Is ATGATT overrated?

+1

I ride for the commute in +90 degree heat most work days out of the week. If I know I'm riding the three miles home in the dark I'll wear the jacket with the helmet and gloves, but if I work a morning shift and am scheduled to ride home during daylight, I forgo the jacket some days.

Now my previous motorcycle commuting - over 22,000 miles in a year - I wore ATGATT for a number of reasons, but it really helped that we had areas that I could change my clothing. My current employer has next to no areas to change or store gear, and there isn't any way to keep dress slacks from getting wrinkled if stowed or worn under appropriate riding pants anyway.

-------

For south Florida, of the large numbers of scooter and motorcycle riders / commuters I see, my motorcycling jacket (mesh), gloves and helmet put me in the category of wearing the most gear daily.

Work is 25 miles, one way.

Closest shopping is 15 miles, one way. (though there is a "convenience store" that is only 8 miles, one way, and one restaurant that is 5 miles, one way.)

No kids, but closest school is 15 miles, one way.

So, no, these things aren't happening where I live. As stated, my rides are seldom less that ten miles.

Any more questions?

The ATGATT folk aren't telling anyone what's best for them. We're just saying that: the rationalization that I won't get hurt without gear because I ride slow is BS.

We're not trying to force anyone to do anything they don't want to do, but the question was "Is ATGATT over rated?" No, it's not. It will protect you in an accident/fall, whether you ride fast or slow. It's comfortable at all temps, and the "hassle" of the extra minute to put on before a ride is well worth it.

Your answer to this is to define ATGATT in a completely unobtainable way. It's pretty easy to take an argument to it's absurd limits. Just look at Wraith Rider, he's barefoot, helmetless, gloveless, no over gear what so ever, admits he's afraid to put his feet down, turn too sharp, or accelerate too quickly, or go over 45mph because it hurts his eyes, yet says he's safer and there's less risk this way than with gear. More absurdity

try rolling your slacks up rather than folding them...i used to roll my uniform pants around a rolled up towel in a plastic bag, the bag stops lint infection...viola wrinkle free at my destination....sorry you have to wear slacks at all tho...

that's exactly my point, if I'm not doing a track day or racing, I'm just doing a casual street ride where traffic is almost non existent

where is the big danger

Wrong, Jim. This just won't end.

ATGATT= All The Gear (I feel like wearing) At The Time.

So 40% of your way to work is less then 10 miles from home, 67% of your way to the shop is less then 10 miles from home, 100% of the way to the convenience store and 100% of the way to the restaurant. 67% of the way to school.
Obiously these things happen VERY MUCH where you live. Seems like the atgatt crowd isn't very good at doing the math.

And reading isn't the strength of the atgatt crowd either. Why are you inventing tales?

Same happened to a black dude I knew. Wouldn’t wear a f-f helmet. High sided and left left and chin on the pavement. While it healed after a time, the pigment didn’t return to the injured area.

"I already showed you, that that's not right.

"

I guess I'm a slow learner.. could you please enlighten me again, why going slower in traffic than general traffic flow, will improve your safety on a motorcycle?

Look up the word "Physics" and thoroughly investigate all the aspects which could apply. (traction, braking, turning, shock absorption, resistance to abrasion of various fabrics, skin, hair, and bone, effects of deceleration trauma to human anatomy, etc.)

Also, look up "Murphy's Law" and give some consideration to the fact that just because you believe the risk is "low" does not mean that you fully grasp the extent to which it does exist. (edit: your risks of a collision with another motorist, road debris, errant driver, pedestrian, etc. are much lower at the trackday. Oddly, this is where you feel is the more appropriate place for ATGATT.)

People who think about risk management in absolutes, like "traffic is almost non-existent" don't fully comprehend the concept of living in a dynamic world.

The only constant in life is change. Expect the unexpected.

If, after considering things rationally and taking into consideration the numerous selection of ways to injure or kill yourself which could be mitigated by forethought, you still choose to dress hoping for the best, well, best wishes on your journey. It is your right to do so and don't let anyone force you to do otherwise.

Dressing like this, for the reason specified, in no way makes an argument against the fact that ATGATT riders will fare better in any given scenario. Including scenarios that do not involve a collision. Just because you are unable to realize "where is the danger?" does not mean it doesn't exist. It only means that you are unable to fathom the extent to which it exists in any given environment.

The odds are in your favor that you will not be involved in a get-off. And, the odds are even more in favor that an ATGATT rider will survive a get-off better than someone in a similar wreck wearing flip-flops, beachwear, and a bandana. (or any other combination of clothing which is not designed to absorb shock and withstand the abrasive road surface while in motion upon it. See reference to "Physics" above.)

Keep in mind that society has changed over the past several decades and, frankly, people have become complacent, seemingly wanting to believe that someone else (god, government, authority figure) has made it all safe for everyone, despite the fact that each day examples can be easily found to disprove this.

While researching, look up "Cognitive Dissonance" as well. Basically this is an aspect of the human condition where information is ignored, even if factual, when it conflicts with some other staunchly held belief.

Those who acknowledge ATGATT is effective, and still do not choose to wear it do not suffer from cognitive dissonance.

Those who are unable to grasp the facts, argue against the effectiveness of ATGATT, and choose to "chance it" because "what are the odds of it happening to me" are likely being affected by cognitive dissonance.

So, you are making my argument for me. Every time I get within about ten miles of home I try to raise my awareness and avoid being one of the statistics.

You seem to think this is a geographic phenomena. It is a thinking problem.

Familiarity of a locale breeds contempt for being vigilant about safety. Those who make up the base of these statistics do so primarily because they let down their guard in familiar territory. Past performance on any given roadway does not indicate future results will be the same.

This is the lesson to be gained from these statistics.

You, seem to miss this entirely and make absurd responses.

What, exactly, is it that you are trying to show by your examples which seem to parrot what I wrote, but somehow you think mean the opposite?

Does it not occur to you that the person who is concerned enough about safety to wear protective gear might also be a person who is less likely to need to use it, because they are more aware of the risks?

I think you are grasping at straws, hoping to "win" in some way that lets you be exposed to the facts, and, allows you to ignore this so you can feel better about your personal choices.

You want to believe that you are no more at risk without all the gear than someone who is ATGATT. Which is of course, absurd.

If you could convince everyone to buy into your argument and go less prepared on their bike, would you feel better about your choice? (because everyone else does it. Re: Lemmings) This in no way changes the facts that define the level of risk exposure in this particular pastime.

The risks are still real. How you prepare in order to manage and mitigate them is a variable. Trying to argue against protective gear in an environment well established for high risk of injury to head, legs, internal organs, and arms (listed, as well as I can remember, in the order of most likely to be damaged per post-crash data) is like an ostrich putting its head in the sand, or Zaphod Beeblebrox putting on Peril-sensitive Sunglasses as a means of avoiding danger.

Just because it makes you feel better is no indication that you will be as safe or safer. It is only a feeling that could be quickly displaced by another feeling, ... of skin peeling off as the fibers of shredded clothing and bits of asphalt are being pushed into the soft tissues. All of which will later be removed to the best of the ability of the emergency room personnel.

Granted, if you want to ride this way and open yourself up for higher risk exposure, please, feel free to do so. It would be nice if you would stop short of trying to convince others that this is the best thing to do for them without having considered the facts.

It does not. Nobody has even claimed it does. You really need to read the sentences until the finish, before you comment on them.

I seen a guy wreck on the highway while i was driving my cage the other day. I do not wish to see a dangling half a foot on my body. I am not riding again til I get some proper motorcycle boots. He was only wearing a brain bucket.:eek1 I had to stick around for as a witness, next time Imma just bone out. I could have gone the rest of my life without seeing that crap.

ATGATT overrated?? I think not... He may have been unscathed if he was wearing boots instead of flip-flops! Atleast definitely not as much trauma anyway.

Comprehension doesn't seem to be fully realized. This may help explain the logic (or lack thereof) behind the responses.

If their native language isn't English, this could be a contributing factor as well.

Or, they are a troll.

ATGATT is overrated...until you have an off and then you'll be saying "I wish I wore my boots, gloves etc.".

Is it practical to wear full race leathers every day? F' no. But at least FF Helmet, Gloves, Mesh jacket, and Boots should be a minimum. I've had road rash a few times and let me tell you it ain't fun.

Also, one of wife's co-workers crashed his R1 on he freeway at speed. Bike totaled and he has been in the burn ward the last two weeks. Nothing broken, he just slid for a long, long time.... Only had a helmet and some "work gloves"

I crashed a mountain bike a few times and that alone is enough to make wear gear on the moto. Road rash on the knee SUCKS!!! I don't want to try that shit ever again.

Try to listen this time: Shorter stopping distance, more time to handle gravel and unexpected situations, less impact energy.

ATGATT means there's no "apporpriate place for atgatt" since ALL the places require atg. However, there is a WAAAAAY higher probability of crashing at track days than on public roads, that's the reason why gear is more important there.

Traffic won't go from practically non-existent to rush hour in an instant at a sunday afternoon. No matter how unexpected that is.

Personal feelings aren't a general fact. Some may fare better with atgatt and some may fare better without.

... weren't seen writing here.

So why do you say that producing heat in your body is an excuse for unnecessarily risking your life?

Statistics are dangerous when one doesn't understand them. You must understand that it's no geographic phenomena. It's about exposition time.

Maybe that's true for some. For me it's not true, because wearing gear and being aware of risks isn't related - and there's no indication that for others it's generally related.

Why are you inventing tales?

Why are you inventing tales?

You have a particularly unique perspective.

It has become clear that even though we are looking at the same words you are finding meanings within them that are different than those I had hoped to convey.

Let us simply agree to disagree, as I feel confident that you are either unable to follow the train of thought I have attempted to get across, :huh or, you are simply trolling for the sake of some personal gratification it brings to you.

Either way, it appears clear that continuing this discussion is unlikely to lead to anything beneficial for either of us in the grand scheme of things.

On the first one: any possible benefits of going slower than others heading the same way, will be offset by the fact, that those others will want to pass you. And they´re gonna drive close behind you to get past. That creates whole new risks, that do not exist, if you take your own space on the road, like you should. The slower you go compared to the others, the more risks you create. If you decide to do this in heavy rain, for example, a truck driver coming from behind might not notice your rear light at all. Also you are not gonna get many new friends on the road by being a motorised roadblock for bigger vehicles.

And on the 2nd one: I did explain in detail, why bicyclists are in a very different situation compared to road-riding motorcyclists regarding heat and ventilation. You just chose to ignore that part.

This was actually taught in a Defensive Driving course I attended. Supported by insurance company statistics indicating the safest drivers were those who routinely travel slightly faster than the flow of traffic.