Specialization and the Myth of the All-Around Rider
(PART 1)
by Mike Hinkens
September 15, 2016
September 15, 2016
The ideal of an “all-round” education is out of date; it has been destroyed by the progress of knowledge.” – Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays, 1928
Renaissance Man
Almost one hundred years ago, people were beginning to question the idea of the “Renaissance Man.” A romantic idea of the cultured man, educated and proficient in multiple fields. A James Bond, so-to-speak, who could order an expensive bottle of champagne, speak nine languages, fly a helicopter, fight a ninja, disarm a missile, as well as charm the pants off of any woman. Maybe the skill set was different a hundred years ago, but the concept was the same I am sure. But, could a person be so well-versed in numerous complex and demanding parts of life? As seen in the quote at the beginning of this piece, some philosophers and historians have thought not. When that quote was written, a few hundred years after the Enlightenment, the world had become a fast-growing and complex place. The study of math and science had leapt ahead faster than ever before, technology never before imagined was arriving in the average person’s home, and new forms of art and literature were pouring out from every corner of the world. Russell must have seen all of this and realized that there was no way a single person could be trained in and skilled at everything; or even be pretty good at a lot of things even when striving to be. As he stated, the base level of all of this, an “all-around” education was an obsolete term, most likely due to his impression of the complexity and depth of new ways of thinking. From there, one can imagine that the idea that becoming an “all-around” person or Renaissance Man when it came to the highly-skilled and specialized trades the world demanded was also an impractical, unrealistic and unattainable goal. In addition, Russell had contemporary examples to support his claim. Some of the most influential and ingenious people inhabiting his historical moment would not have fallen under the category of “Renaissance Men.” For example, someone such as Albert Einstein. His singular focus was on the sciences. And that singular focus, the antithesis of the Renaissance Man, led to some of the most revolutionary discoveries in science that the world has ever seen. But, had he devoted more time to general studies, languages, maybe history or philosophy, would he have achieved the great things he did in physics? When he devoted himself to a life of math and science, you wonder if he lamented the fact that he failed the general studies portion of his university entrance exam or that his grasp of languages aside from German was weak at best.[1] Do we wish Einstein could have been a great historian and linguist as well? He may well have been able to, but at what cost? Does his narrowness of study and expertise take anything away from his achievements? Aren’t we impressed that he was able to dive deep enough into his field to change the way we understand our world? Do we fault Einstein for not being a Renaissance Man? I would argue that no one decries Einstein for focusing his time and energy in a specific direction. After all, he redefined much of the way we look at the world by redefining much of science. Einstein aside, many people have changed the way we look at the world in some specific way due to their singular focus and determined specialization. Yet in the freestyle BMX world, a complex culture of notable size and depth, it has become common-place to criticize bike riders whose style of riding seems narrowly focused and who are not considered to be “all-around” riders.
I am not here to talk about physics though; this is BMX. BMX culture will not help redefine space travel or build nuclear reactors, but it does profoundly influence the ways of life of thousands of people around the world. And, in that sphere, we certainly can point to a few people who have changed the way we understand what we do, riding a BMX bike, as well as who have influenced our entire culture. Edwin Delarosa, Chase Gouin, and Mat Hoffman, as examples, innovated and helped expand BMX in their own ways, yet they were fairly narrowly focused riders. Do we wish that Edwin rode more ramps instead of putting together smooth street lines? What if Chase started riding trails instead of inventing complex and stylish flat lines? Would we have wanted Hoffman to stick to doing demos as opposed to taking vert to levels that many thought were impossible? For the most part, I don’t believe anyone would have had these riders take any path but the ones they did, yet where would these riders be if they had stopped narrowly pursuing their focus and passion long ago? If we pressured Edwin, Chase, or Mat to stop “only riding” what they loved for the sake of being all-around riders, how different would BMX be today? Would it be better? Worse? As developed? These are more than rhetorical questions. Today, as bike riders, we are grappling with these questions and how they affect our culture.
Aside from the general “feeling” in BMX from online comments, personal discussions, and anecdotes that “labeling” yourself one type of rider is close-minded or immature, there are discussions occurring about this in major BMX media outlets. Will Smyth, editor of DIGBMX, one of the longest running publications in the BMX world, in a recent article discussing various forms of riding stated that when it came to styles of riding, “…the majority choos[e] to focus more on a single aspect of riding.” He went on to say “Whether some like it or not, the all-around ‘freestyler’ is long since a dying breed.” [2] This seems strikingly similar to Bertand Russell’s stance on education in 1928. Furthermore, in the same article, legendary BMX pro Chris Doyle made it even more clear, though with a touch of disdain, when he said “New school riders could care less about being well rounded anymore - they pick the style of a rider that they'd like to be and they try their best. I've seen hardcore street kids struggle to clear a basic box jump and I've seen park kids sweat the smallest of handrails.”[3] These very recent and very public examples are indicative of the growing belief amongst many BMXers that BMX riders as a whole are choosing to ride in certain and specific ways at the expense of other styles of riding. Furthermore, the general opinion of this occurrence seems, as seen in more than just Doyle’s statement above, to be a negative thing; something that is lazy as well as contemptible.
Though this criticism often is thrown out in general terms, it must be regarding someone. As in the bigger world, making a blanket statement about a group of people can only be taken seriously when it is actually applied to the real individuals it refers to. It then transforms from a carelessly tossed stereotype into a tangible and considerable issue. If BMXers are specializing, and you dislike it, then who do you perceive to be the problem? Should we start with the big names? Mat Hoffman, Chase Gouin, Edwin Delarosa? Or are they off-limits? We wouldn’t want them to change. If they are off-limits, then it must be everyone else that is the problem; but just because the average rider may not revolutionize or change the landscape of BMX does not mean they are not allowed to subscribe to one style of riding. Maybe we should put the legends on the table. Was Edwin less of a rider, less of an innovator, less of a BMXer because he did not ride ramps and trails? It seems silly to discount the achievements someone has made as well as the contributions they have made to BMX as a whole because they were focused on one style of riding or another. On the surface, it seems that many in BMX culture idealize the Renaissance Man. The all-around rider is touted as the ideal, while specialized riders are disparaged.
I would argue though, that the conflict runs deeper than a discussion of specialization within the disciplines of BMX, as evidenced by the rampant call for a return to “the way it used to be.” Though a greater discussion of this “BMX conservatism”[4] will occur shortly, I believe the first concern of this piece must be the issue I call “specialization” in BMX. I hope to address what exactly specialization in BMX means by discussing a few aspects of this topic such as a bit of history of both the world at-large and BMX, the “freestyle” nature of BMX, BMX “conservatism,” how specialization exists and is a positive thing for BMX, and why specialization is not something to fear. Specialization and diversification of riding styles are neither new, nor indicative of a problem in BMX culture as a whole, but rather natural, historical, and beneficial phenomena.
Some (really) historical context
Back in the day… The tiny green wild grain sprouts that pushed through the soil and reached for the Mediterranean sun some 12,000 years ago were a triumph of life for both the plant itself as well as the early humans who had begun to grasp the concept of farming. As simple an idea as planting crops seems to us, the notion of staying in one place to plant and grow food was revolutionary and changed the course of human history. Once relieved from the burden of constant hunting for food, people were able to focus on more than wandering the planet in search of available food and animals. And once these early people were able to sit back and enjoy the literal fruits of their labor, they reveled in one of the greatest achievements in human history: free time.
With free time, human beings were able to truly separate themselves from the rest of the animal kingdom. The great wealth of ingenuity, creativity, and passion that the human mind held finally had a moment to be unleashed. And as a moment turned into a lifetime of moments, the world saw the birth of everything from toolmakers and leather workers to painters and musicians. In the beginning, those hunters who were better at cutting the skin from an animal and turning it into leather were encouraged to do so while others continued hunting or tilled the fields. For those early humans, knowing there was someone who made clothing—an obvious necessity—all day long, must have been a relief. Others who were concerned with making tools or tending the fields had one less thing to worry about doing. Those same leatherworkers learned new skills in the many years they practiced their trade. And even if they never knew how to farm, they still got to eat. Eventually, as they became experts at their trade, they handed down intricate and detailed knowledge to their successors. Those successors built on the knowledge they attained with practice and perfected old skills while creating new ones.
Fast forward a few thousand years and we have people in charge of entire industries devoted to creating single and specific items of clothing such as light-weight, waterproof, low-temperature resistant jackets. The everyday items we depend on and the innovative technology we put faith in are direct results of a revolution that occurred in the fields of the middle east thousands of years ago. No longer did humans spend their entire existence on the hunt. As farming allowed for free time, the separation and specialization of labor and tasks amongst human beings allowed for people to pursue different aspects of life. From ways to enhance safety and health to ways to entertain and beautify, specialization is woven into the fabric of all human existence and is responsible, in my opinion, for the greatness that people can achieve in almost any aspect of life. Specialization has allowed human beings to move beyond survival and harness their ingenuity, creativity, and passion in specific ways. From the greatest concert pianist to the master carpenter, humans rely on the work of those before them as well as the work of those around them. When freed from worrying about many aspects of life and survival, people can utilize past experience to focus on specific and narrow activities. And when they narrow their focus, i.e. specialize, they can take their skills and ideas to levels never before known. Yet, without time away from the voluminous task of surviving, humans cannot perfect any singular task. As the famous Scottish philosopher and economist David Hume said, “When every individual person labors a-part, and only for himself, his force is too small to execute any considerable work; his labor being employ’d in supplying all his different necessities, he never attains a perfection in any particular art;...” Simply put, humans cannot accomplish great and extraordinary things in a certain area without concentrating and focusing their efforts on that specific task.
This leads me to ask: how is BMX any different from early leather-working or ancient painting? They all have some basis in the concept of necessity. Leather working provided clothing. Painting recorded history. Bike riding improved transportation. But these activities have much more in common that just being necessities at some level. All of these activities can occur only because free time exists. Most of the physical actions involved in these activities can be done to fulfill a need as well as be done simply for pleasure. But, more importantly, these activities can be developed, grown, and perfected. Just as humans have striven to advance and perfect almost all aspects of human existence, like making clothes or painting, we strive to advance and perfect our art, BMX, and we should learn from history that utilizing and embracing specialization is an effective and wise way to do so.
A very abbreviated history of BMX
Back in the day…but not that far back… This discussion of specialization requires a bit of BMX history as well; namely, how BMX started as an outgrowth of other activities and how it began to specialize.[5] It is important to note that the concept of specialization in BMX is as old as the activity itself, yet this discussion is relevant now because of some ahistorical and narrow views many people hold in contemporary BMX culture. Looking way back to the 1960’s, kids who could not afford and/or wanted to emulate motorcycle racing began riding bikes in a similar downhill-race fashion. These kids hoped to have fun in whatever way was possible and accessible and thus used the resources they had to “do their own thing.” With hindsight, it is easy to say that these characteristics were fundamental concepts that would guide the growth and expansion of modern BMX culture. By the 1970’s, what was at first just kids racing bikes in the hills of California solidified into official BMX races and the start of a more substantial cultural phenomenon. Within a few years—1977 according to many—something happened that yet again seems inevitable to us now: Bob Haro and a few others broke the mold. A few riders, especially Haro, started to do “tricks” on their, now more appropriately designed, bikes.[6] But why? “His trick riding resulted from not having much else to do in Stockton and due to no other form of transport.”[7] Again, BMX changed out of necessity and during free time as well as because of both creativity and passion. Both of these characteristics, discussed earlier, are human characteristics that have unleashed so much potential over the years. Haro did not stop with the “curb endo” though. He proceeded to create and learn new tricks with other like-minded riders who saw BMX differently than the mainstream did.
Within a few years, the recently born Freestyle BMX was being displayed and marveled at around the country as teams of young and creative riders advanced their skills and created new tricks at state fairs and sports half-time shows and in school gymnasiums and parades. Some of these riders continued to race as well, but here, we see the first, and dramatic, instance of specialization in BMX: Freestyle as opposed to Racing. BMX saw the growth of young riders committed to learning tricks in their driveways and on things like quarterpipes. It is obvious to see that the specialization into these distinct forms of ridings, or disciplines, made possible the entire culture we are a part of today. Without this diversification, bikes still might be used for going in a straight line, albeit, at a very fast speed and sometimes in the air. Don’t forget, BMX racing was growing alongside another budding and specialized discipline: Dirt Jumping. Throughout the 1980’s the new BMX discipline of freestyle exploded in popularity. Tricks were invented that are still around today and riding a BMX bike became a much more complex, as well as nuanced, craft. Art crept into the culture as people cultivated brand and rider images, set standards of perfection and beauty in tricks, and generally invented and created things on bikes that had never been seen before. As the 1990’s approached, another major division in the disciplines of BMX riding appeared: Freestyle and Flatland. Ramps had been growing in size and specificity and many tricks from the early 80’s were starting to develop specifically for use either on the ground or on ramps. And as people pursued their individual passions and sought to perfect their craft, they honed in on the style of bike riding that best fit their desires and skills. Some rode ramps and moved away from ground tricks, while others did the opposite. This specialization saw the birth of more tricks that had never been done. People focused on their respective discipline and pushed that discipline forward.
But, just as BMX seemed to be in its prime, the floor fell out from under commercial BMX. In the late 1980’s, for various reasons,[8] the money disappeared and the Freestyle BMX world - now encompassing three major disciplines: flatland, ramp, and dirt - was left in the hands of those who actually did it. Shows and contests shrunk from the scene as sponsors and their money vanished. Companies closed their doors and innovation of parts slowed to a trickle. What was to become of BMX? Some riders left. Yet some stayed. Undoubtedly, those who stayed did so to continue pursuing their passion. BMX culture endured, underground, and began to mature and blossom into what would later be called the mid-school period. People like Mat Hoffman and Ron Wilkerson began to build their own bikes and brands as well as hold larger, rider-run contests and events.[9] Tricks developed, BMX evolved, and more disciplines appeared as well. Ramp riding itself began to diversify, i.e. specialize: Half pipes became eleven-foot tall vert ramps or instead doubled the other direction with a six-foot spine in the middle, Dirt jumps multiplied into runs or became wooden box jumps. Riders yet again choose what to ride and some focused entirely on one style of riding. Mat Hoffman, who had the ability to ride almost anything, was already rising as a progressive and innovative vert rider. From the 900 air to many other firsts, Hoffman pushed the limits of his particular segment of BMX. Yet again, we see the specialization of riding styles being at the forefront of progression and change in BMX. And that creative, resourceful, and rebellious spirit of BMX also spawned yet another new discipline in the late 80’s that took a strong hold in the early 1990’s: Street Riding. Faced with a lack of things to ride, e.g. race tracks, jumps, or ramps, many bike riders took to the streets and rode whatever they could find. At first, seen as a supplement to riding when other options were not available, throughout the 90’s street riding took on a life of its own and became a discipline unto itself as yet another group of specialized riders innovated and invented things never before seen on a BMX bike.
Free? Style?
It has been over 30 years since some of the first tricks were created on a BMX bike and I wonder, is there still room in BMX culture for the concept of “freestyle?” Are riders choosing to specialize and ride what they want? Are riders pursuing and perfecting the parts of BMX they are drawn to and love? I believe the answer is “yes,” but for some reason, this historical norm that we have seen in both the world at-large as well as in BMX culture, is under attack. Its difficult to say what the initial reaction was to the sudden change in the ways bikes were ridden in the 1970’s, but it obvious now that the free and open creation and development of our craft did occur as evidenced by the rich, diverse, and complex culture we now inhabit. There are things happening today on bikes that, even after 20 years of riding BMX, shock even me. Riders like Logan Martin who can flip and whip in configurations unheard of or Alex Donnachie who defies the rules of physics with grind combos on balance points that seem impossible, are examples of specialization and what it makes possible.
More on progression later, but the point is, there are still, to this day, many riders who specialize and ride mainly one discipline. This is not a new concept (see BMX history section above!). It is apparent in many aspects of BMX culture. As discussed in the introduction, the long-running competition Simple Session[10] has shown that when the world’s top riders are put together in one location, they are unable to be compared/judged fairly due to their specialization and diversity. And in that same article, when asked about that problem, professional riders, industry insiders, and respected elders were divided on what this meant for BMX as a whole. In general, there seems to be a negative feeling in current BMX culture that specialization is a bad thing. Anecdotally, in real-life, on the web, and in media, we now hear the complaint that BMXers are too specialized, too narrow. That they “go too slow,” or “do too many tricks.” That they “only ride their own trails” or that they “should leave the skatepark once and a while.” Everyone seems to have an opinion about what every one else should do in BMX, but in the end, almost all of these complaints come down to the idea that riders are moving away from “true BMX” and what “BMX is about.” It’s an idea that riding just “one way” is the opposite of what the “nature of BMX” is. Even more, there exists a sentiment that if you must specialize, there are some specific ways of riding that are less worthy of focus or recognition in the BMX world. These sentiments betray that many feel that there is a right way to ride as well as a wrong way to ride. And if one is to believe that there is a right and wrong way, then one must believe that there is an innately “true BMX” spirit since we have no rules or guidelines. That elitism is detrimental to the unity of the diverse and historically free culture of BMX. Ryan Worcester in DIG in 2013 put in print what many were saying then and continue to say now about the specialization and focus of BMX. Behind his words are currents of elitism about “true BMX.”
“If you’re going to go walking speed at some boring flat ledge all day over and over again, you might as well get a trials bike or a razor scooter with 20” wheels for your pogo grind web edit, or have your bike stolen by someone who looks sketchy because maybe if they have a bike they’ll actually ride it like it is one. Ride stupid weird shit that is an adventure to get to[…] and make your own damn spot. Use cement, scrap pallets, dirt or whatever to change things for the better. Who cares if thecomeup doesn’t invite you to their birthday circle jerk. Land into grass, use a kicker ramp, do whatever you want. If it’s there ride it. - Ryan Worcester”[11]
The first condescending sentence from the excerpt is an obvious reference to the growth of technical ledge riding that has seen a boom since the late 2000’s. It is obvious that he believes that BMX should be ridden in a certain way and that some ways are not even worthy of being allowed to happen. Yet, that specialization, which Ryan is lamenting, is responsible for much of the groundbreaking bike riding we see today. Way past the days of unwaxed high speed feebles with the occasional opposite 180 out, riders in the mid to early 2000’s began to realize that, like flatland, slowing down and utilizing a specific space could allow a rider to add layers of complexity and creativity to the usage of a rather mundane spot. Simply put, a ledge could be a canvas for many more tricks than it had been used for in the past. I do not know if the late 80’s witnessed a similar backlash against flatland from ramp riders, but it is apparent that flatland pushed on past the original boundaries of BMX and created an entirely new, amazing, and complex discipline within BMX. Had they not, a major pillar of BMX would not exist today and I argue that we would be much the worse for it. Are we not responsible, as heirs to the original bike riding innovators and rebels of the 70’s and 80’s, to allow for, nay, encourage creative specialization? I strongly answer: yes, we are! Ironically, after answering that question in the negative in his first sentence, Ryan then refutes himself and agrees with me with his edict declaring that we should ride anything and everything and “do whatever [we] want.” As a matter of fact, according to him, “If it’s there ride it.” Well, it just so happens, that the “boring flat ledge” was there, and, guess what some people did? Ride it. This is only the tip of the iceberg though. It is a pervasive attitude in BMX to lament the lameness of certain types of riding that seem to be more popular now than they were “back in the day.” Or to disregard and condescend someone else’s choice of riding style, location of riding, or trick choice because it is different from your own.
The Myth of the “All-Around” Rider
These arguments often come side-by-side the call for the return of the “all-around” rider of yesteryear; a rider who did not label himself, who rode everything, and who strove to be well-rounded -- the “Renaissance Man.” In order to understand why I believe people have recently called for this all-around rider, it is important to discuss an era of BMX history that we did not give into in earlier paragraphs. That era, the height of the mid-school period (late 1990’s) into the early years of the 2000’s, witnessed a unique set of circumstances that I believe are the basis for a major misconception in modern BMX culture. Looking back at the mid-90’s, there was yet again an explosion of creativity and growth within BMX culture like in the late 70’s. Bikes started to look like they do today, tricks were being defined and standardized, skateparks were being built, and new and abundant perspectives were shared through media outlets such as Props Visual and many new rider-run magazines. Riders used their new tools and new influences to take BMX to a level beyond what anyone in the 1980’s could have imagined. Iconic tricks were pulled, iconic videos were made, and iconic riders were consecrated. The entire Props Road Fools 1 crew [12] is a roster of riders who embodied this golden age of BMX; riders like Joe Rich and Taj Mihelich who could flow the trails, shred a mini-ramp, destroy a street spot, all while making it look amazing.
Yet, a subset of riders today, those with what I will call a “conservative BMX mindset,” seems to idealize this era to a fault and use it as a way to discredit new and different forms of riding as one-sided, wrong, and deviating from “true BMX.” Many point to this era as evidence of the existence of and necessity of the all-around rider. From 1998 to about 2008[13] there was, I believe, an anomaly in the way riders were classified. It is in that period that that the concept of the all-around rider seems to have been at its prime. I could list many many riders from that era who fit this description, but it is easier to say that most all of the top pros of the time fell into this category; a category defined by the idea of being good at everything and not just riding one discipline. As mentioned earlier, this ideal is embodied in traditional culture by the Renaissance Man or James Bond. There is no doubt that some, if not many, of those riders fell into that category because they were (and still are) extremely talented and dedicated BMX riders. And there is no doubt that many of them worked hard to be successful in multiple disciplines.
There is an unspoken issue that needs to be addressed, though, to put these achievements as well as classifications in context. Before that can happen though, we must be realistic and discount the certain riders from this discussion. Like Michael Jordan in basketball and Freddie Mercury in music, there are certain BMX riders who are exceptionally and uniquely talented. Those riders deserve their own category as exceptional and rare. Those riders do fit the all-around bike rider description simply because they are some of the best to ever touch a BMX bike. I will call them the “exception” riders because they are obviously the exception to the norm. Instead of pointing to those 10-15 “exception” riders then and today who “can ride everything” and asking why everyone doesn’t model themselves after them, we need to realize that these riders are rare cases. Nowadays, riders like Garrett Reynolds come to mind. A rider who can ride a foot-tall flat ledge and create a new combo daily but who also could compete on an X-games Park course and place high or win. Very few people in the history of BMX can ride at that level and basing our concept of “how people should ride” and “what is normal” around these uniquely and exceptionally talented one-in-a-million athletes is like judging average scientific achievements against Einstein’s theory of Relativity. He was a genius and expecting every other scientist to replicate his abilities and achievements is unrealistic und unhelpful.
Turning back to the unspoken issue of the golden age in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, a discussion of the actual act of riding is important. To me, as well as those who watch old videos, it seems that many of the tricks and styles of riding that were being “mastered” by the all-around riders of the time were a bit shallower than what is being mastered by pros in contemporary BMX. I do not mean to say “easier,” but rather, less complex and less developed, i.e. shallow. With hindsight, it is easier to say with certainty that being able to be a professional who was at the forefront of both street progression as well as ramp progression in 2002 was only scratching the surface of what is now known to be possible. For example, a pro-level street clip in the early 2000’s may have been holding out an icepick on a 12-stair rail. And an innovative and pro-quality ramp trick may have been a barspin to fufanu on a large back-rail of a 6-foot quarterpipe. Both tricks, even now, are high-level and impressive maneuvers. Yet today, many top pros could certainly barspin to icepick to 180 that same 12-stair rail while another might whip to fufanu a sub rail and barspin on the way back in. Both of these modern pros would undoubtedly be doing those tricks in a line as well; adding a level of complexity and consistency unheard of a few years ago. Not to short any of the amazing and ground breaking tricks done by the multitudes of amazing riders in that golden age, but they were just beginning to scratch the surface of the technical as well as burly depths of BMX (style and simplicity aside as there is always a place for that). And, as those were only surface scratches, or a few deep gouges into each discipline, those tricks were able to be mastered by riders who did not necessarily devote all of their time to one discipline or another. These riders spent time riding street and park, for example, and in their historical context were good enough at both to be considered a progressive professional athlete of all-around skill. Yet, again with hindsight, these riders did not push BMX to its entire end-point of progression. They were an integral part of progression, but there was more to be done (this is easy to say with hindsight). This does not mean that simpler tricks are of less value or should not be done, but it speaks to the idea that specialization leads to progression. And if people want to progress, they will specialize (much more on this later).
Placing this all in historical context, the dawn of rider-owned and rider-centric BMX in the early 1990’s was a fresh start or rebirth for our culture in many ways. And just like when BMX began in the 1960’s and 1970’s, birth is followed by growth and transformation… through specialization! That specialization, as seen in the first era of BMX growth as freestyle itself was born, is occurring once again in the modern BMX era and in the same way: experimentation, diversification, and specialization fueled by creativity, passion, ingenuity, inventiveness, and necessity. The reason I say the all-around rider is an anomaly is because that type of rider only seems to exist when BMX is starting fresh in some way and working to move forward. The inevitable growth of our culture creates conditions in which specialization becomes the norm and broad or all-around skills are simply a starting point. Remember, an ancient leather worker was still not that far away from a hunter at first; but now, the people who design clothing are very far removed from those who produce the materials. specialization becomes very pronounced as time passes.
Now, before I am skewered alive for seeming to slight many great riders, let me say a few things. First of all, everything that the riders did in the golden age of 1998-2008 deserves respect at the utmost level. As I said, I see that era as a parallel to the early era of BMX when it was still defining itself. The golden era was a redefinition of BMX and the starting point, in my eyes, for the incredible state that modern BMX is in right now. The riders of that era were pushing the limits of their circumstances and some of what they have done cannot be replicated or outdone. Yet, they existed in a specific historical moment and as such, we must remember and understand them with that in mind. As an example, I, as well as many riders have, when they first began riding, watched old videos of “pros” from times before their current understanding and asked “how was this considered amazing back then?” We must remember, context is everything. And by modern standards, as shown in my trick examples above, BMX was not nearly as advanced in some aspects as it is now. I am not asking you to make a judgment about what is better, BMX tricks and styles back then compared to now, but rather to understand that times were different. And as times were different, styles of riding were different. And, as shown by the analysis of the industry and culture as a whole, it is not strange to say that specialization in BMX in the golden age was not as defined as it is now or even as it was in the late 1980’s. As such, the all-around rider existed because the disciplines were not yet so deeply defined. Here we are, less than ten years after the end of what I have been calling the Golden Age of BMX and we are extremely diversified and specialized. And riding is at a level higher than ever before. Yet, people are crying out against it. I will address why I believe specialization is a great thing later, but I want to talk a bit again about conservatism in BMX.
END OF PART I
I hope you have made it this far and have been enjoying the long journey into BMX culture that this piece takes you on. You have reached the halfway point, but in the interest of keeping you awake and engaged, I have decided to cut the piece here and leave you with a “to be continued…”
Don’t worry, I’ll leave you a little teaser below as well as certainly post the conclusion to this piece shortly. Stay tuned!
PART II – TEASER
BMX conservatism
Conservatism, the idea of preserving the way things “used to be” and limiting change, is rampant in BMX right now. It is almost exclusively focused on a return to the late mid-school era -- the same era I discussed earlier. I think it is very obvious that part of the opposition to specialization in BMX is centered around specialization’s contradiction to the champion of the golden era: the “all-around” rider. Many people, for reasons we can only touch on here[14], have a longing to return BMX to the state it “used to be” in. Regardless of the reasons many wish to take BMX back to that era, it is not surprisingly that those same people dislike the way BMX has changed.
To be continued…
Notes:
[1] http://www.albert-einstein.org/article_handicap.html
[2] http://digbmx.com/features/a-simple-question-does-this-contest-format-work
[3] http://digbmx.com/features/a-simple-question-does-this-contest-format-work
[4] Possible future topic: “Conservatism in BMX: The search for the way things were.”
[5] I realize that BMX history is documented in many places and much of our history has been recorded through various lenses. I do not claim to know the absolute timeline of events of our early years, but encourage someone else to take up where this article, and many others, have left off.
[6] Timeline: http://www.joekidonastingray.com
[7] http://23mag.com/gens/haro.htm
[8] Possible future topic: the collapse of BMX in the early 1990’s
[9] 2Hip Meet-the-Street contests saw early street riding mixing with classic forms of completion: http://www.23mag.com/events/2hip/m88r1.htm
[10] http://session.ee
[11] http://digbmx.com/dig-this/re-print-what-the-fuck-happened-to-spots
[12] http://bmxmdb.com/films/206-Road-Fools-1 and http://digbmx.com/dig-this/the-top-ten-moments-in-road-fools-history and http://propsbmx.com/shop/box-sets/road-fools-box-set/
[13] The end of this period is hard to pinpoint as it has only been a few years since those events took place and being able to look at them with the advantage of time is still a bit challenging.
[14] Possible future topic: “Conservatism in BMX: The search for the way things were.”
Renaissance Man
Almost one hundred years ago, people were beginning to question the idea of the “Renaissance Man.” A romantic idea of the cultured man, educated and proficient in multiple fields. A James Bond, so-to-speak, who could order an expensive bottle of champagne, speak nine languages, fly a helicopter, fight a ninja, disarm a missile, as well as charm the pants off of any woman. Maybe the skill set was different a hundred years ago, but the concept was the same I am sure. But, could a person be so well-versed in numerous complex and demanding parts of life? As seen in the quote at the beginning of this piece, some philosophers and historians have thought not. When that quote was written, a few hundred years after the Enlightenment, the world had become a fast-growing and complex place. The study of math and science had leapt ahead faster than ever before, technology never before imagined was arriving in the average person’s home, and new forms of art and literature were pouring out from every corner of the world. Russell must have seen all of this and realized that there was no way a single person could be trained in and skilled at everything; or even be pretty good at a lot of things even when striving to be. As he stated, the base level of all of this, an “all-around” education was an obsolete term, most likely due to his impression of the complexity and depth of new ways of thinking. From there, one can imagine that the idea that becoming an “all-around” person or Renaissance Man when it came to the highly-skilled and specialized trades the world demanded was also an impractical, unrealistic and unattainable goal. In addition, Russell had contemporary examples to support his claim. Some of the most influential and ingenious people inhabiting his historical moment would not have fallen under the category of “Renaissance Men.” For example, someone such as Albert Einstein. His singular focus was on the sciences. And that singular focus, the antithesis of the Renaissance Man, led to some of the most revolutionary discoveries in science that the world has ever seen. But, had he devoted more time to general studies, languages, maybe history or philosophy, would he have achieved the great things he did in physics? When he devoted himself to a life of math and science, you wonder if he lamented the fact that he failed the general studies portion of his university entrance exam or that his grasp of languages aside from German was weak at best.[1] Do we wish Einstein could have been a great historian and linguist as well? He may well have been able to, but at what cost? Does his narrowness of study and expertise take anything away from his achievements? Aren’t we impressed that he was able to dive deep enough into his field to change the way we understand our world? Do we fault Einstein for not being a Renaissance Man? I would argue that no one decries Einstein for focusing his time and energy in a specific direction. After all, he redefined much of the way we look at the world by redefining much of science. Einstein aside, many people have changed the way we look at the world in some specific way due to their singular focus and determined specialization. Yet in the freestyle BMX world, a complex culture of notable size and depth, it has become common-place to criticize bike riders whose style of riding seems narrowly focused and who are not considered to be “all-around” riders.
I am not here to talk about physics though; this is BMX. BMX culture will not help redefine space travel or build nuclear reactors, but it does profoundly influence the ways of life of thousands of people around the world. And, in that sphere, we certainly can point to a few people who have changed the way we understand what we do, riding a BMX bike, as well as who have influenced our entire culture. Edwin Delarosa, Chase Gouin, and Mat Hoffman, as examples, innovated and helped expand BMX in their own ways, yet they were fairly narrowly focused riders. Do we wish that Edwin rode more ramps instead of putting together smooth street lines? What if Chase started riding trails instead of inventing complex and stylish flat lines? Would we have wanted Hoffman to stick to doing demos as opposed to taking vert to levels that many thought were impossible? For the most part, I don’t believe anyone would have had these riders take any path but the ones they did, yet where would these riders be if they had stopped narrowly pursuing their focus and passion long ago? If we pressured Edwin, Chase, or Mat to stop “only riding” what they loved for the sake of being all-around riders, how different would BMX be today? Would it be better? Worse? As developed? These are more than rhetorical questions. Today, as bike riders, we are grappling with these questions and how they affect our culture.
Aside from the general “feeling” in BMX from online comments, personal discussions, and anecdotes that “labeling” yourself one type of rider is close-minded or immature, there are discussions occurring about this in major BMX media outlets. Will Smyth, editor of DIGBMX, one of the longest running publications in the BMX world, in a recent article discussing various forms of riding stated that when it came to styles of riding, “…the majority choos[e] to focus more on a single aspect of riding.” He went on to say “Whether some like it or not, the all-around ‘freestyler’ is long since a dying breed.” [2] This seems strikingly similar to Bertand Russell’s stance on education in 1928. Furthermore, in the same article, legendary BMX pro Chris Doyle made it even more clear, though with a touch of disdain, when he said “New school riders could care less about being well rounded anymore - they pick the style of a rider that they'd like to be and they try their best. I've seen hardcore street kids struggle to clear a basic box jump and I've seen park kids sweat the smallest of handrails.”[3] These very recent and very public examples are indicative of the growing belief amongst many BMXers that BMX riders as a whole are choosing to ride in certain and specific ways at the expense of other styles of riding. Furthermore, the general opinion of this occurrence seems, as seen in more than just Doyle’s statement above, to be a negative thing; something that is lazy as well as contemptible.
Though this criticism often is thrown out in general terms, it must be regarding someone. As in the bigger world, making a blanket statement about a group of people can only be taken seriously when it is actually applied to the real individuals it refers to. It then transforms from a carelessly tossed stereotype into a tangible and considerable issue. If BMXers are specializing, and you dislike it, then who do you perceive to be the problem? Should we start with the big names? Mat Hoffman, Chase Gouin, Edwin Delarosa? Or are they off-limits? We wouldn’t want them to change. If they are off-limits, then it must be everyone else that is the problem; but just because the average rider may not revolutionize or change the landscape of BMX does not mean they are not allowed to subscribe to one style of riding. Maybe we should put the legends on the table. Was Edwin less of a rider, less of an innovator, less of a BMXer because he did not ride ramps and trails? It seems silly to discount the achievements someone has made as well as the contributions they have made to BMX as a whole because they were focused on one style of riding or another. On the surface, it seems that many in BMX culture idealize the Renaissance Man. The all-around rider is touted as the ideal, while specialized riders are disparaged.
I would argue though, that the conflict runs deeper than a discussion of specialization within the disciplines of BMX, as evidenced by the rampant call for a return to “the way it used to be.” Though a greater discussion of this “BMX conservatism”[4] will occur shortly, I believe the first concern of this piece must be the issue I call “specialization” in BMX. I hope to address what exactly specialization in BMX means by discussing a few aspects of this topic such as a bit of history of both the world at-large and BMX, the “freestyle” nature of BMX, BMX “conservatism,” how specialization exists and is a positive thing for BMX, and why specialization is not something to fear. Specialization and diversification of riding styles are neither new, nor indicative of a problem in BMX culture as a whole, but rather natural, historical, and beneficial phenomena.
Some (really) historical context
Back in the day… The tiny green wild grain sprouts that pushed through the soil and reached for the Mediterranean sun some 12,000 years ago were a triumph of life for both the plant itself as well as the early humans who had begun to grasp the concept of farming. As simple an idea as planting crops seems to us, the notion of staying in one place to plant and grow food was revolutionary and changed the course of human history. Once relieved from the burden of constant hunting for food, people were able to focus on more than wandering the planet in search of available food and animals. And once these early people were able to sit back and enjoy the literal fruits of their labor, they reveled in one of the greatest achievements in human history: free time.
With free time, human beings were able to truly separate themselves from the rest of the animal kingdom. The great wealth of ingenuity, creativity, and passion that the human mind held finally had a moment to be unleashed. And as a moment turned into a lifetime of moments, the world saw the birth of everything from toolmakers and leather workers to painters and musicians. In the beginning, those hunters who were better at cutting the skin from an animal and turning it into leather were encouraged to do so while others continued hunting or tilled the fields. For those early humans, knowing there was someone who made clothing—an obvious necessity—all day long, must have been a relief. Others who were concerned with making tools or tending the fields had one less thing to worry about doing. Those same leatherworkers learned new skills in the many years they practiced their trade. And even if they never knew how to farm, they still got to eat. Eventually, as they became experts at their trade, they handed down intricate and detailed knowledge to their successors. Those successors built on the knowledge they attained with practice and perfected old skills while creating new ones.
Fast forward a few thousand years and we have people in charge of entire industries devoted to creating single and specific items of clothing such as light-weight, waterproof, low-temperature resistant jackets. The everyday items we depend on and the innovative technology we put faith in are direct results of a revolution that occurred in the fields of the middle east thousands of years ago. No longer did humans spend their entire existence on the hunt. As farming allowed for free time, the separation and specialization of labor and tasks amongst human beings allowed for people to pursue different aspects of life. From ways to enhance safety and health to ways to entertain and beautify, specialization is woven into the fabric of all human existence and is responsible, in my opinion, for the greatness that people can achieve in almost any aspect of life. Specialization has allowed human beings to move beyond survival and harness their ingenuity, creativity, and passion in specific ways. From the greatest concert pianist to the master carpenter, humans rely on the work of those before them as well as the work of those around them. When freed from worrying about many aspects of life and survival, people can utilize past experience to focus on specific and narrow activities. And when they narrow their focus, i.e. specialize, they can take their skills and ideas to levels never before known. Yet, without time away from the voluminous task of surviving, humans cannot perfect any singular task. As the famous Scottish philosopher and economist David Hume said, “When every individual person labors a-part, and only for himself, his force is too small to execute any considerable work; his labor being employ’d in supplying all his different necessities, he never attains a perfection in any particular art;...” Simply put, humans cannot accomplish great and extraordinary things in a certain area without concentrating and focusing their efforts on that specific task.
This leads me to ask: how is BMX any different from early leather-working or ancient painting? They all have some basis in the concept of necessity. Leather working provided clothing. Painting recorded history. Bike riding improved transportation. But these activities have much more in common that just being necessities at some level. All of these activities can occur only because free time exists. Most of the physical actions involved in these activities can be done to fulfill a need as well as be done simply for pleasure. But, more importantly, these activities can be developed, grown, and perfected. Just as humans have striven to advance and perfect almost all aspects of human existence, like making clothes or painting, we strive to advance and perfect our art, BMX, and we should learn from history that utilizing and embracing specialization is an effective and wise way to do so.
A very abbreviated history of BMX
Back in the day…but not that far back… This discussion of specialization requires a bit of BMX history as well; namely, how BMX started as an outgrowth of other activities and how it began to specialize.[5] It is important to note that the concept of specialization in BMX is as old as the activity itself, yet this discussion is relevant now because of some ahistorical and narrow views many people hold in contemporary BMX culture. Looking way back to the 1960’s, kids who could not afford and/or wanted to emulate motorcycle racing began riding bikes in a similar downhill-race fashion. These kids hoped to have fun in whatever way was possible and accessible and thus used the resources they had to “do their own thing.” With hindsight, it is easy to say that these characteristics were fundamental concepts that would guide the growth and expansion of modern BMX culture. By the 1970’s, what was at first just kids racing bikes in the hills of California solidified into official BMX races and the start of a more substantial cultural phenomenon. Within a few years—1977 according to many—something happened that yet again seems inevitable to us now: Bob Haro and a few others broke the mold. A few riders, especially Haro, started to do “tricks” on their, now more appropriately designed, bikes.[6] But why? “His trick riding resulted from not having much else to do in Stockton and due to no other form of transport.”[7] Again, BMX changed out of necessity and during free time as well as because of both creativity and passion. Both of these characteristics, discussed earlier, are human characteristics that have unleashed so much potential over the years. Haro did not stop with the “curb endo” though. He proceeded to create and learn new tricks with other like-minded riders who saw BMX differently than the mainstream did.
Within a few years, the recently born Freestyle BMX was being displayed and marveled at around the country as teams of young and creative riders advanced their skills and created new tricks at state fairs and sports half-time shows and in school gymnasiums and parades. Some of these riders continued to race as well, but here, we see the first, and dramatic, instance of specialization in BMX: Freestyle as opposed to Racing. BMX saw the growth of young riders committed to learning tricks in their driveways and on things like quarterpipes. It is obvious to see that the specialization into these distinct forms of ridings, or disciplines, made possible the entire culture we are a part of today. Without this diversification, bikes still might be used for going in a straight line, albeit, at a very fast speed and sometimes in the air. Don’t forget, BMX racing was growing alongside another budding and specialized discipline: Dirt Jumping. Throughout the 1980’s the new BMX discipline of freestyle exploded in popularity. Tricks were invented that are still around today and riding a BMX bike became a much more complex, as well as nuanced, craft. Art crept into the culture as people cultivated brand and rider images, set standards of perfection and beauty in tricks, and generally invented and created things on bikes that had never been seen before. As the 1990’s approached, another major division in the disciplines of BMX riding appeared: Freestyle and Flatland. Ramps had been growing in size and specificity and many tricks from the early 80’s were starting to develop specifically for use either on the ground or on ramps. And as people pursued their individual passions and sought to perfect their craft, they honed in on the style of bike riding that best fit their desires and skills. Some rode ramps and moved away from ground tricks, while others did the opposite. This specialization saw the birth of more tricks that had never been done. People focused on their respective discipline and pushed that discipline forward.
But, just as BMX seemed to be in its prime, the floor fell out from under commercial BMX. In the late 1980’s, for various reasons,[8] the money disappeared and the Freestyle BMX world - now encompassing three major disciplines: flatland, ramp, and dirt - was left in the hands of those who actually did it. Shows and contests shrunk from the scene as sponsors and their money vanished. Companies closed their doors and innovation of parts slowed to a trickle. What was to become of BMX? Some riders left. Yet some stayed. Undoubtedly, those who stayed did so to continue pursuing their passion. BMX culture endured, underground, and began to mature and blossom into what would later be called the mid-school period. People like Mat Hoffman and Ron Wilkerson began to build their own bikes and brands as well as hold larger, rider-run contests and events.[9] Tricks developed, BMX evolved, and more disciplines appeared as well. Ramp riding itself began to diversify, i.e. specialize: Half pipes became eleven-foot tall vert ramps or instead doubled the other direction with a six-foot spine in the middle, Dirt jumps multiplied into runs or became wooden box jumps. Riders yet again choose what to ride and some focused entirely on one style of riding. Mat Hoffman, who had the ability to ride almost anything, was already rising as a progressive and innovative vert rider. From the 900 air to many other firsts, Hoffman pushed the limits of his particular segment of BMX. Yet again, we see the specialization of riding styles being at the forefront of progression and change in BMX. And that creative, resourceful, and rebellious spirit of BMX also spawned yet another new discipline in the late 80’s that took a strong hold in the early 1990’s: Street Riding. Faced with a lack of things to ride, e.g. race tracks, jumps, or ramps, many bike riders took to the streets and rode whatever they could find. At first, seen as a supplement to riding when other options were not available, throughout the 90’s street riding took on a life of its own and became a discipline unto itself as yet another group of specialized riders innovated and invented things never before seen on a BMX bike.
Free? Style?
It has been over 30 years since some of the first tricks were created on a BMX bike and I wonder, is there still room in BMX culture for the concept of “freestyle?” Are riders choosing to specialize and ride what they want? Are riders pursuing and perfecting the parts of BMX they are drawn to and love? I believe the answer is “yes,” but for some reason, this historical norm that we have seen in both the world at-large as well as in BMX culture, is under attack. Its difficult to say what the initial reaction was to the sudden change in the ways bikes were ridden in the 1970’s, but it obvious now that the free and open creation and development of our craft did occur as evidenced by the rich, diverse, and complex culture we now inhabit. There are things happening today on bikes that, even after 20 years of riding BMX, shock even me. Riders like Logan Martin who can flip and whip in configurations unheard of or Alex Donnachie who defies the rules of physics with grind combos on balance points that seem impossible, are examples of specialization and what it makes possible.
More on progression later, but the point is, there are still, to this day, many riders who specialize and ride mainly one discipline. This is not a new concept (see BMX history section above!). It is apparent in many aspects of BMX culture. As discussed in the introduction, the long-running competition Simple Session[10] has shown that when the world’s top riders are put together in one location, they are unable to be compared/judged fairly due to their specialization and diversity. And in that same article, when asked about that problem, professional riders, industry insiders, and respected elders were divided on what this meant for BMX as a whole. In general, there seems to be a negative feeling in current BMX culture that specialization is a bad thing. Anecdotally, in real-life, on the web, and in media, we now hear the complaint that BMXers are too specialized, too narrow. That they “go too slow,” or “do too many tricks.” That they “only ride their own trails” or that they “should leave the skatepark once and a while.” Everyone seems to have an opinion about what every one else should do in BMX, but in the end, almost all of these complaints come down to the idea that riders are moving away from “true BMX” and what “BMX is about.” It’s an idea that riding just “one way” is the opposite of what the “nature of BMX” is. Even more, there exists a sentiment that if you must specialize, there are some specific ways of riding that are less worthy of focus or recognition in the BMX world. These sentiments betray that many feel that there is a right way to ride as well as a wrong way to ride. And if one is to believe that there is a right and wrong way, then one must believe that there is an innately “true BMX” spirit since we have no rules or guidelines. That elitism is detrimental to the unity of the diverse and historically free culture of BMX. Ryan Worcester in DIG in 2013 put in print what many were saying then and continue to say now about the specialization and focus of BMX. Behind his words are currents of elitism about “true BMX.”
“If you’re going to go walking speed at some boring flat ledge all day over and over again, you might as well get a trials bike or a razor scooter with 20” wheels for your pogo grind web edit, or have your bike stolen by someone who looks sketchy because maybe if they have a bike they’ll actually ride it like it is one. Ride stupid weird shit that is an adventure to get to[…] and make your own damn spot. Use cement, scrap pallets, dirt or whatever to change things for the better. Who cares if thecomeup doesn’t invite you to their birthday circle jerk. Land into grass, use a kicker ramp, do whatever you want. If it’s there ride it. - Ryan Worcester”[11]
The first condescending sentence from the excerpt is an obvious reference to the growth of technical ledge riding that has seen a boom since the late 2000’s. It is obvious that he believes that BMX should be ridden in a certain way and that some ways are not even worthy of being allowed to happen. Yet, that specialization, which Ryan is lamenting, is responsible for much of the groundbreaking bike riding we see today. Way past the days of unwaxed high speed feebles with the occasional opposite 180 out, riders in the mid to early 2000’s began to realize that, like flatland, slowing down and utilizing a specific space could allow a rider to add layers of complexity and creativity to the usage of a rather mundane spot. Simply put, a ledge could be a canvas for many more tricks than it had been used for in the past. I do not know if the late 80’s witnessed a similar backlash against flatland from ramp riders, but it is apparent that flatland pushed on past the original boundaries of BMX and created an entirely new, amazing, and complex discipline within BMX. Had they not, a major pillar of BMX would not exist today and I argue that we would be much the worse for it. Are we not responsible, as heirs to the original bike riding innovators and rebels of the 70’s and 80’s, to allow for, nay, encourage creative specialization? I strongly answer: yes, we are! Ironically, after answering that question in the negative in his first sentence, Ryan then refutes himself and agrees with me with his edict declaring that we should ride anything and everything and “do whatever [we] want.” As a matter of fact, according to him, “If it’s there ride it.” Well, it just so happens, that the “boring flat ledge” was there, and, guess what some people did? Ride it. This is only the tip of the iceberg though. It is a pervasive attitude in BMX to lament the lameness of certain types of riding that seem to be more popular now than they were “back in the day.” Or to disregard and condescend someone else’s choice of riding style, location of riding, or trick choice because it is different from your own.
The Myth of the “All-Around” Rider
These arguments often come side-by-side the call for the return of the “all-around” rider of yesteryear; a rider who did not label himself, who rode everything, and who strove to be well-rounded -- the “Renaissance Man.” In order to understand why I believe people have recently called for this all-around rider, it is important to discuss an era of BMX history that we did not give into in earlier paragraphs. That era, the height of the mid-school period (late 1990’s) into the early years of the 2000’s, witnessed a unique set of circumstances that I believe are the basis for a major misconception in modern BMX culture. Looking back at the mid-90’s, there was yet again an explosion of creativity and growth within BMX culture like in the late 70’s. Bikes started to look like they do today, tricks were being defined and standardized, skateparks were being built, and new and abundant perspectives were shared through media outlets such as Props Visual and many new rider-run magazines. Riders used their new tools and new influences to take BMX to a level beyond what anyone in the 1980’s could have imagined. Iconic tricks were pulled, iconic videos were made, and iconic riders were consecrated. The entire Props Road Fools 1 crew [12] is a roster of riders who embodied this golden age of BMX; riders like Joe Rich and Taj Mihelich who could flow the trails, shred a mini-ramp, destroy a street spot, all while making it look amazing.
Yet, a subset of riders today, those with what I will call a “conservative BMX mindset,” seems to idealize this era to a fault and use it as a way to discredit new and different forms of riding as one-sided, wrong, and deviating from “true BMX.” Many point to this era as evidence of the existence of and necessity of the all-around rider. From 1998 to about 2008[13] there was, I believe, an anomaly in the way riders were classified. It is in that period that that the concept of the all-around rider seems to have been at its prime. I could list many many riders from that era who fit this description, but it is easier to say that most all of the top pros of the time fell into this category; a category defined by the idea of being good at everything and not just riding one discipline. As mentioned earlier, this ideal is embodied in traditional culture by the Renaissance Man or James Bond. There is no doubt that some, if not many, of those riders fell into that category because they were (and still are) extremely talented and dedicated BMX riders. And there is no doubt that many of them worked hard to be successful in multiple disciplines.
There is an unspoken issue that needs to be addressed, though, to put these achievements as well as classifications in context. Before that can happen though, we must be realistic and discount the certain riders from this discussion. Like Michael Jordan in basketball and Freddie Mercury in music, there are certain BMX riders who are exceptionally and uniquely talented. Those riders deserve their own category as exceptional and rare. Those riders do fit the all-around bike rider description simply because they are some of the best to ever touch a BMX bike. I will call them the “exception” riders because they are obviously the exception to the norm. Instead of pointing to those 10-15 “exception” riders then and today who “can ride everything” and asking why everyone doesn’t model themselves after them, we need to realize that these riders are rare cases. Nowadays, riders like Garrett Reynolds come to mind. A rider who can ride a foot-tall flat ledge and create a new combo daily but who also could compete on an X-games Park course and place high or win. Very few people in the history of BMX can ride at that level and basing our concept of “how people should ride” and “what is normal” around these uniquely and exceptionally talented one-in-a-million athletes is like judging average scientific achievements against Einstein’s theory of Relativity. He was a genius and expecting every other scientist to replicate his abilities and achievements is unrealistic und unhelpful.
Turning back to the unspoken issue of the golden age in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, a discussion of the actual act of riding is important. To me, as well as those who watch old videos, it seems that many of the tricks and styles of riding that were being “mastered” by the all-around riders of the time were a bit shallower than what is being mastered by pros in contemporary BMX. I do not mean to say “easier,” but rather, less complex and less developed, i.e. shallow. With hindsight, it is easier to say with certainty that being able to be a professional who was at the forefront of both street progression as well as ramp progression in 2002 was only scratching the surface of what is now known to be possible. For example, a pro-level street clip in the early 2000’s may have been holding out an icepick on a 12-stair rail. And an innovative and pro-quality ramp trick may have been a barspin to fufanu on a large back-rail of a 6-foot quarterpipe. Both tricks, even now, are high-level and impressive maneuvers. Yet today, many top pros could certainly barspin to icepick to 180 that same 12-stair rail while another might whip to fufanu a sub rail and barspin on the way back in. Both of these modern pros would undoubtedly be doing those tricks in a line as well; adding a level of complexity and consistency unheard of a few years ago. Not to short any of the amazing and ground breaking tricks done by the multitudes of amazing riders in that golden age, but they were just beginning to scratch the surface of the technical as well as burly depths of BMX (style and simplicity aside as there is always a place for that). And, as those were only surface scratches, or a few deep gouges into each discipline, those tricks were able to be mastered by riders who did not necessarily devote all of their time to one discipline or another. These riders spent time riding street and park, for example, and in their historical context were good enough at both to be considered a progressive professional athlete of all-around skill. Yet, again with hindsight, these riders did not push BMX to its entire end-point of progression. They were an integral part of progression, but there was more to be done (this is easy to say with hindsight). This does not mean that simpler tricks are of less value or should not be done, but it speaks to the idea that specialization leads to progression. And if people want to progress, they will specialize (much more on this later).
Placing this all in historical context, the dawn of rider-owned and rider-centric BMX in the early 1990’s was a fresh start or rebirth for our culture in many ways. And just like when BMX began in the 1960’s and 1970’s, birth is followed by growth and transformation… through specialization! That specialization, as seen in the first era of BMX growth as freestyle itself was born, is occurring once again in the modern BMX era and in the same way: experimentation, diversification, and specialization fueled by creativity, passion, ingenuity, inventiveness, and necessity. The reason I say the all-around rider is an anomaly is because that type of rider only seems to exist when BMX is starting fresh in some way and working to move forward. The inevitable growth of our culture creates conditions in which specialization becomes the norm and broad or all-around skills are simply a starting point. Remember, an ancient leather worker was still not that far away from a hunter at first; but now, the people who design clothing are very far removed from those who produce the materials. specialization becomes very pronounced as time passes.
Now, before I am skewered alive for seeming to slight many great riders, let me say a few things. First of all, everything that the riders did in the golden age of 1998-2008 deserves respect at the utmost level. As I said, I see that era as a parallel to the early era of BMX when it was still defining itself. The golden era was a redefinition of BMX and the starting point, in my eyes, for the incredible state that modern BMX is in right now. The riders of that era were pushing the limits of their circumstances and some of what they have done cannot be replicated or outdone. Yet, they existed in a specific historical moment and as such, we must remember and understand them with that in mind. As an example, I, as well as many riders have, when they first began riding, watched old videos of “pros” from times before their current understanding and asked “how was this considered amazing back then?” We must remember, context is everything. And by modern standards, as shown in my trick examples above, BMX was not nearly as advanced in some aspects as it is now. I am not asking you to make a judgment about what is better, BMX tricks and styles back then compared to now, but rather to understand that times were different. And as times were different, styles of riding were different. And, as shown by the analysis of the industry and culture as a whole, it is not strange to say that specialization in BMX in the golden age was not as defined as it is now or even as it was in the late 1980’s. As such, the all-around rider existed because the disciplines were not yet so deeply defined. Here we are, less than ten years after the end of what I have been calling the Golden Age of BMX and we are extremely diversified and specialized. And riding is at a level higher than ever before. Yet, people are crying out against it. I will address why I believe specialization is a great thing later, but I want to talk a bit again about conservatism in BMX.
END OF PART I
I hope you have made it this far and have been enjoying the long journey into BMX culture that this piece takes you on. You have reached the halfway point, but in the interest of keeping you awake and engaged, I have decided to cut the piece here and leave you with a “to be continued…”
Don’t worry, I’ll leave you a little teaser below as well as certainly post the conclusion to this piece shortly. Stay tuned!
PART II – TEASER
BMX conservatism
Conservatism, the idea of preserving the way things “used to be” and limiting change, is rampant in BMX right now. It is almost exclusively focused on a return to the late mid-school era -- the same era I discussed earlier. I think it is very obvious that part of the opposition to specialization in BMX is centered around specialization’s contradiction to the champion of the golden era: the “all-around” rider. Many people, for reasons we can only touch on here[14], have a longing to return BMX to the state it “used to be” in. Regardless of the reasons many wish to take BMX back to that era, it is not surprisingly that those same people dislike the way BMX has changed.
To be continued…
Notes:
[1] http://www.albert-einstein.org/article_handicap.html
[2] http://digbmx.com/features/a-simple-question-does-this-contest-format-work
[3] http://digbmx.com/features/a-simple-question-does-this-contest-format-work
[4] Possible future topic: “Conservatism in BMX: The search for the way things were.”
[5] I realize that BMX history is documented in many places and much of our history has been recorded through various lenses. I do not claim to know the absolute timeline of events of our early years, but encourage someone else to take up where this article, and many others, have left off.
[6] Timeline: http://www.joekidonastingray.com
[7] http://23mag.com/gens/haro.htm
[8] Possible future topic: the collapse of BMX in the early 1990’s
[9] 2Hip Meet-the-Street contests saw early street riding mixing with classic forms of completion: http://www.23mag.com/events/2hip/m88r1.htm
[10] http://session.ee
[11] http://digbmx.com/dig-this/re-print-what-the-fuck-happened-to-spots
[12] http://bmxmdb.com/films/206-Road-Fools-1 and http://digbmx.com/dig-this/the-top-ten-moments-in-road-fools-history and http://propsbmx.com/shop/box-sets/road-fools-box-set/
[13] The end of this period is hard to pinpoint as it has only been a few years since those events took place and being able to look at them with the advantage of time is still a bit challenging.
[14] Possible future topic: “Conservatism in BMX: The search for the way things were.”
Responses
12.14.16 - Dan Foley
"An Argument for Riding Everything"
(VIDEO COMMENTARY BELOW)
A note from the editor:
I should have known that the BMX community would not approach this site in the exact way I imagined. The creativity and diversity that define our culture should have made me realize that riders would engage with the content and ideas on this site, but they would do so in various ways. I am beyond stoked to share with you a "video commentary" on the piece Specialization and the Myth of the All-Around Rider. Dan Foley does a great job of laying out multiple supports for his main argument for being an all-around rider and does so through the discussion of various topics like bike control, boredom, unique feelings, and life experiences. In addition, there is a very compelling discussion of the diverse roots of modern specialized riders that is worth thinking about. Take a moment and click the link below to hear Dan spell out his take on the topic of all-around riders and specialization in BMX.
- Mike
"An Argument for Riding Everything"
(VIDEO COMMENTARY BELOW)
A note from the editor:
I should have known that the BMX community would not approach this site in the exact way I imagined. The creativity and diversity that define our culture should have made me realize that riders would engage with the content and ideas on this site, but they would do so in various ways. I am beyond stoked to share with you a "video commentary" on the piece Specialization and the Myth of the All-Around Rider. Dan Foley does a great job of laying out multiple supports for his main argument for being an all-around rider and does so through the discussion of various topics like bike control, boredom, unique feelings, and life experiences. In addition, there is a very compelling discussion of the diverse roots of modern specialized riders that is worth thinking about. Take a moment and click the link below to hear Dan spell out his take on the topic of all-around riders and specialization in BMX.
- Mike
9.25.16 - Ricky Lopez
Dear BMX reader....
My name is Ricky Lopez, you may know me by my nick name "Montana Ricky"..... I don't really have that big of a vocabulary or the punctuation skills that many writers have so I'll rely on auto-correct.
What I do have is LOVE, love for a sport, a culture, a passion that we call "BMX".... I breathe this shit daily and I express it always. From the moment I start my day to the end there isn't a moment BMX isn't on my mind.
I'll start from my beginning... I grew up in a small town called Great Falls, MT. That kind of place where everyone knows everyone. Days there go on like a dream that never ends. I was like most typical kids I went to school, messed around in the neighborhood and like some also got in trouble. Most the time trouble actually means something bad but for me that was good cause that's how I found BMX. I was 9 I got 2 felonies for helping a local teenage kid steal some wheelable refrigerators, well actually he told me they were his and I assisted him in this stupid shit. To make things short I got charged,handcuffed and thrown in an adult jail, next to a stinking drunk homeless man. Now let me tell you being incarcerated at that age is scary as shit and I don't wish that on any one. So any how I went to court the judge gave me probation and community service all at 9 years old you can say by statics I was gonna be a menace to society.
Few years past I started riding bikes, not serious, but enough to say I was doing things most kids double my age wouldn't on a bike. I again got in trouble jumping off roofs on to parked cars and I went through one of them, landing myself behind bars again receiving another felony and also another trip to the judge. So here I am 12 years old 3 felonies on my belt and awaiting a sentence from a judge. Her name was Judy and her nor I knowing this would set the tone for my life now.
She asked me "Mr Lopez what do you like in life and what do you want to do"? I answered ride my bike she said good you choose now "ride your bike or Pine Hills (kids rehabilitation program prison). Obviously I chose bikes.
So that summer I went to a NBL Bmx race where there was a dirt jumping contest and a really rad dude by the name of Joe Johnson ( the first dude to do a tail whip air) taught me how to 360. And that's all it took for me to get the bug and seriously want to be glued to my handle grips.
Not sure if that really gives the full detail of the beginning of my biking but it highlights what could been a shitty start for a small town kid if he wasn't given a choice, so thanks judge for making me, ME.
I have a constant want or dream that everyone involved BMX wants the same things and wants to make Freestyle a reality we can all live.
It's funny as I'm writing this with no clue what the hell im doing other then fingering my keyboard rambling that I find myself always searching for the answer "what makes Bmx great and when was it"... well for me in my 23 years of riding it was around 2002-2006 where my golden years: tricks, contests, people and all the riders were amazing and I fucking loved that time with all my life. I ask people that question all the time what years were great for you and it's always the same answer and that answer is only for us guys that have been there that have lived it. The older you get the more you look back on the times, so I say to the new generation love what you have now cause later you will wish you had that now.
Perfect example of this I was in Vegas at inter bike and, like all years, went to Nora Cup. now I have only been going there for the last few years and always do the same thing: walk around, google at the pros I looked up to, waited for the show to start took my small part in it and then left.
Well this year I started it the same way, did my rounds waited for it to start and then just stood there looking around watching people love the hell out of the time they were having; meanwhile I was just quiet watching, I turned looked at this guy doing the same as me and realized FUCK Ricky you only live once and this moment will never happen again. So I took my phone out pushed my way to the front of the stage and yelled my fucking ass off through the whole show, showing love and support for the sport I believe in and live.
So in short don't ever count your self out, don't follow dreams of others or do what they are doing, do you, be you and I'm telling you now when you look back on your BMX life you'll be happy you took a stand and did what you wanted cause memories mean more then just being that cool dude that just stands around watching others enjoy a Monumental experience.
No clue if this story thing I just wrote means anything or is even good but I believe in what Mike H. Is doing and I wanna be a part in it.
Thanks for your time
Ricky
Dear BMX reader....
My name is Ricky Lopez, you may know me by my nick name "Montana Ricky"..... I don't really have that big of a vocabulary or the punctuation skills that many writers have so I'll rely on auto-correct.
What I do have is LOVE, love for a sport, a culture, a passion that we call "BMX".... I breathe this shit daily and I express it always. From the moment I start my day to the end there isn't a moment BMX isn't on my mind.
I'll start from my beginning... I grew up in a small town called Great Falls, MT. That kind of place where everyone knows everyone. Days there go on like a dream that never ends. I was like most typical kids I went to school, messed around in the neighborhood and like some also got in trouble. Most the time trouble actually means something bad but for me that was good cause that's how I found BMX. I was 9 I got 2 felonies for helping a local teenage kid steal some wheelable refrigerators, well actually he told me they were his and I assisted him in this stupid shit. To make things short I got charged,handcuffed and thrown in an adult jail, next to a stinking drunk homeless man. Now let me tell you being incarcerated at that age is scary as shit and I don't wish that on any one. So any how I went to court the judge gave me probation and community service all at 9 years old you can say by statics I was gonna be a menace to society.
Few years past I started riding bikes, not serious, but enough to say I was doing things most kids double my age wouldn't on a bike. I again got in trouble jumping off roofs on to parked cars and I went through one of them, landing myself behind bars again receiving another felony and also another trip to the judge. So here I am 12 years old 3 felonies on my belt and awaiting a sentence from a judge. Her name was Judy and her nor I knowing this would set the tone for my life now.
She asked me "Mr Lopez what do you like in life and what do you want to do"? I answered ride my bike she said good you choose now "ride your bike or Pine Hills (kids rehabilitation program prison). Obviously I chose bikes.
So that summer I went to a NBL Bmx race where there was a dirt jumping contest and a really rad dude by the name of Joe Johnson ( the first dude to do a tail whip air) taught me how to 360. And that's all it took for me to get the bug and seriously want to be glued to my handle grips.
Not sure if that really gives the full detail of the beginning of my biking but it highlights what could been a shitty start for a small town kid if he wasn't given a choice, so thanks judge for making me, ME.
I have a constant want or dream that everyone involved BMX wants the same things and wants to make Freestyle a reality we can all live.
It's funny as I'm writing this with no clue what the hell im doing other then fingering my keyboard rambling that I find myself always searching for the answer "what makes Bmx great and when was it"... well for me in my 23 years of riding it was around 2002-2006 where my golden years: tricks, contests, people and all the riders were amazing and I fucking loved that time with all my life. I ask people that question all the time what years were great for you and it's always the same answer and that answer is only for us guys that have been there that have lived it. The older you get the more you look back on the times, so I say to the new generation love what you have now cause later you will wish you had that now.
Perfect example of this I was in Vegas at inter bike and, like all years, went to Nora Cup. now I have only been going there for the last few years and always do the same thing: walk around, google at the pros I looked up to, waited for the show to start took my small part in it and then left.
Well this year I started it the same way, did my rounds waited for it to start and then just stood there looking around watching people love the hell out of the time they were having; meanwhile I was just quiet watching, I turned looked at this guy doing the same as me and realized FUCK Ricky you only live once and this moment will never happen again. So I took my phone out pushed my way to the front of the stage and yelled my fucking ass off through the whole show, showing love and support for the sport I believe in and live.
So in short don't ever count your self out, don't follow dreams of others or do what they are doing, do you, be you and I'm telling you now when you look back on your BMX life you'll be happy you took a stand and did what you wanted cause memories mean more then just being that cool dude that just stands around watching others enjoy a Monumental experience.
No clue if this story thing I just wrote means anything or is even good but I believe in what Mike H. Is doing and I wanna be a part in it.
Thanks for your time
Ricky