Can someone smarter than me look at this....

[Mully]

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/...et-July-07.pdf

More specifically, page 4 of the PDF.

Seems to me the pie (mmmm, pie) graph is saying motorcyclists are not at fault in most accidents but the bar graph is saying motorcyclists are at fault most of the time.

Have I missed something??

[Skunk]

Pie chart is motorcyclists fault in crashes/not at fault/partly at fault whereas bar graph is ONLY analysing the accidents where the motorcyclist is at fault and whether other vehicles are involved and whether they are fatal/serious/minor.

Page 4 is about vehicles involved and page 5 is about type of accident.

Interesting:

For more serious crashes, the motorcyclist was more likely to have the primary responsibility for the
crash. The motorcycle rider had the primary responsibility for nearly three-quarters of fatal crashes
compared to about half for minor injury crashes.

I find that PDF to have a quite fair and balanced view. Thanks for the link.

[marc34]

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/...et-July-07.pdf

More specifically, page 4 of the PDF.

Seems to me the pie (mmmm, pie) graph is saying motorcyclists are not at fault in most accidents but the bar graph is saying motorcyclists are at fault most of the time.

Have I missed something??

I think the bar graph is just an additional breakdown of the piece of the pie that is "motorcyclist at fault"

if that makes sense??

[Bikernereid]

I am not smarter than you but had a look anyway. From what I understand they have seperated minor accidents and accidents that caused fatalaties. I would appear that motorcyclists are not at fault for 41% of all acccidents but when fatalities occur they are saying that motorcyclists had the primary responsibility for the majority of the accidents. The way they have worded and used diagrams to explain the stats could have been clearer.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/...et-July-07.pdf

More specifically, page 4 of the PDF.

Seems to me the pie (mmmm, pie) graph is saying motorcyclists are not at fault in most accidents but the bar graph is saying motorcyclists are at fault most of the time.

Have I missed something??

[Ixion]

No, that's not what it says.

The pie graph says that 26% of ALL crashes only involved a bike , who was obviously therefore responsible (noone else to blame) (the royal blue segment)

A further 26 % involved another vehicle(s) , but the motorcyclist was the main one responsible for the crash (the aqua coloured segment)

So the pie chart says that in 52% of ALL crashes, the rider was primarily to blame.

The bar chart breaks it down further

It says that in FATAL crashes , about 75% of the time the rider was to blame (around 30% were single vehicle, the rest multi vehicle)

In SERIOUS crashes about 60% the rider was to blame.

In MINOR crashes only about 50% the rider was to blame

But, as there are vastly more minor crashes than serious or fatal (minor to LTSA can still be pretty painful) the smaller percentage for the more numerous crashes, pulls the overall percentage down to the 52% total in the pie graph. Bear in mind that a minor crash may well mean no injury at all.

I suspect the effect of the different number of fatl serious and minor is what you missed. Though the figure still look didgy to me . I think

[Mully]

Of course, then there are the accidents (single and multi vehicle) which are not reported.

I assume this data comes from the Police.

Thanks for the help, all. I knew there were some smart people here.

[Ixion]

It's all reported accidents. so that's anything where the police are advised (legal responsibility to do so for an injury accident); or an ambo turns up; or someone seeks medical attention and records motor cycle accident as cause of injury. So basically any crash that comes to official attention.

If you go into the ditch on a lonely road at midnight, and dig yourself out uninjured, without anybody knowing it happened, then that won't be included.

[Nagash]

If you go into the ditch on a lonely road at midnight, and dig yourself out uninjured, without anybody knowing it happened, then that won't be included.

Unless those damn dirty French are still spying on us..

[RDJ]

The pie graph says that 26% of ALL crashes only involved a bike , who was obviously therefore responsible (noone else to blame) (the royal blue segment).

I appreciate the analysis that has been done by others in this thread, because I found the document not that easy to interpret.

But may I politely contest the assumption above? If I drop my bike on a diesel spill, or run off into gravel evading a cager who is too far over on my side of the road, then by definition these crashes will only involve my bike: but I am not sure that accident should be statistically listed as solely my "fault"... in the sense that there is someone else to blame, although that doesn't mean it's not solely my responsibility as the rider.

[Ixion]

True. But bureaucrats being what they are, they have to classify (at least) one of the involved parties as responsible. And in a single vehicle crash there is only the rider. There is no segment for "no-one" or "outsiders". Often of course the real culprit may be someone is not there at the time of the crash. But that is not the way the bureaucratic mind works.

[gijoe1313]

Did someone mention pie ow? Oh wait, its one of them fangled mathemamatical flangy things ... now pies are squared ... I thought they be round ow? Mmm 3 of them would be good right now, never mind, good bye pork pie!

[RDJ]

True. But bureaucrats being what they are, they have to classify (at least) one of the involved parties as responsible. And in a single vehicle crash there is only the rider. There is no segment for "no-one" or "outsiders". Often of course the real culprit may be someone is not there at the time of the crash. But that is not the way the bureaucratic mind works.

Point well taken Ixion! (but I shan't dispute your assumption that the bureaucratic mind actually does work or we'll be at it forever )

[Ixion]

Opps , sorry, that was a typo. It should of course have read "bureaucratic minds wanks ", not "works"

[RDJ]

Heh