MSF or self-learn riding

[beginner]

[quote]Here in Florida, it's now mandatory to take the MSF course before you can get your endorsement, so even if a lot of people DO get a bike to save on gas money, they'll have to take a safety course (that is, of course, assuming they are all honest law-abiding citizens). Hopefully that will dissuade the more casual would-be riders.[/quote]

The problem is formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement. A couple days of instruction isn't making a difference.

I started riding in June 08. I did an hour of PLP every day for six months, 150 hours, before winter. I'm still not certain I can maneuver my bike at least as well as my car--so it's certain I can't. I'm still a beginner.

When beginners are looking for encouragement they don't get a useful practice message from the MSF or from the riding community. Beginners are not being advised properly.

[Lion_Lady]

Here in Florida, it's now mandatory to take the MSF course before you can get your endorsement, so even if a lot of people DO get a bike to save on gas money, they'll have to take a safety course (that is, of course, assuming they are all honest law-abiding citizens). Hopefully that will dissuade the more casual would-be riders.

The problem is formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement. A couple days of instruction isn't making a difference.

I started riding in June 08. I did an hour of PLP every day for six months, 150 hours, before winter. I'm still not certain I can maneuver my bike at least as well as my car--so it's certain I can't. I'm still a beginner.

When beginners are looking for encouragement they don't get a useful practice message from the MSF or from the riding community. Beginners are not being advised properly.

Doesn't "seem" to reduce crash involvement? Don't try to start your discussion here, beginner.

I'm not sure what kind of "encouragement" you want from the MSF Basic Riders Course, but the instructors to the one, strongly urge new riders to practice, practice, practice their new skills.

The course is for ADULTS. Few adults would accept being told "before you go out on the roads, you MUST demonstrate expert proficiency in the following skills before being allowed to USE the training received on the roads."

Interesting, but in order to be licensed to drive a CAR, a typical teenager (or new driver) is only "tested" on 4 very basic and elementary skills, after completing a similar amount of classroom and behind the wheel nstruction to the BRC:

1. Parallel parking,
2. A "Y" turn (turnabout).
3. Proper technique for stopping at a stop sign.
4. A right turn from a stop.

In both instances, it is up to the student to determine what skills they are weakest at and work on them to their own best ability, after completing training. Additional training is always available, for those wishing it. But for most folks, the best learning is achieved DOING the thing: Driving/Riding.

If you want more, ask for help from any rider, and you'll likely get it.

P

[RhadamYgg]

The problem is formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement. A couple days of instruction isn't making a difference.

I started riding in June 08. I did an hour of PLP every day for six months, 150 hours, before winter. I'm still not certain I can maneuver my bike at least as well as my car--so it's certain I can't. I'm still a beginner.

When beginners are looking for encouragement they don't get a useful practice message from the MSF or from the riding community. Beginners are not being advised properly.

Formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement... This is a questionable statement. According to the Hurt report - training made a significant difference. But....

The MSF - the largest group training riders - has no 'after' MSF community that tracks riders and their experiences. It would appear to be their due diligence to track riders and their crash incidences to be compared to the motorcycling population at large. It certainly isn't part of the police reporting procedure to determine if a rider in an accident/fatality was a trained rider or not.

However, as a member of the IT community that not only designs, but writes, implements and trains the end users - I can tell you that if you don't train users you are in for a world of heart ache. My programs are much simpler to understand and operate than a motorcycle.

From my personal experience, the training at the MSF taught me a lot about the operation of a motorcycle and without it I probably wouldn't have entered in to motorcycling at all.

Now, you make statements about being a beginner after xx hours of training. But this is true of anything. People take driving a car for granted, but we were all beginner drivers (unfortunately for our parents car insurance) and we recognized as such for the first two years of driving cars. Why would it be any different for motorcycles?

In fact, according to the proficient motorcycling book, you are still a beginner on a motorcycle for at least three years. There is apparently a spike in accidents in the two to three years experience level that may be due to overconfidence.

Actually, the MSF - or at least the instructors of my course and others online here at the MSF that we were all told at the end of the course - 'you are now certified to be able to ride a motorcycle... In a parking lot.' The instructors I had were excellent and preached that we practice over and over again throughout the course (as well as preached that you have to turn your head to make the bike go in to a turn properly...)

Now, I don't practice, and that's my fault. But I don't see how you could say that the MSF doesn't promote practicing. Except if you said they didn't have a practice product where people who graduated the MSF could go and practice together.

I doubt if any such offering would be low-cost and attract a lot of people. More than likely the best way to get practice is to either do what I did, which was ride as often as possible and make excuses to ride whenever possible - or find groups that ride together and see if they will let you come along.

But really, how often you practice is just like not buying a 600cc bugsplatter yourself bike as your first bike. It is really just up to you.

Of course, I've gone through this lengthy reply for someone that has only written one post, but it seemed that the post could represent some honest questions.

I would like to see a more up-to-date statistical report on the training levels of motorcyclists that are killed or involved in accidents.

RhadamYgg

[beginner]

Formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement... This is a questionable statement.

Thanks for responding. Here is a souce you might trust about the effectiveness of formal training. http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/street ... index.html

as a member of the IT community that not only designs, but writes, implements and trains the end users - I can tell you that if you don't train users you are in for a world of heart ache. My programs are much simpler to understand and operate than a motorcycle.

Using software doesn't require any motor/balance skills except for not falling out of your seat while you're typing. Operating software is all about knowledge. Operating a motorcycle in a panic situation is about practiced skills.

From my personal experience, the training at the MSF taught me a lot about the operation of a motorcycle and without it I probably wouldn't have entered in to motorcycling at all.

Now, you make statements about being a beginner after xx hours of training. But this is true of anything. People take driving a car for granted, but we were all beginner drivers (unfortunately for our parents car insurance) and we recognized as such for the first two years of driving cars. Why would it be any different for motorcycles?

The safety margin in a car is far higher than a motorcycle, perhaps a couple orders of magnitude higher. The car takes much less skill to operate proficiently and if there is a crash the car offers a lot of protection.

In fact, according to the proficient motorcycling book, you are still a beginner on a motorcycle for at least three years. There is apparently a spike in accidents in the two to three years experience level that may be due to overconfidence.

I think a better definition of beginner is someone who is not certain they can maneuver their bike in a panic situation at least as well as their car.

Actually, the MSF - or at least the instructors of my course and others online here at the MSF that we were all told at the end of the course - 'you are now certified to be able to ride a motorcycle... In a parking lot.' The instructors I had were excellent and preached that we practice over and over again throughout the course (as well as preached that you have to turn your head to make the bike go in to a turn properly...)

Ongoing practice is not advised in the published course materials I have seen. It should be there and there should be a strong case for practice.

Now, I don't practice, and that's my fault. But I don't see how you could say that the MSF doesn't promote practicing. Except if you said they didn't have a practice product where people who graduated the MSF could go and practice together.

If I was teaching people to ride motorcycles my focus would be to persuade them to make drills and exercises their primary activity for months after the course and then expect to keep doing them regularly for as long as they ride. If there was enough practice going on there would be spontaneous gatherings for that. There wouldn't need to be a product. It could be--FREE!

ride as often as possible and make excuses to ride whenever possible

Riding around is practice going straight but not swerving and braking practice.

But really, how often you practice is just like not buying a 600cc bugsplatter yourself bike as your first bike. It is really just up to you.

The overwhelming majority of experienced riders don't practice and the crash statistics reflect that. Brand new riders, who don't have a clue, should be advised properly and that should include a stronger case for practice.

I would like to see a more up-to-date statistical report on the training levels of motorcyclists that are killed or involved in accidents.

It would be interesting to have a study to see if ongoing practice reduces crash involvment. There is no way to do that study because not enough people practice.

[RhadamYgg]

Formal training doesn't seem to reduce crash involvement... This is a questionable statement.

Thanks for responding. Here is a souce you might trust about the effectiveness of formal training. http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/street ... index.html

Hmmm, I didn't see anything I argue with in the article, not sure what you were reading though.

The only problem I have with the article is that it didn't have a link or contain the actual statistical data gathered used to indicate that training might not be as effective as indicated by some people.

I do see from the article that the MSF wants to do research of the type that I would like to see done, but it also clearly states that the MSF has a clear conflict of interest in being the benefactor of such a study and the entity carrying out the study.

Clearly, the safety of the motorcyclist resides with... the motorcyclist. How many do you see on the road with safety vests or bright jackets? Light colored helmets? Full gear? Maintaining a safe following distance?

I mean it goes right back to the beginning of the MSF course, the Proficient Motorcycling book - the ladder of risk.

And that article specifically went and indicated that they recommend the course for new riders. I mean, who really wants to learn how to ride a motorcycle and the controls and what they do in traffic? Not me, anyway.


RhadamYgg

[RhadamYgg]

as a member of the IT community that not only designs, but writes, implements and trains the end users - I can tell you that if you don't train users you are in for a world of heart ache. My programs are much simpler to understand and operate than a motorcycle.

Using software doesn't require any motor/balance skills except for not falling out of your seat while you're typing. Operating software is all about knowledge. Operating a motorcycle in a panic situation is about practiced skills.
[\quote]

Actually, the software I write and what the user does with it does require coordination and skills. It is just that as computer users we forget that these things are required. Of course, the users aren't going to get hurt or killed when they make a mistake - but running my software is an activity with risk that they take on for their own joy.

My users have to use handheld devices and scan barcodes to take inventories of items for the warehouse to backflush the used quantities to the hospital. I thought it was nothing, but when we recently purchased the building of a hospital and the employees - I found myself training people who hadn't used computers at all much less handheld devices scanning barcodes.

These people needed training - which is what I gave them - and even with that the activity of holding the button down and waving the symbol device was nearly too much for one of my older users.

But anyway, that was months ago and things seem to be going well there.

RhadamYgg

[beginner]

Hmmm, I didn't see anything I argue with in the article, not sure what you were reading though.

The only problem I have with the article is that it didn't have a link or contain the actual statistical data gathered used to indicate that training might not be as effective as indicated by some people.

I do see from the article that the MSF wants to do research of the type that I would like to see done, but it also clearly states that the MSF has a clear conflict of interest in being the benefactor of such a study and the entity carrying out the study.

Clearly, the safety of the motorcyclist resides with... the motorcyclist. How many do you see on the road with safety vests or bright jackets? Light colored helmets? Full gear? Maintaining a safe following distance?

I mean it goes right back to the beginning of the MSF course, the Proficient Motorcycling book - the ladder of risk.

And that article specifically went and indicated that they recommend the course for new riders. I mean, who really wants to learn how to ride a motorcycle and the controls and what they do in traffic? Not me, anyway.

RhadamYgg

It's generally well accepted that formal motorcycle training is not reducing crash involvement for practical purposes. Here is another review of that subject.
http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc165.pdf

People who take training courses should be advised that taking a course does not reduce the risk of crash involvment. Training courses for beginners should advise people that without ongoing drills and exercises they won't have reliable emergency maneuvering skills. Accepting that deficiency is like driving a car with bad brakes or steering.

[RhadamYgg]

The safety margin in a car is far higher than a motorcycle, perhaps a couple orders of magnitude higher. The car takes much less skill to operate proficiently and if there is a crash the car offers a lot of protection.

The fact that motorcycling is riskier doesn't break the reasoning that training on any topic make a person more proficient at that topic. The fact that cars offer more protection than bikes is irrelevant.

I think a better definition of beginner is someone who is not certain they can maneuver their bike in a panic situation at least as well as their car.

That might be a good definition; however, I've had 20 years of practice driving a car - and some of those years I drove 36,000 miles in a single year for three years straight. I liked driving my 1992 Civic that much - in the first three years I owned it.

Right now, without a doubt, I can drive my car better than I can ride my bike. After I get a few years of experience I'll improve - but not to the point of someone with 20 years of experience riding motorcycles.

Riding around is practice going straight but not swerving and braking practice.

Actually my commute does involve some straight line riding. But, it also involves riding through heavy traffic tolls, across the GWB, into some very tight declining radius turns to get on to the Saw Mill/9A going north, and collision avoidance maneuvers that well... Only a New Yorker or someone who commutes to NYC can truly understand - unless of course they have balls of steel and ride motorcycles in Thailand or India.

Even so, I don't have to panic stop on every ride and I don't have to swerve on every ride. So, no I don't get to practice those things.

The overwhelming majority of experienced riders don't practice and the crash statistics reflect that. Brand new riders, who don't have a clue, should be advised properly and that should include a stronger case for practice.

Interestingly enough, the answer to the lack of rider capability and training may not be training or skill (or at least, not completely). For example, a recent study indicates that ABS reduces fatalities of motorcycle riders by 39%. ABS, even in dry conditions - offers the ability to fully brake without the risks of locking wheels and the (sometimes) traumatic consequences of locked wheels.

Now, I'm not proposing that the answer to everything is technology as much as I love technology. But what I am proposing is that human limitations can be bridged - by technology - at least some.

And you know if it increases my chances of survival - I'll take it. Maximum braking is a difficult skill - which isn't helped by the fact that your brakes change over time, the bike has different characteristics depending on the amount of fuel you are carrying, how fat you are at that time and road conditions.

RhadamYgg

[ofblong]

Hmmm, I didn't see anything I argue with in the article, not sure what you were reading though.

The only problem I have with the article is that it didn't have a link or contain the actual statistical data gathered used to indicate that training might not be as effective as indicated by some people.

I do see from the article that the MSF wants to do research of the type that I would like to see done, but it also clearly states that the MSF has a clear conflict of interest in being the benefactor of such a study and the entity carrying out the study.

Clearly, the safety of the motorcyclist resides with... the motorcyclist. How many do you see on the road with safety vests or bright jackets? Light colored helmets? Full gear? Maintaining a safe following distance?

I mean it goes right back to the beginning of the MSF course, the Proficient Motorcycling book - the ladder of risk.

And that article specifically went and indicated that they recommend the course for new riders. I mean, who really wants to learn how to ride a motorcycle and the controls and what they do in traffic? Not me, anyway.

RhadamYgg

It's generally well accepted that formal motorcycle training is not reducing crash involvement for practical purposes. Here is another review of that subject.
http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc165.pdf

People who take training courses should be advised that taking a course does not reduce the risk of crash involvment. Training courses for beginners should advise people that without ongoing drills and exercises they won't have reliable emergency maneuvering skills. Accepting that deficiency is like driving a car with bad brakes or steering.

When you get a review thats worth reading (meaning has true statistical data not just words typed up in some report) let us know. Until then it is GENERALLY accepted that taking the MSF course DOES help lower the risk of getting into a crash. So come back when you can actually backup your falsities with truth.

[beginner]

When you get a review thats worth reading...

I offered evidence. Each person has to decide what the evidence proves to them. Here is an excellent review of Michigan motorcycle crashes. http://www.motorcyclesafetyinfo.com/mic ... chigan.pdf What's hard to ignore is the number of single vehicle motorcycle crashes, 47%. I see a lot of crashes where lack of skills, that can only be devloped doing drills and exercises, seems to be a factor. There are a surprising number of crashes where the rider had time to take an action that was within the performance capabilities of his motorcycle and did nothing. Freezing at the controls is a symptom of lack of skill.

The fact that motorcycling is riskier doesn't break the reasoning that training on any topic make a person more proficient at that topic. The fact that cars offer more protection than bikes is irrelevant.

Training is useful, practice is essential. The lower risk of driving a car is relevent to the precautions needed to have a comfortable safety margin.

Right now, without a doubt, I can drive my car better than I can ride my bike.

The same is true for me, even after 150 hours of practicing emergency maneuvers. Just riding around will never bring those skills up to par with what I can do in a car so I'll keep practicing. Motorcycles can turn, swerve, and brake more effectively than any other type of vehicle on the road so I if can't do it that's because I lack the skills. Those will only come by doing drills and exercises. That takes more time than I expected.

After I get a few years of experience I'll improve - but not to the point of someone with 20 years of experience riding motorcycles.

None of the riders with 20 or 30 or 40 years of experience can be certain of maneuvering their bikes in a panic situation as well as their cars unless they practice the maneuvers regularly. They know that. They've decided to accept the risks of not practicing. Beginners notice that experienced riders don't practice and might make the mistake of believing those riders have the skills never the less.

ABS reduces fatalities of motorcycle riders by 39%.

Time will tell what contribution ABS makes to avoiding crashes but most bikes don't have it and many bikes will never have it and even if it was on all bikes people still have to practice to have reliable emergency maneuvering skills.

if it increases my chances of survival - I'll take it.

I believe doing drills and exercises until you can maneuver your bike as well as your car will increase chances of survival dramatically.