What's Luck Go To Do With It?

[planegray]

Great Topic Kurt, Thanks :hail


"I'd rather be lucky than good"
Lefty Gomez

 

[NeilInPacifica]

I can see how a driver of a car (with a roof), wouldn't see that breaking though the overpass sidewall... And that driver having no open space to dodge/swerve into... But.. I bet I would of seen it start, and Not get dropped on.

:rofl I hear you though. Gotta accept that God/Universe, whatever you want to call it, has a plan too, we are just one little tiny spec in that. You like everyone else will take our last breath at some point.

 

[louemc]

:rofl I hear you though. Gotta accept that God/Universe, whatever you want to call it, has a plan too, we are just one little tiny spec in that. You like everyone else will take our last breath at some point.

Of course, my last breath is waiting out there.

But.. This situation was about seeing... And early enough, doing avoidance of a truck and broken concrete, from falling on you.

Different people see differently.

They can't define the word "see" to describe the action of their brain, in concentration and intensity of the eye movements,
taking in the scene that is around them... So... "seeing"... doesn't get defined.

 

[louemc]

True, but personally I would've seen it, and wheelied to a stop to let my bike catch the falling truck, holding it up just long enough for me to jump off. I'd then run back and signal traffic behind me to stop.

But that's just me... :thumbup

Living in imaginary world...:rofl

 

[Lunch Box]

Living in imaginary world...:rofl

Quoted for irony. arty

 

[planegray]

Of course, my last breath is waiting out there.

But.. This situation was about seeing... And early enough, doing avoidance of a truck and broken concrete, from falling on you.

Different people see differently.

They can't define the word "see" to describe the action of their brain, in concentration and intensity of the eye movements,
taking in the scene that is around them... So... "seeing"... doesn't get defined.

:dunno

sounds lucky to me

 

[redtail]

Living in imaginary world...:rofl

Perhaps a picture would help...

Oh yeah, almost forgot: :rofl

 

[canyonrat]

I had a few close calls with buzzards and deer. I've only been able to adjust speed and direction slightly. It has been enough to allow the animal to get out of the way, but had they done different things i would have hit them. I've also slowed way before i saw them, even slowed entire groups of riders, and in those situations total avoidance was possible. Bit there is a new tom cruz movie whoch will involve sport bikes, so that movie should answer all of our questions as to whats possible.

 

[clutchslip]

.....His name was Craig Hightower and he was killed commuting to work.
...... His name was Gary Jaehne, and he was killed on a beautiful spring Saturday out riding with friends on a roads he knew like no one else is ever likely to know them.

I believe in doing what I can to be the best rider I can be. I don't believe in infallibility. I don't believe popes are infallible, and I sure as shit don't think motorcyclists are infallible.

There were enough Greek tragedies taught when I was in K-12 that I soaked in the lesson that hubris is a bad thing and will lead to a bad end. If you've got the hubris to believe you're infallible, well then, all I can do is suggest a little humility and awareness, and wish you good luck.

That's what luck has to do with it.

Most of us get it, I think.
There are more, but I will add, Dave Stanton, paralyzed from the waist down. Are you kidding? This guy was a AFM deity and lost use of his legs in a turn he had ridden thousands of times. Nah, couldn't be "luck". If he was any good, he would have beaten that liter bike into submission before it crippled him.

Luck, chance, and randomness don't really exist.

This sounds like a familiar poster, here, but ignores evolution and quantum physics. There is randomness. Sorry if that disappoints you.

True, but personally I would've seen it, and wheelied to a stop to let my bike catch the falling truck, holding it up just long enough for me to jump off. I'd then run back and signal traffic behind me to stop.

But that's just me... :thumbup

But, did you check your air pressure? I think you are slipping.
--------

I have survived being unlucky. I will never say I was lucky to survive my head-on collision. My skill saved my life. My skill was not adequate to avoid the collision. And neither would anyone else's skill avoid it, well, except, you-know-who.

------- A little off topic, but valid. V

.....
But I've seen him with my own eyes more times than a few push it on the street to where luck made the only difference.
Both Gary and Scott where very passionate about the sport and absolutely loved riding. Neither is a hero or a vilain. Both paid an unfortunate price for their passion.

I did a couple of laps with them on nine at irresponsible speeds. I am glad I was "lucky" enough to survive that experience. It was a mistake that I would never make again.

 

[budman]

This sounds like a familiar poster, here, but ignores evolution and quantum physics. There is randomness. Sorry if that disappoints you.

Have to agree. Ask any WWII combat pilot.

 

[ontherearwheel]

I saw a 300 ninja today with both forks broke in half at the lower triples. The forks springs were the only thing folding the forks. Front wheel had several broken spokes.

This tail was crushed as both sides.

The rider......not a scratch, not a bruise, nothing.

There is luck........

 

[louemc]

I saw a 300 ninja today with both forks broke in half at the lower triples. The forks springs were the only thing folding the forks. Front wheel had several broken spokes.

This tail was crushed as both sides.

The rider......not a scratch, not a bruise, nothing.

There is luck........

:wow Jesus, there has to be some story behind that...

 

[latindane]

Casey Stoner's crash in Suzuka is proof of "luck" being a factor. For I have no clue how many (thousands?) laps, those throttle cables (specific to the HRC endurance bikes) had not failed.

I have the feeling almost everybody is on the same page here. Whether you want to interpret it as "skill (riding, prevention, lessons learned, etc.) increases good luck" or "skill reduces consequences of bad luck", you're saying the same thing in my book.

Uncertainty is inevitable. Mitigating risk to the best of your abilities is a very good idea. Actively and purposefully improving those abilities is a very good idea. Thinking that your abilities will allow you to avoid risk (and riding accordingly) is a very bad idea.

 

[DataDan]

I have the feeling almost everybody is on the same page here. Whether you want to interpret it as "skill (riding, prevention, lessons learned, etc.) increases good luck" or "skill reduces consequences of bad luck", you're saying the same thing in my book.

I think you're right, with some slack in the term "almost everybody".

But I object when someone knowingly leaves himself open to a random event and then, when he either falls victim to it or narrowly escapes, attributes the outcome to "luck" and doesn't acknowledge that he had a choice in subjecting himself to a roll of the dice in the first place.

And I object when someone unknowingly leaves himself open to a random event, falls victim to it, then blames it on "bad luck" and refuses to admit his shortcoming and accept the obvious lesson.

And I object when someone invokes "luck" as a reason not to look for a lesson in someone else's misfortune. It's like it would be disrespectful to the victim or to the Gods Who Determine Our Fate. Like if he did discover a preventive measure, the gods would just find another way to kill him if they really wanted to.

Even the word "luck" grates. Using it to describe the randomness present in the real world is one thing, but it is often used with a mystical connotation that implies supernatural intervention. Whatever works for you. But I'm going to rely instead on my flawed and finite human faculty of reason.

 

[Marcoose]

I think you're right, with some slack in the term "almost everybody".

But I object when someone knowingly leaves himself open to a random event and then, when he either falls victim to it or narrowly escapes, attributes the outcome to "luck" and doesn't acknowledge that he had a choice in subjecting himself to a roll of the dice in the first place.

And I object when someone unknowingly leaves himself open to a random event, falls victim to it, then blames it on "bad luck" and refuses to admit his shortcoming and accept the obvious lesson.

And I object when someone invokes "luck" as a reason not to look for a lesson in someone else's misfortune. It's like it would be disrespectful to the victim or to the Gods Who Determine Our Fate. Like if he did discover a preventive measure, the gods would just find another way to kill him if they really wanted to.

Even the word "luck" grates. Using it to describe the randomness present in the real world is one thing, but it is often used with a mystical connotation that implies supernatural intervention. Whatever works for you. But I'm going to rely instead on my flawed and finite human faculty of reason.

It is hard for me to say this, DataDan, but it makes sense.

:laughing

 

[flying_hun]

I think you're right, with some slack in the term "almost everybody".

But I object when someone knowingly leaves himself open to a random event and then, when he either falls victim to it or narrowly escapes, attributes the outcome to "luck" and doesn't acknowledge that he had a choice in subjecting himself to a roll of the dice in the first place.

And I object when someone unknowingly leaves himself open to a random event, falls victim to it, then blames it on "bad luck" and refuses to admit his shortcoming and accept the obvious lesson.

And I object when someone invokes "luck" as a reason not to look for a lesson in someone else's misfortune. It's like it would be disrespectful to the victim or to the Gods Who Determine Our Fate. Like if he did discover a preventive measure, the gods would just find another way to kill him if they really wanted to.

Even the word "luck" grates. Using it to describe the randomness present in the real world is one thing, but it is often used with a mystical connotation that implies supernatural intervention. Whatever works for you. But I'm going to rely instead on my flawed and finite human faculty of reason.

Where did any of those arguments get made? The only reason I suggested not going through GaryJ's and Craig's crash stuff yet again, was that it has been covered, and I was trying to avoid the sort of sectarian violence that we've seen before in those discussions.

My purpose was to show that a little humility in our riding goes a long way. That random events can occur. We have a few members who appear to believe that their skills are so great, and their knowledge of their local roads so encyclopedic that nothing bad can happen to them. That is the hubris I was addressing.

 

[GAJ]

My purpose was to show that a little humility in our riding goes a long way. That random events can occur. We have a few members who appear to believe that their skills are so great, and their knowledge of their local roads so encyclopedic that nothing bad can happen to them. That is the hubris I was addressing.

If I'm not mistaken, most accidents happen on roads people have ridden/driven over numerous times before.

"You might think the drowsiness that accompanies a long road trip is more of a threat than cruising around your neighborhood. But car accidents often take place within just 25 miles of home. While this is due to the fact that most driving occurs close to home, the relaxation we feel caused by the repetition of driving through our own neighborhood likely plays a role.

If you've ever gotten home from work only to realize that your brain was on auto-pilot the whole drive, then you know this phenomenon. Driving in familiar places can cause us to rely more on muscle memory than on our active driving skills (making us less likely to be hyper-vigilant on the road.

The 2 most important things you can do to stay safe on a short neighborhood ride are the same things that will protect you on any ride: stay alert and buckle up. Seems like a no-brainer, but being active about these things really does make you a better, safer driver.

Try not to fall into a comfort zone when you're approaching your humble abode (or hilltop mansion). Even though you may know the route like the back of your hand, accidents are often caused by unpredictable elements like another driver, a crossing animal, or car equipment failure. And letting your guard down can decrease your responsiveness behind the wheel."

https://www.esurance.com/info/car/where-car-accidents-happen-most

 

[Lunch Box]

If I'm not mistaken, most accidents happen on roads people have ridden/driven over numerous times before.

This type of statement has always bothered me. Of course, most accidents happen "close to home" or on roads that we ride often. Given the same probability per unit time of having an accident on new roads vs roads on which we spend a lot of time, there is a higher probability of crashing on the latter. Why? Because we spend WAY MORE TIME on those roads. The comparison is flawed because it isn't normalized for the amount of time spent on those roads. In short, most crashes happen on roads I have ridden before because I spend most of my time riding roads that I've ridden before. It doesn't say anything about the difference in safety between known and unknown roads.

 

[GAJ]

This type of statement has always bothered me. Of course, most accidents happen "close to home" or on roads that we ride often. Given the same probability per unit time of having an accident on new roads vs roads on which we spend a lot of time, there is a higher probability of crashing on the latter. Why? Because we spend WAY MORE TIME on those roads. The comparison is flawed because it isn't normalized for the amount of time spent on those roads. In short, most crashes happen on roads I have ridden before because I spend most of my time riding roads that I've ridden before. It doesn't say anything about the difference in safety between known and unknown roads.

Yes, the link discusses that, but I think some of the other points are quite valid.

 

[DataDan]

Where did any of those arguments get made?

With a few exceptions not in this thread, and not in your posts.

The only reason I suggested not going through GaryJ's and Craig's crash stuff yet again, was that it has been covered, and I was trying to avoid the sort of sectarian violence that we've seen before in those discussions.

I agree with your choice not to revisit those tragic crashes. And I wouldn't suggest such analysis in RIP threads. But sectarian violence in discussing countermeasures in the context of an actual crash helps raise awareness of what can be done. I'm not defending the Usual Suspects, who seem incapable of humility. But respectful criticism of a crasher's actions (not of his soul) shouldn't be met reflexively with derision.

My purpose was to show that a little humility in our riding goes a long way. That random events can occur. We have a few members who appear to believe that their skills are so great, and their knowledge of their local roads so encyclopedic that nothing bad can happen to them. That is the hubris I was addressing.

:thumbup