This chase is awesome in so many ways.

1. The police seem to be very restrained for what is going on here I only see a couple of gunshots into the car.
2. The police are chasing the guy on dirt bikes.
3. After getting crashed into some victims run from their car and initially get run down by the police, but the police are restrained enough not to shoot them and to figure out that it isn't the person they are looking for.
4. After getting the guy out of the car and restraining him the police don't seem to beat the guy down at all. But they do LET THE PERSON FROM THE CAR HE HIT GIVE HIM A COUPLE OF KICKS (3:09)!!! HAHAHA!!

>> ^rychan:

The advice might be good but the reasoning they're using to justify it is false. Things are much more complicated than they make out.
Why not take their third grade reasoning to the extreme and propose that you should run with zero bounce? If you tried this you'd find it requires very unnatural and inefficient movements.


Things don't need to be complicated if you don't go into the metabolism side of things. Running is different from walking in that both of you feet are off the ground at the same time. You're basically flying through the air most of the time, or should be. Bouncing too much shows that you make contact with the ground for too long. By simply landing on the balls of your feet (not your toes or, worse, your heels) without trying to push yourself forward (i.e. with legs straight down under you at the instant your whole foot is contacting the ground and then pulling the foot up instead of pushing out with your toes), you can create a spring like reaction in your leg muscle that will give you just enough vertical energy to stay level with the ground, reducing the bounce to a theoretical minimum of zero. What makes you advance forward is your previous momentum combined with gravity making your slightly forward-leaning body fall at an angle (the lean will need to be more pronounced the faster you want to run). With good form, you can easily create a very constant stride without bounce since you do not rely on your leg muscles to propel yourself, but only to keep you up in the air for the longest possible proportion of time (resulting in less friction, more energy transfer from gravity, etc.). Look at horses : their hind legs are bent backwards for propulsion, yet they still have no bounce (we feel a bounce because we ride in the middle, but in absolutes they do not bounce). Plus, their front legs always hit the ground at a 90 degree angle right under them. In human terms, the front legs are our legs, the hind legs are our slight forward lean. If we had not adapted this way, we'd either be running like kangaroos, i.e. by actually bouncing, or we'd not be able to run at all, like monkeys.

tl;dr : landing on the balls of your feet keeps you in the air at a stable, constant height; leaning slightly forward allows gravity to pull you forward.

Walking though is very different. Here you want the pendulum effect created by the arms to conserve energy, but the same principle applies for maximum efficiency : land with the legs at 90 degrees to the ground, under your center of gravity and don't push with your toes. Of course there are ways to walk/run faster with less efficiency, it all depends whether you're in a marathon or a race.

>> ^Sagemind:

After ripping my knee out in a dirt-bike accident (think snapping a chicken wing in two), I don't run.
Having said that, I think it's crazy that man has reduced a basic function of the human body down to scientific knowhow! Should we tell our tribal ancestors they've been doing it all wrong all this time??


On the contrary, they're the ones who have been doing it right all along. Mass consumerism + fad marketing destroyed our feet with "running" shoes. Plus, scientists have assumed for a long time that everyone knows instinctively how to run properly. They were wrong. Just as we learn how to walk we must learn how to run. Some can learn on their own, some copy others like Angua1 and some just can't run or end up copying bad running forms from people who "unlearned" how to run thanks to padded "running" shoes. Our ancestors learned how to run properly because for them it was a vital skill, just like using a bow, a knife or a sling. Plus they didn't have padded shoes, medical treatment or motorized locomotion so running badly was not an option if they were to survive long enough to reproduce.

That said, the video is bullshit. Go look for the POSE method of running for accurate information. This method also addresses the crossover problems.

After ripping my knee out in a dirt-bike accident (think snapping a chicken wing in two), I don't run.

Having said that, I think it's crazy that man has reduced a basic function of the human body down to scientific knowhow! Should we tell our tribal ancestors they've been doing it all wrong all this time??

I made it to my 10th but missed my 20th due to being a dirt bike accident (ripped out my knee and ACL) - No one even phoned me or stopped bye. I was back living in my hometown at the time so it wouldn't have been hard - That's when you know, "those people" really aren't your friends any more... so why go...

>> ^rottenseed:
Wearing a helmet while riding on a course like this is like wearing a condom to a blood transfusion in the early 90s...


QFT

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Dirt, Bike, Trail, Dirtbike, Motorbike, Lean to the Left' to 'Dirt, Bike, Trail, Dirtbike, Motorbike, Lean to the Left, enduro, motorcycle' - edited by therealblankman

>> ^potchi79:
Title says backflip. Doesn't say anything about dirt bike.


Note the tags, new guy.

Title says backflip. Doesn't say anything about dirt bike.

Oh, thanks. So what you're saying is that in addition to the cost of your bike that you left out of your budget (whether it's $1,000 or $100,000), you should also be adding in the cost of your waterproof riding gear. Another thing you left out.

Look, I'm not going to argue with you over whether or not most Americans are retards. I agree with that statement, as much as you just love to repeat it.

The fact of the matter is, minimum wage is not a living wage. If you're being paid minimum wage, then you can't support yourself without doing other things to fill in the gaps. Minimum wage is supposed to cover that according to the government but it doesn't.

And regarding your self sufficiency: no one actually needs money to live. I'm sure I could live a long life (barring any health issues) without making any money at all. The point here is that I would have to do other things.

When it was stated above that minimum wage was a living wage, I just wanted to point out that it's not. If you don't agree with me, go and look up "living wage" and educate yourself before you come in to do nothing but egotistically point out how your flawless logic and applied determination can solve all the world's problems. You can't even fill out a budget properly.

And speaking of budgets: I really don't care which stupid fucking political bullshit you adhere to. I don't subscribe to any political party philosophy at all but it doesn't change the fact that if either of us get a minimum wage job anywhere, they're going to take the taxes out before they pay you your check. The manager of McDonald's isn't going to come out of his office and ask, "OK, how many dirt-bike-riding libertarians are working here? Cause I wanna' be sure not to take your taxes out of your check."

>> ^Ryjkyj:
Do you ride to work in the rain? Because nobody I know rides their bike in the rain. So what then, call in sick every time it rains?

Rain, snow, lightning, fog, hail, tumbleweeds, crazy drivers. The weather here ranges from -10 F to 105F and yes I ride every day no matter what. Riding in the rain isn't that big of a deal if you have a waterproof helmet, jacket, pants, gloves, and boots.

You can buy a used dirt bike for about $1000 - in fact my very first motorcycle was a used Ninja 250 (sport bike) which I bought for $1400. Gets 70 MPG. As far as maintenance on my current bike goes; spark plugs are about $2 (single cylinder) and an oil change is what $10? Mine was $7000 brand new, but I don't make minimum wage. Most people spend what, 10, 20, 30 thousand on a new car? Why would you spend $20,000 on a car? They are slow, dangerous, get terrible gas mileage, and can't even ride down single track

Thing is, if you are making minimum wage, why would you need a car to commute in the first place? Theres a McDonalds on every block and used bicycles are like $30. Anyone working less than 10 miles from their house could easily ride a bicycle to work. One of my coworkers does it every day (14 miles) ...yes in the rain and snow too.

Its not a question of "can" its a question of "will." People in America think (know?) they need a car yet theres really no need for it.

As far as TAXES go...you know I'm a libertarian right? I don't believe in taxation...so that part is on you...if you want to steal 20% from someone making minimum wage thats on you, not me

well i ride a 610cc dirt bike 365 days a year so that probably explains the difference in transportation costs are most people wiling to do that? no. can most people do it? of course.

typical rent in this area is $500 to $1500, my house is 550 square feet. Would
most americans want to live in a house that "small?" no, probably not. can you? of course. 95% of the world would kill to live in the conditons i do, yet 95% of americans wouldnt dare.

thats a cultural flaw if you ask me

...kind of like eating out in a food industry where workers rely on tips, and not tipping because you "cant afford it" . by the way, do you guys only ever eat somewhere more than once? i would be worried about the urine content of my food with tipping histories like that

At first I thought this was a dumb design but then I remebered as a kid trying to find a tree to go around when there weren't any...also hiking or rideing a dirt bike past the treeline posed another problem being in the company of males.

But for normal use, yeah it's kind of retarded and I still wouldn't buy it.

Ouch.

I've never ridden a Supermoto bike but these guys have some serious skill. I wonder if the peg-scraping sideways riding and the dirt-bike geometry prevent high-sides? Getting sideways like this on a super-sport bike is a recipe for disaster and many broken bones.

Um I think the dirt bike circuit will stay with their 2 wheelers. Think aerial jumps and off roading will go this way ? Hell no. Those little dirt bike rule. Four wheelers? Nope too much expense, people wont buy it.

So what nitche can this fill ? Um nothing...

I picture this with knobby dirt bike tires that they use on the rear wheels of motocross bikes. And with four wheel drive. It could benefit from an active suspension up front so it doesn't nose-dive when you hit the brakes hard. This must feel like a whole new kind of vehicle when you ride it.