someone else is wide open and upshifting you start to get some inkling of the difference between your perceptions. Leading the way on perception is our ability to process visual data. Or, more accurately, our sense of location in space. It is easy to see that location rules when it comes to working the controls. What one rider sees is vastly different than another, even though the things that are available to use as reference points are exactly the same. One rider's line is different than another's. How much different? Well, you might have a track that is 4 DOT lanes wide but the actual usable space for speed and control narrows down quite a bit from there. The amount of that space that you can use is limited, maybe 10 feet of it would be the amount of variance from one rider to another, maybe. That would be a generous estimate, it is probably more like 5 feet. Unless you are Valentino who seems to be able to make any line work. What's all the fuss about lines? Big fuss. When you break it down the only logical explanation is that a rider can choose and run any line that he can see. The corollary (an easily drawn conclusion) to that is, if you can't see the line you can't choose it and you can't run it. I can't count the number of times we've shown a rider a line and then followed him to see how good his "monkey-see-monkey-do" skills were only to find his line varied only slightly from what he had been doing and markedly varied from what we demonstrated. What someone uses for Reference Points (RPs) and how they use them is the key. This was my first real discovery on riding back in 1976. It changed my riding and everyone that I worked with made huge leaps in their own skills by simply becoming aware of this simple fact. What I now know is: there ARE other points that must be cemented in for a rider to have a solid enough foundation to even get to the point they can find and use good RPs with certainty and with confidence. When we take up Reference Points, and the other visual skills, on Level 2 we get to the real core of riding and it isn't that easy to master it. So what about Valentino? Our Australian school director, Steve Brouggy, has a great way of putting it. "If you could record what you see and record what Valentino sees you would have two totally different movies." I agree. As I have seen with lots of top riders, their biggest ongoing breakthroughs come in their ability to use their visual abilities, their perception of location. Why can a rider go through a turn 300 times and all of a sudden have a massive breakthrough and finally "understand" the turn? It happens all the time. I hope it has happened to you. If it hasn't then I know why. Valentino does it on the fly and it seems that he has honed this ability to its finest possible point. You can see it if you look closely. Watch his lines and see not only that he can use any line in a pinch but that the differences in his and the others out there really is different. Have fun watching for this. Truly, if you have difficulty seeing this from the camera's perspective you would have a very difficult time doing it on your own. What I'm saying is this: it's good practice to notice lines, your own and someone else's, it may give you a new idea on how to use your own eyes. Once you become interested in your lines, I hope to see you for Level 2 and sort it out. Keith Code ⓒKeith Code, 2005, all rights reserved.

Wally, I first rode Chimney Rock Park Road in 1961... Keith

Here is my take on this. Changing more than one gear at a time is fine on the street but not for track or other spirited riding. The thing about one dowhshift at a time is simple--you know what gear you are in. If you miss a shift while trying to go down more than one it completley blows the corner because you have to think it through on which way to go, up or down to get it back together. In a car you know where the stick is, that is quite different from a bike. Keith

Jeff, Well done, it will be interesting to see what you do there at the school in August with the Level III tecnhiques under your belt. Keith

The single most important lesson I ever leanred to get perfect starts is to make sure the throttle is wide open the moment before you let out the clutch and leave it there, all adjusment are done with the clutch lever to keep the front end on the ground and get a great launch. Keith Will Eikenberry taught me that.

Get a 600, they are light and you won't outgrow it even when you get fast. Keith

superdave88, Bad advice--take a look at how much Val Rossi or Tommy Hayden rides and how fast they go and how little they crash as your roll model. Forget the "you don't know how fast you can go until you crash" advice, it leads you to the wrong conclusions and doesn't mean squat when it comes to learning how to do it right. Keith

shoj, Physical fitness is relative to a lot of things, age, weight, endurance and strength. If you are fit enough to do an hour of aerobics and are reasonable strong for your weight and age you can race with no problems of any great concern. We know racers who are old and overwieght but strong and have endurance that do really quite well. I've known other racers who didn't look as though they could stay on the bike for 20 minutes who also did well. Once you go to school you'll have a better idea of what it takes. Keith

shoj here is the link to our school in the UK. if racing is what you want then take a look at who is leading the British Supersport class, Leon Camier who is on of our students. http://www.superbikeschool.co.uk/uk/ssl/ Keith

The 600 Supersport in England is every bit as tough as our own series, lots of fast guys racing on really good bikes so here is one guy we helped a bunch and I made a statement to Road Racing World so I thought you all might be interested. California Superbike School student Leon Camier wins British Supersport round at Thruxton Keith Code-- ?Leon is doing great. We had him as a student last year when I was in Spain at Almeria and after that his sponsors decided to send him over for one of our Code R.A.C.E. programs last Fall, that?s when I started working with him one-on-one. He was already pretty quick but like lots of talented riders he wasn?t consistent and that is what we worked on. Leon crashed in the first round two weeks ago at Brands Hatch and wound up fourth in that one but yesterday he won a convincing victory over the field. I?m starting to have some fun again training racers. Our school director in the UK, Andy Ibbott, has been working with a 125 GP rider named Thomas Luthi. He was leading the 125 GP in Jerez by 3 seconds last weekend and had a mechanical with 7 laps to go so we almost had an international podium the same weekend with another of our one-on-one students. To be honest, I think what we teach is effective up to around 175 hp bike and tire combinations. I can see what Rossi and the MotoGP guys are doing and I can appreciate it but I don?t fully understand it like I do 600s, 125s and Superbikes. Maybe I can get a GP ride and find out!?

This interview with me appeared in the April issue of Roadracing World magazine. I thought you might like to see it. John Ulrich was kind enough to give me a PDF version of the interview for you to read. http://superbikeschool.com/files/code-rw-interview.pdf The file is 600K and requires Acrobat Reader 5 or newer to view it.

The funny thing about htis year is that more riders are choosing our new ZX 6Rs than in the years past so those are the spots that are filling up the quickest. I suppose with Tommy's amazing runaway win at Daytona that will only increase. So your chances of getting a spot on your own bike are better than they have been in the years past. I've ridden our new bikes and, just to put in a huge pump for our sponsor, they are really sweet. Last year's 636 was already the best bike I could think of for track training and riding and this year's bike is head and shoulders above even that---I really like them and the reason is that you just don't think about the bike after about two laps, it's always there for you doing what you want it to do. Keith