(Please visit one of our advertisers)

No donations or subscriptions are required

   OR   
   
Subscription choices:
Board Karma = 40  (3488 positive of 3870 votes is 40 %pts higher than a neutral 50%)
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle   
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

You can the entire collection of Safety Tip articles in a 33 Megabyte PDF Portfolio

 All Forums
 Motorcycle Safety
 Rider Training Courses
 Total Control Intermediate Rider Clinic
Next Page
Member Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/15/2016 :  1:25 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend                        Like
Cash and I audited a TCIRC today held in Houston.

This is one of Lee Parks' creations and has lots of potential, in my opinion.

There were seven students in attendance and two certified instructors teaching the class (Chris and Dave - both knowledgeable pros). Students had to use their own motorcycles.

Starting the class involved each student providing proof that they were legally registered (licensed) drivers (but did NOT require an 'M' endorsement) and motorcycle insurance. Each student met that requirement.

Some of the students were taking the clinic as a quick way to get their 'M' endorsement, but not all.

The second thing that each student was required to do was to ride their own motorcycle from a dead stop up to a speed of about 20 MPH and get into second gear before braking at a marker and coming to a complete stop. Then they had to ride a 20 foot long area then make a 90 degree turn to the left without hitting a cone or crossing a line at the end of the 20 foot area, or putting a foot on the ground.



Unless the student was able to do that rather simple test, they were not allowed to complete the class and were transferred to a BRC class at some later date.

Out of the seven students we had, one was unable to complete the test on his first try but did (barely) manage to do so on his second try while one person tried three times and failed each time he tried. This one nearly dropped his bike the second and third try. He left the class at that point.

The students then went into a classroom environment for a couple of hours of class followed by the first range exercises.

I was disappointed at some of what was included in the teaching material although, on balance, the material was satisfactory for its intended purposes.

I particularly did not like being told - categorically - that motorcycle riding was 33 times more dangerous than driving an automobile. NUTS! I interrupted the class and made sure that the students understood that while riding motorcycles IS dangerous, it is simply not true that it is 33 times more dangerous than driving an automobile - and nowhere near that dangerous. Instead, it is probably true that motorcycle riders are about 33 times more likely to be killed if they are in an accident than an automobile driver who is in an accident.

I then apologized for interrupting the class after the instructor professed that he understood what I was saying but that *HE* had to say what the script called for - that motorcycling was 33 times more dangerous than driving an automobile.

Part of the curriculum - categorically - claims that lower air pressure in a tire results in higher traction. I did not interrupt the class to challenge that statement since I had done so just prior to it being made and I had no idea why the claim was being made or if it's true from some obscure perspective.

Then there was the outright confusing and contradictory statement that 'Concentration' is the same as 'Relaxed Attention'. WHAT? I let that slide too.

Then, in discussion mode (which is essentially what the classroom is like entirely), it was stated by the instructor that for beginner riders, clutch levers are the most critical motorcycle control but for experienced riders, like those in the class, the THROTTLE is the most critical control. NUTS! Anybody who thinks that the throttle is more important than the brakes (especially the front brake), it seems to me, is pushing an agenda that is far from real world. Again, I did not interrupt the class in challenge.

But I'd had enough restraint when the class got to the point where it was being stated - categorically - that tourers and cruisers have 70% of their stopping power from their front brake and 30% from their rear brake while sport bikes have 90% stopping power from their front brake and 10% from their rear.

I interrupted a second time at this point. I pointed out that if a bike can do a stoppie, it OBVIOUSLY can have 100% of its stopping power from the front brake, that braking power is not a zero-sum game - that is, for example, the front brake essentially NEVER provides LESS THAN 70% of a bike's stopping power with as much as 100% while the rear brake essentially NEVER provides MORE THAN about 30% of its stopping power. Choosing to publish and teach INACCURATE DECLARATIVE STATEMENTS does a disservice to the students and damages the credibility of the rest of the curriculum.

Anyway, I again apologized for interrupting and promised not to do so again. I kept my promise.

I particularly liked the fact that the class spoke to the issue of SURVIVING the ride rather than HOW TO RIDE.

I appreciated the topic about riding in a curve. When the instructor had established that braking needs to be accomplished prior to entry to the curve, he then asked the students when acceleration should be done while in the curve. As expected, there were a variety of answers but when one of them said "at about the midpoint of the curve", the instructor made it clear that the correct answer was as soon as possible after entering the curve and that anybody who waits until the midpoint or later 'IS RIDING OVER THEIR HEADS!'. Those riders are entering the curve too fast. (Good advice!)

There was good content, BETTER intentions, and some fresh ideas presented in this clinic. I expected no less from Lee Parks.

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  10:20 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Why is this important?

Training in Texas has been monopolized by the MSF for years. The number of riders in Texas who have received no training or who are riding without an 'M' endorsement is high. The number of riders who attend training of any kind beyond the BRC is very low.

I wondered why, after Total Control got a foothold in California where the MSF failed to even bid for the contract, did it not constitute a viable alternative to the MSF here in Texas and many other states.

The answer ... powerful lobbyists working in behalf of the MSF got the Texas legislature to pen a law that REQUIRES training using the MSF curriculum.

Other states have similar laws, but not all. (It is looking like the state of Indiana may soon break away from the MSF monopoly, though I have no idea what the odds are.)

I am NOT hoping that the MSF fails or 'goes away'!!! I'm hoping that the MONOPOLY FAILS. Competition is what I want to see come back - and the resulting improvements that the providers will THEN put into their curriculums.

Anyway, the TCIRC is well positioned to provide experienced rider training that satisfies the needs of both the state of Texas and of the motorcyclists themselves. It is only one day long and focuses well on survival instead of entirely on 'how to ride'. And it qualifies for obtaining an 'M' endorsement on the Texas license.

Hopefully, a posting about it here on this site will help get some of those riders who have had no formal training or are riding without a motorcycle endorsement into a class. We all want the number of injuries and deaths of motorcyclists to decline. This can help.
Go to Top of Page

gymnast
Moderator
4263 Posts
[Mentor]


Meridian, Idaho
USA

Harley-Davidson

Sportster Sport

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  11:32 AM
In my opinion, MSF is in the process of distancing itself from the actual liability it may be exposed to in certifying instructors conducting courses as well as the potential liability of it's being designated as the the sole supplier of course materials and format.

In that courses are conducted on ranges, there is no accurate accounting of persons injured during training and there is no requirement that such injuries be reported to the various state DMVs. Where successful liability suits have been settled, it is the usual practice that the settlement be held confidential.

By "opening up" motorcycle rider training, the opportunities for innovation and experimentation are improved and the marketplace for training, once opened and expanded to competition will, improve the overall state of the art. Even the MSF will benefit from this competition, despite it taking in excess of 35 years for that organization to, hopefully, recognize that there are "many ways to skin a cat", some better than others.
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  1:16 PM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

...
I particularly did not like being told - categorically - that motorcycle riding was 33 times more dangerous than driving an automobile. NUTS! I interrupted the class and made sure that the students understood that while riding motorcycles IS dangerous, it is simply not true that it is 33 times more dangerous than driving an automobile - and nowhere near that dangerous. Instead, it is probably true that motorcycle riders are about 33 times more likely to be killed if they are in an accident than an automobile driver who is in an accident.
...




An interesting comment which was completely lost on me. Based on my understanding the statistic is presented that motorcyclists are approximately 33 times more likely to be killed per mile ridden/driven vs other motor vehicle operators.

Since the statistic is trying to normalize the data based on mileage, my take on this is that the other accidents that were not fatal would have caused much more damage to the rider than if he/she were in a car. I would therefore have to conclude that riding a motorcycle is greater than 33 times "more dangerous" than riding a car/truck/bus.

I don't understand your interpretation or logic here Jim. I guess I must be missing something!
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  5:17 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Normalizing statistics = getting them to be comparable. But statistics tend to conform to what you are looking for in them.

Let's say that for every 100 million miles of travel last year there were about 4,000 motorcyclist deaths and 22,000 automobile deaths.

From that you could conclude that automobiles are 5.5 times more dangerous than motorcycles, right?

But, of course, not all crashes result in death so you then look at number of crashes per 100 million miles of travel and find that there were about 35 motorcycles and 1.7 automobiles. From that you conclude that motorcycles are about 20.5 times more dangerous than automobiles, right?

Or, since motorcyclists are about 4 times more likely to die than automobile drivers who are involved in a crash, you conclude that motorcycles are 4 times more dangerous than automobiles, right?

Or you combine those statistics to attempt to normalize them and conclude that motorcycles are about 26 times more dangerous than automobiles, right?

Or you could decide to normalize the data by sorting by age. Since a 60 year old 'breaks' more easily than does a 30 year old, you could conclude that motorcycling is more dangerous for 60 year olds than it is for 30 year olds, and give no value to maturity. Since maturity was not measured, you dismiss any conclusions involving age. Normalizing has its limits, after all.

Or you make some 'authoritative' assertion that RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IS GREATER THAN 33 TIMES MORE DANGEROUS THAN RIDING A CAR/TRUCK/BUS, like you just did, and that becomes a fact. Right?

I have an idea. Why not normalize the data by dividing the number of wheels each type of vehicle has to determine how significant number of wheels is to the safety of the rider/driver? Why then the conclusion is that motorcycles are only about 13 times as dangerous as cars, and that if you really want to improve the safety statistics you should switch to riding unicycles. They'd be only about 6.5 times more dangerous than cars, right?

Or, you could learn to avoid riding motorcycles in dangerous situations and/or with dangerous behaviors and always wear safety gear - in other words, be 'abnormal' and beat the odds.

That's been my choice for over 50 years. Seems to have worked for me.

So cutting through all the word play here, the fact is that the statistics relate to a 'normal' population - those who conform to 'typical' stereotypes. Typical riders will NOT take an experienced rider training class. Typical riders sometimes drink (or do drugs) and ride. Typical riders 'usually' wear helmets. For these riders, the statistics tend to be predictive. For ABNORMAL riders, like the students in a TCIRC, they DO NOT and are hugely misrepresenting.

Maybe another example is worth putting out there to be sure that my perspective is understood. If you are 1,000 times more likely to be in an accident driving a car 100,000 miles than if you are flying in a commercial jet for 100,000 miles, but you are 1,000 times more likely to die if you are in a plane crash than an automobile crash, my opinion is that driving a car is MORE DANGEROUS than flying, and probably most of you would agree. You can die doing either, but you are more likely to die driving a car than flying. How likely you are to have an accident is more persuasive of 'danger' than the severity of injury resulting from an accident - at least to me. (I don't know what the real odds are, it's just an example.)
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  10:24 PM
Let's start with the original statement you made. Under what circumstances would your statement make sense to a reasonable person? Most of your above reply implies that you do understand that you have to frame what you mean by dangerous. Most of the examples you give are obviously logically flawed as you are well aware of. So most of your reply is not meant to clarify your position, but is meant to do the opposite?

Safety gear can reduce your injuries, but not as substantially as you imply (in my opinion). The traffic statistics have not changed much over many years. Train automotive drivers to the same degree that you want to see all motorcyclists at and safety for all would vastly improve, but the danger of riding a motorcycle would still be much higher than driving a car. Sorry, I don't agree with your conclusion on this point, I think it is flawed.

Edited by - OB on 01/16/2016 10:41 PM
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/16/2016 :  10:50 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Bill,

The original point was that specifying an inaccurate declarative does a disservice to the students and the credibility of the curriculum. The inaccurate declarative was that riding motorcycles is 33 times more dangerous than driving a car. What's inaccurate about it? For one thing, it doesn't fence the data ... in the United States? Last year? Does 'dangerous' mean accident prone or death prone? What age group? Experienced or newbie riders? Etc.

If you can't answer those simple questions about the declarative, how meaningful is it?

If you want to raise your hand and do your typical challenge of the material presented, feel free to do so. Then provide authoritative evidence to support your challenge, not simply a counter opinion - "More than 33 times as dangerous" is no more accurate than what I objected to originally. But you got heard.
Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  5:04 AM
THE MINTER REPORT - AN ANALYSIS OF STATISTICS RELATING TO MOTORCYCLING

Accession Number:

00394668

Record Type:

Monograph

Abstract:

The study attempts to prove that the accident liability of drivers is not dependent on the type of motor vehicle used and that for the same age and experience the accident levels of twmv riders and car drivers are not very different. Although official statistics on accidents and casualties appear to show that motorcycling is many times more dangerous than car driving, it is believed that these figures overstate the situation. The study examines official and other data in order to judge the matter fairly and makes proposals for future policies that could be followed by both trade and users of twmvs. It is suggested that as there are wide variations of driving behaviour and competance amongst both motorcyclists and car drivers, such variations should be taken into account before conclusions are made. (TRRL)

Report/Paper Numbers:

Monograph

Corporate Authors:

Motorcycle Association of Great Britain Limited

Starley House, Easton Road
Coventry England

Authors:

MINTER, A L

Pagination:

86 p.

Publication Date:

1983-12

Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  5:17 AM
Apologies for multiple posts, but formatting on a tablet is difficult.

Minter found, essentially, that in the UK riders and drivers had the same rate of crashes - it was the outcomes that varied.

During the time I've been biking I'm sure the stat has developed, from 10x about 30 years ago, through 20x, to the current figure. Of course, biking hasn't got 3x or 3.5x more dangerous and drivers probably aren't having 1/3 the crashes - but the outcomes from their crashes have improved due to all of the technological enhancement of vehicles.

PS While Googling Minter, this popped up :) :

http://www.msgroup.org/forums/mtt/t...PIC_ID=14876
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  6:10 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Thank you. We've had the discussion before with the same conclusion: you are about 8 times more likely to be in a crash as a motorcyclist than as an automobile rider, but more than 30 times more likely to be injured as a result. I believe that is consistent with my stated concern about the TCIRC declaring a misleading '33 times more dangerous', though I switched the injured vs killed ratio. It's been a few years.

Still, if you don't get into an accident, you don't end up injured or dead.

The study you pointed to suggests better odds.

Time, I think, to get off this tangent and go back to the purpose of this thread - a discussion of the TCIRC.

Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  6:50 AM
James, could you give more details of the course format (theory practical split), syllabus (content) and some background/context (is it aimed at the ERC market?).
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  7:46 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Horse, you are like me in many ways. I heard about it last year and wanted to learn as much more about it as I could, so I arranged to audit a class. I've met three certified instructors so far and have grilled them (to the point that I've become a pest, I'm afraid).

In any event, I only know of three locations in Texas where the TRIRC is being taught. The one in Houston has conducted 8 classes so far - it's that new. Completion certificates are adequate to obtain a motorcycle endorsement in Texas.

I have not gotten my hands on any instructor material as of yet, so cannot answer your questions at this time, but I have a feeling that some of the MSF Rider Coaches here are already involved and may be willing to share information here.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  10:09 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
This is how the course is advertised by one provider here in Texas:

quote:
GO Motorcycle Training School is the first in North Texas to offer this new and exciting program! Developed by former National Champion, motorcycle racer and moto-journalist Lee Parks, The Intermediate Riding clinic, is a premium, one day motorcycle training course, designed for experienced riders who already own a 2 wheel, street legal motorcycle or scooter, and want to take their riding skills to the next level, or motorcyclists who have been riding for years without obtaining an ?M? endorsement on their driver?s license. Yes, you read it right, now Texas riders have a one-day course that meets the Texas Department of Public Safety?s requirements for obtaining a class M license! In addition, this course can also be used for ticket dismissal (with court approval).

What will you learn in the Total Control Intermediate Riding Clinic? In the IRC you will learn the critical information and skills to make you a better, more knowledgeable and a safer rider. This important step in rider training will focus on better control of your motorcycle including: maximum braking, swerving and cornering skills. These key elements will provide considerable skill improvements and really boost your confidence out on the road.

Our dynamic classroom sections include: maximizing traction management, how to choose proper lines through the turns as well as the psychological aspects of motorcycling like overcoming fear, keeping your concentration and having the right attitude. This fun and exciting class will put a smile on your face and give you a whole new perspective for your next ride.

Total Control IRC includes:

* Throttle control
* Brake control
* Vision
* Line selection
* Low-speed turning
* Evasive maneuvers
* Road-speed turning
Prerequisites: Good condition-street legal, registered, and insured motorcycle. Protective riding gear (long sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes or boots that cover your ankle bone) is required.

Please note: This program is for experienced riders. It will contain a qualifying first exercise, that you will need to pass in order to remain in the course. You must be able to start out smoothly, shift into second gear (if applicable) stop smoothly, then make a 90 degree turn from a stop within 20 feet. If you have never ridden a motorcycle, or you feel you cannot perform the qualifying riding exercise, then the MSF Basic RiderCourse is a better choice for you.

For locations and class schedule click here.
Go to Top of Page

DataDan
Advanced Member
540 Posts
[Mentor]


Central Coast, CA
USA

Yamaha

FJR1300

Posted - 01/17/2016 :  12:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Horse

James, could you give more details of the course format (theory practical split), syllabus (content) and some background/context (is it aimed at the ERC market?).

For info on course content, see Lee Parks' book Total Control. The drills and much of the information in the book originated in his riding clinic. Also see his website, totalcontroltraining.net.

The controversial material on tire pressure, front/rear braking, concentration, and throttle is all found in fuller context in the book. The presentation of statistics probably came via National Motorcycle Institute, which (as I understand it) contributed to Lee's basic riding course, now California's required course for riders under age 21.
Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/18/2016 :  3:19 AM
Thanks, both.
Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/18/2016 :  4:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by DataDan National Motorcycle Institute, which (as I understand it) contributed to Lee's basic riding course, now California's required course for riders under age 21.



An NMI recognized instructor is, at a minimum, one who:
- Maintains a student mishap rate well below the licensing course average student mishap rate.


So what happens if everyone becomes an NMI recognised instructor? They may wish, perhaps, to review their use of 'average' . . .

Edited by - Horse on 01/19/2016 2:02 AM
Go to Top of Page

rayg50
Male Moderator
2082 Posts
[Mentor]


NYC, NY
USA

Honda

Shadow Spirit 750DC

Posted - 01/18/2016 :  6:26 AM
What are the range exercises?
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17283 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/18/2016 :  7:28 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Cash and I only audited the first three hours of the class, so I did not observe the range exercises this time.

It was clear to me that I was disrupting the class with my interruptions, and that that was quite unfair to the instructors and the students. Though the instructors were NOT upset by this, I was. So we left early. We had planned to audit only the first four hours this time anyway as we were going to a tactical training gun firing range in the afternoon.

We were invited to audit the rest of the class when it is next held on 2/12, and I expect that we will do so.

BTW, the TCIRC, so far, is only taught in California and Texas. There are 8 Texas locations instead of the 3 I knew about: Elgin, Houston, LaMarque, Dallas, Irving, Waco, DFW (Dallas Fort Worth), and San Antonio.
Go to Top of Page

rayg50
Male Moderator
2082 Posts
[Mentor]


NYC, NY
USA

Honda

Shadow Spirit 750DC

Posted - 01/20/2016 :  6:53 PM
I know you'll share the range exercises should you get to see them.

I'm trying to see what one could do in one day to earn the endorsement. In my BRC the riding test at the end took more than 2 hours of class time for 11 students. Add in the time it took to review the individual results with the participants and there went the afternoon.

I realize that this is for experienced riders but that just further feeds my curiosity about the range exercises and how they contribute to earning the endorsement

Edited to correct spelling.

Edited by - rayg50 on 01/20/2016 9:24 PM
Go to Top of Page

Horse
Senior Member
263 Posts


Newbury, Berkshire
United Kingdom

BMW

R850RT

Posted - 01/21/2016 :  4:01 AM
Guessing, that's the point of the initial test exercise, to weed out those who won't be able to (or stand ['ride'?] a reasonable chance of) complete within the time available.
Go to Top of Page

commonground
Male Standard Member
155 Posts


Windsor, PA
USA

Yamaha

V Star 1300

Posted - 01/21/2016 :  11:47 AM
I wish that TCIRC would come to a theater near me.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
Jump To:
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle © Master Strategy Group Go To Top Of Page
  This page was generated in 0.83 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05