General bitch (oops, I mean discussion) about bikers thread

[MSTRS:Me]

Perhaps your writing could do with some work if people are being mislead by your statements.
You distinctly quoted the word "idiot" in your sentence, therefore it is you who believes it to be correct.
I doubt very much that anyone would not agree that they could improve. I ride plenty well enough to save my arse but i am in the middle of doing the levels at California Superbike. Always good to be on the learn. It doesn't make me think those who don't are idiots though. They are obviously comfortable with their skill level as it is. Each to their own i think is the term used.
We could in fact say the same for car and truck drivers. There would be a huge amount of both that would not consider increasing their expertise. They are still able to drive safely though and seem to do so.
I don't think anyone is necessarily misguided either, if that's how they want to deal with their life. Entirely up to them really. It may differ from you and i, but still quite relevant all the same. It doesn't make them idiots, because you may just find that these people are extremely good at something else that we are not so good at. We all have our place on this earth.

Oh and i have never held Gareth Morgan in very high regard, so it's pointless quoting anything he said.

"If you crash because you failed to adequately manage the risk you exposed yourself to" ... that just makes you human.
If you go on to defend your actions (ie 'I did nothing wrong') ... that makes you an idiot.

On the other hand, whatever your riding skill or level of risk management, if you never crash then where's the problem?

[MSTRS:Me]

what truth?
"Anyone who says their riding could not be better is an idiot" - who said that? Name one.....go on, just one

No one on here, in those words exactly. They simply distill the salient point of what I've been wasting my time in trying to get through to you.
You'll find them under Action here

[avgas]

On the other hand, whatever your riding skill or level of risk management, if you never crash then where's the problem?

I face this problem.

I really want my balls back - but my wife won't give them too me.

On the upside I have not crashed a bike in years.......

[Grubber]

"If you crash because you failed to adequately manage the risk you exposed yourself to" ... that just makes you human.
If you go on to defend your actions (ie 'I did nothing wrong') ... that makes you an idiot.

On the other hand, whatever your riding skill or level of risk management, if you never crash then where's the problem?

More often than not they don't say they did nothing wrong, they say "so what" and carry on. That's up to them if they so wish.
Obviously there is no problem if you don't crash.
I don't get on my high and mighty and try and tell people what they should do or not do. I will on the other hand offer my 2c worth if i think something has benefited me and is worth recommending though. Such as the California Superbike School. But if that person does not wish to take advantage of said advice, then that is up to them and i don't spend the rest of my day trying to convince them otherwise and i most certainly don't consider them an idiot.
As an aside, if someone denies their responsibility in their accident then that would tell, not that they are an idiot, but unaware of it being a problem, which can also be a human trait. Only difference is, some of us do it in other facets of life other than riding.

[R-Soul]

What mistake did I make? If I can find that out I may not do the same again.

You were riding too fast for the conditions, with low visibility and not being able to clearly see the road in front of you. yes, if you were going any slower, you wouldstill be getting there, but if that is what ittakes to avoid an accident, then so be it.


I hope I am not coming across as preaching. I dont always ride like this, although I know I should (and I am tryingto have more patience and more neuroticism in order to do so). But if I don't apply suitable paranoia and take the risk, I will not be thinking of myself as a victim....

[R-Soul]

Pffft.

Managing the risk, by taking all reasonable and practical steps to avoid or mitigate is all that KM is saying.
Clearly 'reasonable and practical' mean different things to different people.
If your reasonable and practical steps fall short of KM's standard, and you crash because they weren't enough, then clearly his standard of care was =better than yours. And if you go on to defend your steps or deny they weren't enough, then you've just opened yourself to the label of idiot.

You cant argue with fact.

[Katman]

I keep hearing people say 'humans are only human and humans make mistakes - get over it'.

It begs the question, what is an honest/acceptable mistake?

Is wiping out on a corner at 180kph an honest/acceptable mistake?

Is fucking up a wheelstand and putting yourself in hospital an honest/acceptable mistake?

Is losing half the skin off your leg from wearing shorts when you fall off an honest/acceptable mistake?

I would classify something like a learner rider coming to grief from missing a gear change as an honest/acceptable mistake.

[MSTRS:Me]

On the other hand, whatever your riding skill or level of risk management, if you never crash, or cause someone else to crash, then where's the problem?

In the interests of covering all the bases...

As an aside, if someone denies their responsibility in their accident then that would tell, not that they are an idiot, but unaware of it being a problem, which can also be a human trait.

True, but we're not talking about that type of unawareness, are we?
No - we're talking about a different type of ignorance.

[R-Soul]

Here you go again. Your saying right here that if someone has a different risk level than you and i then he immediately becomes and idiot.

No he is saying that if your standard of care is lower, and you have an accident, and then try and argue that your standard of care was sufficient, THEN you are an idiot - since, by definition, it was not!

[Edbear]

You were riding too fast for the conditions, with low visibility and not being able to clearly see the road in front of you. yes, if you were going any slower, you wouldstill be getting there, but if that is what ittakes to avoid an accident, then so be it.

I hope I am not coming across as preaching. I dont always ride like this, although I know I should (and I am tryingto have more patience and more neuroticism in order to do so). But if I don't apply suitable paranoia and take the risk, I will not be thinking of myself as a victim....

Not at all, preach away. But I was driving a Toyota Estima van and could clearly see the road, just couldn't see the oil due to the wet conditions. The road was streaming with water and dark which very effectively disguised the oil. Also at less than 50km/h in traffic, to go any slower probably wouldn't have changed much but would have really frustrated following drivers trying to get to work as I was.

As I said, I drove that road daily to work and was very familiar with it and the traffic conditions on it. My vehicle had just passed a WoF three days before and everything was up to scratch. In the Police Serious Crash report they placed no blame on me or the vehicle.

[Katman]

As I said, I drove that road daily to work and was very familiar with it and the traffic conditions on it.

Familiarity can often breed complacency.

[Grubber]

No he is saying that if your standard of care is lower, and you have an accident, and then try and argue that your standard of care was sufficient, THEN you are an idiot - since, by definition, it was not!

Says who. This is my point. It is you who labeled him an idiot, when in fact, as i have already said, in another field he may well be a lot smarter than you and i. He also may be more unaware than we realize, due to less experience maybe,that he is actually the cause, still doesn't make him an idiot.
If all those that were less informed about something in life were to labeled an idiot, then there would be very little chance of them moving forward.

[Swoop]

jmaybe it was the one that said, "my bike is just a disposable toy"
we will never forget old whats his name?

That would probably be "The Dover".

GSXR's are made to be a disposable toy...

[Grubber]

Familiarity can often breed complacency.

I would call it experience, but hey, you go blow ya horn if ya want.

[R-Soul]

More often than not they don't say they did nothing wrong, they say "so what" and carry on.

No, they allocate fault (legal or moral) for the accident, but keep insisting that their standard of care was good enough, when clearly it was not. in this way, the justify not having to learn from the experience. This is the "victim" mentality. This is what is teh problem with most post- accident debriefings on KB.

We hear: "It was Mary Pajeros fault for turning in front of me".

Not: "I saw here at the side of the road, with her indicator on, and I should have seen the ten children scrambling over the seats in the back, which could have distracted her from seeing me".

We hear: "The stupid bitch was talking on her mobile, didnt see the red light until too late, and smashed into the back of my stationary bike, after sliding 40 meters up an uphill, and knocking me into the intersection." (true story)

We dont hear: " I should have kept an eye on car movements around me, and in gear, even when I was stationary, so that I might have been able to move to the side when I heard the car tyres screeching behind me".

I do it - we all do this - but we need to change that mentality and learn from each other.