[SDCBC] "Actuarial inevitability" my #(#$&@ !

[JonIsaacs at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/17/07 9:32:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
rob_leone at earthlink.net writes:

> Fortunately, they both felt fine enough to dust off and go on their 
> merry ways. the roadie mentioned it was a blind corner, and said the 
> collision was "an actuarial inevitability."
>   Maybe if we had bike paths without blind corners the actuaries will go 
> play elsewhere. I do know I'll be slow and vigilant rounding that bend 
> in the future, and ma even mark it for speical attention if I plan a 
> group ride.
> 
> Robert Leone

========

I can't quite buy it myself...

Blind corners are a fact of life.  Whether one is riding  a bicycle or 
driving a semi, one needs to operate ones vehicle with the awareness that someone 
may well be coming the other direction. 

As I remember it, that path is wide enough for two riders riding at a 
reasonable speed to pass.  "Actuarial inevitability" seems more like an excuse for 
sloppy riding to me...

Isn't it just basic vehicle operating skills?  If you can't see around a 
corner make sure you are can handle whatever comes up.  That means riding slowly 
enough to stay on you own side and maybe even slowly enough to stop if 
necessary.

 The only actuarial inevitability one has to be concerned with is not a blind 
corner but rather the  chance of meeting a sloppy rider or sloppy riding on 
one's own part....

Blind corners are a fact of life that shouldn't present any special challenge 
if everyone is paying attention and practicing "defensive riding."

Jon Isaacs


**************************************
 Get a sneak peek of the 
all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20070718/d690537a/attachment.html