South West Bikers | Motorcycle Forum

phild wrote:The £10 per ride goes towards petrol and running costs as we all use our own bikes and get nothing financially out of it. If you work it out I doubt very much if the £10 covers much in any case.

RoSPA only charge £3 per ride for fuel for its observers

Oh, and you have a vacancy on the course you dont have an offer on the course

How long are their Observed rides?
Are ROSPA 'observers' paid or given expenses?
What fee is there for their equivalent of 'Skills for life'?
What's the point of your further negative comments?
What's your problem?! - clearly you have some kind of issue either with this offer or maybe IAM in general??!!

What's that saying.........if you've nothing positive/constructive/helpful to say............

AndyW wrote: What's that saying.........if you've nothing positive/constructive/helpful to say............

which is why Im staying out of it

one thing I will say though as this thread is a good example of it ..site admins... for f ucks sake can we get rid of the c rash to funky thing as not only is it completely inane it detracts from serious posts....

if nothing else consider the fact that the word c rash is also liable to be in RIP posts. Get rid of it.

AndyW wrote:Hi you

I have to pay so that you guys can have posts from me that make sense?!.......you'll have to put up with the pissprununciation

funky = c r a s h
Lost on me, I don't see the point!

Doing anything Sunday.....few of us off out somewhere

I am not entering into the IAM/ROSPA argument, and please don't take this as a direct criticism Andy, but it seems a bit unfair that you are happy to post up here and promote your club/organisation, which you make a point is a charity and not overly well funded, then baulk at paying a fee that is less than the cost of half a tank of fuel to help keep an equally poorly funded site/resource (that you are obviously quite happy to take benefit of) going ......

Re. the "funky" issue ..... there is a member here called funky who had a spate of crashes/misfortunes in close succession hence crashing became synonimous with Funky and an admin created the name-change ...... tbh, it's wearing a bit thin now .....

Hi TLM, no argument from me re ROSPA vs IAM, both excellent, both have their place, no competition between the two, very different and so appealing to different people dependent on their level of experience and how far they want to take 'advanced' riding. I know a lot of people who have done both and keep up membership of both.

I wasn't having a go re the paid up membership either, I pay a subscription to a couple of biking sites that I use more frequently and have been a member of for years but it would get expensive to pay out for every forum I use, my point was that imho it makes sense for the edit feature to be available to everyone.

Thanks for the funky explanation

speedy(delboy) wrote:

phild wrote:The £10 per ride goes towards petrol and running costs as we all use our own bikes and get nothing financially out of it. If you work it out I doubt very much if the £10 covers much in any case.

RoSPA only charge £3 per ride for fuel for its observers

Oh, and you have a vacancy on the course you dont have an offer on the course

Having been at a meeting with RoSPA, just a few weeks ago, where charges were discussed, it appears we are more or less in alinement with petrol charges and package fees. May be your info is out of date?

Incidentally, I don't take any money from my Associates. All I ask is that once through the test, and only if they are happy to do so, make a contibution to club funds..........unreasonable?

The programme is tailored to the individual, and rides are arranged between the Observer and Associate. We do not carry vacancies, someone signs up to the package we cater for THEIR individual needs not ours.

I really can't understand what the issue is here? Are we for extra training or not? I thought I'd come up with a good idea to help a young rider, appears not. The only thing I'm trying to 'sell' is rider safety. You can only achieve success with IAM / RoSPA if you are keen to partisipate.

AndyW wrote: Advanced Riders…
Are Amongst the safest on the road
Are 50-70% less likely to be involved in a crash
Suffer fewer injuries in the event of a crash
Benefit from lower insurance premiums
Generally have reduced fuel costs and minimised bike wear and tear
Get more satisfaction from their riding

Sorry but I take issue with that.
It sounds like a made up quote from the IAM.
I'd really like to see the study that shows that fact to be true.
Hopefully that will be forthcoming.
As regards insurance discounts.
My insurers offer 5% discount for IAM club, and no further discounts for being a full member.
5% !!!!!
That hardly reflects the level of competance that many percieve advanced riders to have attained.
I get that for being in the AA

By the way.....we do have a great social side to the club as well.


Still don't get what the issue is here with my offer If you're not interested that's fine, I'm not trying to Press Gang anyone.

Stately wrote: Sorry but I take issue with that.
It sounds like a made up quote from the IAM.
I'd really like to see the study that shows that fact to be true.
Hopefully that will be forthcoming.

I've had a rummage back through some IAM publications looking for the source but can't find it now :shrug: but hey would one of the top road safety organisations, a registered charity that's been running for 43 years and has 112,000 members really 'make things up'?! I really don't think so and assuming they ever did how quick do you think they'd be picked up with all the scrutiny from their peers, gov'mnt agencies, the public and so on.......bloody quick.
Surely you didn't really think that?!

Stately wrote: As regards insurance discounts.
My insurers offer 5% discount for IAM club, and no further discounts for being a full member.
5% !!!!!
That hardly reflects the level of competance that many percieve advanced riders to have attained.
I get that for being in the AA

The insurance discount is just one of several 'benefits' but who cares about those.....the point is improving rider safety!!!! That said 5% (some insurance companies may be more) EVERY year is better than nothing and certainly for the under 25's (like me that was a while ago for you ) 5% of say a £400 premium is not to be sneezed at!
I recently attended an FBoS course via CVAM.....FREE!, saving me the £60 that it usually costs and some insurance companies also give a discount for this
I hope evrything works out well with Alcoholics Anonymous

Shame about the all the ill conceived comments that have been posted in this thread as a result of which anyone who might have been interested and benefitted from the offer has probably been put off already.

Ok, I have sat back and said nothing on this subject, with the intention of not getting involved, but despite that here's my take ......

AndyW/Phild .... I agree it's sad that the topic has been taken "off-target", as there is a reasonable offer to help a relatively novice rider gain experience that could otherwise take years to gain.

However, I would also qualify that statement by saying that "the system" does not make you a wonder-rider, and that both groups need to work on their public image - either from the perspective that little is known of them (ROSPA, in my case) or the public perception of them (IAM, in my case).

Most of what is taught by the system is sound common sense - improving visibility, correct road positioning, ensuring clear sight lines before/during overtaking, being in the correct gear, speed, etc., for the conditions - and is what most riders should pick up with experience (or age .... ). However, in my opinion/perception it does get built up beyond proportion by those with vested interest in doing so - whether that be the police, IAM, or ROSPA. Following "the system" will not in itself make you a riding god. It will not make you faster than Rossi. It should make you safer, It should make you more perceptive of the road conditions and the road itself, but this is nothing that you cannot (or should not) teach yourself or gain from miles on the saddle anyway.

The vested parties, once again in my opinion, have a tendency to make "the system" the be-all and end-all in itself, rather than looking at the end product that is desired, i.e. safer, better (and quicker, not faster?) riding. Now I accept that my opinion is formed from experiences the best part of 20 years ago now, when many (most ) IAM ridiers were bearded, pipe smoking, BMW/Pan-European/Goldwing riders ...... and that may not necessarily be as valid now - but surely that is the crux of my earlier point ..... these groups need to work on their public image - and they won't ever change if the non-beardie, sportsbike riding types aren't encouraged to join.

I would say that the offer is great, and any "younger/less experienced" rider should be encouraged to improve their skill-base, whether that be through an advanced riding course (IAM or ROSPA), Bikesafe, private tuition, even to an extent track-days/schools (for machine control rather than road-craft) as I have often found the "learn from your mistakes" approach a little on the painfull (if not expensive) side

At the and of the day education is all about the teacher imparting the benefit of their wisdom, and the pupil having the sense to read through the bull and decide what of it they are prepared to accept/believe/follow ........

So, can we wind the argument/slagging off up now, as it does no-one any good The link is there for those that are interested to follow, we all accept that any training for the inexperienced is better than nothing, and we are all allowed our private opinions as to how beneficial it will be for the relevant party.

ZX6R wrote:A few years back if I remember correctly Ride or Bike magazine did an article on training versus instinct and put a despatch rider against a class 1 police rider over the same short road circuit. The results were interested. It a shame I can't find the article but it must on online somewhere

Of course the Police rider would have been the better rider.

This is what I mean about the IAM being complaicent.

They believe that they are Police class one standard because their training is based on the Police system, but they are as far removed from that as is possible to be.

The St. Johns brigade recieve training based on the same basic techniques as the ambulance service but be honest.

If you were lying in the road and your life depended on who was at the scene, who would you rather it be ?

A St. Johns Ambulance member, or a qualified paramedic.

Bit of a no brainer really ?

Stately wrote:

ZX6R wrote:A few years back if I remember correctly Ride or Bike magazine did an article on training versus instinct and put a despatch rider against a class 1 police rider over the same short road circuit. The results were interested. It a shame I can't find the article but it must on online somewhere

Of course the Police rider would have been the better rider.

This is what I mean about the IAM being complaicent.

They believe that they are Police class one standard because their training is based on the Police system, but they are as far removed from that as is possible to be.

The St. Johns brigade recieve training based on the same basic techniques as the ambulance service but be honest.

If you were lying in the road and your life depended on who was at the scene, who would you rather it be ?

A St. Johns Ambulance member, or a qualified paramedic.

Bit of a no brainer really ?

Surely this is nitpicking.
I was under no illusions when I undertook the IAM test that it was identical training to that the police undertake, and why would I or anyone else think that? The coppers undertake training on a full time basis. We don't. It can't possibly be the exactly same thing, and I have yet to meet an IAM member who claims it is, what is claimed is that it is based on the Police system.
I don't see how the IAM's attempts to demonstrate safe riding techniques is a bad thing. You may not think much of the IAM's image, you might think that some IAM members are t osser's, you may or may not be right on both counts - who cares?
It's about putting the odds in your favour when you sling a leg over your bike. Everything else is immaterial. If you don't get on with the IAM I'm certainly not going to have a go at you for that, but why attempt to sway others away from a bit of training that is indisputably useful. Most of it is common sense I'll admit freely, but the fact that training acts as a reinforcement doesn't harm.
My personal experience of IAM members has been fairly neutral, the training didn't make me a quicker rider, and nor was that a reason for doing it, it didn't make me any more aware of my bikes capabilities or my own, what it did was give me considerably more focus on what I'm doing when I am riding. For that I am grateful.

Andy, do you want this post split up ?

Keep your add in here and split the discussion into another thread ?

Phil

Stately wrote:

ZX6R wrote:A few years back if I remember correctly Ride or Bike magazine did an article on training versus instinct and put a despatch rider against a class 1 police rider over the same short road circuit. The results were interested. It a shame I can't find the article but it must on online somewhere

Of course the Police rider would have been the better rider.

police motorcyclists are legends in their own minds.

give me a copper in a car any day much more reasonable individuals...for some reason the police biker role really seems to attract completely the wrong type of person. I cant remember the last time I got pulled by a policeman on a bike where I didnt end up having a difference of opinion with them.... unprofessional, s hit riders, huge chips on their shoulders, with deep set issues.....probably troubled by the fact that my nan who has mild alzheimers could give them a run for their money on their s hit bikes in her nissan micra.

Personally I think that any training on a bike whatsoever can only be a good thing. Disregarding the social side of it, IAM as far as I can see are only going to teach you (overall) how to ride more safely than you are at present. I honestly cant see how that is a bad thing. Even if you go out every Sunday morning and go absolutely mental, at least you will have that training to know when its safer to go silly speeds and when its needed to take it easy, when the best places to overtake are etc. You may still be riding like a complete twat if thats how you get your kicks, but at least the training is there to know when to slow down. It may not make you quicker on the road, it may even make you slower, but if you go out and enjoy riding more and feel more confident about what you are doing then how can that be a bad thing? SOME of their techniques may be dubious, but as I say, overall I think it is a good thing. When I first started taking riding lessons for my A licence I was taught how to pass the test. Several times I was told my road positioning was spot on, but too advanced and not what the examiner is looking for. So I had to change my riding style to pass the test and then revert back to the 'advanced' road positioning, which was the advice I was given. I am all for the IAM and ROSPA etc, the more things you learn the better.