Advanced Riding - Progressive or agressive?

Need some advice from any advanced/Rospa/IAM types on here about progress, Stu or anyone else can you help clear something up for me? I found this post on another forum and is exactly my thinking:

“ went out on ride with an I.A.M. assessor, though a nice guy [ he was older than me] he was riding a 1300cc Pan with 4 cylinders and i was riding my slug a Pacific Coast 800cc with only two cylinders. The main criticism he made was overtaking.. apart from being on the motorway i overtook nothing. I tried to explain that if a car is doing 45mph or close to the limit in a 50 area with various bends, white lines, farm entrances etc If it was my decision to remain behind that car. at a safe distance then i would do so and not commit to a reckless overtaking manoeuvre which may be dangerous.

This did not sit well with him at all as he rides by the police rule of making progress and that any moving vehicle in front is a possible danger thus one should at the earliest opportunity overtake and leave the car well behind. where presumably it no longer constitute a danger. We disagreed on that point as well and as a result i was marked down on that one.

I've also heard of it happening with RoSPA. One candidate complained he was graded as silver rather than gold because his observer felt he'd failed to make progress adequately when he didn't overtake a car doing 56mph in a 60 limit .”

Is this a requirement that is expected all the time (when safe) to be up to advanced standard? If so, I fear I wouldn't stand a chance of passing

This is the only thing that worries me about taking an assessed ride and signing up… I’m a fairly chilled out rider (or ride like a sissy girlie) and, like the guy above, if there is a car in front of me on a single carriageway doing 56 in a 60 chances are I cba to overtake unless it is really quiet on the roads or I’m in a serious rush and I’m happy with that – I can’t see the danger in doing 56 in a 60 behind a car with adequate braking distance but I can see myself getting into trouble by changing the way I ride to try follow this ‘rule’ and thinking to be advanced standard I would have to overtake every single car that is not dead on the speed limit.

Everything else they talked about at IAM made sense to me, also picked up a few bits especially about the limit points, so its all good. But thinking about it today I don’t understand the logic - Isn't the speed limit a maximum legal speed not a “you must always be riding xx mph exactly rule”. Maybe I just need more time on the bike, and shouldn't be worrying about this advanced stuff just yet

I was taught the "progressive" approach to driving when I did my advanced Police driving course. It was always drummed into us to be progressive and not aggressive in our driving. However, we would get marked down for not taking an available overtake as it would be classed as hesitancy.

I think, or certainly the way it was explained to us it, when you are an advanced driver/rider, your observations and anticipations are far greater, or are meant to be, than that of the untrained driver so that if there is an actual danger, you would have spotted it miles back and thus not taken the overtake, but vice versa too, if the overtake was on, you should have carried out all your obs and prepared for the overtake and be ready to go as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

That said, just because you are trained like that doesn't mean you have to do it all the time. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.

The biggest thing you will learn from any advanced training is observation and anticipation. You will be far more aware of your surroundings and see so much more after training so if you don't want to take an overtake and you get marked down for it, does it really matter? You will still have had invaluable training.

I can't see the point in it all to be honest. I took advanced riding lessons as soon as I had passed my test. I learnt a whole heap of stuff that normally would have only come from experience and near misses.

The IAM and ROSPA type groups give advanced lessons but give out 'rewards' by following their particular rules. There are no rules when it comes to your own riding and what you feel safe doing or not doing. If your happy to have not overtaken the vehicle in front then good for you. I know I don't need some one sat behind me shaking his head and saying I should have made the overtake.

You can keep your gold star or certificate. I'll ride the way I want to. If I want lessons I'll take some, but not so I can 'pass' a non worthwhile test. I think a lot of riders do it so they can get cheaper insurance. I've found out the difference is so minimal it's not worth my time or cost to do it.

Having said all that. Good luck with it and hope you achieve what you want from it.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Stig_Of_The_Dump

I can't see the point in it all to be honest.

I'll answer 100th when i've more time.
But the point of it is, it gives you access to membership of one of the best riding clubs available The .org being another - they are different and both have their benefits & downfalls and even though only one is free I would not want to give up either.

[G]

Originally Posted by the100thidiot

I can’t see the danger in doing 56 in a 60 behind a car with adequate braking distance but I can see myself getting into trouble by changing the way I ride to try follow this ‘rule’ and thinking to be advanced standard I would have to overtake every single car that is not dead on the speed limit.

The point is to remove ALL danger... you say you think there is no danger in following a car at below the speed limit. However, there is, the danger lies in the cars behind you getting frustrated at not doing the speed limit and wanting to overtake the slower vehicles themselves.

They make take unecessary risks to over take you and the slower vehicle...THAT is the the danger.

So better to get by at a safe oppurtunity (there will be one) and remove all risk.

Originally Posted by Stig_Of_The_Dump

I can't see the point in it all to be honest. I took advanced riding lessons as soon as I had passed my test. I learnt a whole heap of stuff that normally would have only come from experience and near misses.

Well, you > than me. I have been riding just over a year and had too many near misses for my liking and all weather commuting over winter (excluding snow/ice) and they still managed to make me think about a few things so I don't doubt these guys can teach me stuff.

I guess it depends on your attitude - if your there just for the reduced insurance then I think you have already closed your mind off. Me on the other hand, happy to confess I know jack*hit, will never stop learning, and I'll take all the 'how to stay alive on 2 wheels' advice I can get.

As for "non worthwhile test" - is there any serious research into this (and maybe from website more reputable than wikipedia)? I found this -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institu...nced_Motorists

Read the bit about the Brunel University research. Must apply to the biking training a little bit too, right? I mean the finer details between riding a bike and driving a car are different, but the basic stuff - spotting potential hazards and not crashing part ha got to be pretty similar? Like MBK said "advanced training is observation and anticipation". If riding and driving were that different I don't think I could have passed my test having only done my CBT, but with over 10 years car driving. So yeah, I'll sign up for that advanced training please.

I just needed someone to explain the thinking behind the 'must overtake' mentality which, to me as a big noob just looks like aggressive riding. I was thinking how is this safer!? I wasn't thinking bout the guy driving/riding behind me who may not be too happy about not going as fast as he can. I have had plenty of people in cars try and bully me off the road when doing 30 in a 30 zone on my 125 so yeah, I totally get this now. Another thing learned courtesy of the IAM, with a lil help from you guys.

Well, now I get the theory behind it but it doesn't mean I'll be able to actually put it in to practice.

[Dave20046]

It's more down to the rider than the organisation if they're aggressive or progressive but I'd say it's likely that the person quoted above just hadn't ever ridden with someone as fast as the IAM bloke. IAM guys tend to be highly trained, experienced skilled riders they're bound to be fast.
I've done IAM in my car but to be honest the majority of them were ******s (apart from my supervisor thankfully)so I didn't keep it up but I can say I'm much safer for it.
I'm keen to do bike IAM , my riding's gone down hill recently but even before then I know I'd have benefited from it.
Last year I did bikesafe and that's like a mini IAM course, all the stuff they taught us I knew from IAM in my car (but good to refresh) but the most invaluable bit was getting feedback on your riding from a police rider. Might be worth doing a bikesafe first?

Originally Posted by G

The point is to remove ALL danger... you say you think there is no danger in following a car at below the speed limit. However, there is, the danger lies in the cars behind you getting frustrated at not doing the speed limit and wanting to overtake the slower vehicles themselves.

They make take unecessary risks to over take you and the slower vehicle...THAT is the the danger.

So better to get by at a safe oppurtunity (there will be one) and remove all risk.

That's exactly what that blue clio did on saturday. I thought he was going to try run you off the road
There's also the risk of them doing something stupid (either on purpose or by accident) rear shunts are dangerous for bikers.

Originally Posted by G

The point is to remove ALL danger... you say you think there is no danger in following a car at below the speed limit. However, there is, the danger lies in the cars behind you getting frustrated at not doing the speed limit and wanting to overtake the slower vehicles themselves.

They make take unecessary risks to over take you and the slower vehicle...THAT is the the danger.

So better to get by at a safe oppurtunity (there will be one) and remove all risk.

Again; friday night on the way to wales - closest thing to a head on I've ever seen. Truck thing at the front then orose, then some **** in a toyota , then paul, then me. Ollie went to overtake the truck (slight bend to the left but plenty of room and you could see far enough to do it safely on a bike) then paul goes but as he does this the toyota decides he wants to, swerving towards paul, paul gets out of there safely, then I hang back and this car juts out slap bang into the middle of the oncoming lane blindly and a line of oncoming cars madly swerve out the way. Heart stopped for a second.

I agree completely that you shouldn't be forced to overtake.

If you look to the examiner like you intend to overtake, then miss a safe opportunity, then yes that is a hesitation. But if you cruise up to the rear of a car, maintain your distance and continue at 56mph, in my book that should be fine in anyone's book! How can it be a hesitation if you never intended to overtake in the first place?

An extra 4mph is about 4 minute saving over a 1 hour ride with an average 60mph speed. Is it that critical?

I've had criticism from an advanced riding instructor who was riding behind me for waiting for a car to pass at a give way, instead of pulling out and gunning it away from the junction, which I would have to do to prevent the oncoming vehicle from having to change speed or direction. I told him I was in no hurry and he needed to learn some patience!

I was told on a bike safe ride that I gunned it too hard on an overtake, when I took the advice from an advanced riding DVD to give it a good bit of power to get past and spend less time in the danger zone alongside the car and on the wrong side of the road.

It's this kind of thing that puts me off advanced training, it's a bit hypocritical sometimes and what one observer/instructor praises you for another one can criticise you. And it's supposed to be about safety, you can't break the speed limit in the exam, but the instructors criticise for failing to make progress in observed rides.

I think you just have to do it with the approach that you take from it the advice that helps you or teaches you something, and ignore the stuff you don't agree with.

I have a friend who has just passed his IAM observers test, and if I do my IAM with anybody it will be him, because I know his personality he will judge each manoeuvre on it's merits and with a dose of realism, rather than apply hard and fast rules for the sake of it.

I did my IAM test years ago (could benefit from a refresher me thinks) anyway I was also a qualified observer (dont allow this to make you think Im a good rider, Ive lost my confidence hence the unable to ride bit). I was advised (we dont teach) and therefore advised my associates to only overtake if they could do so safely and quickly within the speed limit. Ie if car in front doing 56mph in a 60 I was expect them to sit behind as they would only be able to get past him "quickly" by speeding. You dont want to be sitting on the wrong side of the road for any length of time. But if the car was doing 45mph in a 60, I would expect the rider to make an effort to pass. This would involve getting bike ready for overtake, getting into overtaking position, doing all checks and if not safe then back off and repeating this as and when necessary.

I would thoroughly recommend the IAM, a lot of people think its a lot of pipe smoking numpties on pans and a lot of them are, but they would still ride the butt off many colour coordinated GSXR weekend warriors without having to put down their pipe.

[Red Herring]

My general advice is that if you have come up behind another vehicle it tends to suggest that your average speed is higher than theirs, so if a safe and appropriate opportunity to pass arises then it would not be unreasonable to expect you to take it. If you don't take it I would be looking more at the reasons you didn't go rather than simply telling you that you should have gone. Is it that you saw danger where there wasn't any, perhaps you lack some confidence in what you do see, or perhaps you just weren't looking for the right information. Certainly on an IAM test you would be unlikely to be failed for missing a single overtake, but if it was a general trait you would be unlikely to make the expected standard. Progress is not about going fast, it's about processing information swiftly which allows you to maintain speed where appropriate.