(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
Previous Page
Member Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

DataDan
Advanced Member
540 Posts
[Mentor]


Central Coast, CA
USA

Yamaha

FJR1300

Posted - 01/21/2016 :  2:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by commonground

I wish that TCIRC would come to a theater near me.

We Californians don't have a great sense of US geography. There's LA, San Francisco, and everything east of the Sierra Nevada. But there actually may be a Total Control class reasonably close to you in Woodbridge, Virginia: Apex Cycle Education offers an ARC on March 26.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 01/21/2016 :  2:53 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
An ARC is NOT an Intermediate Rider Clinic.
Go to Top of Page

Doc
Male New Member
13 Posts


LAS VEGAS, NV
USA

Suzuki

GSX650F among others

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  6:35 AM   Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
Originally posted by gymnast

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.



In Nevada, there is an absolute requirement to report mishaps that include damage to bikes and injuries. If other states don't do that, that's on them and not the MSF.

Yes, competition is a good thing, but since most people who take classes never take more than a beginner class to obtain a license, they have no frame of reference to determine if a class is a good value or high quality. I signed up for a Total Control beginner class last week, and it was sorely lacking. It was nothing more than outdated and plagiarized, old MSF curiculum. It certainly wasn't the bill of goods it's been sold to be.

If you want an honest review, here's a lengthy review that I wrote. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B...tVHFYV0VNbTA
Go to Top of Page

Cyclonic
Male Starting Member
1 Posts


Houston, Texas
USA

Kawasaki

Concours

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  9:38 AM
quote:
If you want an honest review, here's a lengthy review that I wrote. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B...tVHFYV0VNbTA[/font=Arial]



OK, we get it. You were bored and didn't like it. Not exactly a scientific critique.
The only true measure of training effectiveness is a reduction of motorcycle crashes. Since it's way too soon to be able to measure success/failure in that regard, your "review" is nothing more than a subjective observation by an admittedly biased individual.
If MSF thinks materials in the class are plagiarized they certainly have the legal staff to take care of that. If they choose to do so, the courts will decide.

These grapes seem to be sour.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  10:02 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Once again the thread has taken a tangent. This topic is about the INTERMEDIATE Rider Clinic, not the BEGINNER class and not the ADVANCED class.

I will audit the TCIRC range exercises today and report on what I learn later this afternoon.

If you want to take a shot at the Total Control beginner class, do it in a separate thread. This one is trying to assess the value of a class for riders who never received formal training or who are riding without an endorsement and, it seems to me, the TCIRC fits that audience quite well.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  2:28 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Well, all the best laid plans and all that...

We had planned to spend a few hours auditing the range work of the current TCIRC starting when the class returned from their lunch break. The information we received was that they would be back from lunch at 1:00. We arrived on the range just before 1:00 only to find that the class was about to perform another exercise.

Indeed, after that exercise the class broke for lunch - it was running late. We did not want to waste an hour unproductively.

But we did review the instructor range cards and saw what the exercises amounted to and discussed with the instructors what the purpose of each was and what they were coaching/evaluating the students about. It was productive time after all.

The first couple of exercises were, as expected, throttle control, quick stops, and vision control. (I particularly appreciated that the instructors emphasized body positioning during quick stops - LOWERING the body to lower the CG to keep the wheels on the ground and maximizing stopping ability as a result.)

The next exercise took some setup time as there must have been 25 cones laid out to mark the course to be taken by the students. They were to enter a counter-clockwise circle and ride 1 1/2 times around it, cross over to a clockwise circle and ride around it once, then exit and come to a complete stop at a couple of cones, then make a 90 degree left turn from that dead stop. This was all about slow-speed body positioning and bike control.



Then there was an oval run where body positioning (whoda thunk) was emphasized (lifting the peg off the ground by leaning the body INTO the turn). This is the only teaching that I would have taken issue with if I had seen it taught. It's RACING advice, in my opinion. You should NOT, normally, take turns with this body position. Why? Because if you drag a peg in that turn while leaning your body into it, you have already used the most effective emergency response - leaning into the turn in order to lift the peg. You WANT THAT ABILITY WHEN YOU NEED IT and should not spend it preemptively (unless you are racing).

Swerving came next.

All in all, excellent exercises that relate to real-world riding situations. SLOW SPEED is when it all has to come together!

From my perspective this class is absolutely worth taking for anybody who already rides but has never received formal training or who is riding without a motorcycle endorsement. It's just one day long. It's not expensive. It covers what really needs to be covered. The student rides his own bike. And if you can pass the range exercises you clearly have adequate control to obtain that endorsement.

I didn't interrupt the class even one time to challenge a declarative!! And the coaching method used was spot on and effective. They complimented, got buy-in that a problem exists, then in only a few words, offered a suggestion to the student about how to fix the problem. No long,drawn out dogmatic recitations - simple, quick, and effective coaching. Bravo!
Go to Top of Page

greywolf
Male Moderator
1492 Posts
[Mentor]


Evanston, IL
USA

Suzuki

DL650AL2

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  3:42 PM
I'm hoping the "lean into the turn" exercise may be targeted as practice for if a rider mistakenly gets into peg clearance trouble rather than being taught as a normal way to turn.

I had to do it one time in close to 400,000 miles of riding but I was glad I practiced it when it came time to do it. That I needed to do it was my fault of course as I was overriding my visibility. There's nothing quite as exciting as coming around a mountain curve and having the mountain in my eyes change to the sun in my eyes with the road changing to a decreasing radius downhill shortly being accompanied by my toe finding pavement.
Go to Top of Page

Doc
Male New Member
13 Posts


LAS VEGAS, NV
USA

Suzuki

GSX650F among others

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  4:42 PM   Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
Originally posted by Cyclonic

quote:
If you want an honest review, here's a lengthy review that I wrote. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B...tVHFYV0VNbTA[/font=Arial]



OK, we get it. You were bored and didn't like it. Not exactly a scientific critique.
The only true measure of training effectiveness is a reduction of motorcycle crashes. Since it's way too soon to be able to measure success/failure in that regard, your "review" is nothing more than a subjective observation by an admittedly biased individual.
If MSF thinks materials in the class are plagiarized they certainly have the legal staff to take care of that. If they choose to do so, the courts will decide.

These grapes seem to be sour.



I have no dog in the fight, so it's not sour grapes. I simply reported what I considered to be inferior and oudated training that is being hawked as revolutionary. There is nothing revolutionary about it.

Basic rider training can never be considered a crash reduction strategy, because if it were, they answer would be to never teach anyone, and simply let motorcycle riding die. The TCTI course doesn't give a new rider anything that could even be considered effective mental strategies, since there was so little context to anything in the class. It was no better than teaching a buddy rider in the local neighborhood, as far as I'm concerned.
Go to Top of Page

Doc
Male New Member
13 Posts


LAS VEGAS, NV
USA

Suzuki

GSX650F among others

Posted - 02/12/2016 :  4:45 PM   Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Once again the thread has taken a tangent. This topic is about the INTERMEDIATE Rider Clinic, not the BEGINNER class and not the ADVANCED class.

I will audit the TCIRC range exercises today and report on what I learn later this afternoon.

If you want to take a shot at the Total Control beginner class, do it in a separate thread. This one is trying to assess the value of a class for riders who never received formal training or who are riding without an endorsement and, it seems to me, the TCIRC fits that audience quite well.



Got it, sorry about that. I'm a newbie here, so have to learn the rules of the road (so to speak).
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 02/14/2016 :  9:10 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Perspective ...

There are tens of thousands of motorcycle riders in Houston. Not an insignificant number of them have never received formal training or are riding without an endorsement. These are riders who TEND to be over-represented in accident statistics.

The TCIRC is brand new to Houston as of January of this year. But they have taught it 14 times, so far, with an average enrollment of 7 riders. That's about 100 riders who, based on what I've seen, NEEDED the training/refresher. That's 100 riders who are nowhere near as likely to be injured or killed in a needless crash.

If the statistics can be found to support that opinion (it will take time, of course), then you simply cannot be antagonistic about the existence of this training offering.

I'm sure the curriculum will be modestly modified over time (I'll do what I can to make that happen), but even as it is, this is a winner for the motorcycle community.
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Peer Review: Blocked

Posted - 05/06/2016 :  5:37 PM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

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.



Here is a group that apparently has "crunched" the readily available data and has allowed people to convey this to others. This is what I got off their website (http://www.motorcycleinstitute.org/ Look under their data link).

Current Motorcycle Driver Relative Danger, USA
Driving a Motorcycle is 27 times more dangerous than driving a Passenger Vehicle, mile for mile. Currently, the four year average is 210 Motorcycle Driver Fatalities per Billion Miles Traveled compared to about 8 Passenger Vehicle Driver Fatalities per Billion Miles Traveled.

Driver Fatalities per Billion Miles Traveled

Passenger Relative
Year Motorcycle Vehicle Danger
2010 215 7.88 27.3
2011 220 7.58 29.0
2012 203 7.68 26.4
2013 200 7.45 26.9
Average 210 7.65 27.4

We define the ?driver? as the person, carried within or upon a vehicle, who is operating or controlling the vehicle. We average the most recent four years (2010-2013) so as to provide enough data points to smooth out random fluctuations. However, four years is not so long of a period that it washes out the current trend. (2014 Driver fatality data is now available. The 2014 VMT data will be
available June 2016.)

I hoped that they provided you with enough information to frame what is meant by dangerous. I would say this is what you call "death prone". If data was readily available for "accident prone" I would presume that it would be higher.

I still don't get how you think 33 times more dangerous is highly inaccurate.

EDIT AFTER POST: Well I tried to line up that above table correctly. It didn't work. So here is the direct link to the above.

http://motorcycleinstitute.org/docs...nger-vmt.pdf

Edited by - OB on 05/06/2016 5:49 PM
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 05/06/2016 :  6:34 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Thanks, Bill. I've seen those statistics before but appreciate them being available for our readers.

Fencing the data by miles traveled is one way to look at the data. Perfectly valid.

How many of the average of 210 motorcycle deaths per year per billion miles traveled are untrained riders? There are, as you know, a huge number of untrained motorcycle riders as compared to automobiles drivers. If 'untrained' is awkward, can we agree that drivers of automobiles become more and more competent with experience, regardless of training? On the other hand, can we agree that occasional motorcycle riding does very little to increase rider competence regardless of the number of years those riders claim as experience?

Might it actually be true that many/most of those 210 average killed motorcyclists are newbies to riding and the the claim that motorcycle riding is 33 times (or 27 times) more dangerous than driving (or being a passenger in) a car actually means: it is at least 33 (or 27) times more dangerous (meaning DEADLY) to ride a motorcycle without training/experience than it is to drive an automobile?

Here are some numbers that might help here: One in every twenty automobiles is involved in an injury 'accident' every year (in the United States) - that's 5%!!! While only 1.5% of motorcycles are involved in an injury 'accident' every year. That argues that driving (or being a passenger in) an automobiles is about three times more dangerous than riding (or being a passenger on) a motorcycle per year.

On the other hand, the statistics you provided argues that many fewer people involved in an automobile 'accident' DIE than of those motorcyclists involved in accidents. CLEARLY that means that you are substantially more likely to die from a motorcycle accident than from an automobile accident (assuming you are on the motorcycle as opposed to being in the automobile). No surprise there, right?

So does that not argue that riding a motorcycle is more DEADLY while riding in a car is more DANGEROUS (i.e., likely to result in an injury or death)?

Still want to play with statistics?
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Posted - 05/07/2016 :  4:05 PM
Jim,

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I have to wrap my head around the new (to me) data you gave me (ie 5% auto vs 1.5% motorcycle). Right now that doesn't make sense to me unless... ?

I believe the following without looking at the data first, so, I certainly can be wrong. Motorcycles get killed and injured more than car drivers/passengers due to vulnerabilty and stability. A fender bender type accident between two cars will probably not cause any injury of the occupants but could likely result in major injury or death to a motorcyclist. So, yes, I agree with your conclusion that motorcyclist will die at a greater rate for similar type accidents. But could you expect that the distribution is totally skewed toward death with a reduction in injury? I don't understand that. It doesn't make sense to me.

Going back to the statistic your mentioned: One in every twenty automobiles is involved in an injury 'accident' every year (in the United States) - that's 5%!!! While only 1.5% of motorcycles are involved in an injury 'accident' every year. What does this mean without having raw data to look at? I don't believe they are segregating the motorcycle population from the general population when they are counting the injury accidents. Therefore, if the exposure rate (miles driven per year) is lower for a motorcyclist then I would expect a proportion decrease in the percentage of motorcyclists involved in an accident. Assuming an average miles driven/riden for a car is 10000 miles/year and 2000 miles/year for a motorcyclist, it would roughly mean that if all things are equal if me have 5% of the cars getting into an accident, I would only roughly expect the motorcycles to represent 5% * (2000/10000) = 1% of the injury accidents. This would make a lot more sense to me without investigating further. Anyway, I'm not familiar where your data came from.

// Regards OB


Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 05/07/2016 :  4:16 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Bill,

Two weeks ago I enjoyed my 73rd birthday. Though I'm not senile,yet, I confess that when I posted my 'Judgement' video I had the details, but cannot any longer remember what they are (where I got the data).

Sorry. But I'll bet that DataDan could help us if he wanted to.
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Posted - 05/07/2016 :  6:11 PM
Happy Birthday Jim. I'm just a young whipper-snapper. I'll be 63 at the end of the year.
Go to Top of Page

DataDan
Advanced Member
540 Posts
[Mentor]


Central Coast, CA
USA

Yamaha

FJR1300

Posted - 05/08/2016 :  2:06 PM
From NHTSA's Traffic Safety Facts 2014 (PDF):

In the US in 2014, 4.0% of registered passenger vehicles (cars and light trucks) were involved in crashes of ALL severities (fatal, non-fatal injury, non-injury). As recently as 2002, that was 5.0%.

1.1% of registered passenger vehicles were involved in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes.

1.3% of registered motorcycles were involved in crashes of ALL severities, 1.1% in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes.


However, NHTSA estimates non-fatal crashes (they maintain a detailed database of fatals), so the question naturally arises: How good are their estimates? Most states publish crash data, so I looked at two I'm familiar with, California and Florida, to confirm the national non-fatal crash estimates.

In California in 2013, 1.0% of registered vehicles other than motorcycles were involved in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes (I haven't tallied the non-injury crashes). 1.7% of registered motorcycles were involved in crashes of all severities, and 1.4% were involved in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes.

In Florida in 2014, 3.8% of registered vehicles other than motorcycles were involved in crashes of ALL severities (I don't have count of non-fatal injury crashes). 1.7% of registered motorcycle were involved in crashes of ALL severities, and 1.5% were involved in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes.

So NHTSA's national estimates above seem generally reasonable.


I have more material I'd like to post, but it will have to be another time.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 05/08/2016 :  2:42 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Thank you!
Go to Top of Page

OB
Male Advanced Member
528 Posts


Houston, TX
USA

Buell

1125CR and others

Posted - 05/08/2016 :  8:16 PM
DataDan, thanks for the post.

In Florida in 2014, 3.8% of registered vehicles other than motorcycles were involved in crashes of ALL severities (I don't have count of non-fatal injury crashes). 1.7% of registered motorcycle were involved in crashes of ALL severities, and 1.5% were involved in fatal and non-fatal injury crashes.

That was close to what Jim posted, however,since this specifically says registered motorcycle it can't imply motorcycles (or motorcyclists) are safer than cars since miles traveled per year are much higher for cars than motorcycles.

// Regards, OB

Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17282 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 05/08/2016 :  8:56 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
I cannot understand why you must persist posting negative comments.

OF COURSE riding in a car is about 3 times more dangerous than riding on a motorcycle AT ANY TIME, that's what the statistics you just cited says. At any moment during any given year - that's what fencing the numbers by year means.

OF COURSE riding on a motorcycle for any given number of miles is more dangerous that riding in a car for that same number of miles - that's what fencing the statistics by miles means.

And both of those statements are true because automobiles are driven vastly more miles per year than are motorcycles.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
Jump To:
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle © Master Strategy Group Go To Top Of Page
  This page was generated in 0.44 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05