Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[GazzaH]

Errrrr, yeah, nah.

I'm merely expressing a cynical opinion, much like the blogger and others here on KB.

Take it or leave it.

[Murray]

I have read this fact on non NZ websites and they cant all be wrong irrespective of what Mark Gardiner or you and a few others on here think.

Please provide link

[pritch]

I'm merely expressing a cynical opinion, much like the blogger and others here on KB.

Fairy nuff.

It's all highly subjective of course, but I consider Gardiner to be much above "blogger" status. I'd put him up with the finest writers ever on matters motorcycling. A bold statement I know, so although these have all been on KB previously they are presented here again. No rush, the holidays are coming.

The three items span almost a hundred years so styles change - but quality? Not so much.

http://thevintagent.com/2017/09/04/t...ence-the-road/

http://www.latexnet.org/~csmith/sausage.html

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/2013/0...g-for-spadino/

[GazzaH]

I'm not familiar with his writing, other than that blog piece ... so maybe I should read on.

I wasn't commenting on the quality of his writing, though, so much as the subjectivity of the piece (in my subjective opinion!).

[FJRider]

I have read this WRITTEN on non NZ websites and they COULD all be wrong irrespective of what Mark Gardiner or you and a few others on here think.

Fixed it for you ...

Just for you Cassina ... http://www.lazymotorbike.eu/tips/startridingagain/

https://www.motorcyclistonline.com/8...orcycle-riders

A bit of interesting reading ... https://www.revzilla.com/common-trea...d-riders-story

Produced by Aussie's ... but .. https://jointhedrive.qld.gov.au/moto...orcycle-skills

Everybody loves Wiki ... but ... https://rideapart.com/articles/motorcycle-risks

[awayatc]

ACC used similarly truncated data to conclude that "born again" bikers were more likely to kill themselves.

ACC (in this instance) must be fuckwits too by your warped logic.

Please don't leave your computer unattended....

It appears your dog has been posting on KB again.

[Viking01]

I don't have a link to the original source material, it was ACC though. The raw data wasn't made available at the time, but I later stumbled upon it here somewhere and rearranged the age grouping myself. I wasn't interested in the results outside of confirming that the original format was heavily biased in favour of the report's recommendations, so I didn't bother keeping it.

As for motivation, Occam's razor suggests it was an attempt to justify the massive increases to ACC levies on licencing, (presented by Nick Smith and co at the time as a way to redress what was claimed was an unfair extra burden motorcyclists put on the system). The fact that the target demographic, (older, high earning big bike riders) represent both lower hanging fruit in terms of a levy increase and a higher cost in terms of income insurance adds significant weight to Mr Occam's diagnosis.

He might also have been interested in the fact that this was the first historic instance of any attempt to levy ACC directly in terms of claimed associated activity costs.

Morning. Thanks for the reply. And for advising on availability of source data
or report. Always on the lookout for good data and analysis in this area.

I can recall the last biker hikoi in Wellington a few years ago, and also being
involved in giving the afore-mentioned minister some verbal feedback on his
proposed ACC levy changes. Pity that the greengrocer was all out of soft fruit
that day.

Cheers,
Viking

[Swoop]

I can recall the last biker hikoi in Wellington a few years ago, and also being
involved in giving the afore-mentioned minister some verbal feedback on his
proposed ACC levy changes.

I wonder when the new minister will be asked about the changes required to the system, "hickoied" and publicly shamed into action to reverse the current system...

[Frodo]

I found this to be a well considered and thought through blog. It is not a scientific paper, so the missing citations were okay (would have been useful though).

In fisheries science, if you graph fish age by frequency, you will see peaks in the graph where larger numbers of certain age fish coincide with successful spawning so many years before (please don't take this analogy with motorcyclists too far).
A trawler comes through and scoops up lots of four year old fish this year and then next year 5 year old fish and so on.
The grim reaper is scooping up more 55-60 year old motorcyclists now, because there are more of them riding more miles per year. Ten years ago, the graph shows that the age of the peak was ten years younger.

I agree that we need more data on the number of miles ridden by each age group cohort to accurately calculate relative risk.

[caspernz]

The drug companies need to come up with an alternate cure for a MLC to buying a motorbike. That will be the only way to cut MLC rider deaths assuming they are not the fault of anyone else. An interesting statistic would be how many MLC guys are walking into bike shops each week and buying bikes? Having statistics for the reason why guys get them in the first place would be interesting too. Maybe counselling services need to have a MLC division to divert interest away from buying a bike.

The other solution is to provide a bit of training for BAB or MLC types. Oh wait, it's already available, and by what I've heard it's even having an effect. But then those who have been for a Rideforever course will know this already.

As for the drug companies coming up with an alternate cure for MLC...next you're gonna suggest Viagra and internet porn have a link. Or that Viagra and Tinder have some connection...

I found this to be a well considered and thought through blog. It is not a scientific paper, so the missing citations were okay (would have been useful though).

In fisheries science, if you graph fish age by frequency, you will see peaks in the graph where larger numbers of certain age fish coincide with successful spawning so many years before (please don't take this analogy with motorcyclists too far).
A trawler comes through and scoops up lots of four year old fish this year and then next year 5 year old fish and so on.
The grim reaper is scooping up more 55-60 year old motorcyclists now, because there are more of them riding more miles per year. Ten years ago, the graph shows that the age of the peak was ten years younger.

I agree that we need more data on the number of miles ridden by each age group cohort to accurately calculate relative risk.

Fair comment on the topic. Baby boomers have a lot to answer for aye? Unless the raw data is published, it'll always be someone (or some agency) skewing the stats to present the result they want. Yes I'm a cynic on this

[riffer]

You guys have it all arse about face.

ACC never used the MLC riders kill themselves argument. They were more concerned that MLC riders cost more because they didn't die. They got injured, and they cost more to rehabilitate - a) because, well, older folk take longer to come right and b) us 50+ riders earn more than some young squid does, generally.

They never phrased it that way though. Dumbing it down to the lowest common denominator (as they always do) they told us that we were 20 times more likely to have an accident that would injure us. The truth was, that for each kilometre travelled, the payout for motorcycle accidents was 20 times the payout for car accidents. Now there's some wild manipulations of statistics there but the real thing was Nick Smith wanted to turn ACC into a commercial insurance company so National could sell it off, and so they tried out private insurance company modelling. With the inevitable result. If you were an insurance company, you'd not be keen to bet that a motorcyclist is never gonna get hurt. The big problem of course is, that in a minor accident we can incur some pretty large medical bills. Inevitable result of kinetic energy acting upon a body with relatively low protection.

For the record, I don't consider myself a mid-life crisis rider. I started riding bikes when I was 12, through my teenage years, and I was between bikes when I met my first wife. She had recently had a bike accident and was recovering. Over time she turned negative against bikes, and I wasn't rocking the boat over that one and kept myself happy with a succession of V& and turboed cars. Long story short, we separated and when I married Gini we moved to Upper Hutt (we were closer to Wellington city) and she suggested I get a new bike. That was back in 2003 (if you search far enough back on my posts you'll find my first post all about picking up an FZR750R as a commuter bike).

I have ridden daily since 2003 until exactly three months ago when my riding career was cut short at the age of 50 by a car pulling out from nowhere on SH58. Multiple fractures, and a brachial plexus injury have seen me out of action for two years, if not forever. But the ACC bills have been pretty steep. Three weeks in hospitals, surgeries, MRIs, CTs, Xrays, lost earnings (I earn over the average wage), doctors bills, drugs - they all add up. And I am still facing more surgery and rehabilitation. I only work three mornings a week at the moment. So I can see where the money goes.

So I did everything right - I did all the training, had a good, well maintained bike, was wearing all the gear and a hi viz vest, was scanning the road for danger, and I was travelling under the posted limit. And I still got taken out by somebody else's mistake. And that is the thing that irritates me. It's gone down as a motorcycle accident with motorcyclist not at fault (driver pleaded guilty to Careless Driving causing injury) but all the costs come out of the ACC motorcycle account. Given that approximately 55% of motorcycle accidents are not the rider's fault there is a case for motorcyclists complaining. They do reckon that car drivers subsidise us anyway but I believe the motorcycle and all other road vehicles accounts should be merged to remove this anomaly. Sure, let's accept that motorcycling is inherently less forgiving in a crash, do all we can to remove the issues, but we should not have to pay extra because a) we get more hurt in a crash, b) the road furniture is likely to hurt us and c) the other road users are more likely to hurt us.

Something is wrong here. I said it on the steps of Parliament to hundreds of bikers a few years ago and it's still the same. The government would not ever think of charging women more for ACC because they are more likely to be victims of sexual assault. But still bikers are penalised for being victims.

Sorry for the rant. It's been coming for a while.

[riffer]

The other solution is to provide a bit of training for BAB or MLC types. Oh wait, it's already available, and by what I've heard it's even having an effect. But then those who have been for a Rideforever course will know this already.

As many who know me are getting sick of hearing, if it were not for learning and practicing the emergency braking skills taught on the RiderForever course, I would have definitely died in my accident. No ifs, buts or maybe. Died.

[caspernz]

As many who know me are getting sick of hearing, if it were not for learning and practicing the emergency braking skills taught on the RiderForever course, I would have definitely died in my accident. No ifs, buts or maybe. Died.

You've got a valid message Simon, sod those who don't want to hear it. Banging your head against the KB wall can't be helping your recovery

For me it's challenging to articulate the frustrations I have on the topic of ACC, rider training, licensing standards, enforcement standards etc. But that's only because in my past I've seen the topic handled better, albeit in other countries.

Totally agree that we shouldn't be treated any different by ACC on account of our chosen mode of transport. In the interim, on a personal level at least, becoming the best/safest rider one can be seems sensible. Not foolproof obviously

[Woodman]

There are some muppets on here that dont want that though as they are too frightened of being at fault themselves.

Not one muppet on here has said that. You are making shit up again.

[Akzle]

You sound like you would agree with me to have all those with a history of at fault crashes paying a higher ACC premium than those with a history of not being at fault. This would see many car drivers paying the same or even more in ACC premiums than large motorbike owners. There are some muppets on here that dont want that though as they are too frightened of being at fault themselves.

you're a fuckwit