One for the "There are some right idiots out there" file...

[Dave48]

The only safe assumption is that you cant assume anything other than theyre probably out to get you! :eek  Training is only a pathway. Commonsense is uncommonly rare :lol

[Grahamm]

If an asshole driving in front of me STOMPED on his brakes just for the fun of it, would it be my fault if I crashed into the back of him? YES!! He was acting like an asshole, but it would be my fault for not keeping a safe distance. It's the same thing Graham.

So if you were travelling too fast to be able to stop if something happens in front of you, it's your fault? Erm...

Or look at it this way - and be honest with yourself - if you had made that exact same manoeuvre during your Riding Test, do you think you would have passed??

In all honesty, I do not know. Would the Examiner have brought it up in the debrief? Certainly. Would he have marked me down for it? Very probably. Would he have failed me because they were riding irresponsibly? I do not know and unless you're an IAM Examiner, you don't either. You can assume all you like, but that's all it is: assumptions.

[Grahamm]

This is the bit I dont quite get....

You decided that since they would have to slow down behind the car, then you would also pull out meaning that they would have to slow down even quicker behind you?

No, because had they been riding sensibly and doing anything like the speed limit, there would have been no need for them to change their riding plans or slow down sooner because they would have encountered us a distance further up the road.

As I've already said, my mistake was assuming that they were riding sensibly instead of them trying to overtake on double whites past a junction and, again as I've already said, I will take such things into account in the future.

[maddog04]

IPSGA
Information, Position, Speed, Gear, Acceleration

info wise, you've misjudged their speed
position, waiting to join a main road, let them pass
Speed, in this instance.....thiers not your's, how many times have we heard car drivers say or be told that bikes are deceptively quicker than you think
Gear, you'd be in 1st?
Acceleration, not a chance as the car was slow, let them all pass (move off when safe to do so blah blah blah)
I'm not an IAM instructor or examiner but its all about observation (Info bit) and I think he may have failed you

to paraphrase what JZS said............treat everyone as a pleb and you won't go far wrong

[chilly]

whats all this talk of assholes top  are we in america now :2guns arseholes :lol

[fireblake]

Schools must be back.  Absolute carnage on the streets of London today!  Ahh, for the easy days of the Olympics!

You're not wrong. I had to take my son to a hospital appointment in Hampstead and it took an hour longer than the previous week, so many near misses too. Without being a big head i could often predict near misses to my lad just on observation, you can feel it in your gut when Dippy Dave's daydreaming and is gonna change lanes or Trippy Tina is texting. My latest annoyance is Stupid Simon and his SatNav telling him to keep right on the motorway so he suddenly changes lane for no reason other than a stupid machine telling him too.


I used to write childrens books in an earlier life

[Lazarus]

[quote author=Lazarus link=topic=4486.msg37882#msg37882 date=1346921957]
This is the bit I dont quite get....

You decided that since they would have to slow down behind the car, then you would also pull out meaning that they would have to slow down even quicker behind you?

No, because had they been riding sensibly and doing anything like the speed limit, there would have been no need for them to change their riding plans or slow down sooner because they would have encountered us a distance further up the road.

As I've already said, my mistake was assuming that they were riding sensibly instead of them trying to overtake on double whites past a junction and, again as I've already said, I will take such things into account in the future.
[/quote]




:rolleyes :wall

[MadDogMcQ]

QUOTE GRAHAMM "So if you were travelling too fast to be able to stop if something happens in front of you, it's your fault? Erm..."
I don't know about IAM or any other advanced riding methods, but according to the School of Grown Up Men with Common Sense, yes, you need to maintain a distance and a speed which enables you to come to a safe halt in the event of something happening in front of you. Erm, what's difficult to understand about that?? Seems fairly elementary to me  :rolleyes

And if you honestly believe that a Riding Test Examiner might not fail you for pulling out in front of oncoming traffic, causing them to change the speed and direction (not to mention cause a scene with their angry gesticulations), then you passed your test in the 1970's or are living on a totally seperate planet to the rest of us .

:wall

[MadDogMcQ]

Sorry, that should have been  :lol  separate  :lol  (I can hear Rusty's footsteps)

[MadDogMcQ]

Let me pose another question, if I may. I direct this not only to you Graham, but also to any riders who have advanced riding qualifications (or just common sense)....

If you were going around a blind bend and ran into the back of a car which had broken down in the middle of the road, would it be your fault?

[Lazarus]

Let me pose another question, if I may. I direct this not only to you Graham, but also to any riders who have advanced riding qualifications (or just common sense)....

If you were going around a blind bend and ran into the back of a car which had broken down in the middle of the road, would it be your fault?

Absolutely yes!

[dazza]

Am getting the impression this is one of those threads you wish you hadn't started :pokefun

[MadDogMcQ]

Lazarus - you have passed your test! Well done. :rollin

[rayburn600]

If you were going around a blind bend and ran into the back of a car which had broken down in the middle of the road, would it be your fault?

NO
I would blame the dopey mechanic who last worked on the car.
That statement is of course nonsense. In the same way the other bike riders Graham holds responsible for going too fast when he pulled in front of them, knowing they had nowhere to go.
It becomes illogical to blame someone else for your short comings.
I think..
Ray
IAM

I
Am
Moving.

[budgiemurray]

Yep most definately.. You should only travel at a speed in which you can see to stop.. Most times if.you run into.a slower or stationary object its your fault..

Budgie

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Rusty]

Sorry, that should have been  :lol  separate  :lol  (I can hear Rusty's footsteps)

I now pronounce you Bee flat.  :lol 

[MadDogMcQ]

If you were going around a blind bend and ran into the back of a car which had broken down in the middle of the road, would it be your fault?


NO I would blame the dopey mechanic who last worked on the car.

:lol :rollin :lol

[Rusty]

Yesterday I drove behind a car in traffic, I was pretty close but we were travelling quite slowly.


Then at around 20mph from between his wheels emerged a bit of wood with a nail in it - bump - bump - hit both my tyres as I hadn't left room or time to avoid such an occurrence. That could have been a brick, a pothole - or whatever. I should have known better, I do know better, but we all have occasional lapses of concentration and it's usually at that precise moment when something catches us out.


I remember a chief constable in Wales was caught doing 94mph on an A road, in court he claimed it was "A momentary lapse of concentration". He got away with it - of course.

[Grahamm]

QUOTE GRAHAMM "So if you were travelling too fast to be able to stop if something happens in front of you, it's your fault? Erm..."
I don't know about IAM or any other advanced riding methods, but according to the School of Grown Up Men with Common Sense, yes, you need to maintain a distance and a speed which enables you to come to a safe halt in the event of something happening in front of you. Erm, what's difficult to understand about that?? Seems fairly elementary to me  :rolleyes

So if you're in a 40 limit, you're approaching a junction or exit where vehicles are pulling out from, there are solid double white lines and a blind dip which might conceal an on-coming vehicle, do you a) maintain speed (or back off, depending on the exact distance to the hazard) or b) accelerate and attempt a dangerous and illegal overtake?

And if you honestly believe that a Riding Test Examiner might not fail you for pulling out in front of oncoming traffic, causing them to change the speed and direction (not to mention cause a scene with their angry gesticulations), then you passed your test in the 1970's or are living on a totally seperate planet to the rest of us .

I have done my best to describe the situation, but the fact of the matter remains that *you* weren't there, you didn't see what happened and I cannot include every single detail (did I mention both of them were wearing Iridium Visors that may have been illegal too?)

Again I re-iterate that, in future, I will be certain to *LEARN* from this situation and take account of it in future and I also hope that others may benefit from my experience of what happened so that the same thing doesn't happen to them.

[Grahamm]

If you were going around a blind bend and ran into the back of a car which had broken down in the middle of the road, would it be your fault?

See my post #58.