Personally , I'm glad that bike development has stalled a bit . The more the bikes advance the more radical the tracks become to challenge them ( the rider actually ) . Other threads are discussing the dangers of the sport and are blaming the bikes and the tracks ( among other things ) . Even the best professionals in the world seem to be near the limits of their capabilities ( How many are injured right now > ). How much lighter , more powerful , faster , longer travel do the machines need to be ? Factor the average weekend warrior into the equation of faster/more powerful bike , more radical track design , and human competitiveness ( This is RACING ) and the result is grim . Also , the more advanced the bikes become , the more they cost . If you had told us in the early 70's that a new bike would cost 9 grand and a rebuild around 2 grand we would have laughed so hard we might have spilled our beers .
Yes , I realize times are much different . We raced each other then , not the track ( or to survive it ) . You " run what you brung " on mostly natural terrain ( I still remember the first man-made jump and first double in my area ) with little to no track prep - the track was the same for everyone on it( Always has been , always will be ) . We competed , crashed each other out , trashed talked in the pits , etc. . Most of all we had a hell of a good time without mangling ourselves up too bad or breaking our piggy banks . I always thought the idea of racing was to be in front of the other guy when the checkers wave , not who was more " stylish " or hucked their bike the farthest over a jump without crippling or killing themselves .
I would be just as happy to see the pro's compete on stone stock bikes on milder tracks . My opinion .
