The advanced riding process is self selecting in as much as it tends only to attract thinking riders who wish to improve.
Those that think they don't need to improve or don't think hard enough about hazards usually don't end up taking IAM or RoSPa tests and are more likely to end up in hospital.
The fact that the results are "surprising" is rather a strange phrase since the the original version of Roadcraft (The basis of IAM and RosPA training) was put together early post-war and has been available to the public via TSO for 60 years.
As far as I can see this survey states the bleeding obvious and does not address issues such as the demographic that will never consider advanced riding as an option, the trickier issues of normal riding (night, wet conditions, skid control etc.) which IAM fail to address properly
One final point, insurance companies work on statistics, the statistic that advanced riding reduces risk was proven to them many years ago, and that is why they offer a discount - Why didnt Nottingham just ask the insurers for information and save some money !
Conclusion: this survey was a waste of the money that I and others pay to IAM and the taxes we all pay for research in higher education.
Posted: 03/12/2010 at 17:31