On average, how many riders go down on a track day?

[OreoGaborio]

So, to some extent you can look at this and get some idea of how risky it is for riders to "push" their safety envelope. It will give you some sort of an idea about how much risk there is to operate somewhat beyond a riders normal operating envelope.

Gotcha... Well, if that's what you're looking for then you're gonna have to look at different data and I'm not even sure if you'll even be able to find it.

The guestimates I showed above include people who don't push their limits the way you're thinking of. There's a lotta people that do track days who go out there and ride well within their margin of safety.

I'm not sure that any of the numbers we throw out there are going to help you find the answer to what you're trying to ask. If you narrow down what exactly it is you're looking for, we might be able to help, but the question you initially asked doesn't fit what I think you're actually looking to find out.

[Honclfibr]

Motorcyclists as a whole don't really take to talking about statistics because, well, statistics show that motorcycling is kinda dangerous. Shocking, I know.

[Tricky Mike]

Is that better than no information at all?

If used to decide whether or not to build a house I would say it isn't. That's really the only point I was trying to make.... it would be a mistake to use a number that is generally accepted to have no real meaning to make a decision about wether or not to attend a trackday, or build a house.

It's also something I get asked about frequently. It seems that the assumption is that every rider has a relatively high likelihood of crashing at a trackday when the reality of the matter is that riders, generally, and to a large extent get to *decide* whether or not to crash by how the choose to ride in relation to their ability, experience, the track weather/conditions, etc.


Sorry if I came across the wrong way in this thread... I just try to take the opportunities to debunk the common misconceptions that tend to keep people away from the track unnecessarily.

[SteveM]

This is the whole reason for the mathematics behind the word "average". It allows people to conceptualize a general level without having to review each special case.

Example: What's the average number of people that live in a household in America? The number rounds out to about 3, though there is clearly a range.

But it clearly is pretty normal for a 2-3 riders to crash at a track day. Or, it would be OK to say that 2-3% of track day riders are likely to crash in a given day.

The 'average" is far less meaningful when we don't have the same number of riders, ability levels and conditions at each trackday. This is an excellent example of where understanding the variability imposed by conditions beyond the oragnizer's control is much more important than a simple average.

If we pick 3 as the average and 75 as the average number of riders, it would seem that there's a 1 in 25, or 4% chance of going down. While that may be statistically correct, it varies so much for any individual rider based on skill, daring, equipment, conditions, etc. that the probability is only useful (barely so) for the organizers and useless for an individual.

[BLACK SQUIRREL]

The root function of track days are to make "pushing" safer. .

This is the major flaw in your thinking about this. the "Root Function" is different for every rider. it ranges from I wanna get my knee down to I need race practice.

Thats why the information gathered is of little value.

[taxonomy]

Id vote no, because it doesnt actually give you information. What you're saying is 50% cost more, and 50% cost less. How much is my house gonna cost?
What decisions/questions/comments can you derive by saying the average house costs 100 dollars per square foot to build (serious question)

If you think you have some idea of that the average new house if finished like you will know within some scope how much you expect to have to shell out. If you have $30,000 and want a 2000 square foot house:

This isn't for deciding you need a $170,000 loan but it will give you an idea that you won't likely need a $500,000 loan or that a $40,000 loan won't be enough. What it can do is help to shape how you think about things early in the decision process.

When going to a builder "just to talk" and he quotes you $250 a square foot you can ask if that includes mahogany floors and marble counters. If not for specifics, but an average can help you understand that something is an outlier. That is, something that isn't normal.

As for our example, if you have a friend and he goes to a track day and 25 people crash with 5 going to the ER, you can tell him, that's just not normal. Normal is more like 2-5 people having minor crashes where they're mostly back out in the next session.

Averages are useful

[Pittenger5]

the "Root Function" is different for every rider.

My root function is volvos scare me.

If Volvo ever makes a motorcycle, fuck it, I quit.

[Tricky Mike]

My root function is volvos scare me.

If Volvo ever makes a motorcycle, fuck it, I quit.

You should have googled first

[Pittenger5]

So youre saying if a builder quotes me 100 bucks I dont need to ask him whats included?

[Manny]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

At the days I have been to over the last 4 years the average is roughly 5 crashes a day. This is from memory and guessing that when the action stops it is due to a crash.

I agree that the data is not useful to draw any meaningful conclusions about a specific rider or organization but none the less it is roughly accurate. For example, how many crashes do the cornerworkers deal with on an average track day. If you were writing a contract for their employment based on averages I would say assume 5 per day.

[taxonomy]

that the probability is only useful (barely so) for the organizers and useless for an individual.

For an individual to do what?

It seems like there is this religious aspect to track days where adherents don't want anyone thinking anything that could ever possibly reflect in any way negatively on track days.

More riders go down per hour than street riders per mile traveled. More people break their collarbones riding track days per hour of exposure than people making fish tacos. At some point it has to be acceptable to step back and say, overall, what's this activity like. I really do refuse to have someone else tell me that any piece of information is bad for me to have.

This isn't about Boston Moto or Tony's. I was just wondering about this generally, and it seems like there's a lot of TD people here that have been to a lot of days.

[taxonomy]

So youre saying if a builder quotes me 100 bucks I dont need to ask him whats included?

No. Typical NESR. Yawn.

[OreoGaborio]

No. Typical NESR. Yawn.

Hehe... Ya know what else is typical NESR? When someone asks a vague question, gets a bunch of vague answers in return, along with questions about the context in which the question is being asked so that we can help the person asking the initial question and then the person initially asking the question gets upset because the people giving answers are asking too many questions.

[FireboltEric_MA]

WOW...Just WOW...






How do I get the last 10 minutes of my life back?

[Kurlon]

It seems like there is this religious aspect to track days where adherents don't want anyone thinking anything that could ever possibly reflect in any way negatively on track days.

The risk is that you will end up dead, or worse a vegetable, and the remains of your bike will be used as material to melt down and make into an eBay special cheap chinese pit bike.

How much more do you need to know?

Really? Seems we've all been pretty up front about the risks here.

[Jaynnus]

The root function of track days are to make "pushing" safer. S

The root function of a track day is to have FUN...and not get a ticket for doing so. period

[RyanNicholson]

there is a 34.87% probability of death while participating in a trackday.

I've done the math, its legit

[Pittenger5]

I've crashed twice on the street in 28000 miles, so I'm averaging one crash per 14000 miles.
I've crashed zero times at a track day in 5 track days, so I'm averaging 0 crashes per infinite track days.

THUS, track days are infinitely safer than street riding.

[Bandit12k]

Hehe... Ya know what else is typical NESR? When someone asks a vague question, gets a bunch of vague answers in return, along with questions about the context in which the question is being asked so that we can help the person asking the initial question and then the person initially asking the question gets upset because the people giving answers are asking too many questions.

^excellent

[taxonomy]

Hehe... Ya know what else is typical NESR? When someone asks a vague question, gets a bunch of vague answers in return, along with questions about the context in which the question is being asked so that we can help the person asking the initial question and then the person initially asking the question gets upset because the people giving answers are asking too many questions.

What's vague about it?

Quantitative questions:
How many riders go down on an average track day?
How many riders are there?
How many miles get ridden?

What I am trying to do: Understand a general level of risk for all track days. I am not trying to apply it to an individual, or a single track or track day company. Just trying to get an idea.

What's vague about that?

[OreoGaborio]

The vagueness wasn't necessarily in the questions themselves, but they were vague in comparison to the sample that you're trying to isolate. You're trying to get data to apply to a specifc part of track day riding, and that is the risk that is incurred when pushing your limits (or something along those lines), correct?

Well, the answers to the questions above are taking into account ALL track day riders, not just those that are pushing their limits, so it's not necessarily gonna answer the question you're trying to ask... That's why this stemmed into such a big discussion, because we were trying to isolate what it was that you were really looking for.

[taxonomy]

Thanks everyone.

In all honesty I think I better understand what I was trying to understand when I asked these questions. It seems pretty easy for this line of questioning to turn adversarial, which was never my intent. I appreciate that people put on track days and that instructors are there to help people.

Years ago I did some corner working and I have done a track day. This year I don't have any plans for track days, but maybe next year. This year I hope to take the Lee Parks Level 2.

So, anyhow, thanks for your help. Now, back to your regularly scheduled programs.

[scottieducati]

[taxonomy]

The vagueness wasn't necessarily in the questions themselves, but they were vague in comparison to the sample that you're trying to isolate. You're trying to get data to apply to a specifc part of track day riding, and that is the risk that is incurred when pushing your limits, correct?

No, I was just trying to express how I might use this information to think about something. I don't really have an agenda at all. I was just wondering what percentage of track day riders crash and, on average, how many miles of riding that takes.

Once you have some information you can use it to think about many things. So, you know, I was just wondering.

Really, that's it.

Anyhow, as noted above, thanks.

[KawiSmurf]

How do I get the last 10 minutes of my life back?

http://www.nestreetriders.com/forum/...link-nsfw.html