shane.hogan
-
Posts
14 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by shane.hogan
-
-
Are there going to be any foreign camps next year or is the published list more or less what we have to choose from?????
-
no apology needed.........
from my point of view at least, i think this one has just about run its course
-
seeing as this page is being used to float off into space and go on about other stuff..........
would i be required to go through level 1 again having done it back in 2001/02??????? would like to avoid that if poss and get on with getting stuck into the rest next year.......
-
"braking is done" is mostly interpreted as the brake lever is fully released which is an incorrect understanding. Braking done means you've reached the speed at which you can turn-in and begin releasing the brakes. You're speed is set for turn in.
The rate at which you release the brakes is dependant on your plan for the turn.
As for students and coaching, how do you train someone who consistently overbrakes, never hits the same turnpoint twice, turns the bike too slow, has no real concept of reference points, and is fed a lot of bad data about body position? You have to seperate it into fundamentals. You develop their sense of speed by removing the brakes, their sense of traction and bike stability by throttle control, quick turn, one turn rule, etc... You give them the overall concepts of what the ideal is and why it's ideal so they can think about it and develop their own data and how it relates to their riding.
If a person only does level one, doesn't read the books and relate them to their riding, they could definitely think there's a lot missing - there is.
But, if a rider read the books, does the levels and relates it to their riding, they should see there's a whole package there. Twist of the Wrist I, the concept of getting a product out of a turn was introduced - having the idea of doing specific actions for a whole, overall result from the turn. Soft Science covers several plans for taking a turn and what techniques are used to produce them, their limitations and their benefits. Twist II has the specific techniques and methodology to analyze and improve your riding from almost ground zero.
Greg, fantstic post, thank you.
It does now appear to be alot clearer.
It seems my confusion has come about because you guys fill in the gaps on an individual basis. Would it be fair to say you only take those next steps when the pupil shows the ability? As you point out somebody like me who has only done level 1 and read the books (ad nauseum
) will have a slightly narrow view of the practical side of what you guys teach. On the other hand we students are encouraged to think of the twist series of books as our bible so you can see how somebody might perceive something not dealt with directly in the books as something that is perhaps missing entirely. This was my mistake, but its only after pestering you guys about it personally that its been made clear that what you guys actually do is put the meat on the metaphorical bones ie the twist books. Previously this was not something i was aware of. I'd presumed you simply taught the basic concepts in the book and that was that........Am i the only one with this perception???And on the point of developing the basic skills.....
Do you guys have a set curriculum or is it very much dependant on the individual and his/her level of ability......
-
When is a rider "done" with braking? Is it when the rider fully lets go of the brake lever? Or, is it when the rider is no longer concerned about his entry speed?
Greg, i appreciate you taking the time to respond on the thread but im finding the approach you are taking is a bit frustrating.
I appreciate the whole "ask questions to stimulate thought" approach but i would appreciate straight answers or opinions if you could.
-
I just wanted add a little couple of things here. Firstly, it's a misconception to think you're going to brake all the way to the Apex, that almost never, ever happens, (i guess there are specific turns that it could happen and probably does), but most corners you never, ever get that far.
Secondly, I don't think there is any amibuity about the technology, what is widely misunderstood is the gradient which we often apply the techniques we use to riders. What I mean by this, there is a requirement when coaching to apply the right level of technology to the riders ability, and in addition to this, it's also important that we get the fundamental concepts applied and understood before starting to move the envelope on further in pursuit of say laptimes and outright speed. This is ulitimately a fine point of coaching, and something that would/could be explored with your coach where applicable and relevant.
Hope that helps provide an element of understanding on the why it's done the way in which it is..?
Bullet
I agree with the first point you make, it does rarely happen like that due to many factors.
And i also appreciate the vastly differring levels of ability and understanding you come across on any typical school day.....its one of my lasting memories of my level one course and not a positive one unfortunately. So yes, i understand why the information is delivered in the way it is.
Back to my point though........i'm trying to be as exact as possible in pinning down the bit i would like clarified.....
By the schools method....your braking is done and eased off just as you arrive at your turn point
at this turn point you steer as quickly as possible with an ideal of just 1 steering input
once over you then crack the throttle asap etc etc etc
Bearing the previous in mind, you cant turn very quickly when holding some brake (its a huge risk) as opposed to being off the brakes, but as i'm sure you agree there are some instances where the fastest way through the turn is to hold onto that brake a "little" longer.
here is where i'm finding ambiguity....the rule in any situation is as fast as possible and finish your braking by your turn point
can you see what i'm having trouble with???
-
i think that answers everything perfectly, to think passed that maybe over thinkin it.
Fella, this whole forum is testament to overthinking......thats the point of it, to a degree
We can all deduce for ourselves that you adapt techniques and methods to suit situations and available technology, its a judgment call.
But rightly or wrongly i feel the school are a touch vague and fuzzy about this in contrast to the very matter of fact approach to almost every other aspect of bike/rider interaction.
doesnt anybody else feel the uncertainty?
-
Fast lap times is all about carrying as much corner speed as possible while still using the latest braking point and the earliest on throttle point without going wide. Trail braking lets you enter corners fast but ruins your speed at the apex and exit. Quick turning makes you enter the corners slow but you maintain more speed at the apex and exit. Maintaining speed through and exiting a corner tends to lower lap times.
I see your logic here dave.....but is it really the case that braking deep in to the corner ruins your speed through the corner? Why can you not achieve the same mid corner speed by arriving at that speed via a different method? Is there a physics reason that its impossible or talent reason that just makes it difficult?
Braking deep to your intended point (apex) is not the same as braking too deep because you screwed it up i might add......
-
Trail braking is what it is......we are in danger of going circles already.
holding onto the brakes deep into the turn, tapering off as the lean increases.......untill you arrive at your intended apex point and look to get back on the gas.
I'm struggling to see the relavence of having me define what trail braking is.
-
Hi there, can we look at the cornering from pure engineering approach. If for the given corner where the max speed is say 200 mph for the curve. What will be the quickly time to complete that portion? I would say keep constant 200 mph, right from the entry point before the lean, all the way to when we can increase speed after pick up the bike (assuming after apex). How can it be faster if we are trail braking? Any trail braking means not able to achieve maximum speed (200 mph) during the same portion of the corner. Trai braking is useful for correction for unseen requirement to slow down or change line. If you can set up the entry speed correctly, trail braking seems cannot be faster. 50 years later, Rossi's speed may be considered slow. It will be interesting to see Keith training Rossi's son to break Rossi's record. Correction, I feel Keith can train Rossi's daughter to break Rossi's record too.
hello there fella,
using your theoretical example of a corner speed of 200mph (
) you want to keep that 200mph from entry all the way through and out the corner.Now, if you assume that the bike can approach the corner above 200mph, say 220mph, it is entirely possible to go in to the corner on the brakes past your previously designated turn point doing lets say 210...dropping down to 200 again by the time you are at the apex and off the brakes.......so you have carried more speed up to the corner and the same speed from the mid point onward and so have gone faster.........yes?
Anyway, as i i've now said a few times, I dont want to debate the finer details, its been done already and tends to result in people replying by stating what they believe to be correct rather than adressing the original point.
-
are we talking racing the clock or humans?
does it matter what "methodology" is better or faster?
if you cant addopt both and decide for your self, what is the use of the question?
it just seems to me they are on a lvl that allows them to push those techniques closer to the apex han what we think is possible.
of course to them it is just "brake later, get on the gas sooner".
i hope my novice out look doesnt seem to ignorant, and i hope the last question i asked didnt seem jackassy.
thanks for the reply.
In terms of does is matter........in the greater scheme of things no, it doesnt.
This is just for my peace of mind and clarity on the issue.
And as i pointed out in the original post i'm talikng in absolute terms...ie. lap times
Just in case you guys are getting rubbed up the wrong way by the tone of my post i should point out that i am a convert, but with reservations as i dont do the blind faith thing too well.
Some of the early responses are shaping up in the manner that its my lack of understanding.....that may be so..
but as this general area of the approach keeps getting called into question you have to ask.........are we all just stupid or is there perhaps a weakness with the delivery of this particular portion of the technique?
-
ahh good, i piqued some interest.
I'm not at all sure what you mean by defining my terms, could you be a bit more specific?
Also, as the guy above pointed out this is NOT a post about what is trail braking and when to use it.
The point i'm perhaps clumsily trying to clarify is, would the code approach (at least on paper) be the fastest way round a track if the style and teachings were taken on completely by elite riders????
I'm taking a macro view of the technique as a whole so lets try not to get lost in the details. Mentioning the entry to apex section of a corner was just me highlighting one of the portions of the approach i dont understand very clearly. And by that of course im referring back again to top level riders being faster using a brake to the apex approach.
-
Right then, first post so I'll go straight in at the deep end.
I consider myself a decent track rider and have more than a basic level of understanding when it comes to the how and why of riding fast. I have actually done level 1 of the school a good few years back but never went any further due to a break from bikes. I've read twist 2 and for the most part found it to be an eye opener.
My issue with the code approach is not original and its one that pokes its head out from time to time in different guises. As the thread title suggests, my main bone of contention is the entry to apex section of a corner.
The code approach to cornering, at least to my mind, requires that your braking is done by your turn point and then once settled you're back on the gas gently. This much we are all familiar with. Its also worth pointing out that i'm aware that there are different types of corner that require a slight modification of the technique. By and large though, we are taught Brake, turn fast, back in the gas asap.
Its very clear what the benefits of this approach are with respect to stability, lean for a given speed and traction. But what about when your absolute goal is the quickest lap time possible? There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that alot of riders will improve their lap times as a result of proper application of the techniques taught. Its only as the times get faster and closer to the sharp end that i feel the approach has a gaping hole in it.
I'm going to use the example of pro racers......yes i know they are the elite and beyond the level most of us will ever achieve, but they are also the best of the breed and most importantly, the fastest.
Racers at national and international level attack corners in a way somewhat contradictory to codes teachings. I'm opening myself up to correction here but i dont know of one top racer who does NOT brake right up to the apex (there is bound to be one, but in the minority). Now, even allowing for tyre technology and machinery advantage you simply cannot turn your machine hard and fast if you are braking right up to the apex of a turn. As i acknowledged earlier there are different types of turn and sometimes you will be required to trail a brake, but i think we can all agree that talent however plentifull, cant do much about the laws of physics, so its fast turning or trail braking to the apex, we cant have both. We do in reality have amalgamation of the 2 to a degree but thats not what the school teaches.
In a very long winded and round about sort of way i'm trying to get one of you guys to either claim that the code method is technically superior and potentially faster over a lap and indeed a race but just lacks a top level racer to put it to the test or wether in fact its a system and way of riding that only benefits riders of a certain ability to a certain point.
so to sum up.....Is it
An approach and methodology best suited to dragging average Joe up (quite)a few notches, but not quite enough for top level racers
OR
An approach that even the fastest of the fast would benefit from if adopted in its entirety (not just cherry picking some aspects)
I've seen attempts at answering this point in the past that just descend into a blurring of the lines type affair. So please bear in mind that what i'm questioning is the usefulness of the approach if adopted in its entirety by the best. ie. would rossi and stoner be even faster if it were possible for them to completely change styles ( i realise such a fundamental change is not feasible) Or does the approach only carry you to certain point at which time you need to modify your technique to progress any further.
Answers on a post card
) you want to keep that 200mph from entry all the way through and out the corner.
Slide Practice
in Cornering and Techniques
Posted
As the topic title says i'm keen to get some opinions on the most realistic way to build up to controlled rear slides while on the power.
Its mentioned in one of the twist books that one approach may be to use a rear tyre with less outright grip ie a sports touring tyre. The rationale being you can, in theory at least, get them to move around easier than a focused track tyre.
Now while i admit this idea does make sense on a logical level I would still be a bit aprehensive trying to provoke the tyre to slide.
Has anybody tried this approach?
If so, what bike did you try on?
I appreciate the school cant recommend we all go out and give it a bash for fear of the health and safety police coming knocking........but as a way of becoming familiar with the sensations of reaching the limits of traction on the power what are your personal opinions???
And is there any truth in the old addage that sticky tyres let go very quickly compared to a less grippy tyre which gives some warning that its about to give up the ghost before sliding away in a more controllable (recoverable) manner?
For me personally I've allways been more confident pushing the limits of traction on the front as, in my perception at least, i get a better feel for whats happening.
For example, when you are hard on the brakes and perhaps slighly off dead upright due to the type of corner i get a sort of rolling against the grain or a sort of slide/grip/slide sensation (not and actual slide i dont think, more a sensation) and that lets me know its time to ease off a bit.........
On the rear however, be it due to a lack of confidence or just not knowing what to look for i get a bit lost and never seem to get on the power hard enough to make the rear mis behave........
will using a less grippy tyre help me become familiar with the sensation i'm after or just launch me into the gravel