Google sponsored links
got to watch out for IWD- inadverdant wildlife drift!
Remember, accidental deerings are the cyclist's fault, if they choose to ride in the deer zone.
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
It is already obvious that the driveway IS clear. Which do you think would be more apparant to a cyclist if it were to become "unclear" and require change in position: the residential driveway or the public 50mph road behind the cyclist?
I agree that the driveway appears to be clear, but there is some banking to it and unlike Bek you aren't always going to be stopping to take a picture and your assessment time is going to be radically diminished.
Bek has ruled out the possibility of man's best friend putting in an appearance but this isn't guaranteed for every single driveway. Furthermore you've used a key operative word there - residential. Residential means children and can't predict when a child is going to launch a funny surprise attack or any other of a million things that humans do near a road without realising that it might affect the road.
A vast majority of vehicles moving at 50mph are apparent to me without even looking and you can accurately predict what most of them are going to do. Pedestrians and their pets don't afford us such consideration.
A vast majority of vehicles moving at 50mph are apparent to me without even looking and you can accurately predict what most of them are going to do. Pedestrians and their pets don't afford us such consideration.
IMO a refresher course in traffic safety and risk analysis is in order if you don't understand the difference in accident event severities between cycle-dog/pedestrian collisions and cycle-50mph motor vehicle accidents.
What makes you think YOU (ignoring the easily rideable shoulder) will be so apparent (and in a timely/safe manner) to 50 mph+ motorists on this road? More than likely you'd be the only one that ever was not using the shoulder.
Is it your contention that the MILLIONS of traffic accidents that occur yearly BECAUSE the vehicle drivers' actions are so reliably predictable? Or maybe its only safe for cyclists and motorists who posses the psychic powers you think you have.
IMO a refresher course in traffic safety and risk analysis is in order if you don't understand the difference in accident event severities between cycle-dog/pedestrian collisions and cycle-50mph motor vehicle accidents.
What makes you think YOU (ignoring the easily rideable shoulder) will be so apparent (and in a timely/safe manner) to 50 mph+ motorists on this road? More than likely you'd be the only one that ever was not using the shoulder.
Is it your contention that the MILLIONS of traffic accidents that occur yearly BECAUSE the vehicle drivers' actions are so reliably predictable? Or maybe its only safe for cyclists and motorists who posses the psychic powers you think you have.
I don't rely on my apparentness and did originally caevat with a dependant on traffic conditions. My powers of perception do not rely on anything that might be perceived as supernatural although I will admit that they certainly are quite bizarre. My secret is that I listen and look over my shoulder at key points of my ride. Frighteningly odd but seemingly quite effective though. As for predictability, the laws of physics and mechanics dictate certain behaviour in vehicles which are not applicable to humans. This is, of course unless it's a human whose, weight exceeds half a tonne and has wheels for feet with a power-steering mechanism.
Depends on how wide the shoulder is.
If I'm not towing a trailer I'd take the middle of the shoulder, with certain exceptions, e.g., road hazard, I'm turning left, etc. Motor vehicles can pass with neither of us having to change our line.
If I'm towing a trailer and the shoulder isn't wide enough to accommodate, I'll take my standard right half of the right lane. When being passed in this situation I typically hold my line.
I agree that the driveway appears to be clear, but there is some banking to it and unlike Bek you aren't always going to be stopping to take a picture and your assessment time is going to be radically diminished.
Bek has ruled out the possibility of man's best friend putting in an appearance but this isn't guaranteed for every single driveway. Furthermore you've used a key operative word there - residential. Residential means children and can't predict when a child is going to launch a funny surprise attack or any other of a million things that humans do near a road without realising that it might affect the road.
A vast majority of vehicles moving at 50mph are apparent to me without even looking and you can accurately predict what most of them are going to do. Pedestrians and their pets don't afford us such consideration.
Wow, unpredictable dogs and kids. yep, there's good reason to ride in the middle of the road. They may fit under the I.W.D. rules of C.L.A.P. (Inadverdant Wildlife Drift, Center Lane Avoidance Positioning), even though both are supposed to be domesticated..
Oh, and I took the picture on the fly, tweren't any stopping.
It's amazing how such a simple question can be stretched out into several pages of back-and-forth arguing, complete with sarcasm.
It reminds me of guys who go "fishing," maybe catch something and maybe not, but it's only a loss if they forget the beer.
:beer:
Isn't it amazing? And most of it is smack on topic so far. The debate about semantics and use of language hasn't erupted in this thread yet.
What's amazing to me is how so many are reading so much into the picture, from the non existant dogs hidden off to the side, or the reckless kids playing outside in 40 degree weather, or drifting deer hidden in the bushes. Oh, or the shoulder crumbling beyond my view.
Also, many posters described their positioning choices on roads NOT as nice as the one in the picture, or where they would ride if the shoulder wasn't wide.
That's all great. But this is a simple scenario, and a simple picture. No hidden dangers. It's not a trick picture.
I think there is no 'correct' anwser, but a vehicular cyclists' choice is going to be in that shoulder. Far right as practicable. And moving out of the shoulder for vis, obstructions, etc, of course a bicyclist has that option. But right there, on that road, in that picture, where is the sweet spot for cyclists? hmmm, doesn't seem to need a degree in rocket science....
Wow, unpredictable dogs and kids. yep, there's good reason to ride in the middle of the road. They may fit under the I.W.D. rules of C.L.A.P. (Inadverdant Wildlife Drift, Center Lane Avoidance Positioning), even though both are supposed to be domesticated..
Don't forget about the possibility of undomesticated, unpredictable axe murderers, boogeymen, and mountain lions that make the shoulder a "stranger/danger zone"!
Thank goodness domesticated drivers can be counted on to do just what is expected :rolleyes: when encountering Oh-SoCareful Cyclists in the middle of the road who appear unexpectantly around the bend on narrow 50mph roads.
Isn't it amazing? And most of it is smack on topic so far. The debate about semantics and use of language hasn't erupted in this thread yet.
What's amazing to me is how so many are reading so much into the picture, from the non existant dogs hidden off to the side, or the reckless kids playing outside in 40 degree weather, or drifting deer hidden in the bushes. Oh, or the shoulder crumbling beyond my view.
Also, many posters described their positioning choices on roads NOT as nice as the one in the picture, or where they would ride if the shoulder wasn't wide.
That's all great. But this is a simple scenario, and a simple picture. No hidden dangers. It's not a trick picture.
I think there is no 'correct' anwser, but a vehicular cyclists' choice is going to be in that shoulder. Far right as practicable. And moving out of the shoulder for vis, obstructions, etc, of course a bicyclist has that option. But right there, on that road, in that picture, where is the sweet spot for cyclists? hmmm, doesn't seem to need a degree in rocket science....
The real problem, as a couple of posters have already mentioned, is that this is just but a moment in time relative to what a cyclist might face while riding down that road.
Sure if the conditions remain static... that shoulder looks quite nice to be on... in fact, the shoulder is better then the center part of the road... but the reality is that the PIC IS just one moment in time... what does the road look like back 300 yards, and ahead 300 yards. Planning ahead is one of the best things you can do when riding... to meet the conditions and situations you may encounter.
That is a great pic to put on the wall in front of your stationary bike... 'cause that is the only place it will remain as static as we see it here and now.
Isn't it amazing? And most of it is smack on topic so far. The debate about semantics and use of language hasn't erupted in this thread yet.
What's amazing to me is how so many are reading so much into the picture, from the non existant dogs hidden off to the side, or the reckless kids playing outside in 40 degree weather, or drifting deer hidden in the bushes. Oh, or the shoulder crumbling beyond my view.
Also, many posters described their positioning choices on roads NOT as nice as the one in the picture, or where they would ride if the shoulder wasn't wide.
That's all great. But this is a simple scenario, and a simple picture. No hidden dangers. It's not a trick picture.
I think there is no 'correct' anwser, but a vehicular cyclists' choice is going to be in that shoulder. Far right as practicable. And moving out of the shoulder for vis, obstructions, etc, of course a bicyclist has that option. But right there, on that road, in that picture, where is the sweet spot for cyclists? hmmm, doesn't seem to need a degree in rocket science....
See post #30. This is a snapshot, I don't know about you but I don't make decisions about where to ride based on opening my eyes once in a while.
As to the shoulder deteriorating - it sure looks like about half of it disapears after the driveway, the right half of it slopes down into the gutter it seems.
And like you said, it is not a trick picture or a complex situation - that is why riding position can vary based on the experience and mood of the person cycling and still be safe.
Al
I'll have to send it to you, Gene, coz i don't OWN a stationary bike or a trainer, i prefer all my cycling to be 'reality' based and not textbook oriented.
But you are right, it's just a moment in time. is a picture worth a 1000 words, or dismissed as too illusory to be realistic?
Good observations though. outside of the picture, the road might change.
I'll have to send it to you, gene, coz i don't OWN a stationary bike or a trainer, i prefer all my cycling to be 'reality' based and not textbook oriented.
But you are right, it's just a moment in time. is a picture is worth a 1000 words, or just dismissed as too illusory to be realistic?
Naw, you're right. outside of the picture, the road might change. good observation.
I don't see why you feel the need to be sarcastic. Genec made a perfectly legitimate point. In fact, in Ontario, the scenario shown in the photo is very common. Wide shoulders on inclines and curves are standard. The problem is that as soon as the curve is completed, the shoulder narrows considerably. If that is the case on the stretch of road in the picture, it would significantly change my riding position.
Jalopy
I can't be sarcastic? I took offense at being accused of ever riding a stationary bicycle, what the heck are those for?
Better sarcastic than pedantic, the very air of which i'm trying to dispel with my posts about roadways and riding conditions.
I'm interested in bringing some 'real cycling' scenarios to this textbook heavy forum. And there is a significant amount of armchair bicycling that goes on in here. I remember Genec's post about harassing a bicyclist from his car window....I take a dim view of bicyclists that do that, so my opinion of Genec is low.
It's all true. Outside of the picture, the roadway could potentially change.
I can't be sarcastic? I took offense at being accused of ever riding a stationary bicycle, what the heck are those for?
Better sarcastic than pedantic, the very air of which i'm trying to dispel with my posts about roadways and riding conditions.
I'm interested in bringing some 'real cycling' scenarios to this textbook heavy forum. And there is a significant amount of armchair bicycling that goes on in here. I remember Genec's post about harassing a bicyclist from his car window....I take a dim view of bicyclists that do that, so my opinion of Genec is low.
It's all true. Outside of the picture, the roadway could potentially change.
You can do anything you want. I was just surprised that genec's point was so breezily dismissed. But I see now that, since he commented on a cyclist's illegal behaviour from his car once, we should just respond to all of his posts with flippant retorts.
That makes sense.
Jalopy
It's all true. Outside of the picture, the roadway could potentially change.
Which of course brings in to play the all purpose solution to such a difficult problem for high speed roads: Ride down the center of the road at all times. After all something unknown might be ahead. And what could be better than being in the middle of the road at such times?
Must be great to be a steely eyed alpha dog with a textbook induced attitude; able to glare responsibility, skill, obedience and predictablity into motorists.
Which of course brings in to play the all purpose solution to such a difficult problem for high speed roads: Ride down the center of the road at all times.Who is advocating this?
I can't be sarcastic? I took offense at being accused of ever riding a stationary bicycle, what the heck are those for?
Better sarcastic than pedantic, the very air of which i'm trying to dispel with my posts about roadways and riding conditions.
I'm interested in bringing some 'real cycling' scenarios to this textbook heavy forum. And there is a significant amount of armchair bicycling that goes on in here. I remember Genec's post about harassing a bicyclist from his car window....I take a dim view of bicyclists that do that, so my opinion of Genec is low.
It's all true. Outside of the picture, the roadway could potentially change.
Hey real cycling does not involve static pictures. And as far as me "harassing" a cyclist from a car window... besides the issue of him running a stop light... you totally missed the irony of the whole post. So just drop it.
BTW I don't own a stationary bike either... but that was exactly the format in which a stationary picture works... and no other.
Heck, I don't even own rollers anymore.
defaulting centerish lane positioning of the armchair cyclicular vehicularist faction here, the C.L.A.P.pers.
Which of course brings in to play the all purpose solution to such a difficult problem for high speed roads: Ride down the center of the road at all times.
Who is advocating this?
Careful. If you restrict ILTB to commenting on what others actually say, rather than commenting on his misrepresentations and wild exaggerations of what others say, he won't have anything to say.
Who is advocating this?
Take the lane because something as likely as pouncing mountain lions could come from nowhere.
Read it and weep.
Is it clear that one one approaching from the opposite direction around that blind corner isn't about to turn left across your path into the driveway?
Is it clear that no one approaching from behind isn't about to right cross you as they turn into their driveway?
Sure, odds are it isn't going to happen. Perhaps only 1 in 10,000 (or whatever) cars is going to do that. Of course, it's similar odds at the thousands of driveways our paths intersect per year...
You do the math. I wonder if there is any correlation between this math and the relatively high frequency of left and right cross bike-car collisions? Hmm...
I would be in the lane in my default centerish primary riding position unless there was someone approaching from behind who obviously was not turning into the driveway, in which case I would temporarily move aside to let them pass.
Isn't it amazing? And most of it is smack on topic so far. The debate about semantics and use of language hasn't erupted in this thread yet.
What's amazing to me is how so many are reading so much into the picture, from the non existant dogs hidden off to the side, or the reckless kids playing outside in 40 degree weather, or drifting deer hidden in the bushes. Oh, or the shoulder crumbling beyond my view.
Lions and tigers and bears, OH MY!
Take the lane because something as likely as pouncing mountain lions could come from nowhere.
Read it and weep.I would be in the lane in my default centerish primary riding position unless there was someone approaching from behind who obviously was not turning into the driveway, in which case I would temporarily move aside to let them pass.
Where does it say "ride down the center of the road at all times"?
Where does it say "ride down the center of the road at all times"?
Nit Pick over rhetoric with someone else.
Nit Pick over rhetoric with someone else.
Well, at least you admit that that's all you've got. I respect your honesty.
Wow, unpredictable dogs and kids. yep, there's good reason to ride in the middle of the road. They may fit under the I.W.D. rules of C.L.A.P. (Inadverdant Wildlife Drift, Center Lane Avoidance Positioning), even though both are supposed to be domesticated..
Oh, and I took the picture on the fly, tweren't any stopping.
Good thing you didn't say adult male humans are supposed to be domesticated. Mrs. CommuterRun would take issue with that. Got to give her credit for trying, though. :D
Well, at least you admit that that's all you've got. I respect your honesty.
That's true I didn't really think I should shamble on over to the center of the road because of a fear of mountain lions around every corner.
Unlike the soothsayers who really have got the lowdown on the everpresent unseen danger, danger just out of sight in this Puzzler; real life stuff such as careening cars making screeching lefts and rights into them if they don't stay out of the stranger/danger zone!!
Maybe I should stay off the shoulder because of the danger from oversized mice and anteaters. Are those creatures a menace where you cycle?
No, but if you got off on the shoulder off the pavement you fer'sher want to be on the look-out for fireants. :eek:
No, but if you got off on the shoulder off the pavement you fer'sher want to be on the look-out for fireants. :eek:
On reflection I can think of one obstacle that might appear on the side of the road around here (on the shoulder where present); road kill deer remains. They are all over the place. Now I can't imagine a cyclist going so fast that he/she couldn't take a safe evasive measure (for carcasses or anything else) on a Puzzler#4-like shoulder. But then I don't have much experience with the racer boy club who cycle like deer and couldn't avoid an unexpected obstacle on the highway shoulder for some unspecified reason.
Which of course points out the obvious, these deer were not struck and killed while on the shoulder or side of the highway; the blood puddles, stains and splatter indicates otherwise. They were hit by motorists in the traffic lanes,by drivers who (around here) can expect to see more deer than cyclists in the traffic lanes of 50mph + highways. Why the bright boys expect motorists traveling at 50mph+ to take better evasive measures for cyclists than deer beats me.
Perhaps one of the bright boys can explain why motorists at 50mph+ are expected take appropriate evasive measures to avoid surprises (like cyclists in the middle of the highway traffic lane) that cyclists are unable to execute at under 20mph?
On reflection I can think of one obstacle that might appear on the side of the road around here (on the shoulder where present); road kill deer remains. They are all over the place. Now I can't imagine a cyclist going so fast that he/she couldn't take a safe evasive measure (for carcasses or anything else) on a Puzzler#4-like shoulder. But then I don't have much experience with the racer boy club who cycle like deer and couldn't avoid an unexpected obstacle on the highway shoulder for some unspecified reason.
Which of course points out the obvious, these deer were not struck and killed while on the shoulder or side of the highway; the blood puddles, stains and splatter indicates otherwise. They were hit by motorists in the traffic lanes,by drivers who (around here) can expect to see more deer than cyclists in the traffic lanes of 50mph + highways. Why the bright boys expect motorists traveling at 50mph+ to take better evasive measures for cyclists than deer beats me.
Perhaps one of the bright boys can explain why motorists at 50mph+ are expected take appropriate evasive measures to avoid surprises (like cyclists in the middle of the highway traffic lane) that cyclists are unable to execute at under 20mph?
"Why the bright boys expect motorists traveling at 50mph+ to take better evasive measures for cyclists than deer beats me."
Deer don't move. Cyclists moving at 20MPH are being closed upon by motorists at only 30MPH, not 50.
"Perhaps one of the bright boys can explain why motorists at 50mph+ are expected take appropriate evasive measures to avoid surprises that cyclists are unable to execute at under 20mph?
Cyclists at the side of the road cannot see deer right around the corner like a motorist, at the center of the road. Hence it makes sense for the cyclist to move out a bit to see what is down the road...
Perhaps one of the bright boys can explain why motorists at 50mph+ are expected take appropriate evasive measures to avoid surprises (like cyclists in the middle of the highway traffic lane) that cyclists are unable to execute at under 20mph?Well, the motorists aren't expected to take evasive maneuvers to avoid cyclists in the middle of the lane. Any decent cyclist that decides to take the center of the lane as their default should get out of their way if it's safe to do so. Besides, deer are usually crossing the roadway, not traveling along it, and they tend to stop when confronted with danger, rather than try to get out of the way.
While this shoulder looks nice and I would probably ride in it, I don't enjoy riding on the shoulder in general, mainly due to reasons already discussed. There is usually a bunch of crap swept to the side that likes to poke holes in tires, and if I have to take evasive action for some reason, where do I go - I'm already in the shoulder. Also, most shoulders I've seen aren't paved as well as this one looks.
I've tried to run my bike into a deer one time, and it was darn near impossible.
But a bicyclist using default C.L.A.P.I.W.D. (Center Lane Avoidance Positioning for Inadverdant Wildlife Drift) technique may have a legitimate worry - I sure as heck don't see it in this picture.
Anyway, just wait for VC Puzzler #6, I'll tries to stump ya'alls the next time with a more complex and confusing picture of another actual bicycling scenario.
Any decent cyclist that decides to take the center of the lane as their default should get out of their way if it's safe to do so. Besides, deer are usually crossing the roadway, not traveling along it, and they tend to stop when confronted with danger, rather than try to get out of the way.
SO if by some chance the "decent" cyclist does not get out of the way because it is "unsafe" (or perhaps picked the wrong moments to be looking forward for an an unseen but feared danger instead of behind), its time to make room in the venison locker for cyclist burgers :eek:? Is that your plan for safe cycling on roads as portrayed in the Puzzler#4 picture?
SO if by some chance the "decent" cyclist does not get out of the way because it is "unsafe", its time to make room in the venison locker for cyclist burgers :eek:? Is that your plan for safe cycling on roads as portrayed in the Puzzler#4 picture?If by some chance the motorist approaching from the rear (with a speed differential less than that of a stationary deer) isn't paying attention or decides to ram the cyclist, then someone's having long-pig soup for dinner.
If you're already in the shoulder, where do you go to avoid obstacles? Do you dodge into traffic, or get comfy with a bush?
Bek:
You took this "on the fly" you say in another post (#56).
So, what caused the horizontal shadow and shadow line? What is the white band in left part of the shadow area to te left of the handlebars? Why is the white band textured, as if composed of hexagons with holes? Is any of this relevant to the discussion?
----a Perplexed observer.
I'll tries to stump ya'alls the next time with a more complex and confusing picture of another actual bicycling scenario.
For the record, VC Puzzlers 1, 2 and 3 described actual, not hypothetical, cycling scenarios, though they did not include a photograph.
In answer to ILTB's question, Gene mostly covered it. Deer who get hit generally are crossing the road, and appear suddenly in the motorist's path right in front of him... that's why they tend to get hit.
If a cyclist riding along the road in the same direction as the motorist doesn't seem significantly different to you from a deer suddenly appearing in the motorist's path from the side, that explains much.
Deer don't move. Cyclists moving at 20MPH are being closed upon by motorists at only 30MPH, not 50.
And for those cyclists that are not out "training" and doing 10mph or so in front of a vehicle going a typical 60 mph on a posted 50mph road. What's your math come up with?
And even at a 30 mph differential; we've already heard of the great difficulty cyclists doing 20mph have maintaining a safe ride because of their apparant inability to see ahead and/or react safely at 20mph speed. This inability presumably requires them to leave a wide paved shoulder and place their butts out in front of 50mph traffic as a safety measure.
Are the authorities still burning fields of wild wacky weed in CA?
SO if by some chance the "decent" cyclist does not get out of the way because it is "unsafe" (or perhaps picked the wrong moments to be looking forward for an an unseen but feared danger instead of behind), its time to make room in the venison locker for cyclist burgers :eek:? Is that your plan for safe cycling on roads as portrayed in the Puzzler#4 picture?
KEY:
C = Car
D = Deer
V = Vehicular Cyclist
S = Shoulder Cyclist
~ = shoulder
- = space
c = intended path of car's driver
d = intended path of deer
< = oncoming traffic lane
-----------------D
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<d<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
C->ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccVcccccccccccccc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~~~~S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
As Gene noted, a vehicular cyclist who chooses to control the lane in this situation is probably moving at 15-25 mph, so the car is probably closing on him at 30-40 mph. He's closing in on the deer, on the other hand, at full speed.
In other words, the driver has plenty of time to see the vehicular cyclist He only has to look up from dialing his cell phone to scan his intended path up ahead for a moment and he will see the vehicular cyclist up ahead in his path, but he will not see the deer until it is probably too late even if his eyes never leave the road. And if he is only taking a cursory glance before he gets back to his cell phone, he is likely to not notice the cyclist up ahead riding in the shoulder (due to irrelevance). In this case, the shoulder cyclist is lucky that vehicular cyclist is up ahead, because that will alert the car driver to not take his eyes off the road (and, possibly drift into the shoulder). But if the vehicular cyclist was not present, then the motorist who only pays attention to his intended path, would have little reason to not attend to his distraction, leaving the undetected shoulder cyclist vulnerable to inadvertent drift.
If you normally ride using a centerish position as your default/primary riding position, and you regularly observe traffic in your rear view mirror as you do this, you already know this.
And for those cyclists that are not out "training" and doing 10mph or so in front of a vehicle going a typical 60 mph on a posted 50mph road. What's your math come up with?
And even at a 30 mph differential; we've already heard of the great difficulty cyclists doing 20mph have maintaining a safe ride because of their apparant inability to see ahead and/or react safely at 20mph speed. This inability presumably requires them to leave a wide paved shoulder and placie their butts out in front of 50mph traffic as a safety measure.
Are the authorities still burning fields of wild wacky weed in CA?
The faster you go, the more of the road ahead you need to see... why don't motorists drive at 50MPH along the shoulder of the road?
When I bike at 10 or even 8MPH, such as climbing a huge hill, I gladly stick to the shoulder of the road. When I move the same speed as other traffic, such as down a huge hill, I share the same location as motorists... the center of the road.
My postion changes based on my speed and is not static like a photo. So while the shoulder in that location looks very nice and inviting... where I am depends on my speed and the traffic around me and the road conditions.
You want to ride 20 or 25MPH in the shoulder... have a good time. That is your choice.
For the record, VC Puzzlers 1, 2 and 3 described actual, not hypothetical, cycling scenarios, though they did not include a photograph.
Uh, if you look at the photograph you can see part of the bike, so it seems as actual as any of the other VC puzzlers, if not more so.
By the way, I almost hit a coot (that's a duck-like bird) the other day on the bike path. Oh, the travesties of the danger zone! I'm lucky to be alive!
If you're already in the shoulder, where do you go to avoid obstacles? Do you dodge into traffic, or get comfy with a bush?
I don't know about you but I have found that steering around obstacles works pretty well, sometimes I might have to slow down for an obstacle. That works too. I suppose if I cycled at reckless speeds (maybe with a no brake special) in head down full areo position I too might have a problem seeing anything in time for a safe reaction.
When I can't figure out how to adjust speed and steer for conditions, I then might act like a jerk and join the others in the traffic lane on Puzzler#4 road. Luckily Alzheimer's hasn't set in yet.
Diane, was I not disputing the "actualness" of Puzzler 4.
I was disputing Beck's implication that the other puzzler's were not actual.
Diane, was I not disputing the "actualness" of Puzzler 4.
I was disputing Beck's implication that the other puzzler's were not actual.
Oh, sorry.
The faster you go, the more of the road ahead you need to see... why don't motorists drive at 50MPH along the shoulder of the road?
Good point.
Next time you're driving on Genesee up or down the hill south of 52, if there are no cyclists around, move right so that your right tires are in the bike lane. Just for a few seconds. Just to feel how strange and unsafe it feels to operate that close to the edge. It's insane. Yet this insane zone is the space demarcated for cyclists to use all the time.
Will I see you at the toy ride on Saturday?
Good point.
Next time you're driving on Genesee up or down the hill south of 52, if there are no cyclists around, move right so that your right tires are in the bike lane. Just for a few seconds. Just to feel how strange and unsafe it feels to operate that close to the edge. It's insane. Yet this insane zone is the space demarcated for cyclists to use all the time.
Will I see you at the toy ride on Saturday?
Going up the hill I have no problem with it... at 8MPH. Going down the hill at 30MPH... I am never in the BL.
I don't know about Sunday yet... Thanks for the info.
KEY:
C = Car
D = Deer
V = Vehicular Cyclist
S = Shoulder Cyclist
~ = shoulder
- = space
c = intended path of car's driver
d = intended path of deer
< = oncoming traffic lane
-----------------D
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<d<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
C->ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccVcccccccccccccc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~~~~S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
-----------------d
Ok, now you've gone completely bonkers.
Ok, now you've gone completely bonkers.
I'd guess the after effects of too much second hand smoke from those wild wacky weed burns of the past.
Ok, now you've gone completely bonkers.
Please do not waste everyone's time with baseless and/or frivolous expressions of disagreement.
I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing with me, or even calling me bonkers. Whatever floats your boat.
But I would appreciate your sharing the reasoning behind your opinions. In this case, what is it about what I posted in #88 makes you think I've gone completely bonkers?
What if you reached your conclusion based on a misunderstanding? Or maybe you reached your conclusion because you see something I'm missing. There is no way to know if you understood or not, or if I missed something, or whatever, because you stated nothing about how it is you came to the conclusion I've "gone completely bonkers".
Thanks.
Going up the hill I have no problem with it... at 8MPH.
So you trust each and every driver coming from behind to not inadvertently drift into the bike lane, or do you expect each of them to:
See you up ahead in the bike lane.
Take notice of you in the bike lane, and
Be aware of you in the bike lane.
Or are you just taking your chances that all of them will not drift in the bike lane, either because they're simply not distracted, or because they will notice you up ahead in the bike lane and because of that choose not to deal with whatever it is that would distract them if they didn't notice you up ahead?
For the record, VC Puzzlers 1, 2 and 3 described actual, not hypothetical, cycling scenarios, though they did not include a photograph.
Umm, I thought a couple of them were stories about other cyclists vicariously retold to you, to be further distorted from any actual bicycling....who WAS doing the actual cycling in VC Puzzler #3, did you know them, talk to them about the actual scenario, or did you retell hearsay, which could have been a complete contrivance of your coworker, to feed your fidget, as an 'actual bicycling scenario'?
just calling it as I see it, helmet dude.
the hexagons in the picture are not relevant, it's my handlebar bag.
I'm glad to see I.W.D. is getting the attention it deserves from the C.L.A.P. gang, as viewed from inside the game farm's transporter windows, then discussed later from the comfort of a Brooks armchair. I think I agree with Brad M, looking at a diagram showing a 'deer's intended path!' :eek:
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.