Statistics say Chicks on bikes are bloody dangerous!

[idleidolidyll]

Survival skills? Hell ladies, it looks like you all need lessons!

From Lula's link http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx



Of 110,000 registered bikes in NZ, 11% are owned by women.
Of that 11%, 26% are riding bikes over 750cc.
Women riders make up only 17% of all Motorcycle crashes.

So let me extrapolate: Only 11% of bike riders are chicks yet they have 17% of the accidents.

There are therefore 97,900 blokes on bikes, 12,100 chicks and an indeterminate number of transvestites, 5th sex's etc.

lets divide that down to an even 1000 overall by % to make the numbers easier to fathom. 110,000/110=1000

97900/110=890 blokes
12100/110=110 chicks

If there were say 1000 bike accidents per year amongst the total, then 830 of them would be by guys and 170 by chicks.

830/890=0.93258 accidents per bloke rider

170/110=1.545 accident per chick rider

On that basis, chicks are almost 70% MORE likely to have an accident than blokes

The obvious point therefore is that blokes are better riders

Thanks for that raw data Lula..........................chuckle

Lets continue a bit:

Off and on for a fair while, many of the bikes I rode were registered to my wife. I rode them much more than she did. She NEVER ever bloody ever rode my bikes (vertically challenged). Even when I almost never rode her bike/s, I always rode at least 5x as many km's per year on my own bike/s.

If that is a trend in the community (chicks owning bikes ridden by men and men riding more km's per annum), then the 11% who are chicks actually ride significantly fewer road miles than blokes and, on an accident per kilometre ridden statistical scale: chicks are WAY more likely to have an accident than blokes.

Any of you floosies need some lessons? I'm quite cheap ya know.

[mynameis]

Nice use of colours

[mattian]

You neglected to post the most important stats..... what percentage of those biker chicks were hot?

[Str8 Jacket]

Hell yeah mate, I totally agree! I should never have been allowed to get my licence, I mean I highsided at the 'circulate around the carpark so that I can see you can ride' bit before I started the BHS test started...

Lucky for NZ that I dont have a car licence. Just think of the damage that I could do!!! :devil2:

[YellowDog]

Guys! You are playing with fire here :)

[bogan]

Survival skills? Hell ladies, it looks like you all need lessons!

From Lula's link (http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx):



Of 110,000 registered bikes in NZ, 11% are owned by women.
Of that 11%, 26% are riding bikes over 750cc.
Women riders make up only 17% of all Motorcycle crashes.

So let me extrapolate: Only 11% of bike riders are chicks yet they have 17% of the accidents.

There are therefore 97,900 blokes on bikes, 12,100 chicks and an indeterminate number of transvestites, 5th sex's etc.

lets divide that down to an even 1000 overall by % to make the numbers easier to fathom. 110,000/110=1000

97900/110=890 blokes
12100/110=110 chicks

If there were say 1000 bike accidents per year amongst the total, then 830 of them would be by guys and 170 by chicks.

830/890=0.93258 accidents per bloke rider

110/110=1 accident per chick rider shudnt this be 170/110?

On that basis, chicks are 7.2% 61%MORE likely to have an accident than blokes

The obvious point therefore is that blokes are better riders

Thanks for that raw data Lula..........................chuckle

Lets continue a bit:

Off and on for a fair while, many of the bikes I rode were registered to my wife. I rode them much more than she did. She NEVER ever bloody ever rode my bikes (vertically challenged). Even when I almost never rode her bike/s, I always rode at least 5x as many km's per year on my own bike/s.

If that is a trend in the community (chicks owning bikes ridden by men and men riding more km's per annum), then the 11% who are chicks actually ride significantly fewer road miles than blokes and, on an accident per kilometre ridden statistical scale: chicks are WAY more likely to have an accident than blokes.

Any of you floosies need some lessons? I'm quite cheap ya know.

think your maths is a bit off, though i didnt read the article so may have missunderstood

[flame]

[COLOR=Orange]Survival skills? Hell ladies, it looks like you all need lessons!



....wow! and you have taken SO much interest in this why???????

Seems its a pile of horseshit in reality. I regularly ride with at least 8 chicks who all cover many many miles on the road(more than most sportbike riders I know) and yet Ive never seen/heard of them binning. Unlike 90% of the 80 or so males I regularly ride with who have binned and binned. Or is it just that more women tend to INSURE their rides??? Therefore the statistics are very clouded. Not to mention the amount of dudes Ive seen bin....then run and hide LOL

[howdamnhard]

Geee wheres all the girls hurling tomatoes :laugh::laugh: ? No bites at all how dissappointing.:jerry::jerry::jerry:

[MIXONE]

I have to wake up next to a woman every morning so I'll just :shutup:

[idleidolidyll]

Nice use of colours

it was for a mixed audience, i thought the colours suited

;)

[idleidolidyll]

Geee wheres all the girls hurling tomatoes :laugh::laugh: ? No bites at all how dissappointing.:jerry::jerry::jerry:

i'm sure they'll see it soon

[idleidolidyll]

You neglected to post the most important stats..... what percentage of those biker chicks were hot?

my apologies, going by the chicks i've seen take helmets off, about 11%...............but 17% are REALLY ugly

[idleidolidyll]

think your maths is a bit off, though i didnt read the article so may have missunderstood

no, i'm not a math genius but i'm pretty sure the numbers are about right

[dangerous]

Any of you floosies need some lessons? I'm quite cheap ya know.
Yeah well... ya only ever get what ya pay for :pinch:

[idleidolidyll]

....wow! and you have taken SO much interest in this why???????

Seems its a pile of horseshit in reality. I regularly ride with at least 8 chicks who all cover many many miles on the road(more than most sportbike riders I know) and yet Ive never seen/heard of them binning. Unlike 90% of the 80 or so males I regularly ride with who have binned and binned. Or is it just that more women tend to INSURE their rides??? Therefore the statistics are very clouded. Not to mention the amount of dudes Ive seen bin....then run and hide LOL

dear flame, personal anecdotes do not statistics make.

i've seen a dog hump a cat but that doesn't mean all dogs hump cats or that all cats enjoy dogs humping them

insurance is irrelevant unless you are trying to make a point BESIDE the fact that chicks are bloody dangerous on bikes

[bogan]

no, i'm not a math genius but i'm pretty sure the numbers are about right

you read the red highlighted bit i added (may have missed them cos of all the other orsm color usage)?

I get 61% more likely, which makes sense, 11% of women causing 17% of crashes, gonna be quite a few % more likely.

It does seem rather high, cud be survey population skew or summat. Mind you i dont know any women riders, just have to hope i dont get hit by one by the sound of it :dodge:

[idleidolidyll]

you read the red highlighted bit i added (may have missed them cos of all the other orsm color usage)?

I get 61% more likely, which makes sense, 11% of women causing 17% of crashes, gonna be quite a few % more likely.

It does seem rather high, cud be survey population skew or summat. Mind you i dont know any women riders, just have to hope i dont get hit by one by the sound of it :dodge:

I think you've forgotten to divide by the total number of riders.

mind you, when road km's travelled are factored in, I'd suggest you are probably closer to the mark

[Virago]

From Lula's link (http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx):

Linky no worky...

[idleidolidyll]

Linky no worky...

did Lula take it down?

I'll check again..................hold that thought a sec

[FJRider]

I think the numbers are a bit out. In most cases of joint ownership/insurance ... the male is usually listed first, and as such, those chicks seldom feature in these sort of statistics. Plus those whose bikes were purchased by partners for their (sole) use, but do not feature (was not put on) on ownership forms.

[idleidolidyll]

http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx

looks good to me

[flame]

dear flame, personal anecdotes do not statistics make.

i've seen a dog hump a cat but that doesn't mean all dogs hump cats or that all cats enjoy dogs humping them

insurance is irrelevant unless you are trying to make a point BESIDE the fact that chicks are bloody dangerous on bikes
Dear Idleidolidyll......so do you hump cats or dogs? or both? As it seems your would do much better at attracting them.

Ps....much statistical data is taken from insurance company claims in this respect. Many road crashes are not even recorded in any form or means due to non involvement of insurance companies nor the law. Therefore.......I conclude your ranting is that of a scarred man. Wanna come ride sometime? just don't bin it trying to keep up:moon:

[idleidolidyll]

I think the numbers are a bit out. In most cases of joint ownership/insurance ... the male is usually listed first, and as such, those chicks seldom feature in these sort of statistics. Plus those whose bikes were purchased by partners for their (sole) use, but do not feature (was not put on) on ownership forms.

conjecture my dear chap, we're talking statistics here; that was opinion

please do find some numbers though, i'm happy to be proven incorrect or better still, more correct

[bogan]

I think you've forgotten to divide by the total number of riders.

mind you, when road km's travelled are factored in, I'd suggest you are probably closer to the mark

nah bro, 1000 riders
110 gals
890 guys
1000 crashes
170 gals
830 guys

percantage chances of crash
170/110=1.54 gals
830/890=0.932 guys

difference = 0.61, or 61%

[Duke girl]

So does that also mean woman who use knives are dangerous as well.:crazy::argh:

[Virago]

http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx

looks good to me

Yeah that works.

Original link has ): on the end, making it invalid.

[idleidolidyll]

Dear Idleidolidyll......so do you hump cats or dogs? or both? As it seems your would do much better at attracting them.

woof!
i aint trying to attract em honey, i'm a fat balding old fart happy with his life and even happier with wife and grandkids

Ps....much statistical data is taken from insurance company claims in this respect. Many road crashes are not even recorded in any form or means due to non involvement of insurance companies nor the law (and your point is? that goes for blokes as much as chicks and may not change a thing). Therefore.......I conclude your ranting is that of a scarred man. Shucks yes, i got a scar right up the top of my groin, wanna see it? Wanna come ride sometime? just don't bin it trying to keep up:moon:

a ride? anytime baby, come out with the boys and gals on the SATNR, I'm almost regular

ouch!

looks like i hit THAT spot

ha! ha! ha!
:bash:

[Quasi]

Off and on for a fair while, many of the bikes I rode were registered to my wife. I rode them much more than she did. She NEVER ever bloody ever rode my bikes (vertically challenged). Even when I almost never rode her bike/s, I always rode at least 5x as many km's per year on my own bike/s.

Perhaps its these blokes such as yourself, hiding behind their wifes skirts, registering their bikes in wifeys name, then binning, that are skewing the above mentioned figures.:argh:

[flame]

Off and on for a fair while, many of the bikes I rode were registered to my wife. I rode them much more than she did. She NEVER ever bloody ever rode my bikes (vertically challenged). Even when I almost never rode her bike/s, I always rode at least 5x as many km's per year on my own bike/s.

Perhaps its these blokes such as yourself, hiding behind their wifes skirts, registering their bikes in wifeys name, then binning, that are skewing the above mentioned figures.:argh:

lol....for sure, Ive known a few of those......an ex of mine had two bikes rego'd in my name.....he binned them both!

[FJRider]

we're talking statistics here; that was opinion
please do find some numbers though, i'm happy to be proven incorrect or better still, more correct

It has always been my opinion that statistics prove whatever the person listing them wants to prove.

I would prefer you show/prove accuracy of your figures ... not just quoting an article in a magazine.

[flame]

a ride? anytime baby, come out with the boys and gals on the SATNR, I'm almost regular

ouch!

looks like i hit THAT spot

ha! ha! ha!
:bash:

Sweet! Im up your way in November....See ya on the start grid at Puke:woohoo:

[idleidolidyll]

nah bro, 1000 riders
110 gals
890 guys
1000 crashes
170 gals
830 guys

percantage chances of crash
170/110=1.54 gals
830/890=0.932 guys

difference = 0.61, or 61%

you've got your numbers the wrong way around

should be:
170 crashes amongst 110 gals=1.5454 recurring crashes per chick
890 crashes amongst 830 guys=1.0723 crashes per guy

therefore chicks have about 45% more crashes than guys

ok, that's a way to sum it up i'm happy with

ha! ha! point stands apparently

[idleidolidyll]

Sweet! Im up your way in November....See ya on the start grid at Puke:woohoo:

all my races are in the past lady, i have nothing to prove to you or anyone on a race track. you might learn that lesson one day.

besides, i'm a fat balding grandad with a damaged spine (mountainbike accident) and i ride a gutless 60hp chook chaser: if i beat you, you'd have to commit hare krishna; if you beat me i point to the above stats.

you lose either way

however, you can come around and look at my cups and you're always welcome to listen to my exhaust note on the SATNR

[idleidolidyll]

Perhaps its these blokes such as yourself, hiding behind their wifes skirts, registering their bikes in wifeys name, then binning, that are skewing the above mentioned figures.:argh:

somehow i doubt that accident gender stats are recorded by looking up the owner of the bike

i'd take a wild stab and say they take a peek under your panties or undies.....................nice try tho

[idleidolidyll]

It has always been my opinion that statistics prove whatever the person listing them wants to prove.

I would prefer you show/prove accuracy of your figures ... not just quoting an article in a magazine.

duh! they're not MY statistics.

in fact, they seem to have been offered by a chick and THAT would be the point don't you think?

[bogan]

you've got your numbers the wrong way around

should be:
170 crashes amongst 110 gals=1.5454 recurring crashes per chick
890 crashes amongst 830 guys=1.0723 crashes per guy

therefore chicks have about 45% more crashes than guys

ok, that's a way to sum it up i'm happy with

ha! ha! point stands apparently

well 890 is number of guys and 830 is crashes so pretty sure i had it the right way round.

Goes to show how easy it is to manipulate stats to say what ever is required. What we need is some stats of riding enjoyment, ie what demographic enjoys riding the most, my money would be on ALL OF THEM :yes: , cos riding is just that awesome, chance of crashing is a price I can live with.

[Argyle]

I think allot of women ride 250cc and never had any proper motorcycle training. So they brake with the pedal brake and don't know how to use the bike properly.
But then it said allot of the women drove a bike over 750cc.

But anyway, no one should be allowed to drive a bike without proper training. Not even a 250cc bike. Most a Moped on 50cc maybe!

[Str8 Jacket]

But anyway, no one should be allowed to drive a bike without proper training.

I would definately be interested in learning how to drive a bike.

[FJRider]

duh! they're not MY statistics.



You are the one quoting them, seemingly because you wish to believe them ... therefore they are your statistics.

I stand behind my post. I have little(no) belief in the (claimed) accuracy of statistics ... and the "point" of your original post escapes me ...

[idleidolidyll]

oh come on! this is a troll thread, no sucking up for points or sexual favours ;)

you've made the chicks look even worse than my math after all!

[idleidolidyll]

You are the one quoting them, seemingly because you wish to believe them ... therefore they are your statistics.

I stand behind my post. I have little(no) belief in the (claimed) accuracy of statistics ... and the "point" of your original post escapes me ...

whoosh!

rotflmfao!

[Virago]

...if i beat you, you'd have to commit hare krishna...

What, shave her head, wear a robe, and go busking in malls...?

Still, better than ritualistic suicide I suppose...

[idleidolidyll]

I would definately be interested in learning how to drive a bike.

har! are you one of those trolls lula told me about? or are you a bloke in a dress?

:eek5:

send hornyhornet a pm, ya might get lucky

[MsKABC]

Statistics are like bikinis - they are more interesting for what they don't reveal, rather than for what they do.

I would have said that women riders are safer in many respects in the same way that women drivers are safer. There is no testosterone coursing through the right hand, for a start.

[Rashika]

Of 110,000 registered bikes in NZ, 11% are owned by women.
Of that 11%, 26% are riding bikes over 750cc.
Women riders make up only 17% of all Motorcycle crashes.

So let me extrapolate: Only 11% of bike riders are chicks yet they have 17% of the accidents.

See now theres your first assumption, assuming the owners = riders.
Those 2 stats could actually be totally unrelated, i.e. i dont have to own or register a bike to crash it, just have access to it.
So if i rent a bike and crash it I dont fall under that 11% of female ownership, cos I didn't own it, simply borrowed it for a bit, but I would still have found my way into the crash stats.
If I borrowed a mates bike, then flipped it as i wheelied down the road, I would still be in those crash stats.
Do nifty50s come in under bike registration or car? I can never remember.

Stats are funny things, so easy to flip around to suit your point of view, and really mean absolutely nothing without context.

...and we all know III is just after a shit stir, cos chick riders are far better than their male counterparts ;)

[skidMark]

Chick is more likely to report a lowside etc, usually less mechanical knowledge etc... (not meant to offend) so they report all accidents... most gys i know have a lowside... and are like... screw it, spraycan, it's all good!

Also alot of chicks ride scooters to uni etc... and cant ride to save themselves... these also get counted as motorcycle usually... not sure if appliccable in this case...

[idleidolidyll]

Statistics are like bikinis - they are more interesting for what they don't reveal, rather than for what they do.

I would have said that women riders are safer in many respects in the same way that women drivers are safer. There is no testosterone coursing through the right hand, for a start.

so given that your post says stats are more interesting for what they don't say, exactly how do you draw that statpinion from them if not from pure non statistical opinion?

mars and venus; i don't fathom your reasoning; please elucidate

[davebullet]

indecision or the wrong decision are the differet causes of accidents. Men make more wrong decisions, women are more indecisive when motoring. Just observe women at round-a-bouts. They miss openings. Just observe guys at round-a-bouts - they gun it when they should leave it.

[MsKABC]

so given that your post says stats are more interesting for what they don't say, exactly how do you draw that statpinion from them if not from pure non statistical opinion?

mars and venus; i don't fathom your reasoning; please elucidate

Don't get your panties in a bunch. All I'm saying is that statistics can be used to say anything you want and they usually don't tell the whole story.

For example, I could say that a KB member with 1247 posts to their name and a blue repmeter most talk a whole lot more shit than another KB member with 550-odd posts and a green repmeter. This interpretation of the statistics might be completely erroneous however. :Pokey:

[idleidolidyll]

See now theres your first assumption, assuming the owners = riders.

nah, as i mention later, I rode some of my wifes bikes more than she did.

Those 2 stats could actually be totally unrelated, i.e. i dont have to own or register a bike to crash it, just have access to it.

could be indeed but those are probably what the beurocrats in the beehive pay attention to.

a problem that's bigger: unregistered bike accidents sour the numbers even more: motocrossers, farmers etc

So if i rent a bike and crash it I dont fall under that 11% of female ownership, cos I didn't own it, simply borrowed it for a bit, but I would still have found my way into the crash stats.

indeed, and if you did just that we wouldn't be surprised given the stats.............;)

If I borrowed a mates bike, then flipped it as i wheelied down the road, I would still be in those crash stats.

and if you did just that we wouldn't be surprised given the stats.............;)

Do nifty50s come in under bike registration or car? I can never remember.

sorry dear, you'll have to talk to the man about that, i'm just commenting on what some chick offered as stats

Stats are funny things, so easy to flip around to suit your point of view, and really mean absolutely nothing without context.

hell yes! context: chicks on bikes have more accidents per km than blokes on bikes and probably per km too

...and we all know III is just after a shit stir, cos chick riders are far better than their male counterparts ;)

Hoo Meee?
:sweatdrop :gob:

[idleidolidyll]

Don't get your panties in a bunch. All I'm saying is that statistics can be used to say anything you want and they usually don't tell the whole story.

For example, I could say that a KB member with 1247 posts to their name and a blue repmeter most talk a whole lot more shit than another KB member with 550-odd posts and a green repmeter. This interpretation of the statistics might be completely erroneous however. :Pokey:

my panties aint in a bunch, they're still wrapped around the mrs fanny

i'm havin a great time with this one, chuckle

[MsKABC]

i'm havin a great time with this one, chuckle

Well, you know what they say about small things. :yawn:

[idleidolidyll]

indecision or the wrong decision are the differet causes of accidents. Men make more wrong decisions, women are more indecisive when motoring. Just observe women at round-a-bouts. They miss openings. Just observe guys at round-a-bouts - they gun it when they should leave it.

wot no bodee is sed yett iz thatt chiks mite hav les serius accerdints then bloks

ime disapoyntitted

[idleidolidyll]

Well, you know what they say about small things. :yawn:

hel yess, thatz uh preddy smal poste yoo jus maid

[PrincessBandit]

my apologies, going by the chicks i've seen take helmets off, about 11%...............but 17% are REALLY ugly

But we have way sexier arses than you guys.


Chick is more likely to report a lowside etc, usually less mechanical knowledge etc... (not meant to offend) so they report all accidents... most gys i know have a lowside... and are like... screw it, spraycan, it's all good!


That's a good point. I am happy to accept that some women may disagree with me I would suspect that we're more likely to report accidents than blokes, and we probably do have differing ideas on assessing the "severity" of the results.

[idleidolidyll]

But we have way sexier arses than you guys.

Hell yes!, well some of you do anyway.

gotta go folks, wifey's all hot and gettin nikked

might come back and soil the keyboard later

its been real :bash:

[Cheshire Cat]

kiss my ass :bleh:

[flame]

all my races are in the past lady, i have nothing to prove to you or anyone on a race track. you might learn that lesson one day.

besides, i'm a fat balding grandad with a damaged spine (mountainbike accident) and i ride a gutless 60hp chook chaser: if i beat you, you'd have to commit hare krishna; if you beat me i point to the above stats.

you lose either way

however, you can come around and look at my cups and you're always welcome to listen to my exhaust note on the SATNR
Hmm fat and bald and apparently retired. Perhaps its time you stopped bitching about how dangerous us chicks are on the road and bought yourself a mobility scooter so you'd keep out of our way:bye:

[idleidolidyll]

well, it's more than 30 seconds later and mrs idle is happy............................

Lies, damn lies and statistics:

19. Motorcycle riders between the ages of 16 and 24 are significantly over-represented in accidents; motorcycle riders between the ages of 30 and 50 are significantly under represented. Although the majority of the accident-involved motorcycle riders are male (96%), the female motorcycle riders are significantly over represented in the accident data.

And this is from septic tank land where hogglies and motorways are the norm: probly different here where hogglies are less representative and twisty potholed roads covered in gravel without warning signs are 'normal'
http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

of course i did frame the google query to support my argument..................snigger

[idleidolidyll]

Hmm fat and bald and apparently retired. Perhaps its time you stopped bitching about how dangerous us chicks are on the road and bought yourself a mobility scooter so you'd keep out of our way:bye:

no, not retired, just a little 'tarded: i ride orange ya know

i gots me wunna dem moblitee scootaz, it's gotta RC8 mota, wanna sit on my lap sweetie?

[Goblin]

Heh! Count down to PD....




Im off to watch The Perfect Vagina!

[Cheshire Cat]

Heh! Count down to PD....




Im off to watch The Perfect Vagina!

AWWWW!!!! tape it for me!!! haha

[idleidolidyll]

More lies? and statistics:

must be eh, cause we all KNOW chicks are, well girls when it comes to bike riding

Better Hand/eye Coordination of Male Drivers Reduces Accidents

*

Males score 42% higher than females in hand/eye coordination events like springboard and platform diving.
*

The lower hand/eye coordination skills of females doubles their likelihood of having a fatal traffic accident.
*

10,573 more traffic fatalities and 428,484 more non-fatal accidents each year are caused by the lower hand/eye coordination skills of females.
*

If all drivers had a safety record equivalent to female drivers, there would be 39% more traffic accidents annually.
*

If all drivers nationwide had the same traffic safety record as male passenger car drivers, there would be 21,795 fewer traffic fatalities in the US annually.

this one's from a bunch of raving christians; gotta be dodgy info huh
http://christianparty.net/mensafety.htm

[idleidolidyll]

Heh! Count down to PD....




Im off to watch The Perfect Vagina!

i don't believe there is such a thing and i demand i check em all.................

[koba]

[COLOR="Yellow"]830/890=0.93258 accidents per bloke rider

110/110=1 accident per chick rider

On that basis, chicks are 7.2% MORE likely to have an accident than blokes



Can't be arsed reading your wind up thread but these statistics look like they show that BIKES are dangerous.

That really says that all licenced motorcyclists are likely to crash sometime.

I'm sure that someone else will have covered it and I'm sure that you also know that this will cover reported statistics too.

I've had many many offs on bikes but only two would be in those stats.

Sounds more like a good argument for wearing good gear to me...

[idleidolidyll]

But seriously folks:

This one looks like a good resource on the subject of we bike riders, safety and what can be done about it:

http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/pdfs/safety/mcsafety2.pdf

and on another note:
Why did man invent pillion seats and sidecars?
So chicks could ride in safety of course!

[davebullet]

That's a good point. I am happy to accept that some women may disagree with me I would suspect that we're more likely to report accidents than blokes, and we probably do have differing ideas on assessing the "severity" of the results.

Because guys have ego problems.. too embarrassing to admit you can't ride a bike and bin it as Flame said...

[bogan]

I am reminded of a time a gal caused me to fall off my bike, i didnt know her, it wasnt her fault, and i dont think she even noticed. But my statistics show that good looking females on two wheeled iron horses (well it was a scooter) contribute to 100% of known service station bike bins.

gotta love statistics

[sondela]

Meh, I'm such a good rider that I negate any and all statistics merely by the fact of being on a (very sexy) bike... :innocent:

[Mr Merde]

I am astounded at how many of you rose to take the bait.

An ovious troll and so many took it hook line and sinker.

III I've known you for a long, long time and it still amazes me how you can endear people to you with just a small little prod to their sensibilities or their egos.

Maybe its because this is what they have come to expect from you on this site and they are all just straining at the bit to run you down.

Anyway, keep it up, I really enjoy these threads. Ther replies from the sanctimonious and politically correct always brighten my day.

Merde

[Indiana_Jones]

You know your brother loves you deep down Idle.

-Indy

[idleidolidyll]

"III I've known you for a long, long time and it still amazes me how you can endear people to you with just a small little prod to their sensibilities or their egos."

it's a talent i'm quite proud of. some people take themselves far too seriously

"Maybe its because this is what they have come to expect from you on this site and they are all just straining at the bit to run you down."

a great pity most just don't have what it takes, i hold great respect for intelligent opponents who can string together a rational argument..................and bugger all respect to the rest.
as you know, woolly headed thinking makes me rotflmfao

"I am astounded at how many of you rose to take the bait.
An ovious troll and so many took it hook line and sinker."

I'm not

[idleidolidyll]

You know your brother loves you deep down Idle.

-Indy

mate; we're a tribe, the irish, we stick together like flies on shit

btw: there's at least one cuzzie, and a mrs registered on this site too; with around 150 1st cuzzies, there's probably even a few here who don't know they're cuzzies

[crazyhorse]

[QUOTE=idleidolidyll;1129294886][COLOR=Orange]Survival skills? Hell ladies, it looks like you all need lessons!
/QUOTE]

Well, I've been riding 12 years and never had an off - so seeing you've never ridden with me, really don't think you can judge every chick who rides against your statistics - I seem to know plenty of guys who have come off not once, or twice, but heaps of times - and I ride with the fastest group in HB and am often first to arrive......

so thanks for the offer of a lesson - but maybe some of us chicks could give you guys some lessons...... :woohoo:

[idleidolidyll]

I'm not judging, i'm merely offering a study and watching people get all upset thinking the stats are mine

the people who collected and collated the stats are judging, you just judged me.

personal anecdotes are essentially irrelevant in the face of a serious study. what is the margin of error in your stat? what is the statistical probability that assumptions drawn are correct?

i bet the study Lula offered in that article has answers to those questions

the first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging that it exists

[Hinny]

The Jamaican government did a study to see why there are so many deadly motorcycle accidents in Jamaica.

I think you'd be surprised at the results.

[Hinny]

Did you notice?
Nobody is wearing a helmet.

[idleidolidyll]

chicks on bikes = danger in ganjaland too it seems

mind you, they do have nice arses

nice pics

[idleidolidyll]

file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Trillion/Desktop/womanwearshelmebackwards_fs.jpgPerhaps this is why chicks shouldn't ride bikes

[Trudes]

The first step to proving to idiots that they are idiots is by ignoring their idiotic ramblings.

[jrandom]

The very finest trolls are always those that reflect the troller's own actual opinion and that make demonstrably correct assertions.

We are in the presence of a master.

[MsKABC]

A master baiter alright.

[jrandom]

A master baiter alright.

He doesn't need to master bait with your mouth wrapped so firmly around his, er, hook.

[u4ea]

So does that also mean woman who use knives are dangerous as well.:crazy::argh:
Im better with throwing tomatoes:dodge:


I would definately be interested in learning how to drive a bike.
;)


Chick is more likely to report a lowside etc, usually less mechanical knowledge etc... (not meant to offend) so they report all accidents... most gys i know have a lowside... and are like... screw it, spraycan, it's all good!

Skiddy you never offend!:shake:


my panties aint in a bunch, they're still wrapped around the mrs fanny
i'm havin a great time with this one, chuckle

Your not a good fibber .. get her panties off yur head :sick:

I ride my bike :ride:like I play pool..sometimes it is just about the fun of it and not about point scoring. Might win some , might lose some..and I know I need more practice at pool..:crazy::wait:

[Mr Merde]

The very finest trolls are always those that reflect the troller's own actual opinion and that make demonstrably correct assertions.

We are in the presence of a master.

I could have told you that, I've know III for 50 years and he learnt from a master, his dad.

Taught from an early age that people take themselves too seriously most of the time and the best way to make them stop and think was to expouse the opposite to their beliefs.

I remember watching III's father sit patiently through a long tirade from a group of Mormon missionairies that knocked on his door.

All this with the agreement that if he listened to them first they would listen to him afterwards.

When these very religious persons were finished, III's dad bought out a book on "Devil Worship" and proceeded to lecture them on the benifits. They left very quickly and never came back.

III's dad btw was a very staunch Catholic.

There is nothing quite so satisfying to III's family as a good discussion and someone always had to take the opposite view.

The idea being that how could you in all honesty take a stand for something unless you understood the other side to the discussion. Isnt this the principle behind a good debating session. There must be two sides to an argument and someone must talk for them both.

[Lilly2w]

it's their feathery little Fingers, bad clutch control.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZrnQv0JoT2w&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZrnQv0JoT2w&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[gatch]

With trolling skills like this you should run a charter service..

[Chrislost]

Survival skills? Hell ladies, it looks like you all need lessons!

From Lula's link http://www.motorcycletrader.co.nz/View/Article/Heels-on-Wheels-Ladies-Night/837.aspx



Of 110,000 registered bikes in NZ, 11% are owned by women.
Of that 11%, 26% are riding bikes over 750cc.
Women riders make up only 17% of all Motorcycle crashes.

So let me extrapolate: Only 11% of bike riders are chicks yet they have 17% of the accidents.

There are therefore 97,900 blokes on bikes, 12,100 chicks and an indeterminate number of transvestites, 5th sex's etc.

lets divide that down to an even 1000 overall by % to make the numbers easier to fathom. 110,000/110=1000

97900/110=890 blokes
12100/110=110 chicks

If there were say 1000 bike accidents per year amongst the total, then 830 of them would be by guys and 170 by chicks.

830/890=0.93258 accidents per bloke rider

170/110=1.545 accident per chick rider

On that basis, chicks are almost 70% MORE likely to have an accident than blokes

The obvious point therefore is that blokes are better riders

Thanks for that raw data Lula..........................chuckle

Lets continue a bit:

Off and on for a fair while, many of the bikes I rode were registered to my wife. I rode them much more than she did. She NEVER ever bloody ever rode my bikes (vertically challenged). Even when I almost never rode her bike/s, I always rode at least 5x as many km's per year on my own bike/s.

If that is a trend in the community (chicks owning bikes ridden by men and men riding more km's per annum), then the 11% who are chicks actually ride significantly fewer road miles than blokes and, on an accident per kilometre ridden statistical scale: chicks are WAY more likely to have an accident than blokes.

Any of you floosies need some lessons? I'm quite cheap ya know.

aparently guys can't multi-task...

aparently girls can and do...

bikes take 100% of your attention to ride without fucking up...

[idleidolidyll]

III's dad btw was a very staunch Catholic.


Nope, in fact if it wasn't for the old man saying his kids had gotten enough bloody religion when I was about 10, I might be as brainwashed as all the other subscribers to the madness and control of organised religion. He may have had his own faith but he certainly wasn't a rabid or staunch kaffalik.

That's one of his greatest gifts to me; the strength and ability to stand up and say that belief in religion as espoused by the Kaffaliks etc is bogus and destructive.

[idleidolidyll]

aparently guys can't multi-task...

aparently girls can and do...

bikes take 100% of your attention to ride without fucking up...

that old chestnut: what a crock of shit.

if you believe that nonsense then you've already given up and lost.

[NighthawkNZ]

So if there was only one female rider and then she so happen to have an accident... then the female stats will say 100% of female riders have accidents...

They have the same chance and same percentage of accidents, its a matter of time when the have that accident, stats can be made to say anything, and the less female riders there the higher that stat will look.

[James Deuce]

I saw a chick crash once. She crashed on the same patch of diesel I did. Made me feel less of a loser to see someone else crash and her flying "W" was awesome to behold.

[Owl]

I saw a chick crash once. She crashed on the same patch of diesel I did. Made me feel less of a loser to see someone else crash and her flying "W" was awesome to behold.

The "Flying W" is always awesome when it's someone else!:laugh:

[James Deuce]

I thought I was going to get some, but then I remembered that my wife was on the back so I ducked.

[rosie631]

The "Flying W" is always awesome when it's someone else!:laugh:

Wot's the 'flying W'??

[idleidolidyll]

So if there was only one female rider and then she so happen to have an accident... then the female stats will say 100% of female riders have accidents...

Nope, any scientist or researcher worthy of the title would chuck the study out as ridiculous with a sample as small is 1, that's an inane argument

They have the same chance and same percentage of accidents, its a matter of time when the have that accident, stats can be made to say anything, and the less female riders there the higher that stat will look.

that's not what the stats say and frankly, if there are differences in spatial awareness between males and females, as has recently been suggested in science studies; then there ARE likely to be differences in the accident stats between genders.

[NighthawkNZ]

that's not what the stats say and frankly, if there are differences in spatial awareness between males and females, as has recently been suggested in science studies; then there ARE likely to be differences in the accident stats between genders.


yes when guys have accidents... we do it properly and its not really accident most of the time it could have been avoided

[James Deuce]

Wot's the 'flying W'??

It's when you fly through the air, torso upright, legs spread and feet above shoulder height. Looks like this:

\|/

Your arse is the bottom of the "W".

[monkeymcbean]

It's when you fly through the air, torso upright, legs spread and feet above shoulder height. Looks like this:

\|/

Your arse is the bottom of the "W".

Ah better get some roomier leather pants then!

[idleidolidyll]

yes when guys have accidents... we do it properly and its not really accident most of the time it could have been avoided

yawn, more opinion with nothing to back it up

[Sollyboy]

maybe its how the statistic is gathered , if they are gathered at the point of medical treatments maybe the stats are higher for the gals because they get treatment when a blokes woulden, instead the blokes will drink a bottle of JDs and text all his mates to say he crashed but is to rugged to go to hospitals

[Nasty]

I owned grubs bike ... does that mean that it is recorded as his accident or one that happened on my bike?

[idleidolidyll]

maybe its how the statistic is gathered , if they are gathered at the point of medical treatments maybe the stats are higher for the gals because they get treatment when a blokes woulden, instead the blokes will drink a bottle of JDs and text all his mates to say he crashed but is to rugged to go to hospitals

that's the way to think about these things.
When looking at studies and the stats they produce you should always ask who did the study and what their motives might be. It may be that they were actually looking for figures to support an opinion and fiddled the test to make it so. It may be a study funded by someone with a vested interest in the outcome. It may be a study by a bored student looking for a passing mark in an exam.

[idleidolidyll]

I owned grubs bike ... does that mean that it is recorded as his accident or one that happened on my bike?

I doubt that the accident stats are linked directly with the owner of the bike.
All that seems to be happening is that the number of registered bikes is being compared to the number of accidents and seperated by gender.
That's probably how ACC do stats for car accidents too.

[Bass]

that's the way to think about these things.
When looking at studies and the stats they produce you should always ask who did the study and what their motives might be. It may be that they were actually looking for figures to support an opinion and fiddled the test to make it so. It may be a study funded by someone with a vested interest in the outcome. It may be a study by a bored student looking for a passing mark in an exam.

Sad but true.
Sad because properly applied statistics is the most powerful tool for investigating how the world behaves, that I have ever been handed.
The thing is that you have to play by the rules.
If it's not completely rigorous, it's a waste of time.
I have seen applied statistics used for investigating industrial processes where up to 22 variables were manipulated simultaneously, with completely meaningful results at the end.

BTW having read this whole thread, I can't help but wonder if your arms aren't brown right up to the shoulders.

[NZsarge]

The "Flying W" is always awesome when it's someone else!:laugh:


I thought I was going to get some, but then I remembered that my wife was on the back so I ducked.

Must spread rep around before... blah blah.

[Mr Merde]

......
BTW having read this whole thread, I can't help but wonder if your arms aren't brown right up to the shoulders.

I seem to remember somewhere in this thread he admitted it was a complete wind up. This little overlooked fact seems to have escaped a number of those who have subsequently posted replies.

I get the distinct impression that III is the person most likely on this board to provoke a shitstorm of replies.

I reckon there is a lot of KB'ers out there just waiting for him to post something so they can start thumping their chests, engage in pissing contests and pumping up their egos.

Not that I am complaining. Its extremely entertaining.

[pritch]

The OP looked sort of interesting. (There is a lower theshold of interest in work time...) I couldn't be bothered with the naf colours however.

[Bass]

I get the distinct impression that III is the person most likely on this board to provoke a shitstorm of replies.

Not that I am complaining. Its extremely entertaining.

Poking the monkeys with a long stick, eh?
He's quite good at it and as Jrandom pointed out, the best stick is one that has just enough factual content to sound plausible and so trigger "Defence Mode".

[The Pastor]

I bet a large % of the women who crash are asian

[idleidolidyll]

I seem to remember somewhere in this thread he admitted it was a complete wind up. This little overlooked fact seems to have escaped a number of those who have subsequently posted replies.

I get the distinct impression that III is the person most likely on this board to provoke a shitstorm of replies.

I reckon there is a lot of KB'ers out there just waiting for him to post something so they can start thumping their chests, engage in pissing contests and pumping up their egos.

Not that I am complaining. Its extremely entertaining.

i've pissed over the great wall of china and the arch de froggyland, i've pissed on dumb amerikans and fascist tossers, i've pissed so fuckin high jesus had to look up to see it curve down again: i always welcome a challenge

girls are crashers, even my wife admits blokes are just better riders and some here know how hard it is for her to EVER admit i'm right

who's next?

[idleidolidyll]

I bet a large % of the women who crash are asian

i bet most of the women who crash have no balls................

[idleidolidyll]

yes, MOST but not all..........

[The Pastor]

these statistics are probably why there are NO hot sane biker chicks. Jrandoms touched on this before. Hot chicks simply just cant ride bikes, they crash and die, leaving only the manly chicks around (they have to be manly as men dont crash)

[Lula]

83 percent of all injured motorcyclists, and 90 percent of motorcyclist deaths, are males.
Source: Ministry of Transport, Motorcycle Crash Factsheet 2008

[mstriumph]

all my races are in the past lady, .............................

besides, i'm a fat balding grandad with a damaged spine (mountainbike accident) and i ride a gutless 60hp chook chaser:.....................

however, you can come around and look at my cups ..................

will you have finished crying into them by the time she gets there?? :innocent:


(sorry - couldn't resist it ........... carry on!)

[alley cat]

Yup im a mad dangerous rider. If i was worried about safety id be driving a 4wd. So keep paying your acc levys kids. Girls just wanna have fun. :woohoo: No offence to all you other lovelys who im sure ride beautifully.:innocent:

[davebullet]

Remember the 3 types of lies people... there's lies, damn lies and then there are statistics!

[Danae]

This thread is TL;DR

[Hinny]

Remember the 3 types of lies people... there's lies, damn lies and then there are statistics!

I thought the three lies were:


I love you.
The cheque's in the mail.
I won't come in your mouth.

[MarkH]

But we have way sexier arses than you guys.

Not enough love here for this statement - this is the truest thing stated on this thread by a long way!

[MarkH]

More lies? and statistics:

must be eh, cause we all KNOW chicks are, well girls when it comes to bike riding

Better Hand/eye Coordination of Male Drivers Reduces Accidents

*

Males score 42% higher than females in hand/eye coordination events like springboard and platform diving.
*

The lower hand/eye coordination skills of females doubles their likelihood of having a fatal traffic accident.
*

10,573 more traffic fatalities and 428,484 more non-fatal accidents each year are caused by the lower hand/eye coordination skills of females.
*

If all drivers had a safety record equivalent to female drivers, there would be 39% more traffic accidents annually.
*

If all drivers nationwide had the same traffic safety record as male passenger car drivers, there would be 21,795 fewer traffic fatalities in the US annually.

this one's from a bunch of raving christians; gotta be dodgy info huh
http://christianparty.net/mensafety.htm

Hmmm, could be true I suppose. But then again I don't believe the accidents statistics contain enough vital info to draw accurate conclusions from.

For me to reliably draw conclusions from the stats I would want to know how many hours/kms are travelled by any particular group vs the number of accidents (broken down by seriousness). How many kms are ridden by women every year? How many kms are ridden by men every year? How many accidents to men have? How many accidents do women have? Without accurate answers to these questions how can we say who has the worse accident record?

The stats are not complete enough to know fuck all!

[idleidolidyll]

and if you'd read back you'd have seen that I asked the same questions

accidents per kilometre and the info to determine who commissioned the study and what their possible motives might be

[MarkH]

and if you'd read back you'd have seen that I asked the same questions

accidents per kilometre and the info to determine who commissioned the study and what their possible motives might be

But has that info been collected - I don't think that it has, so the stats we need are stats that don't exist! So what we can do is guestimate the likely values, but we don't have and can't have the accuracy we would really like.

[idleidolidyll]

You could probably find it if you cared.

The original point of this thread (besides the obvious troll) was to point out Lula's wee error in logic re the stats actually being complimentary to Shewis.

It's been fun though

[caseye]

I'm betting you are in for an ear bashing when she catches up with you on Thursday night! Been a great read.

[flame]

and if you'd read back you'd have seen that I asked the same questions

accidents per kilometre and the info to determine who commissioned the study and what their possible motives might be

like we actually give a rats arse. LOL. We're women, you'll never understand our motives.

[sondela]

Actually being dangerous isn't such a bad reputation to have, bad and dangerous.. awesome!
my friends think I'm awesome, I think Flame is way more awesome than I am..
It just gets better.. :D

[mstriumph]

I, too, am awesome ... in a shy, modest sort of way :banana:

[mstriumph]

like we actually give a rats arse. LOL. We're women, you'll never understand our motives.

too right!!

[and, always remembering the the Rules of the Sisterhood state that, if any man ever comes CLOSE to understanding them, we are obliged to CHANGE THEM IMMEDIATELY!!] :rolleyes:

[sondela]

Indeed! Awesome! :clap:

[idleidolidyll]

like we actually give a rats arse. LOL. We're women, you'll never understand our motives.

no problem; we're men, we'll never really give a damn as long as we get some ass

[Hinny]

Not a rat's arse though!

[idleidolidyll]

No, not a rats arse indeed.

Of course the thing most older women fear is the younger woman.

Irrespective of above post by women suggesting that we even give a rats arse about their motives: the fact seems to be that chicks age badly and older blokes find it relatively easy to hook up with a younger one when the old one stops putting out or starts to look like the back end of a donkey.

In the end then, it's probably worth the money to split the assets and dosh down the middle and go off to find some horny arse elsewhere. At that stage, who really cares what their motives are/were?

Am I now expecting flames?

Chuckle

[Hinny]

go off to find some horny arse elsewhere.

Therein lies the real danger of chicks on bikes.
Luring lecherous fat bastards away from their aging spouses
Like these young chicks wearing nothing more than leather jackets

[idleidolidyll]

Therein lies the real danger of chicks on bikes.
Luring lecherous fat bastards away from their aging spouses
Like these young chicks wearing nothing more than leather jackets

that's not a danger; that's a bonus

BTW: those chicks just aint my type

[jrandom]

it's probably worth the money to split the assets and dosh down the middle and go off to find some horny arse elsewhere... Am I now expecting flame's?

Oh, I dunno. You'll probably have to take her out to dinner first.

[idleidolidyll]

I guess I must add to that last post in light of Flames post and support from her fellow babes (or not):

You may think that changing your motives is clever and that you are fooling your man. The truth is that most of the time guys expect women to be somewhat devious and as long as they are getting some; they put up with it and pretend not to know.
Men have always understood womens' motives; we just don't care.
However, after a lifetime of the lies inherent in 'changing motives', the woman herself is quite likely to become more and more paranoid and harder to live with. In the end the very fact that they are devious aliens from the planet Pluto will tend to push the lucky guy into the arms of that younger woman and he won't look back with any regret when he finally dumps the old dragon for that 25 year old. He will just laugh when you waffle on about his 'mid life crisis'.

[MotoKuzzi]

The inherent flaw in that logic is that the younger new spouse eventually sees the old fool in the same light. No fool like an old fool etc.:(

[idleidolidyll]

so you're saying they both win?

sounds damn fine to me

[Hinny]

And where does one find hot 25yr olds that would be interested in overweight balding semi crippled old farts with a high opinion of themselves?
maybe La la land.

[PrincessBandit]

And where does one find hot 25yr olds that would be interested in overweight balding semi crippled old farts with a high opinion of themselves?
maybe La la land.

Hollywood? Playboy mansion? yep La La land. Oh, and having tons and tons of money would probably be a prerequisite which rules most out. What hot young thing in her right mind would be interested without a healthy payout somewhere along the line? (Unless they're Anna Nicole, who of course, married for love).....

[Hinny]

Hollywood? Playboy mansion? yep La La land. Oh, and having tons and tons of money would probably be a prerequisite which rules most out. What hot young thing in her right mind would be interested without a healthy payout somewhere along the line? (Unless they're Anna Nicole, who of course, married for love).....

I guess there could be a payout at 'business time'.
25 years more experience ... oooh yeah baby!

'It only takes two minutes cos I'm so intense.' ha ha ha
<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WGOohBytKTU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

[idleidolidyll]

And where does one find hot 25yr olds that would be interested in overweight balding semi crippled old farts with a high opinion of themselves?
maybe La la land.

you shouldn't believe everything you read in print; that path leads to self deception and rage at what you think is true but isn't

[idleidolidyll]

Hollywood? Playboy mansion? yep La La land. Oh, and having tons and tons of money would probably be a prerequisite which rules most out. What hot young thing in her right mind would be interested without a healthy payout somewhere along the line? (Unless they're Anna Nicole, who of course, married for love).....

so why are older women so paranoid?

maybe you are missing something

[Hinny]

I like the story of the guy in divorce court being asked by the judge why would he leave the gracious lady seated before him for the wanton young hussey who is the co-respondent.
He replied "Your Honour, there is a difference between graceful acquiescence and enthusiastic co-operation".

[PrincessBandit]

so why are older women so paranoid?

maybe you are missing something

Oh, I don't think paranoid is quite the word. Cynical might be better.

Besides, us older ones can have just as many surprises up our sleeves too ya know. Experience teaches us a thing or two as well, not just enthusiasm :msn-wink:

[oldguy]

And where does one find hot 25yr olds that would be interested in overweight balding semi crippled old farts with a high opinion of themselves?
maybe La la land.
Fuck they are every where, they cost but you get what you pay for, and you don't get all that unwanted baggage that usually goes along with the live in.

Oh and the best thing is, for an extra $20 bucks she will tell you she loves you,
my favourite is, out of all my customers your the Best.:woohoo:

[buellbabe]

What a load of bollocks!

[MIXONE]

What a load of bollocks!

This is kb after all.surely you didn't expect intelligent,well informed musings.

[idleidolidyll]

nah, paranoid seems to fit often enough

[idleidolidyll]

Besides, us older ones can have just as many surprises up our sleeves too ya know. Experience teaches us a thing or two as well, not just enthusiasm :msn-wink:

please be a little more specific; we really want to know

[idleidolidyll]

Fuck they are every where, they cost but you get what you pay for, and you don't get all that unwanted baggage that usually goes along with the live in.

Oh and the best thing is, for an extra $20 bucks she will tell you she loves you,
my favourite is, out of all my customers your the Best.:woohoo:

in the long run its probably cheaper just to hire a hooker.............

[flame]

I guess I must add to that last post in light of Flames post and support from her fellow babes (or not):



Oops, sorry, Im BACK, been to busy buying another bike, this one's gonna make my ass look even better!!!! LOL

.......so ya might wanna try and keep up for a while:msn-wink:

[Hinny]

in the long run its probably cheaper just to hire a hooker.............

I once asked a hooker "How much?"
probably out the corner of my mouth like you are supposed to.
Well I thought that you were supposed to cos all the businessmen walking past seemed to do it that way.

So I said "How much?"

She replied "100, 200 or 500"

I said "Whaddya mean, 100, 200,or 500"
Perhaps slurring my words a little...

She replied
" Well for 100, you go.
For 200, I go,
and for 500...

you just hang on baby!"

[oldguy]

staying on topic, all the female riders that I have had the pleasure of riding with, (mind out of the gutter ) have all been very good riders, and some alot better than I.
They don't seam to get court up in the Ive got to keep up. like some male riders who ride outside there ability.
So statistically riders be it male or female who constantly ride out side there ability are more dangerous

Please ignore this post as I don't know what the F**k I'm on about.

:drinkup::drinkup::drinknsin

[Hinny]

I still think this is what makes chicks on bikes dangerous.
Especially if the guy she is riding with is going like the clappers and you are transfixed by the glorious arse on the back of his bike.

[idleidolidyll]

Please ignore this post as I don't know what the F**k I'm on about.
:drinkup::drinkup::drinknsin

Well said John!