Every few months, someone comes along and reminds us of the role of the “police system of motorcycle control”, sometimes accompanied by an explanation of how invaluable it is to riders, and how they need to learn it so it’s second nature.
And off we go on a long, long convoluted discussion which usually ends up with the original poster thinking I’m disagreeing with him because I suggest that “The System” is only one version of “a system”, and because I point out that ALL riders use some kind of system, whether they realise it or not.
I’m frequently reminded of a post on Visordown years ago after a long, long thread about the vanishing point technique that went on for dozens and dozens of posts…
Someone who didn’t normally post on the forum posted:
Someone else who didn’t normally post replied:
It’s a bit like this here. Everyone who drives or rides anything from a tricycle at the age of 3 upwards is using some kind of system to avoid running into other tricycles and houses and things.
There are only four steps:
1) you decide what you want to do
2) you gather information
3) you decide what’s about to happen next
4) you choose a course of action that gives the results you want
That applies to riding a tricycle in the back garden, driving on the road or racing at MotoGP level. It should be obvious it’s fairly pointless to keep re-inventing the wheel with a “new, improved, washes whiter” approach to doing exactly the same thing.
The really important bit is making sure that riders and drivers actually use the “search predict act” bits of whatever flavour of “system” they prefer.
One observation that came out of the latest discussion was valuable, however. One of our contributors (Wasabi) pointed out that:
Words like plan / act… put the onus on me as the rider to control what happens”.
The more I thought about that, the more I realised it was a Very Good Point… I know I’ve always mentioned the need to be “proactive”, or in footie speak “to get your retaliation in first”, but the implication of the language had escaped me.
The Motorcycle Safety Foundation in the States have used:
Predict / Evaluate
Act / Execute
Search Predict Act has been replaced by SEE in the newer Experienced Rider Course.
There is another US one – SIPDE – taught on the MSF’s ‘learner’ course, and revisited on the ‘experienced’ course, then shortened to Search Predict Act. I’ve just lifted this of Wikipedia:
The SIPDE process is a system taught in drivers’ education classes to help drivers drive safely. The acronym stands for:
- S—Sweep, Search, and Scan (keep your eyes moving at all times to effectively see imminent danger)
- I—Identify hazards, Identify what’s happening (road-way features) (take notice of things that could cause trouble)
- P—Predict which hazards could potentially come into conflict with you; predict 2 things 1-worst case scenario and 2-actions
- D—Decide on a safe action (decide on something to do should the dog run across the road)
- E—Execute that safe action; use communication
This process saves drivers from getting into accidents and prevents damage.
Another safe driving system (also via Wikipedia) is the Smith System:
- 1. Aim high in steering; use 15 sec rule (look in to the future) (look far down the road, not just right in front of the car)
- 2. Keep your eyes moving: scan (don’t be focused so much on the dog walking beside the road that you fail to see the dog in the middle of it)
- 3. Get the big picture; 360 degree circle of awareness (watch all around the car, not just the front)
- 4. Make sure others see you; communicate (use proper communication to let other drivers know your intentions)
- 5. Always leave yourself an out; don’t get boxed in (don’t put
yourself in a situation that there is no room to steer out of danger if
needed)
Again, the emphasis is in positive actions.
The very latest version of “Roadcraft” has apparently adopted “Observe Plan Act”!
Contrast with “Information Position Speed Gear Acceleration”.
It’s a weird mix. First there’s the very vague “information” phase. There no explicit “predict / plan” phase. You get that by breaking down the information phase with “TUG (Take information, Use information, Give information)” to cover that. And then for some reason, you get a “tick list” of “position, speed, gear, acceleration” advice for the final “Act / Execute” phase.
Personally I prefer a holistic approach, rather than any “tick list”…
Lifted from Wikipedia again:
“Holism (from ὅλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, entire, total) is the idea that all the properties of a given system cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone. Instead, the system as a whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.”
The key point is that in the holistic approach the system itself only serves as a tool to getting the job done; as I said earlier:
1) you decide what you want to do
Ultimately, if you know what you want to do, exactly which system you adopt is irrelevant so long as you carry out the three remaining steps adequately.
2) you gather information
3) you decide what’s about to happen next
4) you choose a course of action that gives the results you want
That’s it. Simple!
