Everything is bigger in Texas?

Motocross

Not the MX tracks, apparently.

Their national track sucks. I missed Hangtown and was stoked to see Freestone on TV the other day so I clicked it on. Was that supposed to be an MX track? It was like they took a supercross track and replaced the jumps with ruts. Supercross is boring. Where are the damn hills? Bring back Glen Helen and dump this sorry-ass track.

Just felt like making my little voice heard.

Dan

Edited by danweasel
To seem as if I was a better writer.

Motocross isn't just one type of layout, one type of terrain, one type of soil. It's different conditions, soils, terrain, regions, fans, etc. If you want to watch a Southern California outdoor series, I am sure there are more than one you can go attend live.

However, this is the AMA "national" motocross series, so it is contested at various tracks across the nation. Before they add yet another California round, they should add a round in the South, like Florida or Georgia. If you want to see Glen Helen (I can't argue there), tell the AMA to ditch Pala and race the Helen.

I was at the race, and the track is much more fun to watch in person than on TV. The rollers before the finish are insanely huge, I have no clue how they were creating so much speed to be able to fly over them. The wall jump before the rollers was NUTS. When they the riders were looking for the fastest line in practice, Reed, Barcia, and a few others were airing it out, but most thought the fastest line was to roll it...until Davi and Wilson started cracking the throttle and skipping the top, which was pretty awesome to see as well. Many jumps had kickers, and the guys would slam into them with the back end about to end their day and yet they were still on the gas...lots of wrecks with the women's MX because of them. It's a very technical track for being outdoors, and I think it's good they have one in Texas. You just saw the toughest guys in the sport win this weekend because of this track. Of course Dungey had his problem, but him, Reed, and Rattray have some serious skills to push it that hard for two motos.

I was hoping there would be more cameras so the race on tv would have more views, but it seemed there were just a few covering the entire track. What I didn't like what that some cameras were on the outside ends of corners before a turn, so you couldn't get the feel of how fast they were going down the straights and into the turns, and you could see them railing the corners from the inside of the track.

Don't hate the track, hate the lack of cameras and views.

I call BS on that one.

Their national track sucks. I missed Hangtown and was stoked to see Freestone on TV the other day so I clicked it on. Was that supposed to be an MX track? It was like they took a supercross track and replaced the jumps with ruts. Supercross is boring. Where are the damn hills? Bring back Glen Helen and dump this sorry-ass track.

Just felt like making my little voice heard.

Dan

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they don't schedule the Lucas Oil AMA Pro Motocross based on what YOU like. I heard no complaints from any of the riders, other than the heat which is a given down there. It's true, there isn't a whole bunch of elevation change there, but then, I didn't read where that was a requirement for a national Mx race. BTW - there are a couple of others on the schedule that don't have much elevation change, in all fairness - make sure you bash those tracks also. One more thing - most riders are glad GH is off the schedule - I, as a spectator, am not.

I was hoping there would be more cameras so the race on tv would have more views, but it seemed there were just a few covering the entire track.

Because of the lack of hills, they didn't need 'em!

I have seen tracks that lacked elevation plenty of times but this is a AMA national race! They did what they could with the terrain and I definitely agree that the rollers were cool but the track really lacked a natural terrain feel (or look as it were). It looked to me like a rutted up local supercross track to me. Overall I would have to say the track sucked compared to EVERY OTHER TRACK I HAVE EVER SEEN ON TV. Hangtown and Washougal are the only ones I have ever been to in person.

I do agree that in person it would have been fun to attend, of course. I also agree that Texas probably deserves a national but they really need to earn it. My OPINION is that Freestone didn't.

there are a couple of others on the schedule that don't have much elevation change, in all fairness - make sure you bash those tracks also

No offense intended but what track is gonna be flatter than Texas this year?

most riders are glad GH is off the schedule

I am sure they are. Glen Helen is so gnarly. Watching those guys drop down those hills is scary. And real speed too? Yeah, the pros would trade a Glen Helen for a Freestone any day.

evidently it was too big for RD's gas tank...

My initial impression was that it doesn't deserve to be a National track. Rider cam view looked VERY narrow in places, seemed very amateur.

But, it grew on me. Definately technical, tested the rider's skill effectively. If it can pull the attendance year after year, it's all good.:smirk:

At first i didn't like it but, I think there needs to be variety on the series. Im glad its a part of the series, usually see some new riders excel there because its different. Having every track like red bud would be neat, but i think some variety is needed, ex: southwick(sand), freestone(flat, man made obstacles), thunder valley(elevation around 5,500ft i think)

At first i didn't like it but, I think there needs to be variety on the series. Im glad its a part of the series, usually see some new riders excel there because its different. Having every track like red bud would be neat, but i think some variety is needed, ex: southwick(sand), freestone(flat, man made obstacles), thunder valley(elevation around 5,500ft i think)

Actually its almost 6200ft elevation and although I maybe biased its one of my favorite tracks. :smirk:

If it can pull the attendance year after year, it's all good

Yes, I guess that is the bottom line isn't it?

Here's hoping it doesn't! (Insert devil smiley emoticon here).

This just came to mind and it pretty much sums up what I am trying to say.

I think that as a motocross track Freestone is fine. I would like to watch a race there, or even better, ride there myself. But, I would be pretty embarrassed if we hosted the MXdN on it! Not so with any other track on the circuit.

I like the tracks with elevation changes. That being said i think its cool to see what different parts of the country have to offer. unlike supercross for the most part, these tracks can be as different as night and day.:smirk: It's all GOOD.

This just came to mind and it pretty much sums up what I am trying to say.

I think that as a motocross track Freestone is fine. I would like to watch a race there, or even better, ride there myself. But, I would be pretty embarrassed if we hosted the MXdN on it! Not so with any other track on the circuit.

Really? Pala is just as flat and just as man made. It's a crappy representation of the local region.

Texas is flat, no way around that. But, we got great sandy to loamy soil, plenty of tracks, and year around racing. MX is very big down here. And plenty of the current and up and coming pros are coming from this region. So a MX national is gonna be contested here. It's debatable that Freestone is the best MX track in Texas, even us locals will debate that (Lake Whitney was a much better track). But, we are all very happy to have a national MX event back in our state after 20 years. So, you won't hear us complaining much.

I feel for the rider/fans in the South East, another hotbed of amateur MX. No national for them.

Hahaha you got me. I have never even heard of Pala before. I must have missed that one.

I am not hating on Texas, I used to live there and the dirt is great! For my skill level I actually prefer to ride flatter, slower tracks anyways. You also can't argue with year round riding. I am starting to agree that yeah it makes sense to have a track on the circuit representing all the regions (even if the whole industry seems to be in SoCal) and I guess one has to be the worst. Now we have to wait for a few months to see if it is Texas or SD...

I was asking myself last year why Freestone was a National. The track just does NOT look fun! It just looks flat, with a bunch of rollers.

At the same time; it is cool to see how challenging it is in a different way. There's only a few big jumps, and it doesn't seem to flow too well. It seems like everyone was struggling to hit different parts of the track clean, and the smart guys were able to skip across some obstacles with amazing bursts of speed, resulting in much more speed in those sections. It seems really challenging, but not in a way that other tracks are, with massive step-ups and whatnot.

Does that make sense? lol

I've never been to either track in person, but Oak Hill seems like a much better track.

I can't beleive they race Pala over Glen Helen. The jumps and hills are insane and make for some outstanding pro racing. That is a real shame.

I like Oakhill. It's a great amateur track. It even makes for a great vintage track. Probably a little too short for a National, but they got plenty of room to work with it.

I am certain that the location of the Texas national is determined by it's proximity to the large population centers here. Freestone is roughly central to Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio/Austin.

I was there. It was bad ass. That track was so rough. We walked the track after the race and it was crazy how tow up it was. I'll bet you would have a hard time just riding around it slow,I know I would. TV does not do it justice. Read some of the rider comments to get a feel for what it was like.

Lake Whitney would be the ultimate location for a National(I have been to many that were held there as well as raced there many times).

Oak Hill in Decatur Texas is a killer place too but too small for a National.

3 Palms in Conroe Texas could put together a couple of there tracks to make a National

track.

Cycle Ranch in Floresville and a few others could hold Nationals.

It seems really challenging, but not in a way that other tracks are, with massive step-ups and whatnot.

There's no HUGE jumps, but I suppose the love of an aerial display can be blamed on SX.

I've never been to either track in person, but Oak Hill seems like a much better track.

Oak Hill is much closer to me, and IMHO, it is a much better layout. Only thing is, it doesn't have the space (as is) to put on a National and the infrastructure surrounding it (access roads) would never support the influx of people. Great track - can't handle a National.

I can't beleive they race Pala over Glen Helen. The jumps and hills are insane and make for some outstanding pro racing. That is a real shame.

Again, the pro's (a good # of them anyway) are thankful they aren't there anymore. It's not just the difficulty, it's the speed that can be generated on several parts of that track. It's one thing to bail, entirely another to bail at speed. In the end though, track management lost the National for GH, that's what I've read at least.

ive never been to a pro track till freestone. so i dont really have anything to base my opinion on what a national track should be. but i thought the track was awesome. pretty good sized and still had some decent sized jumps. i know that for how rutted and tore up it looked in person it would be a blast to ride. although after about 4 laps my arms would be numb!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now