Allstate names DC the city with highest percentage of out-of-city drivers, or something

Allstate names DC the large city in the US with the most accident-prone drivers. I'm a bit dubious. Not that I think DC drivers are so good, but I question their methodolgy. They don't explain where they get there numbers beyond

Allstate actuaries have conducted an in-depth analysis of company claim data to determine the likelihood drivers in America's 200 largest cities will experience a vehicle collision compared to the national average. Internal property damage reported claims were analyzed over a two-year period (from January 2008 to December 2009) to ensure the findings would not be impacted by external influences such as weather or road construction.

A weighted average of the two-year numbers determined the annual percentages. The report defines an auto crash as any collision resulting in a property damage claim. Allstate's auto policies represent about 10 percent of all U.S. auto policies, making this report a realistic snapshot of what's happening on America's roadways.

So are they dividing crashes in DC by population in DC? Or is it crashes by DC residents per population? I don't know. Their complete report is just a spreadsheet with numbers they don't explain.

If the first, you can see obvious problems there. DC will have an inordinate number of crashes within city limits for their population of drivers, because so many drivers drive in who don't live here.  Even if its the second, since most drivers in DC are not DC drivers, it's likely that most crashes involving a DC driver also involves a MD or VA driver. And it takes two to tango as they say. If drivers from Arlington county are driving into DC and crashing into everything that doesn't make DC a city of bad drivers, it makes it a city where bad drivers come to drive badly. 

I'm the first to enjoy the perverse joy of coming in last in something like this {"For a while there it looked like Baltimore would catch us, but then the city really pulled together, starting driving like lunatics and we kept the title. We just want to thank our fans and God for sticking with us."], and I'd will probably point out to drivers that we reportedly have the worst drivers in the country the next time some "scofflaw" cyclist bashing comes up, but I'm not sure what to make of this.

Besides there's discussion every time a list comes out about the limitations of trying to compare unlike things. There are just too many variables. The only relevant comparison is DC 2011 to DC 2010 etc...

BTW, Arlington finished 180 out of 193 and Alexandria was 184.

Still, many drivers in DC could drive more safely. I don't need a report to know that.

Comments

[charlie]

And no Fairfax, Montgomery, or PG County either.

However, a crash can easily be a one vehicle accident.

I'm pretty sure DC did very badly (along with the entire region) in the 2010 allstate rankings.

[washcycle]

a crash can easily be a one vehicle accident.

True, but it doesn't change the gist of it.

[charlie]

Yes, it does. Your assertion is that crash involving a DC driver is more likely than not involving a MD or VA driver.

DC ranks in previous years:

2005:196
2006:196
2007: 196
2008:193
2009:193

So, this year sounds about right.

I agree the methodology is opaque. Given how badly Arlington, Alexandria and Baltimore do, however, you can safely say mid-Atlantic drives are a hazard. Maryland drivers, a bit more so.

[washcycle]

Your assertion is that crash involving a DC driver is more likely than not involving a MD or VA driver.

Correct. It still is.

That DC has consistently scored badly in the study using the same flawed methodology is only proof they it is flawed in a consistent manner.

[charlie]

"Your assertion is that crash involving a DC driver is more likely than not involving a MD or VA driver.

Correct. It still is."

A majority of car accidents in the US are single car accidents.

[charlie]

sorry, I needed to edit that.

Majority of fatal accidents. I can't figure out the overall percentage from the federal figures.

[JeffB]

The reason is simple. Washington prevented, unlike many cities, the construction of downtown expressways.

Since we didn't bulldoze entire neighborhoods that meant most commuters have to, at some point, leave the relative safety of their grid locked beltway and enter a street grid full of "hazards".

Since all too many of these motorists fail to adjust their driving habits to these new surroundings accidents then occur.

The answer is easy. Dust off the old plans, fire up the bull dozers, and blow some blocks down! An expressway is mandatory right to your office door.

[washcycle]

Here's another reason why I'm suspicious. We own a car. And we don't drive it that much because we live in the city and can walk and bike and take metro more. When I lived in Texas I almost never did any of those things. I used to drive to Town Lake to run or drive to Capital of Texas highway to bike. That's how much I drove.

And I don't think I'm alone in driving less in DC. I'd love to see the miles driven per car owner in DC compared to other places. So, if I'm right - like I usually am - that means people in DC drive far less per car owner. Which means they should get into fewer crashes. Maybe they're adjusting for mileage. I don't know because they don't give us those numbers. They've basically said - these are the rankings, trust us.

This from the same company that released a debunked study of car crashes based on astrological signs. A study they had to retract. True story.

[think a little]

My guess is washcycle is right, that they are doing total # of crashes by total population and it inflates the numbers given that daytime population of DC is 2 mil and resident population is .5 mil.

That being said I think it just is DC and surrounds cant drive/bike/walk and chew gum at the same time

[Greenbelt]

Methodological opaqueness or not, it's pretty clear to me that drivers tend to be both aggressive and inattentive, with an inflated sense of entitlement. It's not a good combination.

[Contrarian]

Methodological opaqueness or not, it's pretty clear to me that drivers tend to be both aggressive and inattentive, with an inflated sense of entitlement.

I can't think of anywhere I've been in the US where that isn't true.

[Rootchopper]

Apparently Allstate is not familiar with Boston. There is simply no way that DC has more accidents than the Boston area. They drive like they are in bumper cars up there. (I drove a cab up there when I was in college.)

[Michael H.]

DC cabbies are pretty aggressive. Or just plain nuts.

[guez]

And someone needs to teach DC-area drivers what a turn signal is...