Iam nz

[swbarnett]

Free advice is worth nothing.

Or less than nothing if the wrong advise is taken on board by those that can't be expected to know any better.

[James Deuce]

Or less than nothing if the wrong advise is taken on board by those that can't be expected to know any better.

If you've come here looking for advice, you've most definitely come to the wrong place.

[bogan]

If you've come here looking for advice, you've most definitely come to the wrong place.

Which nevertheless doesn't prevent it from happening, so bad advice can nevertheless be taken on board, lest it be exposed as such.

[swbarnett]

If you've come here looking for advice, you've most definitely come to the wrong place.

The thing is that the novices that don't know this are the ones that are in danger of being sent down the wrong track by others that know not of what they speak.

Also, if you have a vague idea of what you're looking for sifting through the garbage can produce some real gems.

[Gremlin]

Is it because most of us are blokes and want to fix the broken person's attitudes? Is it because cassina's attitude reflects horribly on the future of motorcycling? Is it because someone, somewhere isn't getting their eggs in the morning?

No, it's because we don't some poor novice to read they're drivel and take it as unoppsed gospel.

Yup, what he said. As long as both sides are presented, a newb should be able to at least gain some balanced understanding...

As far as I know, you will only get an I endorsement for classes of licence that you already previously hold. So a person with car and motorcycle licences, will be allowed to teach both.. If they only have the car licence, then that is all they can teach.. You would need to have previously held heavy goods, in order to teach the classes 2, 3, 4,5. I didn't have to pass any truck questions to get my endorsement. Just car and Motorcyc questions.

Follow that then folks, Tricia holds an I endorsement (amongst many other factors)... I don't

Just don't but it through Amazon or Book Suppository. Shipping will change from $12 to $32 after you've submitted your payment authorisation.

I bought from Fishpond (NZ site), which at least charges in NZ dollars, although they do drop ship from supplier (usually overseas).

If you've come here looking for advice, you've most definitely come to the wrong place.

Actually, there is some excellent information within KB, just have to sort out the drivel. At lot of good reviews, technical knowledge etc. Doing complex searches (hell, even some van stuff, which made me laugh) often yields KB results...

[James Deuce]

Seldom are both "sides" presented rationally, and I long ceased laughing about anything on this site when it became apparent that "advice" and bravado were leading to deaths.

Motorcycling is turning into a Nana activity for fluoro fetishists. In that context cassina's advice to never ever completely ride all the way around a corner because you'll fall off starts to look like part of the norm.

[GrayWolf]

Engraved on your headstone will be ... "It wasn't my fault" ...

first day on my course waaay back, Tim came in, introduced himself and the evenings discussion topic, and spouted a poem, something like...

here lies timothy wright,
a man who stood firm when he knew he was right,
he went round a corner and came into sight,
a car on the wrong side, that wasnt right,
Here lies Timothy Wright,
he still stood firm when he knew he was right,
even now he's still right, Dead Wright.....

[FJRider]

Or less than nothing if the wrong advise is taken on board by those that can't be expected to know any better.

Advice has no value if you cannot see any worth in it.


Hindsight can increase its value ... and can often lead to you giving the very advice you had ignored.



If I had a dollar for each time I had ...

[Gremlin]

So why would you consider their teaching to result in it being impossible to crash (as they claim) irrespective of who is at fault after passing their course?

Uh... I'm not exactly certain what you're trying to say? One thing I'm going to guess... try and find any course that claims it's impossible to crash. You're clearly not looking at any, because I've never seen one claim that, and I doubt there ever will be. There is no magic bullet.

I bet if someone hit you though their fault I am sure you would lose any thought of OWNING the crash if you were injured.

Owning the crash and owning your part are two separate points. In any crash, you're not going to learn a thing if you spend your time blaming the other side. While legally it may be their fault, you assess objectively and ask yourself (with your increased knowledge through training) if there was anything you could have done differently (ok, I should qualify, I mean reasonably, not, I shouldn't have got on the bike for another 10min) that would have changed the outcome.

[caspernz]

Advanced drivers use a way of driving called “The System” which is derived from the Police “Roadcraft” system of car control. The System of Car Control is a way of driving that allows the driver to approach all situations and negotiate all hazards in a methodical and flexible way that leaves nothing to luck or chance, therefore it will be safe.
The above quote is from the IAM website which I interpret to mean their training will make safe any hazard you confront? What they are trying to claim is in effect even a head on collison could be made safe with their training?

The principle of advanced driving is to make a situation as safe as practicable, you're taking it to an absolute level, which is no longer practicable. In essence if you apply the system in earnest, the vast majority of near misses will allow you to take evasive action. Not fail safe, but in several million clicks on various modes of transport, I for one can attest it works.

But hey, the mind is like a parachute, it needs to open before it can work...

[rambaldi]

Advanced drivers use a way of driving called “The System” which is derived from the Police “Roadcraft” system of car control. The System of Car Control is a way of driving that allows the driver to approach all situations and negotiate all hazards in a methodical and flexible way that leaves nothing to luck or chance, therefore it will be safe.
The above quote is from the IAM website which I interpret to mean their training will make safe any hazard you confront? What they are trying to claim is in effect even a head on collison could be made safe with their training?

I can't believe I am about to do this but:

What they are saying is that if you approach all situations with their system in mind you will be as safe as possible. Not that you are guaranteed to survive or anything like that. If a truck drives over you there isn't much that can help you. But maybe you won't get driven over in the first place if you follow their system. If you are aware of your surroundings, and what is happening. If you are aware of what is happening, you could drive around the on coming truck or stop out of the path of the truck or a bunch of other situation appropriate things.

[willytheekid]

But they say doing and passing their training course "WILL" make any hazard situation safe not just "as safe as possible".

...you can even borrow my coloring book if its gonna help in ANY fuckin way

[bogan]

But they say doing and passing their training course "WILL" make any hazard situation safe not just "as safe as possible".

Do they? This is what I read...

Sustained energy. Healthy digestion. Shiny coat.
Switch your dog to an IAMS™ diet and look for
the visible differences yourself.

[nzspokes]

I bet if someone hit you though their fault I am sure you would lose any thought of OWNING the crash if you were injured.

Few years back I hit a car that had pulled into my path. It was dual lane and he was coming the other way and ducked through traffic to avoid going down to a roundabout and coming back up. I was in the lane closest to the footpath. I was watching a 4x4 that seemed to be slowing about 20m away. And bang he was in front of me pulling into his driveway. Yes I was hurt.

As he pulled into my lane my insurance covered it but it went to court as he was not covered and he didnt want to pay. I went to give evidence. We won. Legally it was his fault.

But I should have seen the signs he was about to duck through as there was a gap in the outside lane and he would have been slowing. So that part was my fault for not seeing what was about to happen.

If I was you I would be blaming everybody else. I own my part in the crash.

A dog running out would have to be going very fast for you not to be able to avoid, was it a Greyhound?

[Jin]

cassina is winning this argument