Advocacy & Safety - "safe and fun" traffic cycling: visionary, inspired?

I commute by bicycle all year long. My spring to fall commute ecompasses highway, back roads and urban high traffic areas. I find all of these environments safe to ride in with the right skills - and fun as well. Now, I find the low traffic areas more fun than those with tons of traffic, but they all have their rewards. Is the future and acceptance of cycling served by promoting the understanding and acceptance of the skills needed to safely ride in traffic dense situations? I think so. ;)

Mars, you must be from a different planet :) , I mean that in a good way ;)

Yes, I agree. I can ride safely in traffic and enjoy it but I must admit that on the long run it may no longer be fun for some, not matter what vehicle you use. That's one of the reasons we moved to the country a few years ago ;)

But I agree, it's possible for someone who is nervous in traffic or can get by it to end-up enjoying it with a few learnt skills. It's been done.

Mars...It must be nice to live somewhere with such a
friendly year 'round climate ;)

I dont think it has to do with skill as much as mindset.
I consider myself a very skilled rider but in some types of
traffic Im still very nervous. Why is it that a 16 year old kid can
get behind the wheel of a car and not be scared ?? Even though in
my opinion 1 out of 2 car drivers shouldnt be on the road there is
a tacit understanding between cagers about what is acceptable and
what isnt, even when they are doing anti-social stuff like cutting each
other off or jockying for positions in the mindless redlite to redlite dragraces
during rush hour etc, etc.... I believe that as soon as bicycle riders know
unequivocally that they fit into this unwritten but universally understood
equation will more of them become comfortable with riding in traffic to the
same proportion that car drivers are.
In reading different threads and opinions here I am making a supreme effort
to try to 'A-o-tize' my waaaay too "B" type personality in search of this
illusive confidence a lot of you people have but it is hard and I dont think
a lot of other cyclists will want to make the (futile ??)effort or even think its
necassary to develop a traffic confident mindset when avoidance of these
situations has become habit and works for them.
Finding what will help cyclists en masse want to achieve this mystical zen-confidence
will go a long way toward acceptance and tolerance. Good luck :(

I just posted on this topic in another thread two minutes ago. I won't repeat everything, but I basically agree with you mars. I don't know of any statistical or objective evidence that cycling is more hazardous than driving in traffic.

Some people may feel more exposed on a bike. I happen to feel more endangered in a car. But I don't think feelings are the best tool for judging risk, do you?

Is the future and acceptance of cycling served by promoting the understanding and acceptance of the skills needed to safely ride in traffic dense situations?

Yes, but I could care a less if its "accepted" or not, im doing it anyway. I do not and have never really seen any battle lines tween riding on the road with cars, they are nothing more than more obstacles for me to dodge. Ride like you mean it and belong, and the cars more often than not accept it as it is, not like they can do anything about it. In dense traffic you can easily prettymuch own the situation.

Yes, but I could care a less if its "accepted" or not, im doing it anyway. I do not and have never really seen any battle lines tween riding on the road with cars, they are nothing more than more obstacles for me to dodge. Ride like you mean it and belong, and the cars more often than not accept it as it is, not like they can do anything about it. In dense traffic you can easily prettymuch own the situation.
+1

Pedex just described the key to learning safe and fun traffic cycling.

[It's] not like they can do anything about it is absolutely right. Yes, in theory, someone who doesn't "accept" us out there could in theory ram into one of us intentionally, but the probability of that happening is so low, that if one takes such insignificant odds into account in his decisions, he might as well count on winning the lottery for his retirement.

It is as irrational to worry about being "accepted" out there, because the lack of "acceptance" might make us unsafe, as it is irrational to not get on a commercial airliner because it might fall out of the sky. Well, yeah, it might. So what?

Yes, but I could care a less if its "accepted" or not, im doing it anyway. I do not and have never really seen any battle lines tween riding on the road with cars, they are nothing more than more obstacles for me to dodge. Ride like you mean it and belong, and the cars more often than not accept it as it is, not like they can do anything about it. In dense traffic you can easily prettymuch own the situation.
"Ride like you mean it!" What a great quote.

It seems that many riders on this forum actually are concerned that motorists are deliberately trying to hit them! I never really noticed this paranoid perception before. Now that I noticed it, I see it everywhere.

It seems that many riders on this forum actually are concerned that motorists are deliberately trying to hit them! I never really noticed this paranoid perception before. Now that I noticed it, I see it everywhere.

Roody, do you mean like, the Dynamic Lateral Lane Technique, where you ride in the center of the lane, until you get the cars approaching you from behind notice you, and even slow noticably, before you yield the right of way to let them by?

Yep, sounds pretty paranoid to me. Glad I don't ride like that!

In many many years on a bike I can say that the number of cars that have deliberately tried to get me don't even take all my fingers, bear in mind this is also taking into account 6 years of messing. If you think they are all out to get you, you really shouldn't be riding, because you ARE paranoid.

Roody, do you mean like, the Dynamic Lateral Lane Technique, where you ride in the center of the lane, until you get the cars approaching you from behind notice you, and even slow noticably, before you yield the right of way to let them by?

Yep, sounds pretty paranoid to me. Glad I don't ride like that!
Please, what did I say that could possibly make you think that this is what I meant?

Maybe you're confusing me with somebody else, Or maybe you are making a pitiful straw man argument. If so, leave me out of it.

nope, Roody

you said, some people have paranoid perceptions about being hit, and I asked you if you were describing the Dynamic Lateral Lane Technique,

the technique of riding down the lane with a center lane bias, waiting for cars approaching you from behind to notice you, and even slowing noticably, before the bicyclist yields the right of way.

That's a pretty paranoid way of riding a bike in my opinion, and asked if this was the paranoid methodogy you were talking about?

Bek, you are confused between the irrational paranoia of being intentionally hit from behind vs. the rational concern of being accidentally hit from behind by a motorist who doesn't see you.

No motorist wants to hit a cyclist so by ensuring you are as visible as possible helps motorists avoid an accident by allowing them to see you as early as possible and giving them the clear message they need to slow and/or merge left. In parallel to the motorist doing this the cyclist can choose to move right, this ensures the greatest passing clearance possible allowing for any error on motorist part and shows courtesy.

Al

Oh, Okay Al. I just wear bright colors or a DOT safety vest or surveyors' vest for visibility.

The angular difference of a bicyclist' lane position is virtually indecipherible at distances of greater than, oh, maybe 60 feet.

The worries of being hit from behind by a driver that doesn't notice you unless you ride smack dab in the middle of a lane is pretty paranoid, no?


Deliberate by intent, neglect, intoxication or bad vision/lack of driving skill, it's kind of splitting hairs in the safety arena.

Oh, Okay Al. I just wear bright colors or a DOT safety vest or surveyors' vest for visibility.

The angular difference of a bicyclist' lane position is virtually indecipherible at distances of greater than, oh, maybe 60 feet.

The worries of being hit from behind by a driver that doesn't notice you unless you ride smack dab in the middle of a lane is pretty paranoid, no?


Deliberate by intent, neglect, intoxication or bad vision/lack of driving skill, it's kind of splitting hairs in the safety arena.
I too wear ANSI lime yellow shirts.
It is not the angle of visibility, it is the driver attention spot I want to be in. There are times* I want the driver to register me as in the way and cause them to react. If I am too far off to the side even if they see me they may not react as I am off to the side and away. This is far from paranoia, it is just a technique to help by visibiliy and driver response.

Why do you wear high visibility gear? Is it paranoia or just another tool to ensure you get notice?

*Now before you jump on me as riding in center of lane all the time, let me assure you apply this method when needed and as traffic conditions allow. An obvious example is a NOL on a multilane road where I ride in center and don't move over at all with approaching traffic. Don't you do the same in a NOL on a multilane road? There are also time when I ride right biased in a WOL and only move over very slightly and only if needed for approaching traffic and there are times when traffic is lighter on a multilane road with WOL where I ride in center and every rear approaching vehicle needs to and does move into adjacent lane. There are also times in more heavy streams of traffic I ride in a BL, but there are times where I am well out of the BL in center of right wide lane, such as on approaches where I know ther are lots of right turns made.

Al

"Ride like you mean it!" What a great quote.

It seems that many riders on this forum actually are concerned that motorists are deliberately trying to hit them! I never really noticed this paranoid perception before. Now that I noticed it, I see it everywhere.

I don't think it is so much of an issue of being intentionally hit as it is an issue of being carelessly overlooked. Distracted motorists are perhaps our worst problem. Motorists paying attention will give us the room, perhaps begrudgingly, but non the less they will grant the room. But a distracted driver may not even see you to give you the room... no matter how visible you are, no matter how much you ride in the middle of the lane, no matter how much you signal... if the driver has their mind somewhere else, you are vulnerable. Now couple this with higher speed roads and decision making has to be sharp and drivers have to be paying attention. Couple in cell phones and DVD players and ipods and Starbucks...

There is a commercial that I have seen lately showing a driver eyeing a cup of coffee... suddenly the expression on the driver changes, he drops the coffee and slams on the brakes... but not in time to avoid the rear end collision with a vehicle in front of him. Then the announcer begins a voice over about safe driving discounts. But the point is... if the drivers out there are not paying attention, all your rights, all the bright clothing, etc, doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Now on the other side of this are the motorists that decide to teach a lesson... these are rare and far between, but they can really scare the crap out of you... and hit you if their reactions are not as keen as they think they are. This driver can be anyone... from male teens (usually) to some soccer mom who is just at the end of her wits, to even a seasoned SMU law professor (to illustrate a very specific instance).

Generally however, drivers are NOT out to get you.

I too wear ANSI lime yellow shirts.
It is not the angle of visibility, it is the driver attention spot I want to be in. There are times* I want the driver to register me as in the way and cause them to react. If I am too far off to the side even if they see me they may not react as I am off to the side and away. This is far from paranoia, it is just a technique to help by visibiliy and driver response.

Why do you wear high visibility gear? Is it paranoia or just another tool to ensure you get notice?

*Now before you jump on me as riding in center of lane all the time, let me assure you apply this method when needed and as traffic conditions allow. An obvious example is a NOL on a multilane road where I ride in center and don't move over at all with approaching traffic. Don't you do the same in a NOL on a multilane road? There are also time when I ride right biased in a WOL and only move over very slightly and only if needed for approaching traffic and there are times when traffic is lighter on a multilane road with WOL where I ride in center and every rear approaching vehicle needs to and does move into adjacent lane. There are also times in more heavy streams of traffic I ride in a BL, but there are times where I am well out of the BL in center of right wide lane, such as on approaches where I know ther are lots of right turns made.

Al


But do you then refer to that center form of cycling as your "default position?" Or in fact is it something you do only when the occasion calls for it?

I think Bek is all wrapped up in some of HH's statements that Serge makes that seem a bit over the top. While riding centerish can make a difference in some places, in others it demands way too much attention and effort and could be misunderstood.

Your comments about riding centerish in a NOL and not moving make sense to me... I do that. And at the same time riding centerish on a quiet country road and then giving way to any approaching traffic also makes sense...

But in some comments HH has made, it sounds like he prefers to ride centerish and will make extra effort to do that while gazing at his mirror to almost zig zag before motorists. (note the term "almost," as I know that if HH reads this he will in no uncertain terms correct the "zig zag" comment.) While that may not be what he means, he does state it a way that that is what it sounds like. (I.E. "human speed bumps").

I want motorists to know I am there, but not to the extent that a miscue in timing puts them close to me. I prefer to give as much ground as I expect motorists to give me.

But do you then refer to that center form of cycling as your "default position?" Or in fact is it something you do only when the occasion calls for it?

I think Bek is all wrapped up in some of HH's statements that Serge makes that seem a bit over the top. While riding centerish can make a difference in some places, in others it demands way too much attention and effort and could be misunderstood.

Your comments about riding centerish in a NOL and not moving make sense to me... I do that. And at the same time riding centerish on a quiet country road and then giving way to any approaching traffic also makes sense...

But in some comments HH has made, it sounds like he prefers to ride centerish and will make extra effort to do that while gazing at his mirror to almost zig zag before motorists. (note the term "almost," as I know that if HH reads this he will in no uncertain terms correct the "zig zag" comment.) While that may not be what he means, he does state it a way that that is what it sounds like. (I.E. "human speed bumps").

I want motorists to know I am there, but not to the extent that a miscue in timing puts them close to me. I prefer to give as much ground as I expect motorists to give me.
My default position varies depending on road design and traffic conditions. If I had to make blanket statement I'd say I ride in the center of the right half of a lane (or the right line of the two that divide a lane into thirds)

This early morning I rode 7mi in the center of a WOL on a three same direction lane road and never once needed to move over because every (probably about 6 every mile block) approaching vehicle merged fully into the adjacent lane. When traffic is denser, drivers may not always be able to do this, so when they don't merge fully into next lane as this morning, I move right and let them pass in same WOL, then move back to center. So this AM my default position was center.

Al

sounds a little bit paranoid to be default positioning in the middle of a WOL, that's like 8-9 feet from the edge line striping isn't it?

But hey, I ride there often, I'm splitting hairs, and you guys are too, over my concerns about how far over we all mean;

I'm saying riding in the middle of the lane, getting cars overtaking you to notice you and slow noticably before yielding the right of way, is paranoid.

It's no paranoia, the risk is real, it has happened and unfortunatly will happen again wether drivers are distracted, blinded, or intoxicated. Someone can be taken by rage and hit you, and as mentioned above these are extemely rare occurances. A driver can have a heart attack and lose control, any imaginable scenario. It happens on roads, bike lanes and even on sidewalks like this girl recently who skidded three lanes and killed a father of two riding his bike on a sidewalk.

Getting hit from behind is a risk but an overstated one compared to other reasons a cyclist can get killed or seriously injured. And the risk of being intentionally hit from behind (or from any angle for that matter) could probably be compared to being stricken by lightning.

Being hit from behind however seems to be the highest ranking fear for most cyclists who feel nervous riding on the road. I hear it all the time, and I understand it. It's not the collisions at intersections, or the passing vehicule cutting you off while turning right, or even the falls without any other vehicules involved that people fear the most. (these are the actual far higher risks!).

I understand it because people feel that they are much more in control of the other situations, that they can do more to avoid them. And they are right. It's coming from behind!

Overcoming the fear of getting hit from behind is nonetheless the most important thing to learn, otherwise it interferes with the riders concentration and ability to judge and avoid other hazards and makes for miserable rides.

It comes with practice and it tends to be more challenging as we age. There are skills to learn first in order to be safe such as riding in a straight line, not swerving (like in an out of parking spaces), maintaining a reasonable pace and being visible and predictable among the most important. Practicing on quiet roads and gradually moving to busier ones can set a stage to confidence building. A rear view mirror also helps as it shows cars slowing down or preparing to pass, and provides an element of self-control mentioned earlier - it's still happening behind but now there is some awareness.

My default position varies depending on road design and traffic conditions. If I had to make blanket statement I'd say I ride in the center of the right half of a lane (or the right line of the two that divide a lane into thirds)

This early morning I rode 7mi in the center of a WOL on a three same direction lane road and never once needed to move over because every (probably about 6 every mile block) approaching vehicle merged fully into the adjacent lane. When traffic is denser, drivers may not always be able to do this, so when they don't merge fully into next lane as this morning, I move right and let them pass in same WOL, then move back to center. So this AM my default position was center.

Al


But that was a rare instance... I too have done the same thing... when it is quite clear to me that MV traffic is not enough to even burden one lane (of many), so clearly I can "own" the lane I am in. Of course, it almost never fails that some motorist will then come up behind me and make a fuss about me using that lane... but then, they are clearly idiots. :D

I was taken down in '99 from behind by a distracted cab driver on a cell phone as i moved from the right tire track into the center of a lane to avoid a car pulling out ahead of me as I tooled up a hill at less than 10 miles an hour, so I know firsthand the reality of being hit from behind;

and this hasn't made me unrealistic about roadway hazards. I ride a LOT of highway miles as well as city riding. I'm approaching 1000 miles for March; including a five day tour and one century so far.

I do agree with everything Cycliste says.

I was taken down in '99 from behind by a distracted cab driver on a cell phone as i moved from the right tire track into the center of a lane to avoid a car pulling out ahead of me as I tooled up a hill at less than 10 miles an hour, so I know firsthand the reality of being hit from behind;

Did you signal your intent to merge left in the lane and ensure the taxi driver responded? Pehaps there was not time.
What if instead you had already been in center of lane? Then taxi driver may have seen you and/or not had to see you suddenly to react to your sudden movement.

Al

But that was a rare instance... I too have done the same thing... when it is quite clear to me that MV traffic is not enough to even burden one lane (of many), so clearly I can "own" the lane I am in. Of course, it almost never fails that some motorist will then come up behind me and make a fuss about me using that lane... but then, they are clearly idiots. :D
The rarity is not me riding in center, but that each and every driver moved over well before getting close enough to me where I would have made the call to move right. Getting 8ft of passing distance vs. the equally safe 3ft passing distance is something that made this stretch of my commute 'fun'. Also keep in mind that traffic was not that light, there were quite a lot of cars passing me continuously in the adjacent two lanes, it just that the drivers in the right lane saw me early enough and recognised early by my position they couldn't fit in same lane, that they had enough time to safely merge into the adjacent lanes.

Al

I think Bek is all wrapped up in some of HH's statements that Serge makes that seem a bit over the top. While riding centerish can make a difference in some places, in others it demands way too much attention and effort and could be misunderstood.

Perhaps. For example I don't ride centerish as default when there is a BL and traffic is not light. Its just invites too much harrasment from motorists, even if I move over before they get too close. But I do ride centerish in 'primary' lanes when there is a BL and either approaching and going thru intersections with common right turns or when preparing for a merge across multiple lanes for a left turn. The later, keep in mind this may involve 1/8mi of travel starting to merge first from BL, then from right lane, then to inside lane until at left turn, invites the most harrassment from motorists, sometimes yelling to get back in BL in spite of my left arm sticking straight out signalling I am planning on merging an additional lane over.

Al

...just splitting hairs.

I'd rather have accomodations than nebulous visions of 'the future and acceptance of cycling being served by promoting the understanding and acceptance of the skills needed to safely ride in traffic dense situations?'


Do ANY of you think these platitudes will be making the roads any safer? Engaging society in a sea change by promoting some unfacilitated vision of 'Fun and safe traffic cycling??? what about all the drivers that will have never of heard of sucha a notion??

Drivers would laugh their collective asses off at ANY campaign that was for "safe and fun" traffic riding.

I was taken down in '99 from behind by a distracted cab driver on a cell phone as i moved from the right tire track into the center of a lane to avoid a car pulling out ahead of me as I tooled up a hill at less than 10 miles an hour, so I know firsthand the reality of being hit from behind;
You just don't get it, Bek. Here you describe a situation where you swerved left in front of a taxi, and blame the cab driver for hitting you because he was distracted!

The fact that you were not far enough left in the first place (to prevent stuff like having to suddenly swerve left in front of taxis in order to avoid cars pulling out ahead of you), apparently does not even occur to you.

No wonder you don't understand how traffic cycling can be safe and fun.

nope, Roody

you said, some people have paranoid perceptions about being hit, and I asked you if you were describing the Dynamic Lateral Lane Technique,

the technique of riding down the lane with a center lane bias, waiting for cars approaching you from behind to notice you, and even slowing noticably, before the bicyclist yields the right of way.

That's a pretty paranoid way of riding a bike in my opinion, and asked if this was the paranoid methodogy you were talking about?
I guess you were trying to sound all cryptic and wise but you sure lost me. My point was a lot less subtle and did not refer to you at all. I was just saying that I have noticed that many people post statements that indicate that they fear motorists are deliberately aiming at them and trying to run them down. Since this seems to be an irrational suspicion of others' motives, I would categorize it as "paranoid."

I still don't understand what so-called "Dynamic Lateral Lane Technique" has to do with anything. Is that something you made up? Does it make cycling more safe and fun for you, or less?

:D I like cheese.

Drivers would laugh their collective asses off at ANY campaign that was for "safe and fun" traffic riding
.Why do you say that?

Personally, I don't care what amuses cagers. (I mean give me a break--they laugh at drive time radio!!!)

I do suppose that most (maybe all) riders would say that riding is fun, and that's a major reason why we do it. Millions of people have ridden recreationally at some point in their lives, then gotten lured into cars, and some would probably like to try riding again. Most of them sure don't seem to enjoy their car commutes!

Now we as advocates just need to stop spreading the LIE that cycling is dangerous. More and more, I'm seeing that's what so called advocacy is really all about--spreading the lie that what we do every day is actually dangerous!!

If we want others to join us on their bikes, doesn't it make sense to share the "secret" that riding is safe and fun?

HH, the cab driver admitted as much in court. I looked, I signaled. The cabbie was looking at the water and not watching where he was driving while he was on the phone. Screw you, jackstripe. Quit playing the 'all knowing judge' on things you know nothing about....

I'm interested in exposing the flaws in your "SFTC" techniques, your paranoia that leads you to your dynamic lateral lane shift after getting cars to slow noticably before yielding, your false advice to 'ride to the left of the bike line stripe unless there is good reason to do otherwise' and all sorts of other suspect cycling advocacy and advice.

Your message reeks of elitism and is not a populist approach to bikes on the roads.

Where does the 'safe and fun traffic cyclist' ride their bike on a roadway with a wide bike lane, buffer zone, and to the left of the right turn only lane?

If Helmet Head says, 'in the traffic lane' his methodology is flawed. %100 percent flawed.

I can just see an ad campaign for trying to get riders out on the road as being great, and well received by riders. Drivers however would totally see it as a push onto "their turf" vis-a-vis the road, and subsequently not as well received. I can totally see drivers laughing their asses off at an ad like that. You don't think you can tell someone it's safe, because danger does exist. You need to teach riders to aware of the dangers and how to best ride through these situations. A panicky rider in traffic is not going to be having fun at all. I suppose it wasn't well worded. I still like cheese though. I really do feel that for the advocacy of riders to be completely successful, it's is going to NEED to involve everyone on the roads, not just riders. peds, cars, police, and riders.

Besides... on the road you MUST maintain a safe following distance and be aware at all times. You need to be able to avoid ANYTHING in front of your car period. Be it a weaving drunk ped, an exploding car, or a rider tryin' not to get doored, it simply doesn't matter. I worry about what's in front of me just like the driver behind me SHOULD be.

Being hit from behind however seems to be the highest ranking fear for most cyclists who feel nervous riding on the road. I hear it all the time, and I understand it. It's not the collisions at intersections, or the passing vehicule cutting you off while turning right, or even the falls without any other vehicules involved that people fear the most. (these are the actual far higher risks!).
Don't confuse relativly high count (or percentage) of accidents with high risk. Seldom, if ever will the actual risk (which MUST consider accident severities) of falls approach the actual risk of collisions with motor vehicles at speed. Risk evaluations that ignore considerations of accident severities should be ignored in their entirety.

The rarity is not me riding in center, but that each and every driver moved over well before getting close enough to me where I would have made the call to move right. Getting 8ft of passing distance vs. the equally safe 3ft passing distance is something that made this stretch of my commute 'fun'. Also keep in mind that traffic was not that light, there were quite a lot of cars passing me continuously in the adjacent two lanes, it just that the drivers in the right lane saw me early enough and recognised early by my position they couldn't fit in same lane, that they had enough time to safely merge into the adjacent lanes.

Al

LOL, reminds me of the evening back in Feb when I was working late and drove home and all the motorists on the hiway were actually using their turn signals to change lanes. All those blinking lights... wow, it was amazing. Haven't seen the likes of it before or since.

HH, the cab driver admitted as much in court. I looked, I signaled. The cabbie was looking at the water and not watching where he was driving while he was on the phone. Screw you, jackstripe. Quit playing the 'all knowing judge' on things you know nothing about....
What I know of the incident is what you wrote about it, Bek. And what you wrote was: "I was taken down in '99 from behind by a distracted cab driver on a cell phone as i moved from the right tire track into the center of a lane to avoid a car pulling out ahead of me". And now you added the statement above.

From that alone, assuming your statement are accurate, we know:

The taxi was going faster than you, to your left, and behind you.
When the car ahead of you pulled out, you looked back, signaled and started moving left.
You did not wait to see if the cab driver yielded to you (fyi: he didn't).
As you were moving left in front of him, he hit you.


Yet you blame the cabbie.

Am I missing something?

is that in any way related to your skewed, elitist, anti populist "advocacy" of 'safe and fun' traffic cycling in lieu of bicycle accomodations, Helmet?

I tell you what, instead of you trying to play 'traffic cop' and dissect my accident to dilute the thread, why don't you chime in with an analysis of your paranoid style of riding down the center of a wide outside lane, getting overtaking traffic to slow noticably before you yield the right of way.

Any comments on your paranoid riding technique?

Where does the 'safe and fun traffic cyclist' ride their bike on a roadway with a wide bike lane, buffer zone, and to the left of the right turn only lane?

Looking at this conversation... just for a second, I was thinking about my ride today and how twice I left the BL on a 50MPH street and rode in the center of the right hand lane. Now both times when I did that, it was because there was something in the BL... a phone truck in one case... don't remember the other thing. But in both cases, I looked well behind, and the nearest vehicle was so far back that they were barely visible. So I did not signal, I just moved. Of course I wasn't hit, and in only one case did the motorist actually pass me before I moved back into the BL. (light traffic at the time... few vehicles)

So the question here is... do I really have to signal, and watch to ensure that I am seen, when I take a lane? I honestly, in these cases (3 lanes each way) make the judgement that the motorist should see me, therefore I don't need to take "special precautions." If I had to ensure that the approaching motorist saw me, I would actually have to wait for them to get closer before I could determine if they saw me...

What would you do? Would you wait until the motorist was closer? Would you signal and pull out and simply hold your position? Or would you pull out, then gaze into your mirror and make slow down gestures in the hopes that you would be seen? Do you trust motorists to see you?

BTW I was wearing a bright multicolored jersey and the lighting was good and the sightlines were also good... good enough so I could see the vehicles long before I could tell if they saw me.

...just splitting hairs.

I'd rather have accomodations than nebulous visions of 'the future and acceptance of cycling being served by promoting the understanding and acceptance of the skills needed to safely ride in traffic dense situations?'


Do ANY of you think these platitudes will be making the roads any safer? Engaging society in a sea change by promoting some unfacilitated vision of 'Fun and safe traffic cycling??? what about all the drivers that will have never of heard of sucha a notion??

It's great to work towards better accomodation and educating motorists, I think that would help our cause greatly. But until that happens what's the problem with learning a few skills and enjoying the accomodation we already have? I'd rather educate folks than have them sitting around waiting for accomodations that will never come or being limited to the few roads that have lanes.

You wrote once that you have fun cycling through downtown Seattle, it doesn't sound like you've been having fun lately.

Bek, until you understand basic traffic principles enough to know why looking and signaling alone does not give you the right-of-way to swerve in front of someone, that you also need them to yield to you, and it is up to them to decide whether to yield, you will not be able to understand the point of dynaming lane positioning.

Gene, I would not have bothered using a hand signal in the situation you describe. If he's so far back to not be immediately affected by your merging left, then you don't need him to yield the ROW... it's already yours for the taking.

What I know of the incident is what you wrote about it, Bek. And what you wrote was: "I was taken down in '99 from behind by a distracted cab driver on a cell phone as i moved from the right tire track into the center of a lane to avoid a car pulling out ahead of me". And now you added the statement above.

From that alone, assuming your statement are accurate, we know:

The taxi was going faster than you, to your left, and behind you.
When the car ahead of you pulled out, you looked back, signaled and started moving left.
You did not wait to see if the cab driver yielded to you (fyi: he didn't).
As you were moving left in front of him, he hit you.


Yet you blame the cabbie.

Am I missing something?

I would say you are missing something. Last time I checked the right tire track means where the right tires of car go. One whould think this meant he was even with the right tire of the cab. That means the cab hits him either way.

Good point, Keith, I did miss that.

I wonder why Bek didn't point that out?

Oh, no, Treespeed, I've been enjoying my cycling greatly- did a "triple trail' mixed surface century on Saturday with 20 miles of gravel to keep me honest, today I rode about 45 miles in my urban training loops, and put about 250 miles on last week. And I did a five day tour out on the Olympic peninsula earlier in March, Tree. I'm all about enjoying the ride.

I'm for cyclists learning all the skills necessary to handle any road with confidence. Demanding this, and substituting this for physical accomodations as 'the' cycling advocay message is what's soured my stomach in here.

I think its because I spend so much time riding on well accomodated streets, i can't stand HH's insistance they make the roads more hazardous for cyclists. What a crock of hooey.

Don't let my distaste for HH's foul mismesssage fool ya, i'm a very happy biker.

i can't stand HH's insistance they make the roads more hazardous for cyclists. What a crock of hooey.
I can't stand Bek's strawman arguments, like his insistance that I insist that "well accomodated streets" make the roads more hazardous for cyclists. What a crock of hooey.

:rolleyes:

hmm.

Helmet Head, anwser this: Using your 'safe and fun' cycling method,

Where does the 'safe and fun traffic cyclist' ride their bike on a roadway with a wide bike lane, buffer zone, placed to to the left of a right turn only lane?

Where does the 'safe and fun traffic cyclist' ride their bike on a roadway with a wide bike lane, buffer zone, placed to to the left of a right turn only lane?
It depends on countless factors and variations in conditions.

whatever. you're such a dodger.

I'll anwser the question for Helmet Head, because he won't endorse bike accomodations of any variety...

"the fun and safe traffic cyclist will take advantage of well provided bicycle accomodations unless there is a good reason to do otherwise."

That doesn't sound fun nor safe to me, Bek. Those bike lanes to the left of right turn only lanes are usually full of glass and other kinds of crud. Pee-yew.

whatever, you cagey old dodger. (Or should I say, dodgey old cager?) Well provided, unless there is good reason not to. glass would be a reason not to. most lanes like that up here are actually swept quite clear, I think you're hyping that glass issue up a bit.