Are More Expereinced Sailors Actually Safer? Prove It.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by daletournier

If one can obtain humility and knowledge through experience hopefully one is a safer sailor.

Oh, I'm now also superstitious.. Lol.

Experience is gained through bad judgement.
Good judgement is gained through experience.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by thinwater

And we've all been guilty, in part because it is difficult to self-access where you are on the curve. You don't always know what you don't know.

I think this explains a lot of comments we see on CF … including many of mine … and this one … damn

[Jim Cate]

Experience is what you get just after you really needed it!

Jim

[KiwiKen]

There is experience, and there is wide experience, and it is a matter of degree.

Some 30 years ago the NZ yacht Lionheart was lost with the loss of 6 lives (1 survivor) with an "experienced" crew when they attempted to enter Whangaroa harbour, which doesn't have all that a wide an entrance, when it was on a lee shore in a full storm. They yacht was returning from Fiji, and the conditions were extremely rough with crew members seriously seasick. They miscalculated their approach, tried to beat out when they were experiencing leeway in the order of 55-60 degrees, and it isn't rocket science to work out what happened. They had Sat Nav, and it was assumed, that knowing approximately where they were, led them into making the fatal decision to seek shelter in Whangaroa Habour.

The comment was they were an experienced crew, and it was very true, many years of experience sailing round the Hauraki Gulf, but none had experienced a full blown Force 10 storm - why would they, no one with their full ration of marbles seeks out a Force 10 storm to find out if they can cope with it. So instead of standing out to sea where the wave motion was considerably less violent, they closed a lee shore with a tragic outcome.

[RaymondR]

The aged get more crafty and more conscious of the sheer inconvenience of adventures and consequently more skillful at avoiding them.

[Sojourner]

Not sure but there is a similar curve in motorcycling which might apply albeit over a longer timeframe.... most accidents happen to bikers around the 3 or 4 year mark. Beginners are on smaller bikes, going more carefully because they know they are beginners. Experts (+5-10 years riding) have seen a whole lot, maybe survived a few close calls or crashes, and know what they know and know what they DONT know. But that meaty part of the bell curve around 3-4 years...that's when you feel confident enough as you're not a beginner, but you sure aren't expert enough yet to know what you don't know. And boom, there's your T-boned by a car on a quiet sunday morning 5 km from home. ask me how I know

[Juho]

It is likely that out of those sailors that started sailing fifty years ago, those who have had accidents have given up this hobby with higher probability than those who have not had accidents. This means that those who have already stopped sailing are probably less safe persons than those that still sail.

This proof does not prove that old sailors would have less accidents than other age groups, but this (partial) proofs says that old sailors are probably on average safer persons than young sailors. If those sailors that have stopped sailing would still sail today, they would probably have more accidents than the ones that still sail. The idea is just to separate concerns of lifelong personal safety attitudes from having different skills, style and attitude at different phases of life. The key assumption is that the probability of stopping sailing increases if one frequently ends up in accidents and other problems.

P.S. One more small argument in favour of having safe old sailors is that rescue teams have now better machinery than before, which means that the younger generation of (potentially unsafe) sailors will be rescued with higher probability than before, and they may therefore have less incentive to sail safely.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Juho

It is likely that out of those sailors that started sailing fifty years ago, those who have had accidents have given up this hobby with higher probability than those who have not had accidents. This means that those who have already stopped sailing are probably less safe persons than those that still sail.

Yep, a logical fallacy known as "Survivorship Bias".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...orship-Fallacy

Description: This is best summed up as "dead men don't tell tales." In its general form, the survivorship fallacy is basing a conclusion on a limited number of "winner" testimonies due to the fact we cannot or do not hear the testimonies of the losers. This is based on the cognitive bias called the survivorship bias.

[boatman61]

Or is it simply a refusal to admit their bottle's gone.. and the reason.
Some folks are open about their lives and will admit to mistakes they've made, however most will bury things out of sight of everyone rather than 'lose face'.. That's one reason I have a lot of respect for Ellen Macarthur.. she openly admits that she's done her thing and its got her where she wants to be.. and if she never steps on a sailboat again it'll be one day to soon.
Every day folk bleed all over FB because their dog, Mom, cat died.. or has the big 'C'.. but you'll never see someone put their hands up to a cock-up..

[conachair]

Originally Posted by boatman61

. but you'll never see someone put their hands up to a cock-up..[/SIZE][/FONT]

My hands are rarely down

From a cruising perspective I think lots of skippers get much more cautious quickly as fixing things after every passage gets boring very quickly.

[Juho]

Maybe the more experienced sailors are also, thanks to their experience, more skilful in telling tall tales.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Juho

Maybe the more experienced sailors are also, thanks to their experience, more skilful in telling tall tales.

I think its the other way round.. have had a few 'Newbies' describe sea's as enormous when in fact they're maybe 3metres tops.. an average day in the Atlantic..

[Juho]

Originally Posted by boatman61

I think its the other way round.. have had a few 'Newbies' describe sea's as enormous when in fact they're maybe 3metres tops.. an average day in the Atlantic..

Can't really trust your stories since you are too experienced in telling them.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Juho

Can't really trust your stories since you are too experienced in telling them.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Juho

Can't really trust your stories since you are too experienced in telling them.

Excellent! Back to the thread...

Clearly there doesn't have to be one reason. Some people gain experience and lower their risk tolerance. These are safe, conservative sailors.

I wonder if we all agree on whether being described as a conservative sailor is a compliment.

But if we look at the average age of guided Everest climbers and guided Clipper race sailors, it is clearly above the average for such vigorous and potentially dangerous activities.

• Money. We can better afford guided trips when we are older.
• Bucket list. I actually don't have much left on mine, and they are low-risk activities.
• Positive experience with risk. Bad experiences can scare you off. I bet lunch these folks can tell stories of very positive experiences with risk. Success in the face of risk can be very emotionally rewarding.
• Ultima Thule. Some people have a need to test themselves to the limit, curious as to how they will hold up. The older they get, if they have never felt the test, the more strongly they are drawn to it. This applies to both the Clipper and Everest, I believe.

I think risk also feels different to the experience adventurer. We're not scared. Instead, we measure. We know it may be vigorous. But we have to remind ourselves to be cautious sometimes, because the fear is gone. I have to warn myself to be careful near the edge of a cliff, because heights don't register anymore, yet I'm more prone to stumbling, because of weakness in the knees, than I was at 25. The casualness is not the result of arrogance, as I first stated incorrectly. It is because fear is not there to reinforce caution.

In this last, Evan hit nail squarely (post 17) when he refereed to a "complacency cycle." You think you know a lot, get smacked down a little, and become a little more cauious, at least for a while. Some of the caution remains a perminant part of you, but at the same time, you know a little more, perhaps, and begin to push again.As many answers as there are people.