Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => On The Road => Topic started by: Martin on 01 January, 2014, 01:41:41 pm
-
split off from the A303 thread because I think it's by and large a seperate issue to riding on a 70mph DC.
I'm aware of the concept of riding in primary and secondary position, and probably do it quite a bit myself (especially at night where I try to ride as near to the centre line as possible as usually the surface is best there). And if I'm on a steep very narrow hill or a road with poor sight lines I will generally hold my position until it is safe to pass. If it's on a narrow uphill I will keep riding until there's a convenient place to pull over and let the patient motorist pass, this usually results in a friendly raise of the hand. The same usually goes on bends where I've held my position (when it's me that does the hand gesture)
I'm sure I'm going to ruffle some feathers here but whilst I see us all as having equal right to use it, IMO roads are primarily designed and maintained (and of course used) for the motorised vehicle, any concept that we as cyclists should try to "control" the traffic by the way we position ourselves in the road just seems arrogant and often confrontational.
-
I'll continue to be arrogant then. What is that priority list - my safety, your safety, the law, my convenience, your convenience?
-
Your [Martin] two paragraphs seem to be somewhat at odds with each other. You "hold your position until it is safe to pass" and yet say that controlling traffic through positioning is arrogant and often confrontational.
Traffic of all flavours "take the lane" all the time. It is part of safe, predictable and courteous road behaviour. I think the reason it can invite aggression when people do it while riding a bike is that there is a significant minority of car drivers who do not appreciate the amount of space required to safely pass a cyclist, and so can assume that holding a position is unnecessary. But that is not a reason to avoid doing it.
-
The arrogant users of the roads are those who feel they are able to bully pedestrians, horses, and bicycles off of what are shared use facilities and appropriate them purely for their own use.
-
Your [Martin] two paragraphs seem to be somewhat at odds with each other. You "hold your position until it is safe to pass" and yet say that controlling traffic through positioning is arrogant and often confrontational.
I don't think they are but YMMV, to me it's about common courtesy mixed with a bit of safety. And I think it's a majority of drivers who are unaware of the room required to safely pass a cyclist, which is why some many of them who pass me end up having to avoid uncoming traffic.
If I hear a car gunning it up my arse I usually move into the gutter pronto, they are rare though
-
The arrogant users of the roads are those who feel they are able to bully pedestrians, horses, and bicycles off of what are shared use facilities and appropriate them purely for their own use.
and riding primary is going to address this? you want to use your body to stand up to that type of motorist go right ahead
-
I have to agree that your paragraphs do seem to contradict. What you describe in the first paragraph is how you control the road to ensure that those wishing to pass you do so safely...basically it seems that you agree with taking the lane in this context.
The only difference I can see in what you are saying, and forgive me if I have this wrong, is that you initially take the lane and if the driver behind waits patiently you stay there. However, if the driver behind starts revving, beeping, etc then you swing over into the gutter and allow an impatient and bad tempered driver to overtake where you have already decided that it is not safe to overtake. I would not do this, rather I would continue to block the unsafe overtake until I deemed it safe to let the driver past....I certainly don't want such a driver trying to squeeze past me in an unsafe situation.
If, on the other hand, I'm riding along on a road, in secondary, where it is safe for drivers to over take me, then I will happily stay in secondary all day (apart from at junctions, etc) and let them past. I know of very very few riders who actually ride in primary just to hold up traffic, rather than to benefit their own safety. Likewise, off the top of my head I know of no cases where riding in primary has led to a collision...assuming that it is done correctly.
But it does occur to me that if drivers know that revving their engines and banging their horns will make some cyclists swing over into the gutter and let them squeeze past, then they will be more likely to do it to all cyclists and become even more bad tempered should said cyclist not immediately grovel in the gutter for them.
-
I sometimes use a trick or two to "control" the traffic.
If I'm turning right and have a car behind me on 30-40mph limit roads, I will time my hand signal to coincide with oncoming traffic. It works wonders for preventing them overtaking me a second after I have signalled and it means I can get to the right of the lane much more easily.
I don't have a default position on the road. I just do what I think will keep me safest. Sometimes I'm right in the gutter, other times I'm on the centreline or even on the other side of the road.
Roads have to be designed to accommodate the largest vehicles that will use them. It wasn't until around the 1950s that roads were split into different categories from footpaths to motorways. Before roads were categorized, everything was called a road. Aristocratic cyclists started putting tarmac on them then along came the motor car and the government decided to fund road construction for them. I'm guessing that it's because of cars that cycling is illegal on footpaths, though local councils are keen on reversing that by turning pavements into shared use cyclepaths to earn brownie points.
I'll stick with what it says in the highway code about who has priority over using roads.
We don't build proper roads like they do in the USA IMO.
-
I'll continue to be arrogant then. What is that priority list - my safety, your safety, the law, my convenience, your convenience?
+1 and then some.
-
Different cyclists have different perceptions. I nearly always aware of what is behind me and manoeuvre accordingly. I have a riding partner who is oblivious and never l looks behind him. I have been on audaxes and seen solo riders pretty much sticking to the centre of the road (not lane) regardless of the road width or traffic.
-
I used whichever part of the road wasn't underwater today ;D
-
Your [Martin] two paragraphs seem to be somewhat at odds with each other. You "hold your position until it is safe to pass" and yet say that controlling traffic through positioning is arrogant and often confrontational.
+1
The first para makes wonderful sense, but taken as a whole I'm completely baffled by your post Martin :-\
-
Your [Martin] two paragraphs seem to be somewhat at odds with each other. You "hold your position until it is safe to pass" and yet say that controlling traffic through positioning is arrogant and often confrontational.
+1
The first para makes wonderful sense, but taken as a whole I'm completely baffled by your post Martin :-\
well just read the first paragraph ;) The point I was making was that politely expecting and encouraging other road users to wait until a safe place to pass (and also for a relatively short time) is all fine and dandy and indeed part and parcel of sharing the road;
judging by some of the replies there seem to be cyclists who think it's fine to assert their right to be on the road even to the annoyance of other road users; not an attitude I agree with (which is what the second paragraph is about)
if you think I'm talking crap ignore me, simples!
-
If what you're saying is that it's OK to ride assertively but not to ride agressively, then I think the majority on here will agree with you.
For me 'taking the lane' is just another way of communicating with other road users, just like sticking an arm out when turning.
-
Wobbly you got my vote for president :)
-
'Controlling' the traffic means preventing someone from carrying out a dangerous overtake. I'm not sure why anyone on this forum should object to that.
I'm sure a small minority of cyclists misunderstand how and when to use primary, but that doesn't mean that everyone else should get out of the road so that an impatient car can pass. Depending on the situation I will allow an overtake by pulling in, but that very much depends on the circumstances and is hardly a default position.
-
I often/always cycle (and drive) in a way to remove any doubt from the traffic around me.
If allowing the oncoming car to think they could squeeze by me, creating a difficult, and drawn-out, passing manoeuvre, then I'll just move into the very centre of the road and remove any doubt.
If you allow a car the possibility to "squeeze" then they will. If you don't (mostly) they won't. You must make their minds up for them.
It's easy to cross a line into aggressive cycling/driving. I like to think of it as "persuasive".
-
Your [Martin] two paragraphs seem to be somewhat at odds with each other. You "hold your position until it is safe to pass" and yet say that controlling traffic through positioning is arrogant and often confrontational.
Traffic of all flavours "take the lane" all the time. It is part of safe, predictable and courteous road behaviour. I think the reason it can invite aggression when people do it while riding a bike is that there is a significant minority of car drivers who do not appreciate the amount of space required to safely pass a cyclist, and so can assume that holding a position is unnecessary. But that is not a reason to avoid doing it.
This is nicely put.
I "take the lane" frequently when passing parked cars but always knowing what is behind me and signalling well in advance of pulling out (well, most of the time, sometimes difficult in town requiring a snap risk assessment and dynamic flow through) but am careful to move over and indicate to a following car to pass now when there is a safe opportunity, or if they would be stuck for ages, for example on a long uphill singletrack lane. We have to give and take if we are to share the roads safely and reasonably amicably.
-
I'm conflict avoidant to a fault and generally of the belief that pissing off drivers isn't conducive to anyone's safety. I'm also of the belief that my own safety is greatly improved by avoiding dodgy road surface conditions, making my intentions to manoeuvre as clear as possible and - where possible - having somewhere to go if it all goes pear shaped. This means I end up 'taking the lane' from time to time, because that's how much space I need to ride my bike in a safe manner. When there's enough space for me to move over, I will, in a blatant "the hazard has passed" way, if not actively thanking the driver behind for being patient.
I think there's usually an optimal position to ride in where you've got enough space for your own safety, but still look like you're making an effort to keep left (theatrically looking at - or even pointing at - potholes, glass, chutney, doors, pedestrians etc, helps reinforce this). The idea is to show whoever is following that you're not a bloodycyclist gratuitously "riding in the middle of the road" but that you're avoiding some hazard(s) and the road simply isn't wide enough for them to overtake yet. Once your behaviour becomes situational rather than dispositional, they're likely to be a lot more patient.
If there's a pinch point, better to ride 1/3 of the way out, conspicuously avoiding the gutter debris, than right in the middle so as to block the following car. The car still won't have room to overtake, but it becomes the pinch-point's fault, not yours.
I like teethgrinder's point about timing to coincide with oncoming traffic. I'll make an effort to do that in future. :thumbsup:
-
We have to give and take if we are to share the roads safely and reasonably amicably.
Absolutely. And that sometimes means....shock horror.....pulling to the side of the road to let traffic past. A small gesture at no cost, but greatly appreciated.
Sometimes the bloody-minded attitude of cyclists is counter-productive. I remember on the Dean 300 a couple of years ago riding on that single track road before the climb to the monument. There was a car that had been following patiently up a hill, I spotted a driveway and me and riding partner pulled into it to let car past. Or so we thought. There was another rider behind us who just carried on. Pointless, and just served to aggravate the driver.
-
Cars delay me every single day. I don't get aggravated.
-
That would be a first for you.
-
At least I don't piss on baby mice and stuff them up my arse.
-
This is my favourite thread of the year :thumbsup:
-
At least I don't piss on baby mice and stuff them up my arse.
New Year's resolution, eh.
Won't last.
-
We have to give and take if we are to share the roads safely and reasonably amicably.
Absolutely. And that sometimes means....shock horror.....pulling to the side of the road to let traffic past. A small gesture at no cost, but greatly appreciated.
Sometimes the bloody-minded attitude of cyclists is counter-productive
eggsacktly and my whole OP; make it clear that you are a road user the same as the cars / WVM and it's not always convenient to overtake, but allow them to as soon as it's safe to do so, just a bit of common courtesy. It's I what almost always get from cyclists when I'm driving my car
-
We have to give and take if we are to share the roads safely and reasonably amicably.
Absolutely. And that sometimes means....shock horror.....pulling to the side of the road to let traffic past. A small gesture at no cost, but greatly appreciated.
Sometimes the bloody-minded attitude of cyclists is counter-productive
eggsacktly and my whole OP; make it clear that you are a road user the same as the cars / WVM and it's not always convenient to overtake, but allow them to as soon as it's safe to do so, just a bit of common courtesy. It's I what almost always get from cyclists when I'm driving my car
Surely that is what every one else on the thread has said they do - take the lane until it is safe to pull back in and let the vehicles behind pass.
But perhaps the issue is the definition of pulling in to the side of the road: if you mean that we should ride through the debris and drain covers just to let a car past then I'd have to disagree. If you mean that we ought to pull right off the road every time we are going to have a car or two behind us for a short while then I'd disagree. If you mean pull back into secondary and let the waiting traffic happily and safely pass us then no probs at all. If you mean pull into a passing area on a single track road if it can be safely done to let a car past that would otherwise be stuck behind us for an inordinate amount of time then fair enough.
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
...though, for the other some of the time, on say a relatively empty but narrow road, I find it helpful to sit out in primary to make it clear to a vehicle approaching that they will have to change course to overtake and wait until the opposite lane is clear; once they have slowed down anticipating this but before they have come up behind me, I can pull back into secondary and let them continue through at a sensible speed. As everybody keeps saying, there are exceptions to the exceptions.
Has anybody made the obvious point that it's never worth deliberately blocking an overtake that could otherwise be made safely, because you want the idiots in front of you where you can see them?
-
Has anybody made the obvious point that it's never worth deliberately blocking an overtake that could otherwise be made safely, because you want the idiots in front of you where you can see them?
I don't think so, but it's a very good point. :thumbsup:
(I do wonder how many people do the same in their car. There are plenty of idiots I don't want behind me even when I'm driving ... )
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
no that's not what it says at all; and I did say I expected to ruffle a few feathers
perhaps what I'm saying is respect other road users as you would expect them to respect you, this means not persistently riding in the road in a position that pisses drivers off (and then rubs off on your fellow cyclists) just because it's what John Franklin says...
http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/fuck-you-john-franklin/
-
Well I suspect the reason why this ruffles a few feathers is because you are misrepresenting what 'taking the lane' means. If I were to say I think that people shouldn't drive at a 'sensible speed' because it isn't safe, and then define that as being 25mph faster than the legal limit then perhaps I might find people disagreeing with me. It wouldn't add much to the debate about road safety however... Nobody on here is advocating persistently holding cars up by riding in the middle if the road for the sake if it. Indeed my experience of the road is that this hardly ever happens and the reverse is true. Most cyclists seem reluctant to be in primary when it would be safer if they were.
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
no that's not what it says at all; and I did say I expected to ruffle a few feathers
perhaps what I'm saying is respect other road users as you would expect them to respect you, this means not persistently riding in the road in a position that pisses drivers off (and then rubs off on your fellow cyclists) just because it's what John Franklin says...
http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/fuck-you-john-franklin/
pretty horrible SafeSpeed style London centric bile fest.
-
Yes, that's a silly article:
“I believe that the anti-infrastructure policies that Franklin promotes are responsible for the high cycling death toll on Britain’s roads.”
Right, so it's not inattentive drivers then?
-
<sip>... Nobody on here is advocating persistently holding cars up by riding in the middle if the road for the sake if it. Indeed my experience of the road is that this hardly ever happens and the reverse is true. Most cyclists seem reluctant to be in primary when it would be safer if they were.
Very true.
I'm also going to point out the other side of all this; most cyclists tend to be over-deferential to their steel-caged overlords, no doubt motivated by perfectly natural fear. In turn, the behaviour that pisses many drivers off is riding between the white lines - you know, not on a cycle-path. Even riding in the gutter we are often considered a nuisance.
Then if you ride as most people are describing here - 'taking the lane' with good reason, not being bolshy for the sake of it - you will piss off an even larger minority of drivers.
Sorry if I've ruffled any feathers there.
-
Sometimes drivers (Hampshire anecdote so maybe not applicable to central London) are "over-deferential" , waiting in an overtaking lay-by (the sort you see cut into the hedgerow every few hundred yards on single-track) when there is ample room to pass safely.
I think the ratio of cars being nice to me and me being nice to cars, by pulling over and waving them past, is about 1:1.
Generally I find cyclists and motorists get on perfectly well.
My main concern in all these (Motorist v Cyclist) issues in London will force a reaction impacting the whole country. I know they are not 100% London-based but it does feel that way when you watch the "Cycle War" style documentaries or read articles in papers.
I can well imagine London based petrol-head MPs, whose commute involves a taxi ride from Kensington to Parliament, thinking that something drastic needs to be done, although, mostly, nothing does.
Even in London itself I imagine that, mostly, nothing needs to be done (I have previously posted that all my issues in London have been with knob-heads on bicycles, not cars).
If you add up all the interactions we have with cars, and then add up all the terrible interactions, it's probably not a bad ratio.
Let's hope that MPs are distracted by the flood of (two at the last count) Romanians and forget to force through some sweeping legislation that impacts my fairly "live and let live" cycling in Hants.
-
My experience of London commuting suggests that the overtaking issues are not really London-based at all, but are rural. In most of London, cyclists are very unlikely to hold up cars, not least because the average car speed is so low.
There may, of course, be other aspects of London cycling behaviour that cause upset, but that's another matter.
-
My London centric comment arises out of the suggestion that infrastructure will solve cyclists problems. People that say that have never ridden in the country.
-
Has anybody made the obvious point that it's never worth deliberately blocking an overtake that could otherwise be made safely, because you want the idiots in front of you where you can see them?
I don't think so, but it's a very good point. :thumbsup:
(I do wonder how many people do the same in their car. There are plenty of idiots I don't want behind me even when I'm driving ... )
I do, car and bike, it's a fundamental part of keeping myself safe.
Rightly or wrongly I often decide how to gauge my approach to a pinch point based on my perception of the immediate road conditions, if I feel taking the lane may threaten my safety, I'll even stop if needed to avoid the risk. Normally it is just a matter of adjusting speed down to let one (particular) car past and using the immediate gap after to position myself.
All this taking the road and what have you depends on the reasonableness and acuity of the driver of the vehicle. The chance that the driver might be under the influence of drink or drugs or otherwise engaged turn the process into straight Russian roulette.
Out of interest how many here have experienced the phenomena of people driving stolen BMW and the like doing power slides and handbrake turns etc in the public road? That's seriously scary. There was a spate of it around here last year, and it hasn't gone away. I really wouldn't want to meet one of those whilst taking any lane (or gutter come to that)
-
.....Out of interest how many here have experienced the phenomena of people driving stolen BMW and the like doing power slides and handbrake turns etc in the public road? That's seriously scary. There was a spate of it around here last year, and it hasn't gone away. I really wouldn't want to meet one of those whilst taking any lane (or gutter come to that)
Someone I work with, well, we work for the same company, comes to work in a tatty Mazda MX5. Bumpers and other bits of trim held in place with cable ties. Blue bulbs in the side-light clusters....
I'm painting a picture here....
What really caught my eye about this car was the wheel/tyre arrangement:
Slightly wider than standard Carlos Fandango wheels on the front (the arches have been flared to accommodate these) with the expected low profile rubber.
But on the back, very, very skinny, almost space-saver skinny, steel wheels, and negative camber.
Curiosity got the better of me one day so I asked why he has such an unusual (illegal?) tyre arrangement, and what did it handle like?
Turns out he has it so arranged as this greatly assists with power sliding. Something he does on a regular basis (to the extent that he has adapted his car to make it easier for him).
On the roads.
The ones you and I use.
Words fail me.
-
My experience of semi rural (london commuter belt), Rural (touring) and City (Birmingham as a student) taught me that the threats from drivers change depending on where you are.
In an Urban environment I was worried about SMIDSY from side turnings and left hooks. in this case taking the lane in the last 20-50m before the junction reduced the left hook potential and provided more space to manouver in the event of the SMIDSY.
In the semi rural commuter belt the greatest percieved risk still is the inapropriate overtake (Blind bend, brow of the hill, oncoming traffic etc.) here taking the lane is again a posible means to influence the behaviour of the driver for the short duration until a suitable oportunity to pass is available. Whilst delivering the daily paper for 4 years I learnt exactly which stretches of road I had to control for my own safety.
When on rural tours none of these were prominant risks, though the closest I ever came to a SMIDSY from a left turn was while touring, only good anticipation and heading for the centre of the road got us through that, the percieved risk has been from the potential for a local who knows the road to be travelling to fast to respond when the cyclist suddenly appears round the bend. In this case taking in the lane is not helpful as it gets you more in the way of the danger.
Personally I do 'take the lane' in some circumstances normally for short stretches round known or obvious contraints: Pinch points, blind bends etc. where I want to discourage an overtake. However these will be for short distances before returning to a secondary position. I do occasionally 'take the lane for longer' periods but this is one of two scenarios:
1. heavy traffic on a multi lane road where I am matching the traffic speed, I will now align my road position with the drivers seat, this maximises visibility, gets clear of side turnings and allows access for right hand side filtering if the traffic slows.
2. On a lightly trafficed dual carriage way I will move out to a position that makes a driver believe they can not pass me whilst not changing lane. This is only possible if the traffic volumes are such that changing lane is not a problem and is normally something I start to do once I get buzzed by someone who didn't move over.
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
no that's not what it says at all; and I did say I expected to ruffle a few feathers
perhaps what I'm saying is respect other road users as you would expect them to respect you, this means not persistently riding in the road in a position that pisses drivers off (and then rubs off on your fellow cyclists) just because it's what John Franklin says...
http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/fuck-you-john-franklin/
pretty horrible SafeSpeed style London centric bile fest.
I thought so too, but just shows that one man's Messiah is another's Satan ;)
I thought there was something about Franklin that had the stench of CTC Head office Newspeak, and I was right. These are the people that opposed the cyclepath next to the A24 near Box Hill ( now beloved of Kamikaze pilots every weekend) after all
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
no that's not what it says at all; and I did say I expected to ruffle a few feathers
perhaps what I'm saying is respect other road users as you would expect them to respect you, this means not persistently riding in the road in a position that pisses drivers off (and then rubs off on your fellow cyclists) just because it's what John Franklin says...
http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/fuck-you-john-franklin/
pretty horrible SafeSpeed style London centric bile fest.
Has a great big CEGB emblem on it... quelle surprise
-
Sometimes drivers (Hampshire anecdote so maybe not applicable to central London) are "over-deferential" , waiting in an overtaking lay-by (the sort you see cut into the hedgerow every few hundred yards on single-track) when there is ample room to pass safely.
I think the ratio of cars being nice to me and me being nice to cars, by pulling over and waving them past, is about 1:1.
Generally I find cyclists and motorists get on perfectly well.
<snipped some tedious london shit>
If you add up all the interactions we have with cars, and then add up all the terrible interactions, it's probably not a bad ratio.
I completely agree :thumbsup:
The good nature of the majority is why I try to treat other road-users in a civilised manner. (Until they give me good reason not to. And often even then).
-
Paul; one of the reasons I started Audax in your neck of the woods is because the roads are MUCH quieter and also the drivers are MUCH more courteous than in my area (where we are pretty much limited to very quiet B roads and roads that don't have numbers or signposts if we want to avoid motorised knobends)
don't get me started on Kent....
-
Sometimes drivers (Hampshire anecdote so maybe not applicable to central London) are "over-deferential" , waiting in an overtaking lay-by (the sort you see cut into the hedgerow every few hundred yards on single-track) when there is ample room to pass safely.
That happened to me twice on the way back from the Andover camping weekend. Maybe it's a Hampshire thing. Around here they're more likely to assume you'll be able to ride up the skoggy embankment to let them squeeze past.
-
Generally, around my area drivers are pretty good and I've had very few ill-tempered or simply inattentive episodes. The more major the road the less tolerance I find, but the numbers of contretemps are still remarkably low. Most drivers seem to entirely understand why I might wish to take the lane, and even those that don't rarely do anything other than overtake very quickly once it's clear to do so. I've had far more problems - or, rather, observed drivers' potential problems - when drivers have made overtakes approaching blind bends on our little lanes. None has yet reaped the whirlwind, but I've seen some phenomenal avoidances! I'd guess the issue has usually been drivers underestimating my speed. Well, I'd like to think so, anyway!
Despite some of the rhetoric here, I don't see many differences in the way we all seem to approach this issue - there's probably far more difference in the way we express it, than in the way we practically apply it.
-
This is why your OP seems at odds with it self: you start by saying that you do what everyone does, but then give the impression that we should not be in primary if there is a car behind us....which sort of defeats the purpose a lot of the time!
no that's not what it says at all; and I did say I expected to ruffle a few feathers
perhaps what I'm saying is respect other road users as you would expect them to respect you, this means not persistently riding in the road in a position that pisses drivers off (and then rubs off on your fellow cyclists) just because it's what John Franklin says...
I find it hard to believe that the whole point of the thread is to tell people not to do what they don't do, and what no one including Franklin is telling them to do, anyway? Perhaps what you actually need to do is to give a detailed example (with diagrams and everyfink) of what you find is wrong, and how you would have done it differently, so that we can all try to understand what you think the thread is actually about; because at the moment it looks as if it's you in one corner and the rest of the world in the other.
-
If you add up all the interactions we have with cars, and then add up all the terrible interactions, it's probably not a bad ratio.
Yep I agree with that. I'd say 99% of drivers are fine and only a tiny fraction of the remaining 1% are actually malicious. Quite surprising really as by definition 50% of drivers are below average (assuming a normal distribution of driving skills).
BUT in the course of a year's cycling many/most of us must be overtaken by tens or hundreds of thousands of vehicles. (eg I regularly use a road that carries an average 24000 vehicle movements a day, so much more than 1000 vehicles per hour when busy.) 1% of a hundred thousand vehicles per year is 1000 idiots per year potentially causing each of us a problem due to inattention, sleepiness, prescription or recreational drugs, alcohol, inadvertent idiocy or malicious intent.
My last close call was last year just approaching a gentle left hand bend on the above mentioned road when a car overtook just on the bend. Visibility was fine, nothing coming the other way. The car overtake was safe and proper, unfortunately the driver seemed oblivious to the fact that the huge caravan he was towing swung in as he rounded the bend. Missed me by a whisker. On reflection, if I'd been expecting a caravan to overtake I would have positioned myself further out, but for normal traffic on a fairly narrow two way road in relatively quiet conditions a secondary position about 50cm from the gutter should have been no problem.
-
My last close call was last year just approaching a gentle left hand bend on the above mentioned road when a car overtook just on the bend. Visibility was fine, nothing coming the other way. The car overtake was safe and proper, unfortunately the driver seemed oblivious to the fact that the huge caravan he was towing swung in as he rounded the bend. Missed me by a whisker.
It's often the car immediately behind, or the trailer behind, the car overtaking me that catches me, and my Spidey-senses, out.
Mantra - "There's probably another car to come....There's probably another car to come....There's probably another car to come...."
-
Had a knobend who decided that I shouldn't be taking the lane today.
I was here
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d85575!2d-2.9651133!3d56.473815
Just turned right out of the cyclepath (put in place since this satellite picture was taken), no traffic in sight. I am middle of the lane and wanting to go up Thompson Street. Knobend comes up from behind in a car that sounds like a boy racer. I indicate right and ease out a bit further decides that 20m is enough to overtake me but not enough to get past properly so squeezes through, forcing me off my line. I exclaim my displeasure 'what the hell was that for?' at which point KE stops (blocking my way ahead), gets out (proving to be a late 50's and rather obese man) swears at me and claims I was weaving all over the road without looking (I was in the middle of the lane, and could hear his bright yellow wagon a mile off so knew he was there). Exclaims it was all on camera and would be posted to youtube (not seen a sign yet).
Then pulls in and parks 30m further up the road. I shake my head as I go past and he berates me and says it will be on youtube. I made a somewhat disparaging remark along the lines of 'that doesn't stop you driving like an asshole' which probably wasn't the wisest of things to say.
Aggressive, impatient prat who has invented his own 'safe speed' style rules of the road and will use his car to bully others.
-
Sounds like you pissed him off.
-
In less than 50m of road. I think he was an impatient, self-righteous idiot who hadn't even considered the middle pedal.
-
In less than 50m of road. I think he was an impatient, self-righteous idiot who hadn't even considered the middle pedal.
It happens sometimes. Strangely enough, it seems to happen less and less as I get older and calmer.*
(*note I resisted claiming wisdom)
-
I seem to have dug myself into a hole in this thread but David's post sort of backs up what I meant in my OP; taking the lane is often a very good idea but there are knob-ends who will take umbrage so it has to be used with discretion, that's all
-
I seem to have dug myself into a hole in this thread but David's post sort of backs up what I meant in my OP; taking the lane is often a very good idea but there are knob-ends who will take umbrage so it has to be used with discretion, that's all
So are you saying David lacked discretion? :-\
-
It was an unusually arrogant knobend. Don't know what his problem was. Normally I have virtually no problems. I was expecting him to wait behind for the three or four seconds to the junction.
-
I seem to have dug myself into a hole in this thread but David's post sort of backs up what I meant in my OP; taking the lane is often a very good idea but there are knob-ends who will take umbrage so it has to be used with discretion, that's all
So are you saying David lacked discretion? :-\
matt, I think you are trying too hard to pick an unnecessary fight, here. I certainly didn't get that fromMartin's last post. What I got was that even when you make a perfectly justified move you can still come up against someone who doesn't think you should have made any move at all! I certainly didn't infer that he was getting at David.
-
I thought matt was just trying to reinforce the first 12 words
-
Ah! Words, eh? They get you every time!
-
Let's have a trial with no words.
:thumbsup: :P ;) :-\
-
Inferences, then.
-
Out of interest how many here have experienced the phenomena of people driving stolen BMW and the like doing power slides and handbrake turns etc in the public road? That's seriously scary. There was a spate of it around here last year, and it hasn't gone away. I really wouldn't want to meet one of those whilst taking any lane (or gutter come to that)
Came across this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6M2Q24k178
Sends shivers down my spine thinking about it. Yes they sometimes "practice" on normal roads.
-
Let's cheer things up a bit with this video:
http://youtu.be/dBC-nnvixHc
:)
-
Out of interest how many here have experienced the phenomena of people driving stolen BMW and the like doing power slides and handbrake turns etc in the public road? That's seriously scary. There was a spate of it around here last year, and it hasn't gone away. I really wouldn't want to meet one of those whilst taking any lane (or gutter come to that)
Came across this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6M2Q24k178
Sends shivers down my spine thinking about it. Yes they sometimes "practice" on normal roads.
It's not exactly a "normal road". It might be technically a public highway but you could hardly say it was "accessible to the public" at the time... :( >:( Perhaps we need a new sigh "Road closed for hooliganism"
-
Jeremy ClarksonVerified account
@JeremyClarkson
It's middle of the road point-makers like this who make car drivers so angry about cyclists.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdoYu8kIgAAYrFJ.jpg)
https://twitter.com/JeremyClarkson/status/421676710107811841
Right then, from the horses mouth so to speak.......
I was riding home from work (this is one of my regular routes) down Sloane Avenue in Chelsea towards Sloane Square. As I approached this island at the junction of Ixworth Street, a Range Rover over took me, because he had to veer left to avoid hitting the island I got pushed owards the kerb.
There was no point to this pass as there was slow moving traffic a little bit further down the road.
Now I was pretty cheesed off with this and most of you will know a close pass starts pumping adrenaline. Sloane Ave is a nice flat road and it's really easy to keep up with the trafic and just past the island I was keeping pace with the Range Rover, the driver was looking in his N/S door mirror giving the 'stare'. I admit that I was fairly vocal at this point and shouted 'What? you f*****g c**k, f****** knobstick' not much of an insult but I was too riled up to think straight.
As we approached the junction with Cadogan Street the traffic started slowing so I moved to the middle of the road to overtake. As I passed the Range Rover the window started to come down and a few words were exchanged by both of us as I passed (I can't remember what, I don't think it was as bad as the first reaction though as I tend to calm down fairly quickly). I then kept up with the traffic for the rest of Sloane Ave, and then in to Draycott Place which is quite narrow for a two way road.
I was turning right at this junction to go down to Sloane Square, so as I moved off I was positioning myself for this.
At the junction I looked behind me and saw Jeremy Clarkson just pulling up behind me with his head and arm out of the window, holding his phone and shouting 'gotcha' and looking well smug with himself. He was driving, and there was nobody else in the car. I got off my bike and pushed it back to his car and pointed out that he was overtaking me going in to a hazard, and made me change course. He just kept shouting increduously 'you were four feet from the kerb, but you were four feet from the kerb, I'm a cyclist and you were four feet from the kerb!'.
After a couple of attempts to explain to him why I thought he was wrong I gave up as he just kept shouting, I then rode off. Throughout this exchange I stayed reasonably calm.
At no time did I abuse any other road user or pedestrian on my journey home.
What JC's pic on twitter doesn't show is how much traffic was about at the time. Before I stopped at the crossing the junction was busy, and the traffic was queing all the way down to Sloane Square. I was probably well on my way to Parliament Square by the time JC got through Sloane Square. The ambulance wasn't parked either, it was moving.
Thanks for your patience reading my longest ever post!
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/jeremy-clarkson-continues-to-be-a-moron/page/3
-
Shouldn't have pissed him off.
-
So Clarkson takes a picture on his mobile phone. That is an immediate fixed penalty and points. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2695/made
The device doesn't have to be used for communication, just has to be capable of it.
-
Let's cheer things up a bit with this video:
http://youtu.be/dBC-nnvixHc
:)
;D
-
That is excellent. Should be shown on TV.
-
That is excellent. Should be shown on TV.
+1
-
So Clarkson takes a picture on his mobile phone. That is an immediate fixed penalty and points. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2695/made
The device doesn't have to be used for communication, just has to be capable of it.
Which is what I thought when I read
At the junction I looked behind me and saw Jeremy Clarkson just pulling up behind me with his head and arm out of the window, holding his phone and shouting 'gotcha'
-
I had previously thought that The Jeremy Clarkson was just a bejeaned publicity generating DVD retailing device. But that photo and response suggests he really is a danger to himself and others with only a half-grasped idea of what skills and attitude are required to use a vehicle in shared space.
-
Head and arm out of the window suggests he wasn't in proper control of the vehicle, which on the face of it - if there were witnesses and the will to prosecute - is presumably careless or even dangerous, just like driving with your hands behind your head ...
More provably, the Exif data on that pic should show what device it was taken on. I wonder if the Met's Cycle Task Force counts showing Clarkson he's an arse among its objectives.
-
That photo is golden for anyone wanting to show Clarkson up as a Mr Toad. Looks like he wants to overtake a cyclist at a zebra crossing where someone has only just crossed the road and immediately before a junction where he'd have to give way, topped off by it being taken illegally.
Has he been roadsafed?
-
Wasn't sure what to make of that, I thought Clarkson was trolling, I may be wrong, he really thinks there's something wrong with the rider being there. If someone does a close pass then says "You're too far out!" it's admitting a punishment pass.
-
If someone does a close pass then says "You're too far out!" it's admitting a punishment pass.
Exactly. Had a couple of those.
-
This is what you get when media-savvy Jeremy "just a joke" Clarkson stirs up the bottom dwelling creatures from the other half of the internet:
http://hbjcyclist.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/thanks-jeremy/
-
Sounds like a story for The Times - the injured party should contact them as part of their safer cities campaign.
-
That is excellent. Should be shown on TV.
Filmed in North Finchley, so close to home...
-
reminded me of that Living Doll documentary.
-
This is what you get when media-savvy Jeremy "just a joke" Clarkson stirs up the bottom dwelling creatures from the other half of the internet:
http://hbjcyclist.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/thanks-jeremy/
(shrugs) exactly and the whole point of the OP; use primary sparingly & only when appropriate, unless you really do want to start an all out war against these twunts (which can only result in us coming off worse)
-
This is what you get when media-savvy Jeremy "just a joke" Clarkson stirs up the bottom dwelling creatures from the other half of the internet:
http://hbjcyclist.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/thanks-jeremy/
(shrugs) exactly and the whole point of the OP; use primary sparingly & only when appropriate, unless you really do want to start an all out war against these twunts (which can only result in us coming off worse)
Even leaving aside the account of the incident from the cyclist's POV posted above, do you think that the approach to a junction is an inappropriate place to be in primary?
To use Clarkson's phrase, I was a middle of the road point maker yesterday. I was out with friends: someone was kind enough to pull away from lights very slowly to allow all four of us to turn right in front of her into a minor road. The (black) van driver behind her took exception to this as he was turning too - blaring of horn, revving of engine, shouting of abuse as he passed the guy behind me. I moved to the right of the lane, and stayed there for about a hundred yards.
Making a point? Possibly. Stopping him overtaking me and the two in front of me in a potentially dangerous way, definitely. There was oncoming traffic, and he'd clipped the guy behind me with his wing mirror during that overtake. A car,a van and a bike would all fit across the road, but without much room between them.
Surprisingly little revving or hooting once it was obvious I wasn't pulling back in (not
before a gap in the oncoming traffic anyway), but the passenger made it clear he thought I was a wanker when they did pass.
(Oh, for the avoidance of doubt, black van as opposed to white van. Don't care about the driver.)
-
This is what you get when media-savvy Jeremy "just a joke" Clarkson stirs up the bottom dwelling creatures from the other half of the internet:
http://hbjcyclist.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/thanks-jeremy/
(shrugs) exactly and the whole point of the OP; use primary sparingly & only when appropriate, unless you really do want to start an all out war against these twunts (which can only result in us coming off worse)
Even leaving aside the account of the incident from the cyclist's POV posted above, do you think that the approach to a junction is an inappropriate place to be in primary?
No I just think there are some real knobs out there in cars and I fear for our safety having to use the same roads as them sometimes
-
(shrugs) exactly and the whole point of the OP; use primary sparingly & only when appropriate [...]
Your implication there is that holding the lane in front of a zebra crossing prior to a right turn is somehow not appropriate. Rule 191 (http://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/pedestrian-crossings-191-to-199) is unambiguous here - there was no opportunity to overtake before that junction.
I know 'victim blaming' has become a well-used phrase recently, but the idea that because fuming inadequates like JC and his bottom crawling minions are out there somehow means the cyclist is to blame really stinks.
-
err no; my post was in response to the stupid comments on Facebook; seriously I'm not interested in starting a war of words with other cyclists, far less a war of road users with idiots driving a ton of metal;
you all want to prove a point go right ahead
-
The alternate route is to give up the right to be there and become subservient to drivers whatever the circumstance.
Of course, it is entirely possible that behaviour like Clarkson's is modified by increasing numbers of cyclists meekly giving up road space to him whenever he wants it.
-
Martin, Do you think the cyclist in Clarkson's picture was wise to be in the middle of the lane at that point or not? Yes or no?
(I say yes).
-
Martin, Do you think the cyclist in Clarkson's picture was wise to be in the middle of the lane at that point or not? Yes or no?
(I say yes).
I don't actually care; I was posting in response to the knobs on Facebook
I'm going to have to walk away from this thread as I'm dealing with people on here whose concept of road use seems inherantly different to mine
-
But Martin, I am genuinely perplexed about what your views are on such road use. You say your comments are in response to the Twitter trolling, and I think we all agree about the unacceptability of their behaviour. I think all here also agree that holding primary in all circumstances is also unacceptable behaviour. So what is it that you disagree with, because every specific example of actual road behaviour discussed on this thread, we seem to be in agreement on?
-
Martin, Do you think the cyclist in Clarkson's picture was wise to be in the middle of the lane at that point or not? Yes or no?
(I say yes).
Maybe he was turning right
There is no context with this photo other than what Clarkson said in his next tweet. Which we can't take on face value as he is trolling
Clarkson is well known for his bias use of the media. In this case it's clear that he is trolling
-
He was turning right - see Spindrift's post that includes an extended quote from the rider in question.
-
Martin, You care about the subject, and the Clarkson example is still a good opportunity to be more specific, regardless of what you were responding to previously. I don't know how your concept of road use differs from anyone else's here. You're entitled to your opinion, whatever it is, and shouldn't feel embarrassed to explain it.
-
Maybe he was turning right
There is no context with this photo other than what Clarkson said in his next tweet. Which we can't take on face value as he is trolling
Clarkson is well known for his bias use of the media. In this case it's clear that he is trolling
Never mind about Clarkson for a moment. The picture by itself is handy.
-
No I just think there are some real knobs out there in cars and I fear for our safety having to use the same roads as them sometimes
No-one is going to argue with that, yes there are a few and anyone who's cycled much will have come across some with the attitude shown in that twittering.
However, they are a tiny minority, and an even tinier number will ever do anything silly. In comparison, there are an awful lot of drivers who do not know how to drive very well. Take the situation in that picture. Approaching a junction like that with a range rover behind you, you can either ride centrally (having indicated your intention in good time) which will piss off maybe 1 in 100 drivers, or you can ride on the left and be guaranteed to be left hooked on at least one in ten ocassions.
The point is, riding centrally in such a circumstance can irritate a few people who don't understand why, but for one of them to knock you off would be deliberate and extremely rare. Wheras leaving ambiguity will get you knocked off by someone simply not paying attention.
-
Jeremy ClarksonVerified account
@JeremyClarkson
It's middle of the road point-makers like this who make car drivers so angry about cyclists.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdoYu8kIgAAYrFJ.jpg)
https://twitter.com/JeremyClarkson/status/421676710107811841
Right then, from the horses mouth so to speak.......
I was riding home from work (this is one of my regular routes) down Sloane Avenue in Chelsea towards Sloane Square. As I approached this island at the junction of Ixworth Street, a Range Rover over took me, because he had to veer left to avoid hitting the island I got pushed owards the kerb.
There was no point to this pass as there was slow moving traffic a little bit further down the road.
Now I was pretty cheesed off with this and most of you will know a close pass starts pumping adrenaline. Sloane Ave is a nice flat road and it's really easy to keep up with the trafic and just past the island I was keeping pace with the Range Rover, the driver was looking in his N/S door mirror giving the 'stare'. I admit that I was fairly vocal at this point and shouted 'What? you f*****g c**k, f****** knobstick' not much of an insult but I was too riled up to think straight.
As we approached the junction with Cadogan Street the traffic started slowing so I moved to the middle of the road to overtake. As I passed the Range Rover the window started to come down and a few words were exchanged by both of us as I passed (I can't remember what, I don't think it was as bad as the first reaction though as I tend to calm down fairly quickly). I then kept up with the traffic for the rest of Sloane Ave, and then in to Draycott Place which is quite narrow for a two way road.
I was turning right at this junction to go down to Sloane Square, so as I moved off I was positioning myself for this.
At the junction I looked behind me and saw Jeremy Clarkson just pulling up behind me with his head and arm out of the window, holding his phone and shouting 'gotcha' and looking well smug with himself. He was driving, and there was nobody else in the car. I got off my bike and pushed it back to his car and pointed out that he was overtaking me going in to a hazard, and made me change course. He just kept shouting increduously 'you were four feet from the kerb, but you were four feet from the kerb, I'm a cyclist and you were four feet from the kerb!'.
After a couple of attempts to explain to him why I thought he was wrong I gave up as he just kept shouting, I then rode off. Throughout this exchange I stayed reasonably calm.
At no time did I abuse any other road user or pedestrian on my journey home.
What JC's pic on twitter doesn't show is how much traffic was about at the time. Before I stopped at the crossing the junction was busy, and the traffic was queing all the way down to Sloane Square. I was probably well on my way to Parliament Square by the time JC got through Sloane Square. The ambulance wasn't parked either, it was moving.
Thanks for your patience reading my longest ever post!
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/jeremy-clarkson-continues-to-be-a-moron/page/3
Something about this account doesn't ring true.... I can't quite put my finger on it but something is making alarm bells ring.
-
Peter Walker's blog on the matter (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jan/13/jeremy-clarkson-cyclists-taking-the-lane) is a good one. It makes the point that not only should we be able to take the lane for safety reasons, but there is a need to educate road users about taking the lane. That seems like a better strategy to me than giving up riding safely in order to avoid the possibility of encountering a bullying driver.
-
The Police say the incident is under investigation.
-
ooo.
What's the betting JC had "turned off the engine and got out of the car before taking the picture"?
-
In which case, he had not parked his car properly, legally and safely, and was creating an obstruction. ;)
-
In which case, he had not parked his car properly, legally and safely, and was creating an obstruction. ;)
Definitely not - parked on zigzag lines before a pedestrian crossing if he claims he was parked...
Is this another Emma Way moment? Think before you tweet.
-
I hope so.