mugget

You and me both! But riding with the goal of getting a knee down (like in the above video) is a very different thing to riding with good technique when knee down is a result of that, rather than a goal of it's own. You can see in the video that the bike is bobbling around almost every time the rider changes body position, also he is not quick steering (at least not to a very high level), which to me is a dead giveaway that all that effort is just for show. I've got to think that a bike like that is better off being ridding as designed - just planting your backside and not moving.

Well that's not very good manners for a track day! At least you'll know for next time - that's when you get all defensive and elbows come out! Anyway - that was not what I was expecting to find in this thread! If you liked riding without a front brake, I reckon you should give flat track a go!

Welcome Ken. I'll definitely vouch for CSS - I wish I had done CSS years ago when I first started riding! See ya 'round the forums.

In addition to what has already been mentioned, think about what will happen with the rear of the bike if you start steering with only the front tyre on the ground... This could happen if you're riding on a bumpy section of road/track, you may not even be close to full braking force but the rear wheel may still be bouncing due to the bumps. Also if you are braking hard and your rear wheel leaves the ground it could take a few seconds or so for it to settle again. If you make a steering input in that situation the front tyre will change direction, but the rear of the bike will want to continue on it's current course which is straight ahead. Best case - you get a little wobble and make a mental note not to do that again! Worst case - the rear of the bike ends up at such an angle that when the rear tyre touches down again it will be just like a highside. I would definitely wait until the bike is settled before making the steering input. Anyway, welcome to the forum Seitman. Why not head over to the introductions forum and tell us a bit about yourself?

Haha. Well a bit of showboating never hurt anyone. (Unless they're riding beyond their abilities...) Probably about as useful as this guy getting his knee down though:

Okay, I have to confess that I misread your earlier comment and for some reason thought you were describing staring at the turn point until you were right on top of it. Anyway, good to have that info quoted from TOTW II. Notice that the actual two steps don't mention RP's. To me that says that it's something you can do regardless of whether or not you have RP's on the road. And like Hotfoot mentioned, the main point of that drill in Level 1 is to separate the vision and turning. Of course the benefit that one will gain depends on their willingness to try new things and push outside their comfort level. But from what people have described here I'd say that there's a lot of people doing the two step, but not necessarily recognising it. As long as the vision and turning are separate, does that mean the goal has been accomplished? (I would say so.) And won't better results be possible if that behaviour is correctly identified? It seems similar to counter steering in that everyone uses counter steering to turn their bikes, but someone who recognises that can then use it even more effectively to greater advantage.

Hey T-McKeen, one part of your post especially caught my attention so I have a question for you - do you actually do the two step in a track environment using the below technique? Do you think that is correct execution of the two step? On the subject of reference points, do you really think it's necessary to have a reference point in order to execute good vision? (Let's not forget that the Two Step is a vision technique.) Do you need a reference point to use a "wide view"? Why/why not? So far no one has taken up my earlier pop quiz challenge. If everyone re-read the relevant TOTW II chapter with the current topic in mind, I'm certain that alot of questions regarding RP's would be answered. So I'll pose the challenge again: look up TOTW II, Chapter 23 - The Two-Step and let us know how many times Reference Points are mentioned.

Good one - I never thought of it that way before. I'll try that out next time I hit my favourite mountain twisties!

Well said Stewal. Well let's look at the options, it seems to me that there are only two: 1. You choose your turn point. 2. You don't choose your turn point. If you don't choose your turn point, where is that going to leave you? It will just leave the door wide open for alot of SR's. Correct? Or if you leave it to your subconscious, you can't be sure that you're not reacting to SR's either. You say that you leave your turn point as late as possible, so it seems like you already have an idea of where you want to turn - but would it be possible to have an even better outcome if you had a more accurate idea of your turn point? The main point is to direct your vision towards the turn. In a series of very close turns I can see how one may not even have time to spot a turn point, but they would already be looking into the turn, so they have the information about the next corner (or two). In that case you have got your information about the turn and will know your entry speed etc. You do need to be looking into the turn to be able to find your entry speed, turn rate etc. I would say that using the Two Step is (one of?) the most reliable method to do so.

Nice pics from Sepang. I would love to ride a world-class circuit one day... I have never complained about riding in the rain, I don't see any problems with it. In the case of riding on track in the rain I would go for it and recommend others to do the same. Make the most of it because you can't buy a wet track day.

Pardon me, but it seems you have this confused for "the Stoner".

Yep, that's absolutely right. So let's say that you don't change your speed in the corner, but you increase your quick flick rate, you'll arrive at the above result of using less lean angle for your speed. This gives you the option of getting on the throttle much sooner, OR increasing your speed into the turn to use more lean angle. I suppose there is a third option to also increase your quick flick rate along with your speed, and then the cycle starts again. It's not so much a case of being true or not, just that it's not a "universal truth" for every corner, because some situations may require waiting until after the apex. But also waiting until the apex or after is not required in every single situation (there are always alot of options available). Just that the way you said it sounded like it was "best practice" or the ideal way to ride any corner. For the particular example that I had in mind, I was talking about getting on the throttle proper (maintenance? I just wanna go fast! ) I don't always open the throttle as soon as I've stopped steering, a common exception is when I'm aiming for a late apex and use a fast entry speed, I coast a little bit to get to the apex. Am breaking some rules? That's true as well. Actually I have never even had my knee down (maybe some tiny, tiny millisecond scrapes). That's a kind of funny thing about the quick flick - I have been going faster and faster into turns, but also increasing my turning rate and so I don't use any more lean angle (or very little). But I'm also riding the fastest I ever have by a fair margin, moved up a group at track days, and alot of that is simply because of working on my quick flick. At the rate I'm going it may be a while before I have to worry about lean angle, because now that I can see the speed that is possible I know it's probably going to take a little while until I become comfortable going that fast. But I'm kind of looking forward to mixing it up with guys on their track bikes and slicks while I'm on my road bike with street tyres. Exactly right. And to expand on that: if you can increase your quick flick ability you can also go faster through the turn without increasing your lean angle. Now back to the original topic of finding the entry speed for each turn... Isn't this mainly a question of having the correct vision, and being able to know where you're going so you can actually see what speed will be required? That's why I spent a couple of posts on the subject of the two step - because it's a vision technique. You don't need reference points to be able to use correct vision. Who has ever found themselves needing a RP to be able to use their "wide view"? Needing a reference point to be able to use two step makes about as much sense. Those vision techniques will are just what's needed to be able to find your reference points. Can you see how that all ties in with selecting a corner entry speed?

My advice for them would be "don't crash", "keep it rubber side down" "when in doubt, gas it!" or something helpful like that. (Well you did say they were 'new' to the spot...) But like khp said, "Advice - that's an interesting topic..." (Hey, that seems really familiar...) But in all seriousness, the only "advice" I would really give would be to just ride at their own pace and not try to keep up with faster riders, and enjoy the day. After that I would advise they pick up a copy of Twist of the Wrist and get themselves schooled at CSS. Thinking about a new rider, would they even know what a reference point is? If they do figure out that they need to find points of reference on track, what about the danger that they find too many RP's? Lots of unforeseen consequences can arise from a little friendly advice. Although if they came to me with a specific question, I'd be more comfortable talking that through with them.

This is one of those variables that will change for each corner/turn point/steering rate/entry speed combination. But saying that it's absolutely not possible to stand the bike up and start opening the throttle before the apex isn't really true. Relating your throttle opening point to a certain distance before or after the apex seems to be counterproductive to me. Isn't the really important thing whether or not you will be able to keep your line on the exit and not run wide or exit too slowly? So then the decision of when to open the throttle can be thought of in this way: open the throttle as soon as your know that you will hit your apex and achieve your line through the remainder of the turn. It's interesting to note that in Level 1, one of the main points that stuck out to me aside from opening the throttle as early as possible, was that this would ideally be before the apex. If you look at some of the diagrams in Twist II you can see this really clearly. Using a late turn point combined with a quick steer it's possible to achieve more or less a straight line from your turn point, to apex, to exit. Which makes it much easier to complete your turning, get back on the throttle, then you pass your apex and you're really having fun. Contrast that with a early turn point and slow steering, in that case it will probably take at least until the apex to complete the steering, which will stop you from opening the throttle as early. Two-Step and Reference Points It's also interesting that so much of the discussion here around Two-Step involves some mention of Reference Points. But as everyone is quick to point out - you wouldn't have a turn point on an unfamiliar road. Pop quiz: turn up TOTW II Chapter 23 (The Two-Step) and note how many times RP's are mentioned. By using the two step and looking ahead into the turn you will be able to find out how quickly to turn and how far to lean it over, simply because you know where you're going. If you don't use the two step, you'll end up looking into the turn while you're turning, and that's too late. The more I read up on the two step, then more it sense it makes that two step is exactly what is needed when riding unfamiliar roads.

I would say that using the two-step on unfamiliar roads is definitely possible, and it should be the preferred way to ride. Every corner has a turn point. Right? It's a fact. So then if you don't choose the turn point, how will you know where to turn? When will you turn? Usually when your SR's force you to turn! I don't know about you guys & gals, but letting SR's control any aspect of my riding is an unsettling prospect! Riding an unfamiliar road may alter a turn point, but the person who has consciously selected a turn point knows where he is and the person who doesn't is lost to some degree. (Reference for this info is TOTW II, Chap. 18.) It may seem like a really strange thing to try and select a correct turn point on a completely new road, but I suppose this comes down a lot to experience. Being aware of the different lines that are possible using different steering rates and earlier/later turn points gives you a better idea of what will work for a turn. That's not to say that you'd be able to get a new turn immediately correct, a small steering correction may be needed, or you may realise that you need to slow or quicken your steering rate - but those type of corrections are bound to happen. To me, the point is that it's better to consciously choose your turn point, even if it is slightly wrong and does require that you make some small corrections. Because the only other option is to let your SR's determine the turn point, and you can bet that point will definitely be wrong. So back to the two step - if we agree that it's better to consciously choose your turn point and that ideally we want to do that on every turn (unfamiliar or not), then it's possible to use the two step. Choose your turn point as early as possible, look to where you want to go in the corner, turn when you reach your turn point. Job done. I suppose those actions may be completed much closer together in a new turn, but it seems to me like the single biggest advantage of the two step is overcoming the SR to turn as soon as you look. Now this has all got me thinking about how easy or difficult it would be to practice the two step on an unfamiliar road... I have got to ride some new roads and test this out...

Welcome Tyler. I have seen you posting around the forum already so I thought I'd better stop by and say hi!

Welcome to the forum! I'm a bit of a fan of the FZ1 as well. Hired one in Japan earlier this year and it was a pretty fun bike - seemed to tip in faster/easier than my Gixxer!

Okay, so you've done Level 1? Do you still have your booklet/drill sheet? Or more importantly, did you fill in the blanks while in the classroom sessions? Those five drills are all things that you can practice any time you're riding. Street, track, dirt biking, you name it. Keep working on those 5 Level 1 drills and you'll be well prepared for when you get a chance for Level 2.

Hi Jeff, Welcome to the forum! I just noticed your questions about taking other courses, and wanted to jump in... I would say that if you can't get to CSS, then yes definitely take rider training of some kind. That's certainly what I did before completing Level 1 at CSS. I had done about 4 track days with tuition (the same as a regular track day, but with an instructor on track and then classroom debriefs after each session, also a couple of "roadcraft" type courses, and also an "advanced rider" course on a private closed road course. That was all well and good, I picked up something from each of those. But then I did CSS. By far CSS is the most comprehensive and beneficial of all the training that I've done. And I think that says alot given the amount of previous training I've had - Level 1 gave me more benefit than nearly all the others combined. That's not to say that the others were bad, but CSS is just that great! You mentioned Total Control, that's Lee Parks, right? I don't know about his course, but I have his book and can recommend that just on the basis of the sections that touch on the mental side of riding (if you're interested in that kind of thing). I'm not sure that Total Control would teach things that are "wrong" (although I can't be sure), but it's interesting to note that Parks openly admits in his book that alot (if not all) of the riding technology and terminology that he and others use were developed by Keith Code. Hope that helps. Cheers, Conrad

Good find. Just on the subject of upshifting after a missed gear - I had heard the same as well, but was told that it's more to do with less risk of damaging the gears if you upshift? Either way, it's still better not to miss a gear in the first place! It's kind of funny to think that people compile these lists of little tips & tricks when they could just spend a bit of time looking at the Twist books and at CSS, and learn all that stuff and more.

Great stuff! Level 1 seems to help people make the largest improvements. Now the fun really beings when you can start putting all that knowledge to use and keep improving!

On the subject of some drills that could even be tried on the street - the no-brakes drill that Eirik mentioned is a great one I think. As it was put when I did Level 1 - if you can't set your speed in 300m with no brakes, you have no hope of doing it in 100m with brakes. That's not to say that you should be trying to charge into corners faster and faster with no brakes, but you may know some corners and a speed that you're comfortable with - so you could simply ride those corners trying not to use brakes, just using the throttle to set your speed. That's one of the main differences between an average rider and the world's top racers - they have a very finely developed sense of speed and timing. Steve Brouggy (CSS Australia) mentioned a really interesting point to the Level 1 class. He has analysed Casey Stoners laps at Phillip Island and there were a bunch of laps mid-race where his laptime/speed had less than 1% variance (I don't remember the exact figures). That's pretty amazing - a distance of 4.4km with 12 corners, and less than 1% speed variance for 10, 12 or more laps. Just goes to show how important a good sense of speed is.

Very good question. I used to think that I would have to crash to be able to find the limit, but that's not true at all (whether we're talking about cornering, braking, whatever). Actually that's a really bad outlook to have, to think that you need to crash to find the limit. Dangerous and expensive. The bike will give you signs that you're nearing the limit, like Hotfoot mentioned - rear end moving around, front end vibrating, chattering etc. But you've got to recognise those signs rather than continuing to push on far beyond that point. Was this at a regular track day, or was it a CSS instructor (have you attended the Superbike School)? After I did Level 1, the main thing that struck me at my next track day was just how early most people brake for a corner. I used to ride like that as well, I think the main reasons is because I thought I was "being safe", and since that's how a lot of others ride it's easy to get sucked in and just copy their line, braking points etc. Also keep in mind that the very act of turning the bike will scrub off speed. Do you enter the turn and have the feeling that you could be going faster?

I don't know... would it really add anything? I mean everything being discussed here is nothing new, it's all in the Twist books and others. The best thing about the forum is the ability for discussions, which you wouldn't get with a Wiki, books etc.

Good point! I didn't think of that... but now that you mention it, makes sense. It's not so dissimilar to cycling. I remember when I was a kid always messing around with my brother running into his rear wheel (pushbikes though). But I was always careful not to do so with too much force. Easy to see how sticky tyres and much greater forces involved with motorbikes could make things go bad really quick. I don't think the 'more weight on the rear' theory holds water.