[Closed] Hazard perception test [RANT]

To be fair, the hazzard perception bit of the driving test has always been a bit iffy.

Don't know about anyone else, but since I passed my test, I've not once had a suicidal clipboard try to end it's life by launching itself against my dashboard!

TJ have you considered motivational speaking ?

I also clicked more and earlier than I should have done but it's a Hazard Perception test not a Potential Hazard Perception test. As long as you understand that, you're fine. All this guff about test structure is missing the point. As thisisnotaspoon said:

The way my instructor explained it was you're not clincking at everything you notice and would keep an eye on (otherwise you'd click for every road user coming into your field of vision), you're clicking at the point in time you'd come off the throttle/change down a gear and be hovering over the brake pedal anticipating that somethings about to happen.

It's a game, but a really simple one!

The other issue (when I sat it at least) is that the video quality is so appalling you sometimes can't tell if something is a potential hazard or just a random splotch.

Wooosh - complacency

Er, thinking you're fit to drive is complacency? So, what, you should only drive if you believe you aren't fit to do so?

TJ, you come across as a bright chap, but you really should consider staying away from motoring threads. You never do yourself any favours.

TandemJeremy - Member
Yup - but its easy to see what they intend you to see and to click on them when they are obvious. I didn't click on the hazards they don't have down as hazards

Edit - yes 30 or so on each clip. ( roughly) Any pedestrian, any vehicle at a junction, any parked car with someone in it. any unusual object at the roadside, anything creating a blindspot like a van parked at the roadside or a tree.

..but it's a Hazard Perception test not a Potential Hazard Perception test

yes, but to get 5 points you [b]do[/b] have to spot the [i]potential[/i] hazard before it turns into an [i]actual[/i] hazard.

Okay, the freshly parked car is only a [i]potential[/i] hazard. But how is an open van door or an oncoming car in a narrow street not an [i]actual[/i] hazard? Would you not come off the throttle for either of those?

Cougar - Member
Wooosh - complacency
Er, thinking you're fit to drive is complacency? So, what, you should only drive if you believe you aren't fit to do so?

TJ, you come across as a bright chap, but you really should consider staying away from motoring threads. You never do yourself any favours.

Indeed. Surely it's also rather complacent to assume that you are the sole arbiter of when the speed limit applies. What is the effect of speeds "that would make your eyes bleed" on one's ability to spot hazards, I wonder? 😉

I cilcked once for every EMERGING hazard on my test and did not get penalized despite clicking a lot of times.

Also, yes I think 40% of driver instructors probably arent safe to be driving on the roads. Driving is something most people can "do" but really cant do correctly. My standards are obviously higher than most.

No cougar - thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. [i] Knowing[/i] you always have more to learn makes you safer.

for example - I have not ridden a motorcycle for a couple of years - so despite a few hundred thousand miles on one I would be very cautious if I got on one now - I wouldn't think I was a skilled as I was a few years ago.

CFH - non at all- you can still see them you just have less time to do anything about them. 🙂

What a bucket of monkey spunk

My mate Mickey may want a word with you about his moped. 😆

yesiamtom - Member
I cilcked once for every EMERGING hazard on my test and did not get penalized despite clicking a lot of times.

Also, yes I think 40% of driver instructors probably arent safe to be driving on the roads. Driving is something most people can "do" but really cant do correctly. My standards are obviously higher than most.

I passed it first time when doing it for my bike test having been a car driver for 20 years .As an experienced driver it is easy to anticipate problems in sone scenarios and click early .You will fail parts for multiple clicking though as they assume you just click away until the hazzard appears? .Did the OP practice at all prior to taking the test or just assume it was easy ? I had no problem at all doing it and scored highly

thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. Knowing you always have more to learn makes you safer.

I'd suggest that 20 years in a car without incident would imply a reasonable proficiency in hazard perception. The only person implying that that makes him "safe to ride a bike" appears to be your good self.

No cougar - thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. Knowing you always have more to learn makes you safer.

enfht - Member

What a bucket of monkey spunk

My mate Mickey may want a word with you about his moped.

I thought he was bothering female giraffes these days?

Man fails hazard perception test

Man claims that decades of driving means he is safe therefore the test is at fault

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims - because of his complacent attitude.

Comedy gold. Re-read the thread

you kind of get used to this with TJ around.

The comedy is stoner claiming the test is at fault because he failed it and there cannot be anything wrong with him and his hazard perception.

Too complacent to train properly for the test. complacency does not make for safe bike riders

Man fails hazard perception test

Man claims that decades of driving means he is safe therefore the test is at fault

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims - because of his complacent attitude.

man spends his time on STW arguing with people
man ends up with no friends
dinosaurs eat man
women inherit the earth

I am not the one who failed a test them blames the structure of the test for his failure!

[img] [/img]

Nanny TJ's word of the day is "Complacency". See how many times you can find it kids!

Too complacent to train properly for the test. complacency does not make for safe bike riders

complacency does not make for safe bike riders

Nor does a blatant, flagrant, arrogant disregard for the speed limit.
😉

How's the view from up there on your high horse, TJ?

TandemJeremy - Member
I am not the one who failed a test them blames the structure of the test for his failure!

*Picks up Sesame Street theme...*

*Sings*

one of these kids is not like the others, one of these kids is not quite the same....

😉

Ok

Stoner is the safest driver in the world. His failure to pass the hazard perception test does not show a lack of preparation for it but as he obviously is a safe driver well prepared for the test then the test must be at fault - its the only answer

the fact that 93% of would be bikers doing the test pass it first time is neither here nor there. there is nothing else Stoner could have done to prepare, the only possible answer is the test is at fault. After all how could stoner possible be at fault at all?

TandemJeremy - Member
Ok

Stoner is the safest driver in the world. His failure to pass the hazard perception test does not show a lack of preparation for it but as he obviously is a safe driver well prepared for the test then the test must be at fault - its the only answer

the fact that 93% of would be bikers doing the test pass it first time is neither here nor there. there is nothing else Stoner could have done to prepare, the only possible answer is the test is at fault. After all how could stoner possible be at fault at all?

Straw man. There were other posts in between yours y'know!

I bought the cd rom when it came out and found that if I clicked as fast as I could then I failed on every hazzard. At the end of the test each of my click points were too quick on the scale. So it was worth buying the cd rom as I learnt that I needed to wait a fraction of a second before clicking to pass the test.

You also get away with another click,so I would click approx 1 second (if that) after the first click.

If were were all the same the world would be dull.

TJ - marching to the beat of a different drummer ( the one in my head that talks to me)

Good job Stoner is packing it in next year then! Oh,wrong Stoner.

If were were all the same the world would be dull.

TJ - marching to the beat of a different drummer ( the one in my head that talks to me)

Scuzz, missed your edit in your first post:
"Two clicks per hazard won't penalise you, neither will four for the developing hazard"

Im going to go for that technique next time. Identify hazard, click, give it a second for the computer to join in, click again, then click 4 times as it's developing.

Scuzz, missed your edit in your first post:
"Two clicks per hazard won't penalise you, neither will four for the developing hazard"

Im going to go for that technique next time. Identify hazard, click, give it a second for the computer to join in, click again, then click 4 times as it's developing.

So much for hazard perception. Someone should invent a test for self perception.

I think computer kids would find it a doddle.
I did lots of practice ones online first for my bike test, its easy to click too early or too much.
Passed though.

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims - because of his complacent attitude.

It only shows a complacency towards tests, not towards driving. Stoner may approach all things in life with the same complacency (I don't know, I've never met him) but there's nothing to suggest the absolute correlation that you seem to be inferring.

It's the flagrant complaceny extended towards internet arguing I can't abide.

Good to see the excellent work on this thread.

It's the flagrant complaceny extended towards internet arguing I can't abide.

Good to see the excellent work on this thread.

I reckon it would be a fairly easy task for one of the STW programming gurus to put together an automated "STW Thread Generator", where you type in a topic, enter the names of the participants and then the code generates a 4 page thread, locking it immediately afterwards.

This would give many people lots of spare time to do other things, like ride bikes and talk to humans and stuff.

(can some please try coding this, it would be great 🙂 )

LOL. You don't think TJ is actually a real person do you? 😉

[url= http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26272 ]Biker petition[/url]

Not sure if STW have done this. Equally relevant to non- motor bikes. Deserves own thread?

But peterfile I think the site does a sort of theraputic service for the communnity.

Maybe Mark and co. could apply for Social services funding?

don't worry teej, junkyard reckons I'm a crap motivational speaker aswell, i think he's just not very motivation-able.

I cant be arsed replying – See what I did there 8)