The CB1100 Community Forum

Reading an Australian motorcycle magazine my attention was caught by an article entitled TRAINING CAUSES OVER-CONFIDENCE. The sub-text to this read, “A careful balance must be achieved in training to ensure riders do not develop unrealistic confidence in their ability”. The article then went on, in part:

"On-road motorcycle training does not reduce the risk of crashing but makes riders more cocky, leading to higher risk behaviour such as speeding, an Australian university study has found. It also reported that these riders spent more time riding, which means they are longer on the road and therefore statistically more likely to be involved in an incident.

The study of 2399 newly licensed provisional riders recruited in Victoria was conducted from May 2010 to October 2012. It was funded by the Victorian Government Motorcycle Safety Levy, paid by all state riders in their annual registration fee.

The riders were put through a VicRide coaching program put together by the Monash University Accident Research Centre in conjunction with Honda Rider Training Australia (HART) and Learning Systems Analysis.

The on-road motorcycle rider coaching program involved pre-program activities, four hours of on-road riding and discussion in small groups with a riding coach.

Results were obtained from the riders reporting back to the researchers and crosschecked with police records of crashes and traffic offences. The Victorian study was carried out by university researchers Rebecca Ivers and Teresa Senserrick, whose results have just been released. In their report, they say there is no evidence that on-road coaching helped novice riders avoid crashes."

[My bold]

I've always been a strong advocate for ab initio motorcycle training. I suppose that, like many on this forum, I began riding when the only training available to most of us was conducted by big brother, dad, mate-who-knew-how, or just solo by trial and (mostly) error. This training, such as it was, could have been conducted in a paddock, back yard, lonely road or a back alley in the city. Most of us survived, although those that didn't aren't here to dispute that, I guess. For me it was a solo effort on my mates BSA Bantam in a paddock planted with crops. Then, having mastered that in about ten minutes, it was out on the road, keeping a good eye out for Dad 'cause he wouldn't be amused at me riding without a licence. And he was a hard man. Having sorted things out with Dad (he went to his grave thinking he had taught me to ride extraordinarily quickly), it was into town to get my licence. The local "Walloper", looked at Jack (my Dad) and said, "Is e orright mate?". Jack, not a very verbose kind of bloke, nodded slowly. The "Walloper" said, "Still, we better do this properly. Once around the block son. An' don't forget to give hand signals". Done and dusted.

In this more enlightened age, in Australia and some other countries, the licensing process is comprehensive and can take up to two years before a full and unrestricted licence is granted. [url=http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/licence/rider/rider-training.html]This, from the state of NSW, will give you an idea of the process. It varies slightly from state to state. So I was mildly surprised to read that article. Felt counter intuitive that training would lead to higher risk behaviours. Or, on reflection, is there some sense in this? What do the riders on this forum, both experienced and, more importantly, the newbies, think?

Cheers

Much food for thought here. The value of basic motorcycle training was recently covered in Motorcycle Consumer News and the writer of that article discussed how some states were rethinking the value of current new rider courses. Since these courses are industry related, the emphasis has been to present riding as something anyone can do safely. I have a problem with that. I've had friends through the years who wanted to learn but never felt comfortable on two wheels even though they successfully completed a rider safety course. This was brought home to me a few years ago when the wife of a good friend was nearly killed while riding her Bergman. She had successfully completed the rider course at a HD dealer but it was evident to Sparky and I after riding with her that she was not ready for real street riding. Within a year she had an accident while riding with her husband. Thanks to ATGATT she recovered from her injuries but now will not ride a bike, even as pillion.

Like Ptero, I had no formal motorcycle training; learned to ride on a friend's BSA 441, riding it on a graded dirt road near home. From there I bought a dirt bike, an SL100 Honda, and kept to dirt trails. That time spent learning to ride on dirt trails was more valuable than any riding course I believe. When I bought my first street bike I felt I had learned the basics of riding. A school of hard knocks was to follow as I learned how to survive in traffic.

I think the comment from the article I found the most annoying is this:

"It also reported that these riders spent more time riding, which means they are longer on the road and therefore statistically more likely to be involved in an incident."

Well, sure, the best way to not have a motorcycle accident is to simply not ride at all. But then again, the best way to avoid any accident and/or sickness is to never have been born.

It's similarly obvious as the statement "you're most likely to get into an accident within X miles of your home."

I don't know if I trust their conclusions. They might have had an agenda, or maybe their analysis was off, or who knows. Maybe I'm the odd one, but every bit of training or classes I've taken about motorcycling has made me more respectful and cautious, and downright grateful that I even have the health and the right to partake in such a glorious activity...

But that article did remind me of a brother in law I have. He took a motorcycle racing course down in California years ago, and ever since has been tearing around on his sport bike as if the public streets and highways are his personal racetrack. Sure, his form is impeccable, it all looks like what you might see on a track, but he's pulling this stuff in neighborhoods, crowded roads, national park highways, you name it. Makes him a complete a-hole in my book. I've confronted him about (and have long since stopped riding with him because of it), and his view is that he is SO skilled now because of his class that even though he is regularly breaking every traffic law, he is still riding at "only" about 80% of his physical and mental limitations, so that extra buffer means it's all perfectly safe and there's nothing to worry about. So, I don't know, what the article states may be true about some riders...

Training in almost any physical endeavor tends to instill overconfidence, or at least over compensation, in the person trained. Think of kids getting driver training - almost always they start out cautious, then get cocky, then (hopefully) find balance. Think of a golfer trained on a new swing - almost always he over-compensates and then has to learn how to make very minor adjustments. So it may be with rider training.
So...it would be interesting to see where the formally trained rider is compared to the informally trained one after a year of riding..maybe two.

(05-13-2016, 11:32 PM)Henrik_imp Wrote: [ -> ]I think the comment from the article I found the most annoying is this:

"It also reported that these riders spent more time riding, which means they are longer on the road and therefore statistically more likely to be involved in an incident."

Well, sure, the best way to not have a motorcycle accident is to simply not ride at all. But then again, the best way to avoid any accident and/or sickness is to never have been born.

Henrik, you're right, and I had the same initial reaction. To be fair, I think that statement might be there as a balance to explain why there may be a trend towards the enthusiastic rider being more likely to experience incidents than those who are on the road less.

Cheers

I learned to ride the old fashioned way. Trial and (often painful) error. My first 5 years of riding were peppered with newbie gaffs that often led to replacement parts and some healing time.

About 10 yrs. ago a friend was teaching a local motorcycle safety course and I sat in on the class one weekend just for fun. I found that the basic skills that they were teaching the new riders would have probably prevented 3/4 of my early goofs. It seemed to me that learning the ins and outs of motorcycling in a classroom/parking lot setting was much more efficient than learning those lessons one at a time on the road.

I always recommend that new riders take the course, with the caveat that it will not make them an expert rider in one weekend. Only that it will likely keep them from making the most obvious newbie mistakes. The rest is up to experience. I tell them that they start out with a full bag of luck and an empty bag of experience. The trick is to fill the bag of experience before the bag of luck is empty.

Jon Oliver did a piece about "scientific studies" on May 8th. After watching it, I don't think I will put too much stock in "studies"

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/9/11638808/joh...ek-tonight

I can point to several instances where the knowledge I gained in the BRC saved my ass - counter-steering in particular. People just need to understand that the training is a starting point to develop good habits. A couple of Saturdays in a parking lot don't make you a darned expert.