What's the worst thing about cycling? Other cyclists.

[jimini]

Evening all. Would be interested on others' thoughts on this article from the Grauniad over the weekend:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/jul/05/worst-thing-about-cycling-other-cyclists

I've been thinking similar thoughts a lot over the recent months. It does - as you would expect - peak in the summer and then fade away as the nights draw in and there's only the more dedicated two-wheeled commuter left on the roads like us, but this summer in particular is driving me a little bit loopy.

I used to be a resident of Tooting so I was a CS7 type of commuter, but I've been in South Woodford for the past three months and, if anything, the issue seems more prevalent in inner north east London. The usual things like RLJing are the most regular causes of frustration, along with the usual people who push in front at ASLs only for us to have to overtake them again on the next portion of road. Some of the road etiquette on display on the Shoreditch High Street > Old Street roundabout portion of my journey in particular do my blood pressure no favours, not least because of some of the (I can only assume) ignorant yet dangerous risk-taking manoeuvres I witness on a daily basis.

So as I said, I was wondering about your collective take on this article and its sentiments. From a personal perspective my initial thought was "thank god I'm not the only one feeling this frustration". It saps a lot of the enjoyment out of pedalling for me personally.

I'd like to offer some sort of solution to the problem but, along with whoever wrote the article, I suspect there isn't one. All that notwithstanding: does the forum agree or disagree with the article? I'd be fascinated to hear your thoughts. Cheers - Jim.

[spindrift]

complete rubbish, they've ripped it apart here

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jul/07/other-cyclists-scariest-thing-bike-nonsense

[clarion]

The response by Peter Walker is a much more sensible article.  I thought the original piece was a bit silly.

[Jaded]

"says one jaded cyclist"

Not me mate. 

[Basil]

"Peter Walker"?  Hmm.

Anyway, I will say, of course other cyclists don't cause me more danger than other traffic.  But other cyclists do often piss me off more than other traffic.
And this is not a new thing for me - I've thought this now for a long time.
Ymmv

[jimini]

Thanks for the link to Peter's article, I hadn't had a chance to read the riposte. I'd agree that this makes more logical sense than the original article, but aside from the slightly more controversial notion that other cyclists are more scary / dangerous than those with internal combustion engines, I do still think there's a point he/she alludes to in the original article which is still an issue on the roads at the moment, that of the"fair-weather cyclist" (for want of a better expression) flouting the rules of the road far more than the more regular cyclist, which in turn winds up other road users (both on two and four+ wheels).

I guess the point I was trying to extract from the original article is that of the more ignorant / oblivious / aggressive / risk-taking cyclist that seems to frequent the roads, particularly more-so in the summer months. I don't know - maybe it's just me - but I do generally find that the % of RLJers, people scooting up ridiculously tiny gaps on the inside of buses and lorries at lights, people undertaking without warning etc. seems to be exponentially higher at the moment, which is a source of frustration, and it tends to mean that we all get tarred with the same brush by our fellow road users. Just my two-penneth anyway!

[teethgrinder]

Nope.
Cars and bad driving is the worst thing about cycling for me. To the point that I avoid using some roads, such as the A303, A14, A1, A421 etc etc and am very glad that I have a GPS which can direct me along roads seldom used my the motorised menace.
I've never avoided any route because of cyclists.
One of the things I enjoy most about off roading is that I don't have to constantly be on guard for crap driving.
If I'm going to overtaken with inches to spare by a twat, I'd rather it was a twat on a bike who would be unlikely to do any harm and might end up coming worse off.

I think the article in the OP is a good insight to the mindset of the average motorist and how bad they would be without license plates etc. It strikes me that these fair weather cyclists go back to driving their cars in the winter. I somehow doubt that their attitude changes for the better and that it is just accepted when carried out by a motorist.

I don't go along with this "giving cyclists a bad name." Motorists kill with their pollution on a daily basis without having a "bad name" and that's before all the other problems and inconvenience they cause. It's people with prejudice who give cyclists a "bad name."

[clarion]

"Peter Walker"?  Hmm.

The Guardian has at least two staffers who share names with people of this parish.

[sojournermike]

The original article is dishonest, but dangerous because it reinforces the mindset of those who view people on bikes as below themselves and so of little or no importance. This leads to increased dangerous all of us.

In practice, the people who are stupid, dangerous law breakers on a bike are likely to be very much the same in a car, but more dangerous. They are invisible as a result of their behaviour being considered acceptable in a car.

Mike

[ian]

Other cyclists are often annoying but, when it comes down to it, that's about it. Unlike the average badly driven urban battle tank, which might kill me. And cars in general. They pollute, the block pavements, they all manner of things that make the urban environment pretty awful. A cyclist skipping a red light? Whatever (and cars universally do the same, yet people complain endlessly about cyclists). Yeah, yeah, some cyclists are their own worst PR. I hate it when they thread through crossings on green etc. but to be honest, it's not murder-kill-death. And yes, I think the attitude of many cyclists can be intimidating to other less confident cyclists. But people are people. I'm not responsible for every other person on a bike. I'm responsible for me. I'd always, always rather put up with a twat on a bike than behind the wheel of an X5.

It's a weird perspective to be concerned about cyclists when there's something that directly kills 2,000 people a year and puts tens of thousands in hospital, leaves families broken and grieving, and costs us all many, many millions of pounds. And that's not even mentioning the indirect effects. Pollution kills, hospitalises, and worsens the quality of life. The anti-social effects of speeding and badly parked cars are manifest. The noise pollution for people who have misfortune to live near any kind of main road. Then there's the further symptoms of obesity, both from the reliance on the car, but also through urban environments that make walking and cycling unpalatable alternatives.

Yeah, but what about those cyclists going through red lights.

[danhopgood]

Yeah, but what about those cyclists going through red lights.

Your own post says you hate cyclists who go through red lights.  And reading between the lines, you do it yourself.  So cyclist rule breaking is OK 'cos it don't kill people?  Even though it's hated - even by cyclists?  And you wonder why motorists have it in for cyclists?

With that attitude we're on a race to the bottom - and it ain't an eye for an eye - 'cos the motorists have got the killing machines.

A positive image of cycling is what's required.  That needs cyclists to play by the rules - not make up their own. 

[hellymedic]

What is the worst thing about cycling?
Sloppy cyclist-hating journalists...

[Otto]

Without doubt.... Buses.... remeber how beautifully the traffic flowed during a bus strike...

[ian]

Yeah, but what about those cyclists going through red lights.

Your own post says you hate cyclists who go through red lights.  And reading between the lines, you do it yourself.  So cyclist rule breaking is OK 'cos it don't kill people?  Even though it's hated - even by cyclists?  And you wonder why motorists have it in for cyclists?

With that attitude we're on a race to the bottom - and it ain't an eye for an eye - 'cos the motorists have got the killing machines.

A positive image of cycling is what's required.  That needs cyclists to play by the rules - not make up their own.

You might want to read the response to the original article, which covers this.

It doesn't really matter, you know, every cyclist in the world could decide to behave in some abstractly perfect way, follow every law, and doff their caps to pedestrians and car drivers. We'd still, somehow, be in the way. And this assumes there's some spooky universal cycling compact that links everyone on a bike from lycra MAMILs to chavs on a one-previous-careless-owner bike. It's bizarre, but it happens for all out-groups, where an individual characteristic is applied to the entire group. We don't view drivers as a distinct communally responsible group. Nor pedestrians. Of course, if you see someone 'Romanian-looking' begging, well, that means all Romanians are beggars. Maybe all Romanians should get together and agree to stop begging, after all it makes them look bad.

It also doesn't matter because cyclists aren't going to behave. We may as well stop sweating it. It's not going to happen. They'll wobble everywhere and do the things that cyclists all over the planet do. There's no been a mass slaughter of pedestrians since we put tourists –or anyone else – on Boris Bikes. Cyclists aren't going to get training. In most of the world, people don't give a shit. Perhaps we shouldn't either. Because to do so removes the focus on the actual issues.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: cyclists are their own worst advocate.

And no, I don't cycle through red lights. I do occasionally scoot along pavements though.

[contango]

It seems to me it's more about perception than reality. If a car is stuck behind a tractor on a narrow road it seems the frustration is paired with a sense that you can't get past it. But if the same car is stuck behind a few cyclists on a narrow road it's as if the sense is replaced with an entitlement to get past and the slow cyclists are somehow more antisocial than the slow tractor. Yes, perhaps the cyclists could pull off the road and let the car pass but unless you go through life assuming everybody else has an obligation to get out of your way at every opportunity it doesn't always work like that.

Of course if someone goes through life assuming that cyclists are the cause of their problems (and however annoying they are to watch, red-light jumpers only affect me if I'm the one who has to brake hard to avoid giving them a Darwin award), every time a cyclist does anything wrong they'll regard it as proof of their worldview, while conveniently ignoring the cyclists they pass who don't fit their preconceived idea. I suppose it's no different to the way we as cyclists remember the close pass or the jackass who squeezed past when there wasn't really space to overtake only to indicate left and turn so close in front of us that we had to brake hard, and don't remember the hundreds of other cars that passed safely and without any impact on our blood pressure.

[Ham]

ICNBA to read the article, but my general health and wellbeing (if not my actual life and deth) is far more frequently threatened by cyclists than it is by motor vehicles (I avoid Old Street and the Hackney rat run for just that reason). A good example was last Thursday, at a traffic light, I'm positioned in what would be a cycle lane area, somewhat away from the kerb. Lights are changing and I am just about to move forward as someone comes through at full speed between me and the kerb, brushing me in the process. Doesn't wind me up particularly as long as I am not damaged, but I will often choose to avoid the worst cycling areas, just as I might avoid Vauxhall if I could. Funniest incident of that  type was when a knobhead rode into my left turn signal. Hurt my hand, but it was funny. ("Clyde, left turn!").

And no, I am not going to ride in the gutter to stop that happening.

[contango]

At least with motor traffic it can only change direction so fast. Pedestrians, especially the infernal iZombie variety, can change direction without warning and step out without warning. I'm sure being hit by a car could do more damage but a fast collision with a pedestrian who just walked out without bothering to look (or the knucklehead variety who look right at a cyclist and then step out anyway) doesn't seem like it would be much fun. I'm not as fast as Andy Schleck but if a spectator collision caused him to have to pull out of the Tour it's unlikely to end well for me, even at my lower speeds.

[sojournermike]

At least with motor traffic it can only change direction so fast. Pedestrians, especially the infernal iZombie variety, can change direction without warning and step out without warning. I'm sure being hit by a car could do more damage but a fast collision with a pedestrian who just walked out without bothering to look (or the knucklehead variety who look right at a cyclist and then step out anyway) doesn't seem like it would be much fun. I'm not as fast as Andy Schleck but if a spectator collision caused him to have to pull out of the Tour it's unlikely to end well for me, even at my lower speeds.

A few years ago I was running up the road in Walthamstow when a chap stepped out from behind a building at a junction. I was checking behind me before crossing the road and, unfortunately, 'shouldered' him. I was probably running at between 6 and 7 minute mile pace and it bounced him across the pavement and left him looking very dazed. My shoulder was sore for the rest of the week. 

I felt pretty guilty about it as it really wasn't his fault, but it does demonstrate that running into one another can be painful.

[danhopgood]

Yeah, but what about those cyclists going through red lights.

Your own post says you hate cyclists who go through red lights.  And reading between the lines, you do it yourself.  So cyclist rule breaking is OK 'cos it don't kill people?  Even though it's hated - even by cyclists?  And you wonder why motorists have it in for cyclists?

With that attitude we're on a race to the bottom - and it ain't an eye for an eye - 'cos the motorists have got the killing machines.

A positive image of cycling is what's required.  That needs cyclists to play by the rules - not make up their own.

You might want to read the response to the original article, which covers this.

I have read that response, and I disagree with it.

It's simply untenable to say that abuse of the rules of the road by one group matters less than another group.  The rules apply equally to everyone.  The consequences when an impact occurs though is not equal. 

There have been cases where juries have aquitted motorists in fatal (to a cyclist) incidents when there's very little doubt the motorist was at fault.  That's the way justice works - if there's a little doubt, the result is not guilty.

How do you think it looks to a jury - who likely as not are not cyclists or don't cycle frequently - if there daily experience is of cyclists who run red lights, ride on pavements etc. but bang on their car windows and shout at them if they do anything wrong?

What happens to the potential for doubt that the cyclist is innocent in the minds of those people? I'd say it increases.  So innocent cyclists and their families see no justice done, as the result of the actions of the minority.

[MikeFromLFE]

I'm not sure how this relates to the original article because the context is very different. I was among the multitude coming down off Buttertubs on Saturday - the lane was packed (I mean packed) with pedestrians (with/without dogs/children) and cyclists of several persuasions.
It was stop/start all the way and I was thinking "this is the future - a non-motorised traffic jam in the heart of rural England " just as a bunch of wannabe racers were barging their way through the throng on their bikes, berating those in their way. Much tutting and grumbling in a very British fashion followed. But, it just shows how we can be our own worst enemies.
Maybe I have seen the future, and it contains nuts.

[Gattopardo]

I agree with the first article, you expect cyclists to be sensible but, in London, am regularly amazed there aren't more deaths.  But undertaking cyclists don't get a mention tho, as well as riding so closely that you get clipped.  But no mention of lemming peds tho.

The second article is the usual smugness of cyclist that state things like needing cycle lanes and comparing London to Copenhagen or the Netherlands.

Oh with rlj, it is bad when they scream past peds crossing properly, or just going through without looking.

[ian]

Yeah, but what about those cyclists going through red lights.

Your own post says you hate cyclists who go through red lights.  And reading between the lines, you do it yourself.  So cyclist rule breaking is OK 'cos it don't kill people?  Even though it's hated - even by cyclists?  And you wonder why motorists have it in for cyclists?

With that attitude we're on a race to the bottom - and it ain't an eye for an eye - 'cos the motorists have got the killing machines.

A positive image of cycling is what's required.  That needs cyclists to play by the rules - not make up their own.

You might want to read the response to the original article, which covers this.

I have read that response, and I disagree with it.

It's simply untenable to say that abuse of the rules of the road by one group matters less than another group.  The rules apply equally to everyone.  The consequences when an impact occurs though is not equal. 

There have been cases where juries have aquitted motorists in fatal (to a cyclist) incidents when there's very little doubt the motorist was at fault.  That's the way justice works - if there's a little doubt, the result is not guilty.

How do you think it looks to a jury - who likely as not are not cyclists or don't cycle frequently - if there daily experience is of cyclists who run red lights, ride on pavements etc. but bang on their car windows and shout at them if they do anything wrong?

What happens to the potential for doubt that the cyclist is innocent in the minds of those people? I'd say it increases.  So innocent cyclists and their families see no justice done, as the result of the actions of the minority.

I’m still not sure what you are arguing - I genuinely have no power over other cyclists. There’s no such things as cyclists, any more than there are drivers. There’s people who cycle and people who drive and people who walk. They’re all people. There’s no mechanism whereby tomorrow all cyclists will agree to be adhere to some unimpeachable standard of lawfulness, any more than drivers tomorrow will all agree to adhere to every speed limit. You might as well say that while you disagree with racism, until those dark hued people agree to unanimously behave, you can see why those happy-go-lucky racists have a point.

It’s diversionary and panders to victim blaming. It makes for a pretend equality when the relationship between someone on a bike (or walking) and a car are somehow even. That relationship, of course, is massively unbalanced.

I don’t much care about people on bikes, to be honest. There aren’t many of them. I do care about people in cars and what they do with those vehicles since that affects us all. Sure, you can campaign for better cycling (whatever that might be), but it’s not a battle you’ll win. Even the Germans scoot through red lights. Or you can campaign to make the roads and our environment better for everyone. That means focusing on the car and not letting attention be dragged elsewhere. While we worry about vague annoyances, another five or so people a day are being buried. That’s a tragedy and that’s just the primary negative impact.

[David Martin]

"Peter Walker"?  Hmm.

I have met both and can confirm that the Peter Walker who writes for the Grauniad is not the same person as the Peter Walker who stalks these hallowed cloisters.

[danhopgood]

I don’t much care about people on bikes, to be honest. There aren’t many of them. I do care about people in cars and what they do with those vehicles since that affects us all. Sure, you can campaign for better cycling (whatever that might be), but it’s not a battle you’ll win. Even the Germans scoot through red lights. Or you can campaign to make the roads and our environment better for everyone. That means focusing on the car and not letting attention be dragged elsewhere. While we worry about vague annoyances, another five or so people a day are being buried. That’s a tragedy and that’s just the primary negative impact.

I just don't accept what you're saying.  Safety on the roads requires all road users to obey the rules.

People break the rules - more incidents occur - vulnerable road users come off worst.   Making the roads better needs to include better infrastructure - for all users, cars as well as bikes, but behavior is a huge factor.  You seem to be saying the behavior of cyclists is irrelevent.  It very much is relevant.

[vorsprung]

I just don't accept what you're saying.  Safety on the roads requires all road users to obey the rules.

yeah that would be great.  Next time I am out please let there be

• no close passes by motorised traffic - against the rules but happens every time
• no overtaking by motorised traffic and then immediately turning left - always happens in urban traffic
• no mobile use while moving in a motorised vehicle , I'm sure you've seen the recent research comparing it with drink driving - see this all the time
• no aggressive overtaking by motorised traffic accompanied by incoherent shouting - about once a month on average
• no parking in dangerous places that blocks visibility
• no exceeding the speed limit by motor vehicles

All of these are extremely dangerous.  All of these are considered normal motor vehicle driving behaviour.  Compared to these everyday occurrences most of the bike crimes are relatively trivial.    That's why I can't get het up about RLJ or pavement riding or the other stuff that the media seem to be raving on about.