Who Is The Most Perceptive of Them All?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:29 pm

Took my theory test this morning. 34/35 for the Q/A was nice but 70/75 for hazard perception is surely world-beating - anyone got higher? Can I really be the most perceptive of imminent road-based danger in the UK?

Can't find higher scores from chat on the net.

No lying please, so liars beware! I'm on to you and your lying ways!!!

Mattb · Post by **Mattb** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:43 pm

I went into Specsavers the other day....guess who i bumped into? Everyone!

Shows how perceptive i am!

:P

Matt

Istenem · Post by **Istenem** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:43 pm

coming soon to a pub near you: Bob's wordupmobile.
not just a menace to society but a menace on the roads. be afraid.
if you hear gun and cameo dance grooves run for cover.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:54 pm

unknownpseudonym wrote:not just a menace to society but a menace on the roads

How could I possibly be a menace when I'm so damn perceptive of evolving situations that may cause me to reduce speed or change direction?

Surely with my staggeringly high score of 70/75 on Hazard Perception, the roads will become an infinitely safer place and society's problems will consequently correct themselves?

mjd · Post by **mjd** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:54 pm

must say thats impressive. I took the H/A and got about 40 / 75, basically didn't get what they were looking for with those stupid 'pedestrian on the pavement' hazards that they invent!

Thankfully still passed though

Mattb · Post by **Mattb** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:59 pm

Would 75/75 be the equivalent of a WU clearance then?

I guess 70 is probably on a par with tranquillizers and a score below 2000. I suggest you take the test again, and make a total clearance (with pictoral evidence!)

Matt

Istenem · Post by **Istenem** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:04 pm

Mattb wrote:Would 75/75 be the equivalent of a WU clearance then?

I guess 70 is probably on a par with tranquillizers and a score below 2000. I suggest you take the test again, and make a total clearance (with pictoral evidence!)

Matt

70/75 is the equivalent of being offered £1 at 500 and refusing the gamble to £2 at 550

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:04 pm

Mattb wrote:Would 75/75 be the equivalent of a WU clearance then?

75/75 would be the equivalent of leaving yourself 10 seconds on the clock before setting up TRANQUILLIZATIONS, spotting QUINTESSENTIABLENESS and clearing for 2500pts whilst chatting up the barmaid.

The problem is I can only retake the theory test if I accrue 6pts on my licence and am forced to do so - but how could I possibly do that, seeing that I'm the most perceptive and safest driver in the UK? 'Tis a veritable Catch 22.

Mattb · Post by **Mattb** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:11 pm

Well i'll be back in Cambridge fairly soon. If you can maneuvre your way through the bollard system in town without getting stuck my hat goes off to you. If you manage that, i guess i could sneak up and put a banana in your exhaust. You'd have to be perceptive to see me do that one!

Matt

Cardinal Sin · Post by **Cardinal Sin** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:16 pm

Without wishing to sound like Roger Braggart, I recently passed my Advanced Driving Test, and the examiner was most praiseworthy on my commentary and hazard perception.

And not 2 weeks later, I hit a fecking bollard in a retail park, and now have to drive about with a big dent for everyone to laugh at.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:28 pm

cardinal richelieu wrote: I hit a fecking bollard in a retail park, and now have to drive about with a big dent for everyone to laugh at.

That's the problem with the hazard perception test - it only tests your ability to avoid moving objects. Stationary objects like bollards present an immeasurably greater threat, as you have proved.

Mattb · Post by **Mattb** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:32 pm

Maybe they should test the US air force for hazard perception then.
They don't seem to able to avoid anything, whether it be friendly, enemy, stationary or not!

Matt

Demmerz · Post by **Demmerz** » Tue May 09, 2006 3:07 pm

I managed 34/35 for the theory test and was creully robbed of victory in a true ItBox style by a deliberately misleading question. I was asked which was worse for visibility:

a. bright sunshine
b. heavy rain
c. being blind (theyalways throw a daft one in....)
d. dense fog.

I chose dense fog only to be told afterwards that actually, heavy rain is just that bit worse. Which I think is complete ding dong utter bollocks.

I was never tested for my hazard awareness abilities. This only suggests one thing: it was clear that I was so good, a test would have been a waste of time as I would have nailed it anyway - which means I must better than you, so ner.

Or maybe it was because I passed in 2000 and it wasn;t a requirement anyway, but I much prefer to live in blissful ignorance and believe the first option.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue May 09, 2006 8:07 pm

Demmerz wrote:I was never tested for my hazard awareness abilities. This only suggests one thing: it was clear that I was so good, a test would have been a waste of time as I would have nailed it anyway - which means I must better than you, so ner.

There's only one way to find out - the inaugural DVLA Theory Test Hazard Perception World Championships

Drpepper · Post by **Drpepper** » Tue May 09, 2006 9:51 pm

Will be taking shortly, how much do they all cost nowadays??

Cheers