You've also lost your sense of humour in this post.
:rolleye:

I seem to remember from one of the classroom sessions Andy (?) saying it was far easier to stop someone who is very fast from crashing than it was to make someone who is slow very fast.

Better start crashing then.......

It's you cheeky Belgians ;) ;) ;) ;)

Please do, he's driving me mad having a debate about it all with me!

I never said that Andy/CSS had nothing to do with the results that Luthi achieved.

What I actually said was, that Luthi was already blindingly fast and a GP podium finisher, and that was NOT down to CSS.

I also never said that Andy/CSS had nothing to do with Luthi winning the Championship.

It takes a bit more than a 1:1 riding coach to win any Championship, let alone a GP Championship.

You're all very good putting 'spin' on things.

No I haven't :P

I'm just being a pedant that's all ;)

:)

TP

How about you take me round cadwell for the day at the DSC track day....show me how it is done and then i can see if the course works..??...

im serious and genuine.?

Phil

ha!! Nothing to do with your interpretation then ;)

My task for you this afternoon my young padewon is to look up an article on the web on "Entrenched Thought" ... once you've read that, there's another theory you might find interesting ... it's called "Groupthink"

:D

And then you might want to look up "Patronising bastid"

:lol:

You cut and pasted that from your 'other' classified ads ;) ;)

Look, I've no doubt that Andy has helped Tom - otherwise he wouldn't still be there would he.

My point was just that everyone was making out that CSS was responsible for Luthi being so fast.

My personal view, looking at the available evidence (I think I've investigated more than most - I'll assume that though) is that Tom was already fast before. Maybe Andy just helped him stop crashing - who knows? Nobody can answer that, not even Tom or Andy, coz we'd never know what would have happened had they not met.

[Edited on 24-5-2006 by domski]

well what do you think TP.....im faster than these wannabe's on this thread.. i have beaten them all......

If you can help me then deffo the CSS can help them...????

Phil

Based upon some email and phone call disscussions with Andy, i can tell you that Andy can tell you in quite concise detail what was wrong with Luthi's riding and how he improved him, so much so that when Luthi rang Andy and told him he'd qualified badly, Andy could tell me why and what corner before Luthi even told him...

he was actually correct.

It was to do at that time with 'blind' corners and picking out observation markers for positioning and braking/turning.

Does that mean it will make me younger
As I use to be faster as a young stupid idiot of a teenager, just an old plodder now that i'm well into my 40s

You are missing the point, Phil. What you do on track starts with practising what you've been taught in the classroom. Following someone round isn't going to help without having been taught something before you get out there.

So Tom Luthi would never have won a world title if he hadn't been coached by Andy?

Never done any track tuition let alone a CSS course but I can see distinct advantages to those that can learn to analyse their riding technique and timing.
How can you consistently brake later into a corner, turn in faster and get the power on earlier if you don't know where or when you were doing those things to start with? Granted there are other options out there but CSS (Andy Ibbott specifically) is extremely good at getting the message across to the point where you can improve yourself. As to value for money, that's a very personal concept depending on how much dosh you have to start with and what the perceived benefits are.
I'm in a sort of chicken and egg situation, I can afford to race or I can afford CSS and a couple of trackdays, I cannot afford to do all that so I'll stick with the racing for now.

Some road skills ARE transferable to the track and vice versa. Smoothness learnt on cold, wet, slippery winter roads can translate into faster laptimes in a wet race as much as confidence in the bike and your own abilities learnt on the track can help you concentrate less on those aspects of your riding and more on your surroundings on the road.

God knows mate... i'm just trying to answer the questions viable.... not complete conjecture.

i used Braking markers both before and after the course.

well, speaking on behalf of the polished turds here I would have to ask why would you want to pend £'s on improving your riding if your already winning consistantly?

Surely any training would have to be in the context of objectives, not just for the sake of?

He;'s winning in DD... bsically it's like being the champion Window Licker at school


:frog:



p.s i'm leaving for Milan now... you boys can figght the rest out amongst yourselves.... cya.

im not missing any point.... im more than happy to listen to TP on the drill required then go out and put it into practise under his supervsion...i think TP would be an excellent coach he is able to explain and get his point across...its not TP im questioning its wether the CSS will make me faster ..cos thats what i want to be..

:)

I don't mean to sound patronising Steve but good for you, I think you're very lucky to have either a built in skill that enables you to pick out those points or you've been lucky enough to have someone show you, but without "someone" to show me how to work these things out I'm just gonna have to continue "guessing", I'm no racing god like young Fil but I manage to hold my own (most of the time!) and I am concentrating so much on where everyone else is and whether I'm closing on them or dropping back that I don't "think" about what I'm doing, when or where I'm doing it on track. I need someone to show me these things so I, personally, feel that I'd gain tremendously from doing a CSS (or any type of race) school.
Dominic's question was what did we all feel we'd get/got out of CSS. I would learn a hell of a lot and it would only be the beginning....;)

I consider you a mate, so please don't take this the wrong way ...

Phil, you and I have had conversations in the past about the school and the theory. Based on those chats I would say that you have a firm belief that the school is an expensive waste of time and couldn't teach you anything. You've been extremely sceptical. You of all people, drawing from your martial arts experience, know that a student with a closed mind or preconceived notions is not going to learn as much as the 'sponge', or even learn anything at all! I haven't had a chat to you about it for a while so I don't know if you're view has changed or not.

The CSS can help you, it's just a matter of if you'll let it :D

If you're absolutely genuine, I'm more than happy to help.

Distinct whiff of heavy negativity entwined in this lot. So, something positive...

Did Levels 1 & 2 a few years ago at Brands and for me, it was one of the most enlightening thing I've ever done on a bike. Andy Ibbot's communication skills are exceptional and I concluded that there was something positive in there for everybody, from successful racer down to novice road rider.

The only requirement....an open mind and an acceptance that there is always more to learn, otherwise a waste of time and an even bigger waste of money.

yes i am genuine TP.............i have said that..................

:)

Paul quit it m8......im no riding god or young.............:)

Ok, see you at Cadwell :D

:D:D:D............

i will be on the 620 TP...to try and get to grips with it.......

thanks M8

Phil

Well, all this has been very amusing (as usual :P ) but it doenst help those like dominic or me who have been thinking about css.
The facts and the twist books are incontravertable (sorry, just trying to wind domski up) - code's approach is very good.
I'm going through the books (slowly - cos i'm an old git) and there are just sooooooooo many things that are put sooooooooo well, that it is simply a fantastic experience thinking about how to change the habits you pick up without knowing it.
But I want to ride these modern things faster, and I know I need help (no, not psychiatric - that all failed)

Personally, I want a deal to do more than the start-at-the-beginning schedule they advertise. I would happily pay more if I knew I was going to get better value, but 350/day probably means that I will have to pay 1050 before I get the meat of what I want.

(Is that more where you were going dominic ???)

[repeat previous rant]
And remember that I dont want to learn how to race (fil2 you're already good enough to race in any series you want !) _I_ 'just' want to go faster !
All you idiots who started dd-racing to learn how to race are already faster than me anyway !
[/repeat previous rant]

ps
I've just entered 12 races in one (vintage) race weekend :burn:

Paul - not sure you would. Like me, you are not the most mobile and leaping around on the bike seems a pre-requisite!

I think I would learn as much from someone like Kev as a proper school...the rest I can learn from a book.

Sorry but got to disagree, leaping about on the bike has not been a part of any CSS class that I have been on

what about body positioning? Looking at TP and others who have attended, great style but I and others arent built for style ;)

for me, it seems a lot of dosh to learn brake markers, looking thru the corner etc when I can learn that from a book or following the likes of skids or psychlist on the road/track

like most things, practising the right drills will help - and unless you do loads of track time events after CSS tuition I dont see how you will stop going back to bad habits...you are certainly NOT going to break them in a couple of days spread out over a few months

I need some training

Potty training :D

I'm just happy to be out there having a go though.

Suppose I should be taking it more seriously really but I'm having to much fun to let it get serious and spoil it for me.

Thing with improving at bike racing/riding compared to other sports is fear and pain. You can only go as fast as your own fear will let you. when you go to fast you get pain. Bit different to golf or tennis.

Played golf for years then went to a coach and after three months was playing a different game entirely.

Badminton weired or what.


OMHO but coaching in any sport is essential if you want to move forward breakdown your own barriers and succeed.
This coaching has to be a long term program to work effectively. I am convinced that anyone who did a full coarse with CSS would be a faster rider as a result which is the idea, coaching works for everyone. I'm sure someone will tell me otherwise but if so why has every top level sports man or woman got one?
Not only one but several. physiological, dietician, fitness or fatness, riding?

sod it I think I might go and do lodes of it and **** the lot of yu :lol:

[Edited on 25-5-2006 by ericthered40]

Did they make him fast or did their assistance in some way help him to stay on the bike by changes (possibly only minor) in technique ?

I seem to recall an old adage "you have to finish to win" or "to come first you first have to finish"

Fair point Paul, but I later found out that this 2004 season that Luthi was such a crasher - he actually didn't even compete at the first 7 GP's due to pre-season injury - so not like he fell off 7 times, he wasn't even there!

Then the last 8 GP's that he did do - he finished every race!! Most of them in the top 10.

For what its worth from a 'non-competitive, non-racing, road and TD riding, average Joe' I have completed levels 1 and 2 and found them very good.

I view the cost of the course as part of my never ending search for biking nervana...i.e. being able to ride at speed, in control...and safely. Whether that be on the road or on track at a TD...the same rules apply, and have certainly helped me in becoming more confident in the corner and on the throttle...and therefore ultimately, safer. Money well spent in my eyes.

The point seems to be if the course is worth attending for everyone...and the answer is clearly no. That applies all through the various levels, some beginners will find it of beifit others won't. The same applies to the best in the world...some will find it of use, others won't. Thats life.

I do find it funny though that some peeps appear to think that they are genuinely quick and that they can only be 'made' faster by watching or being taught by someone quicker than themselves. You only have to look at the sporting world in general to see that that is in fact almost never the case...with managers/coaches etc. generally being people whom fully understand the underlying factors that make someone successful in their chosen sport, not their history, not their speed/strength/balls or how may medals they have won in the past.

[Edited on 25-5-2006 by Harv748]

[Edited on 25-5-2006 by Harv748]

Oooooh dear, I can feel an essay coming on.

I've spent the last 15 years of my professional life involved in workforce development and performance improvement. I've literally 'written the book' for my company (a major international corporate) on instructional design and performance methodologies through being the main author and architect of the company's 'Learning and Performance Solutions Lifecycle' - A web page designed as an electronic performance support system that is now used by all of our instructional developers and performance consultants. I've taught hundreds of people how to put high quality instructional packages together. I have presented at intenational performance improvement conferences and I have co-taught instructional design courses with internationally recognised 'gurus' in this field such as Dr Harold Stolovitch.

I'm not saying this to be boastful, just to state my claim that I know a bit more than most people about what it takes to put an instructional package together, what skills are required of a coach and what skills are required as a 'subject matter expert'.

Because we've all been taught something, by somebody, at sometime in our lives and because we, in turn, have almost certainly taught other people (even if it's teaching your toddler how to hold a knife and fork), one of the issues that I constantly deal with is that everybody thinks they know how to teach and what makes for good instruction.

The truth is that people very rarely know how to put good instruction together and the sad truth is that people who are real experts at something very rarely know how to teach it. They will use wooly words such as 'when I've taught them these facts people will understand how to....'.

There is so much wrong in that simple sentence. For a start, it's focused upon the teacher, not the learner, it assumes that the facts they've assembled are valid and presented in the correct order and there is an assumption that different people will all arrive at the same level of understanding given the same information. This is frankly a nonsense.

What a good instruction package will do is to produce reliable results, consistently, for every person that attends. It can only do this by exhaustive analysis of the tasks involved and the context in which those tasks need to be performed. It can only do this by being learner focused and ensuring that learners can actually DO the things that the instruction set out to accomplish and it can only check that the learner can actually DO those things by having specific 'Student Performance Objectives' and learning checks that the course is written around.

I can't emphasise enough that without doing the analysis and breaking the whole thing down task by task into an ordered heirachy task analysis and ensuring that learners can actually DO the things that the course is trying to build on by ensuring that the whole course is built around 'Student Performance Objectives' or SPO. A good SPO contains three important things - the conditions under which a student is expected to perform, the performance that they are expected to demonstrate (which is always stated in terms of a verb - a doing word) and the criterion or performance standard they are required to reach to demonstrate that they can indeed DO what is required.

A suitable SPO for the first drill in CSS level 1 might be "Riding a motorcyle around a series of different corners, in one gear and without using their brakes (the condition), the student will demonstrate (performance verb) to the instructor that they can control their entry speed correctly into 100% (criterion) of the corners that they take"

That seems fairly simple doesn't it? Well, the sad truth is that very, very, very few people take the time and trouble to go into the construction of instructional content to this level of analytical detail. Most people dive straight into demonstration by a subject matter expert (as in the 'follow an instructor that the learner thinks is better than they are school). This has it's attractions, both to the school and the learner. It's **** easy for the school to do because they invest no time at all in constructing any meaningful instruction and the learner gets fooled into thinking that they're learning.

I am really sorry to tell you guys that if you honestly think that you're learning something from simply trying to follow a faster rider you are deluding yourselves. I've got so much heavyweight research into Human Performance at every level to back this statement up that I could take all week justifying this statement, but think on this...

By definition you are less able than the faster rider so you may just about be able to follow his lines and you may also develop a sense of false confidence that if he can go round at that speed, so can you. But! Do you know from your position behind him precisely when he brakes? How hard does he brake? How does he modulate his braking? When exactly does he initiate the turn? How quickly does he counteersteer? How much force does he use on the bars? Where is he putting his weight? Which muscle groups is he using to do that and to hold onto the bike? How quickly is he getting on the gas? How is he balancing the amount of throttle he can use with the grip he's got available? When is he picking the bike up? Is he tense or relaxed? How is he reacting to the bike moving around beneath him? Where is he looking (can you see where his eyeballs are pointing from behind him?) What information is he taking in from what he sees? the list goes on... Can you tell all that from your position a few bike lengths back? I couldn't and neither can you...end of story.

Even if you had some kind of uncanny telepathic telemetry, how would you (as the less experienced rider) know whether the things your mentor was doing were right or wrong? What aspects of his style are helping him go fast and what aspects are holding him up? Which bits should you copy and which bits should you discard? Do you know? Of course you don't. If you really, really believe that you can learn anything this way then be my guest

The good news for CSS fans is that having done levels 1 through to 3, I can tell you that by accident or good design the Code method has got nearer than most to constructing valid course content. Code has done a truly excellent job of analysing the physics of what makes a motorcycle turn and (since the laws of physics are an imutable constant) he's also done an extremely thorough task analysis of what a rider needs to do to make the best of those laws. He's also done a thorough task analysis of the psychology at work and the visual skills required to ride with more confidence and more consistency. All of this builds into being able to ride smoother and faster.

The CSS methods are not perfect from an instructional point of view. The bits that are lacking are a true adherence to those 'Student Performance Objectives' that I was talking about (they only typically set out the conditions and what you need to demonstrate - the criteria are missing), the coaches debrief can be somewhat cursory so doesn't really qualify as a learning check. Most of all the CSS methods lack any real 'learner analysis'. One of the key things that any instructional designer has to know is what their student knows already, what they are doing right and what they're doing wrong. Of course, how could they? Learners at CSS can go from people who've just started to ride through to Thomas Luthi and Leon Camier how can one size course fit all.

The CSS answer of course is to start everyone from scratch with the attendant frustration for more experienced riders.

In the professional world, we accomplish this with a simple pre-test to ascertain the starting point for instruction - maybe the CSS could consider the same thing.

I am of course available for consultancy on how to perfect instructional content ;)

Oh, and Fil...Why do so many good karate instructors spend hours going over basic building blocks like Oi Zuki and Age Uki with higher grades, and why are you always asked to do Taikyoku Shodan (the very first Kata you learn) at every grading?

It wasn't a dig at you just a general comment, I guess it's like anything in life it depends on how you approach it and your attitude towards learning.

It won't work for everybody and it won't necessarily result in mind blowing revelations on how to ride better but I doubt that many could honestly say that nothing on the courses would/could help their riding ?

As I said, just a general comment, not aimed at anyone.

I'd like to do the course but it is pretty full up most of the time, I'd like to unlearn the sidecar lines and get a lot better at solo riding.

Before I get deluged with responses saying "yes you fat old git you sure need to" I ALREADY KNOW THAT :D:D

Please don't assume that my post was in any way worded as having read the one from Julian, we must have been writing them at the same time and his got there first. No intention to refer to anything you said Julian.

All the karate instructors i have had were way better than me and still actually practised what they preached....not just stood up front of the class spouting commands on techniques they cant do themselves........unlike some schools where the new blackbelt has started to teach...!! what does he know.? what can he teach other blackbelts...experience counts for alot in karate and BLACK BELTS are now imho given away to almost anyone.


Phil

ps......this comment is NOT aimed at anyone .... jools pls dont use me in your argument.



[Edited on 25-5-2006 by fil2]