Yay me! :-)

[chephy]

It happened! It happened! I took the lane! :) Now, of course you're all anxiously waiting for a full report :p , so here goes.

Of course, I took the lane before many times. I took it when I was able to keep up with traffic, when I was on relatively quiet backstreets, when I was passing some obstruction or when I was making a left turn. But today was special. I was coming home with my boyfriend after a shopping trip. For a relatively short distance (about 1 km or so) we had to ride on a very busy four-lane road with narrow lanes (for fellow Torontonians: a stretch of Yonge between Bloor and St. Clair). At one point we were stopped at a red light ahead of all the cars in the queue, still in the way of cars (the lane is darn narrow) but quite far to the right. As the light turned green, a car that was just behind me passed me on the left extremely closely. That pass wasn't dangerous per se, since nobody has built up any appreciable speed yet, but it still pissed me off. I also knew from previous experience that close passes are common on this stretch, especially at rush hour. And at that point I made a life-altering decision: do what you know is right, take the flaming lane! And I did! I took a lane on a major busy road! Going up a hill too, so I was almost as slow as a pedestrian - and I didn't give a damn. It helped that I've had a bit of beer just before that. Mind you, it was not much - in fact, it would've still been legal for me to drive in this province. Still, it seems to have given me just that tiny additional bit of confidence/bravery/attitude or whatever you wish to call it. And, oh, I just finished reading a book about a heroic Russian all-female air regiment that fought during WWII and did some truly amazing things, so I might've been a bit inspired by that too. :D

Guess what: I had no problems with cars after that. Nobody honked, nobody tried to "educate" me, nobody passed me too closely. This may just mean I was lucky, but it's still nice not to encounter a**holes on your first attempt to claim your full rights to the road. :)

I am writing this partly to thank several people on BF, most notably Helmet Head, for their contributions to the A&S threads that helped me overcome some of my fear of cars. I was aware of the VC principles, in particular correct lane positions, before, of course, and believed in them, but it helps to discuss them with live human beings who share the VC viewpoint and practice what they preach. It's nice to know that you're not alone. And I sure do feel alone sometimes when I see every other cyclist on that road either ride on the sidewalk or hug the curb.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

"It helped that I've had a bit of beer just before that"

I always found a few glasses of bourbon helped me make decisions
like playing with cars in traffic.

[chephy]

"It helped that I've had a bit of beer just before that"

I always found a few glasses of bourbon helped me make decisions like playing with cars in traffic. Nothing else makes you so good at powerweaving, eh?

To repeat myself: my blood alcohol content was so low that it would've been perfectly legal for me to drive. You can go ahead and play with cars in traffic if you wish (I suggest hockey; you would have to be the puck after all that bourbon, I'm afraid), I didn't though. I was just riding home after a shopping trip and a lunch. In the safest manner possible.

[webist]

Ya did good.

[chephy]

I was almost as slow as a pedestrian - and I didn't give a damn.

nice--I bet your fellow vehicles were just as happy. They didn't seem to mind, as I wrote. I was doing the common-sense thing.

I hope you continue to enjoy riding, and let others do the same, even if they are *not* taking the lane or even if they are *gasp* riding on the sidewalk!! Since you're so concerned about making everybody happy, you should really disapporve of the sidewalk cyclist. There are a lot of pedestrians around that area. To those who are not taking the lane I do wish pleasant cycling, of course, but I don't know if that's realistic given all the buzzing they are subjected to. I never felt very happy on that road before.

It's interesting to note that the motorists today seemed to have a much more positive reaction to my doing something safe and legal (albeit causing a ten-second delay for them as they change lanes to pass me) than my fellow cyclists. :rolleyes:

I am writing this partly to thank several people on BF, most notably Helmet Head, for their contributions to the A&S threads that helped me overcome some of my fear of cars.

Oh, man, please don't encourage him! Oh yes, I will. His posts helped me and now you suggest I should discourage him from posting? Don't even hope. It's not as though I agree with him on every issue, but he is a valuable contributor to the forums and I am glad he posts here. Helmet Head, I hereby encourage you to post on A&S. :)

I've got some advice to you too, rando: learn how to use the QUOTE feature of the forums. It is common courtesy after all: your posts will become more readable. ;)

[chephy]

I think you'll find lots of disagreement on what is "correct". and in my opinion, what is "correct" may be different for every rider. There's no "ONE" way to ride all the time. The Highway Traffic Act in Ontario, for one, says that cyclists should ride at least half a meter (1.5 feet) from the curb. And I don't think too many experience cyclists will maintain that riding five inches away from the curb while cars pass you on the left within ten inches is "correct" under any circumstances for any rider. Do you?

[I-Like-To-Bike]

It happened! It happened! I took the lane! :) Now, of course you're all anxiously waiting for a full report :p , so here goes.
BTW what was the distance you travelled so boldly and the relative speeds of the vehicles as they approached your slow self?

Full report? Don't forget to report how this method works day in, day out, at night, as well as on other roads in other locales, especially high speed narrow roads with dense traffic and few or no traffic controls to temper the typical high speed of the motorists.

You know, some people may drink a whole lot before a single driving trip and didn't have a bit of problem on the journey; may well have thought they were dang driving like champions and wonder what the fuss is all about.

[Helmet Head]

I was aware of the VC principles, in particular correct lane positions, before, of course, and believed in them,

I think you'll find lots of disagreement on what is "correct". and in my opinion, what is "correct" may be different for every rider. There's no "ONE" way to ride all the time.
It's interesting how some people seem to react differently to phrases like "correct lane positions".
To me, in this context, "correct lane positions" means "the set of any position that is not incorrect". And "incorrect" is if your lane position is unnecessarily impeding traffic, or in the door zone, or endangering yourself some other way. In other words, it's pretty much any reasonable position, which does indeed vary depending on various factors and conditions, including the particular cyclist.

But rando seems to read these same words quite differently. To Rando, these same words imply that there is "ONE" way to ride all the time and it may not vary from rider to rider. Very different.

I wonder why Rando and so many others choose such a strict interpretation of these words, while VC advocates like myself tend to be much less strict about it. Whatever the reason, I think it's related to why we have such radically different reactions to the words of John Forester in his book, Effective Cycling. To me, VC methodology is liberating. To many others, it seems restrictive.

Interesting.

[rando]

They didn't seem to mind, as I wrote. I was doing the common-sense thing.

Since you're so concerned about making everybody happy,

Nope, not concerned with making everybody happy. your attitude strikes me as selfish and rude. you don't care about going as slow as a pedestrian and holding up traffic. doesn't matter to you because you're proving a point to the clueless motorists about who is in charge and what "should" be done. this is the kind of attitude that gives cyclists a bad name with motorists.

you should really disapporve of the sidewalk cyclist. There are a lot of pedestrians around that area.

What makes you think the sidewalk riders were riding unsafely? I do it all the time.

To those who are not taking the lane I do wish pleasant cycling, of course, but I don't know if that's realistic given all the buzzing they are subjected to. I never felt very happy on that road before.

but now you do because you are the steely-eyed Alpha dog. Maybe you should have taken another route...

It's interesting to note that the motorists today seemed to have a much more positive reaction to my doing something safe and legal (albeit causing a ten-second delay for them as they change lanes to pass me) than my fellow cyclists. :rolleyes:

nah, it's just me.

Oh yes, I will. His posts helped me and now you suggest I should discourage him from posting? Don't even hope. It's not as though I agree with him on every issue, but he is a valuable contributor to the forums and I am glad he posts here. Helmet Head, I hereby encourage you to post on A&S. :)

jeez, just a joke. Don't be so literal. you VC types.

I've got some advice to you too, rando: learn how to use the QUOTE feature of the forums. It is common courtesy after all: your posts will become more readable. ;)

ha! um... no.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

My issue is that this person who probably doesnt have a whole lot of
traffic experience given the overall undertone of the post is excited because
on one whole trip cars didnt beep at her when she went quasi-VC. The reality
is that if this becomes habit she WILL suffer a lot of unpleasantries.
Once again I digress to the Philly / Lancaster regions I came from.....if you try
lane commanding you WILL be hit by a car eventually. If you want to be a martyr
for VC, fine....Just not my style.

[genec]

It's interesting how some people seem to react differently to phrases like "correct lane positions".
To me, in this context, "correct lane positions" means "the set of any position that is not incorrect". And "incorrect" is if your lane position is unnecessarily impeding traffic, or in the door zone, or endangering yourself some other way. In other words, it's pretty much any reasonable position, which does indeed vary depending on various factors and conditions, including the particular cyclist.

But rando seems to read these same words quite differently. To Rando, these same words imply that there is "ONE" way to ride all the time and it may not vary from rider to rider. Very different.

I wonder why Rando and so many others choose such a strict interpretation of these words, while VC advocates like myself tend to be much less strict about it. Whatever the reason, I think it's related to why we have such radically different reactions to the words of John Forester in his book, Effective Cycling. To me, VC methodology is liberating. To many others, it seems restrictive.

Interesting.


People are looking for good definitions of "the right way to do things..." for motorists, there are clearly painted lines that give them these answers, (stay between the lines), the same thing exists with bike lanes. (clearly defined spaces)

But "correct riding position" is not clearly defined, and this is very subject to the rider's interpretation, as well as the motorist's interpretation. The wide variations you outline in your statements do not offer any guidance to a rider learning or attempting the VC style. Further, post crash analysis by you and others have addressed riding position with comments that stated the position was wrong, but offered no better "correct position" other than "further left" or "further right..."

You have also stated that riding position is a game of inches... again indicating that the position is critical, yet not measureable or repeatable, again denying guidance to those that are attempting VC.

At a very minimum, "left tire track" and "right tire track" are fairly observable, repeatable decent gauges of position in a lane... far more accurate than "further left" or "further right."

Perhaps this lack of "landmarks" is what causes some of the "confusing commentary. "

[sbhikes]

Hey good for you cephy. I did not realize you are also a woman like me. I sometimes feel I'm the only one around here.

I have found that drivers are more polite to women cyclists than men. They tend not to honk, yell and throw things as much.

[genec]

Hey good for you cephy. I did not realize you are also a woman like me. I sometimes feel I'm the only one around here.

I have found that drivers are more polite to women cyclists than men. They tend not to honk, yell and throw things as much.

Perhaps it is less the "homophobic" issue you mentioned earlier and more of one of pure sexism when it comes to how drivers treat women. As far as the male to male issue, it is probably one of the usual "testostrone challenges" that men tend to make to one another... similar to bar fights and "can you top this" type challenges typical of the males of many species. (well, perhaps not bar fights for "other species," but you get the idea... )

[chephy]

My issue is that this person who probably doesnt have a whole lot of
traffic experience given the overall undertone Ahem... I commute by bike every day, always in traffic. It used to be 20 miles every business day for three years; lately it's only been 10. That's not counting errands by bike, going on bike tours etc. So I do have a bunch of traffic experience. And I do ride assertively a lot of the time, it's just that I had this ONE last issue to combat: I rode too far to the right on major 4- and 6-lane streets. I let the cars pass too closely. I probably will still do this to an extent, but will try to improve.

is excited because
on one whole trip cars didnt beep at her when she went quasi-VC. Quasi? What was so quasi-VC about this situation? Please, try to put aside your assumptions about my inexperience and just analyze the situation. You have 2 lanes in each direction. You are riding in a NOL. What do you do - let the cars pass you in the same lane? That would be the true VC as opposed to quasi-VC?

The reality is that if this becomes habit she WILL suffer a lot of unpleasantries. I've suffered a lot of unpleasantries already trying to hug the curb. I also got unpleasantness in other traffic situations. It's not as though I'm not expecting them; I'm used to them, they are a part of life. So far they haven't been serious enough to deter me from biking in traffic and I don't think they will become so.

One reason I mostly avoided moving to the left on busier roads was my fear of having more confrontations with drivers. I tried modifying my riding style today, and it was a positive experience. I was happy about it. Why shouldn't I be? I did also mention in that very post that luck probably had something to do with this, but that it was nice to get a cooperative bunch of motorists on one's first try: helps build confidence.

I don't expect it to always be wonderfull and smooth, I know I'll run into road rage and aggression. But I already run into them anyway. I'd have to ride further to the left for some time before I know whether to expect more, fewer or about the same number of confrontations.

Once again I digress to the Philly / Lancaster regions I came from.....if you try
lane commanding you WILL be hit by a car eventually. If you want to be a martyr
for VC, fine....Just not my style. I am not in your region, so I can't comment. But given that I live elsewhere, why are you assuming I am making myself a martyr based on how people drive in your area? In my view, I am making myself safer; I am certainly not riding in a certain way just because I take a particular liking to letters V and C or have a crush on Forrester. :D I want to do what works.

[chephy]

Hey good for you cephy. I did not realize you are also a woman like me. I sometimes feel I'm the only one around here. I bet you there are lots of us on this forum. It's just that there isn't an easy way to find out the gender of the forum members, so people usually assume they are talking to a male unless the poster's handle is something like Mary-Jane. :)

I have found that drivers are more polite to women cyclists than men. They tend not to honk, yell and throw things as much. Interesting. Though I never noticed it myself (the area one lives in probably has an effect) and I don't know if this would really help me: my short hair, make-up-free face and the clothes I wear occasionally get me mistaken for a girly teenaged boy even when people are talking to me face-to-face. :D So I don't know if it's easy for a car driver to notice he is dealing with a woman here. :D

[chephy]

BTW what was the distance you travelled so boldly and the relative speeds of the vehicles as they approached your slow self? I thought I mentioned the distance (~1 km), but I now realize that it's unclear what this distance referred to. The cars weren't going all that fast, 60 km/h perhaps.

Full report? Don't forget to report how this method works day in, day out, at night Of course. You wouldn't insult me by thinking I take a two-minute traffic experience as a statistically significant indication of... anything, would you?

as well as on other roads in other locales, especially high speed narrow roads with dense traffic and few or no traffic controls to temper the typical high speed of the motorists. Now, now, now - wait. Suppose this approach doesn't work on some roads. Does it mean it shouldn't be used on roads on which it DOES work? Imagine your friend who used to be a sidewalk cyclist finally cycled to work through low-speed residential streets obeying the rules of the road and had a blast. Are you going to be happy for him or will you tell him: "Hah, so what? Try this on the Interstate, they'll squash you like a bug!" Or how about: "Oh, wait and see, them damned drivers will harass the hell out of you eventually. It's going to be very unpleasant. Get ready to duck for I can already see that brick thrown from an SUV coming toward you." :D

You know, some people may drink a whole lot before a single driving trip and didn't have a bit of problem on the journey; may well have thought they were dang driving like champions and wonder what the fuss is all about. Take a plane here and administer a breathing test. :rolleyes:

[brokenrobot]

I am writing this partly to thank several people on BF, most notably Helmet Head, for their contributions to the A&S threads that helped me overcome some of my fear of cars.

I'm glad he helped you; he's not always wrong! On the other hand, be aware that if you are (god forbid!) ever *injured* or *killed* in traffic, he'll be right here telling the rest of the world that it was all your fault and that you got what was coming to you...

[galen_52657]

Forget the haters chephy. It took some intestinal fortitude to do what you did and you should be proud. You took an assertive approach and were respected by the majority for taking it. There will always be a minority that will be offended, but like you said, you have that anyway. As you logically deduced, you are safer away riding away from the curb.

[JohnBrooking]

It seems a very simple question to me. chephy asked herself "Is it safe to let people pass me without changing lanes here?" and found the answer to be "No". So the choices were:
Continue to ride meekly on the right anyway
Move left enough to force them to give her room
Hop to the sidewalk (assuming presence of sidewalk, and no bike lane or path)

Most of us here would not choose #1, so if we eliminate it as a possibility, the argument is between #2 and #3. Thus it becomes a sidewalk debate, and we've been over that a million times already.

There might be wiggle room for argument within #2, namely, must you be exactly in the middle, or just left enough to make sure they can't pass you while staying completely in the lane? That is perhaps worth discussing rationally, or maybe it's just that I'm uncertain of the best answer myself. (Although I confess a preference for "just enough", but I might be persuadable.)

P.S. I confess - Helmet Head has helped me, too! So go ahead, brand me a mindless VC disciple... ;-)

[Helmet Head]

Rando - what happened to your post?



I think you'll find lots of disagreement on what is "correct". and in my opinion, what is "correct" may be different for every rider. There's no "ONE" way to ride all the time.




I wonder why Rando and so many others choose such a strict interpretation of these words...




People are looking for good definitions of "the right way to do things..." for motorists, there are clearly painted lines ...

You may be right that there are people looking for that, but I don't think you're referring to Randa or her ilk. To the contrary, these folks seem to be repulsed by their impression that VC is about defining "the one right way to do things".

I think your post is talking more about yourself and folks like you, rather than about folks like Rando.

[chephy]

I'm glad he helped you; he's not always wrong! Well, nobody is.

On the other hand, be aware that if you are (god forbid!) ever *injured* or *killed* in traffic, he'll be right here telling the rest of the world that it was all your fault and that you got what was coming to you... Can you be so sure? At any rate, if I get killed in traffic, I don't think I'm gonna care anymore about what anybody says (not to mention that he easily could be right after all :)). However, while I'm still alive, I prefer to remain this way. HH's posts help me with that. Actually, everybody's posts do because more information is always good. But as I said, I have long ago figured out when taking the lane would make sense, after reading several cycling books and cycling in traffic for three years. I guess I needed help more with my personality than with figuring out traffic solutions, and HH helped me defeat a few irrational fears (that I already recognized as irrational a while ago, mind you). Let's say that in this particular situation he was more of a cheerleader to me than a coach, so, in fact, whether he's always wrong or always right or something in between doesn't really matter.

[Helmet Head]

There might be wiggle room for argument within #2, namely, must you be exactly in the middle, or just left enough to make sure they can't pass you while staying completely in the lane? That is perhaps worth discussing rationally, or maybe it's just that I'm uncertain of the best answer myself. (Although I confess a preference for "just enough", but I might be persuadable.)
Even I wouldn't sweat about that kind of wiggle room. Probably anywhere between the two tire tracks wouldn't make too much significant difference. However, one of the interesting things I learned after adopting a rear-view mirror (attached to glasses), was how subtle changes in lateral position do seem to matter sometimes. However, I haven't figured out a "formula", if you're like Gene and looking for one. Instead, you just ride, observe traffic approaching from behind, adjust, and take note how that affects them and how they treat you. There is an art to traffic cycling, and subtleties in lane positioning is no science.


P.S. I confess - Helmet Head has helped me, too! So go ahead, brand me a mindless VC disciple... ;-)
Thanks for being bold about that. Such a confession takes courage on this forum.

[chephy]

Forget the haters chephy. It took some intestinal fortitude to do what you did and you should be proud. Thanks, galen. :) I am (see thread title).

It seems a very simple question to me. Unfortunately, I mentioned Helmet Head in my posts, and in a positive way too. This seems to have a magic effect on some members on the forum: they will NEVER agree with what I said in that post (and possibly anywhere). Even if the post asserts that most humans have two legs, they'll probably try to find a way of defeating that statement. :D

I hope I'm wrong when I say this. But it sure does seem that way...

[rando]

[QUOTE=Helmet Head]Rando - what happened to your post?

I deleted it shortly after I originally posted it. unfortunately, not before Chephy saw it and quoted it. D'oh!
Chephy, I apologise for getting all cranky on you. I didn't ride today, maybe that's why.

[Helmet Head]

On the other hand, be aware that if you are (god forbid!) ever *injured* or *killed* in traffic, he'll be right here telling the rest of the world that it was all your fault and that you got what was coming to you...
Though I have often take the opportunity of a description of an actual crash to point how how riding vehicularly probably would have prevented the crash in question, I believe I have NEVER attributed the cause of any bike crash as being the fault of the cyclist in question. So why you would think I would react this way to a crash Chephy is involved in is beyond me. Can you explain why you said this?

[chephy]

Chephy, I apologise for getting all cranky on you. I didn't ride today, maybe that's why. You better have a ride tomorrow or I'll start worrying about you. ;) :)

[Helmet Head]

Let's say that in this particular situation he was more of a cheerleader to me than a coach, so, in fact, whether he's always wrong or always right or something in between doesn't really matter.
I think what you're getting at here is that it's not so much knowing what to do, but feeling comfortable doing the right thing. And if I've been able to help anyone get there, so to speak, nothing could make me happier here, because that is my purpose. Specifically, I'm trying to share with others what I got from studying Forester, which is much, much more about attitude and mentality than skills and methodology.

[rando]

You better have a ride tomorrow or I'll start worrying about you. ;) :)

yep. riding to work with a friend tomorrow. should be fun. take it easy!

[CommuterRun]

Good job, Chephy.:)

It has been my experience that riding further to the left not only cuts down on the number of negative interactions with drivers, but also cuts down on the number of close passes. The more space I keep on my right, to a point, being the center of the lane, the more room I am given on my left by passing drivers.

[joejack951]

The reality
is that if this becomes habit she WILL suffer a lot of unpleasantries.
Once again I digress to the Philly / Lancaster regions I came from.....if you try
lane commanding you WILL be hit by a car eventually. If you want to be a martyr
for VC, fine....Just not my style.

This is such a ridiculous statement. It's like guaranteeing a run-in with the 1 in 10 million psycho people out there. I'd personally place my bets on a run-in with the 1 in 10 distracted drivers who might not see a cyclist hugging the curb and turn into you or throw a door open in your path. I bike around similar regions every day and do not have problems with "lane commanding." People often tell me how much they don't know about traffic law but stick and stones...

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Of course. You wouldn't insult me by thinking I take a two-minute traffic experience as a statistically significant indication of... anything, would you?
Of course not. Your full report clearly indicated that you had no intent to extrapolate from your one-time, two-minute, 1 km traffic experience. Your "full report" clearly indicated that it may or may not have any applicability/repeatability in numerous other typical cycling scenarios, including tomorrow on the same street.

[chephy]

Of course not. Your full report clearly indicated that you had no intent to extrapolate from your one-time, two-minute, 1 km traffic experience. Your "full report" clearly indicated that it may or may not have any applicability/repeatability in numerous other typical cycling scenarios, including tomorrow on the same street. There is no need for quotation marks. It was a full report. Of two minutes. It's very difficult to try to troll around that. :p

Now, I did gain some helpful information as a result of this two-minute ride. More precisely, that the thirty drivers I met on this road today reacted well to my lane position. This is good. In fact this is the best possible way those two minutes could have gone. I also had more than two minutes of experience of curb-hugging on that road. That consistently gave pretty poor result. Changing the behavoiur improved the result immediately, so while thirty drivers (who all happened to be in a certain part of town on the same time of day) don't by any means constitute a representative sample, I have reasons to be optimistic. I already had reason to believe this is a sensible thing to do; this experience strengthened this belief even though it could easily have destroyed it. For instance, I could've gotten harassment from fifteen of those thirty drivers. I didn't, and that's a good thing already.

It's something like this: suppose I go to the dentist and he examines a tooth he feels "suspicious" and eventually declares it to be in excellent shape. Will I feel happy about that? Of course I will! But you're saying I should not get excited about this, since this doesn't paint a clear picture of my health at all. My other teeth might be all rotten, not to mention that I might have AIDS, cancer and bird flu. :D

[chephy]

I think what you're getting at here is that it's not so much knowing what to do, but feeling comfortable doing the right thing. That's exactly right. :) Sorry if the cheerleader reference offended you. I do not picture you as a baton-twirling high school girl. :D

[LittleBigMan]

At one point we were stopped at a red light ahead of all the cars in the queue, still in the way of cars (the lane is darn narrow) but quite far to the right. As the light turned green, a car that was just behind me passed me on the left extremely closely...And at that point I made a life-altering decision: do what you know is right, take the flaming lane!

Guess what: I had no problems with cars after that. Nobody honked, nobody tried to "educate" me, nobody passed me too closely.
I think you handled this very well. On a narrow lane where there's not enough room to share it with a motorist, timidity can be the worst part of valor. Sometimes motorists will try to squeeze by you in their impatience. When I first started riding and this happened to me, it scared the lemon juice out of me. Now, I value my safety more than motorists' "need" to get to the next red light ahead of their fellow drivers.

Nobody tried to "educate" you, except of some of your fellow cyclists. But I'm sure they would have done exactly the same thing.

[Helmet Head]

Of course not. Your full report clearly indicated that you had no intent to extrapolate from your one-time, two-minute, 1 km traffic experience. Your "full report" clearly indicated that it may or may not have any applicability/repeatability in numerous other typical cycling scenarios, including tomorrow on the same street.

There is no need for quotation marks. It was a full report. Of two minutes. It's very difficult to try to troll around that. :p

Now, I did gain some helpful information as a result of this two-minute ride. More precisely, that the thirty drivers I met on this road today reacted well to my lane position. This is good. In fact this is the best possible way those two minutes could have gone. I also had more than two minutes of experience of curb-hugging on that road. That consistently gave pretty poor result. Changing the behavoiur improved the result immediately, so while thirty drivers (who all happened to be in a certain part of town on the same time of day) don't by any means constitute a representative sample, I have reasons to be optimistic. I already had reason to believe this is a sensible thing to do; this experience strengthened this belief even though it could easily have destroyed it. For instance, I could've gotten harassment from fifteen of those thirty drivers. I didn't, and that's a good thing already.

It's something like this: suppose I go to the dentist and he examines a tooth he feels "suspicious" and eventually declares it to be in excellent shape. Will I feel happy about that? Of course I will! But you're saying I should not get excited about this, since this doesn't paint a clear picture of my health at all. My other teeth might be all rotten, not to mention that I might have AIDS, cancer and bird flu. :D
:beer:

You are very wise and insightful, Chephy. Thank you for joining this forum!

[LCI_Brian]

Good job, chephy, eh!

[Bekologist]

I'd have to say, way to take the lane.

You will come up in front of angry drivers at some point in your taking the lane- heck, I get idiot drivers yelling at me, aggressive passing, and generally doing stupid driver tricks, pretty much every day.

How there is one way to ride in a lane of traffic and receive driver threats and taunts daily, versus claims by others that largely identical methods result in absolutely no driver harassment, is complete and utter fantasy.

Al in Pheonix encounters it regularily; Genec rides in among angry drivers in San Diego that let him know about it often; I ride among angry drivers every day in seattle - How some mystical, faith backed 'exorcisms' of "notions" about lane position can absolve bikers of their perceived 'sins' upon the petrol class is a patently false, dogmatic self delusionment by anyone that subscribes to these 'notions' in this forum.

however, way to go, and good luck.

[galen_52657]

Bek....

Always with the backhanded compliments...

[Bekologist]

I reserve relatively little compliment for the purveyors of ill conceived 'notions', galen, I think you've confused me with someone else.

Again, way to go, Chephy. I imagine Toronto is more civil than many American cities. Last time I was on Younge street I never noticed any "hills" but maybe I didn't see the whole street. If experience is any guide, as opposed to mere theory, there will be an angry driver behind you at some time while you take the lane.

And once you start riding in the full POWERWEAVE method of dodging the steel smoke billowing monsters, you will more than likely find drivers, even in Toronto, willing to play their game of 'educate the bicyclist' like many drivers are so fond of doing here in the States.

But heck, keep your bike riding 'notions' largely emphereal dogma, and you will likely never encounter angry drivers in the theoretical world of 'safe and fun' traffic cycling.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Bek....

Always with the backhanded compliments...
Of course there is always the wise and insightful method of describing as "trolls" or "haters," anyone who is not in tune with (or joyously overwhelmed by) the wisdom of the experts, lessons to be learned from the sophist/dogmatic thought process, wishful thinking and/or BFD anectdotes.

[Helmet Head]

I'd have to say, way to take the lane.

You will come up in front of angry drivers at some point in your taking the lane- heck, I get idiot drivers yelling at me, aggressive passing, and generally doing stupid driver tricks, pretty much every day.

How there is one way to ride in a lane of traffic and receive driver threats and taunts daily, versus claims by others that largely identical methods result in absolutely no driver harassment, is complete and utter fantasy.

Al in Pheonix encounters it regularily; Genec rides in among angry drivers in San Diego that let him know about it often; I ride among angry drivers every day in seattle - How some mystical, faith backed 'exorcisms' of "notions" about lane position can absolve bikers of their perceived 'sins' upon the petrol class is a patently false, dogmatic self delusionment by anyone that subscribes to these 'notions' in this forum.

however, way to go, and good luck.
The claim above in bold inspired me to start this new thread:

Survey: How often do you get driver threats?

[Bekologist]

That's just great, Mr. HEAD, more armchair analysis by your quizes and threads, not respective AT ALL of the 'average bicyclist' out there. The A&S forum is loaded with alpha dawgs and armchair bicyclists, all willing to assert their cyberspace dominance over the smoke billowing monsters on the roadways.

Har, Har. Let's send that skewed data right over to ANSI for analysis- we should call the study "blowhard cyclists spout off about angry drivers"

[Roody]

Chephy is spunky! On the road and on the internet.

I like spunky!

[Helmet Head]

How there is one way to ride in a lane of traffic and receive driver threats and taunts daily, versus claims by others that largely identical methods result in absolutely no driver harassment, is complete and utter fantasy.

The claim above in bold inspired me to start this new thread:

That's just great, Mr. HEAD, more armchair analysis by your quizes and threads, not respective AT ALL of the 'average bicyclist' out there

The behavior of the "average bicyclist" out there, whatever that may be, is irrelevant to your claim about whether or not certain methods might be effective at reducing negative encounters with motorists, is it not?

[brokenrobot]

The behavior of the "average bicyclist" out there, whatever that may be, is irrelevant to your claim about whether or not certain methods might be effective at reducing negative encounters with motorists, is it not?

The EXPERIENCE of the average VC rider vs the average adaptive rider is totally relevant, even if the question of whether more cyclists behave as one or as the other is not. The decks here are stacked, in that everyone in this forum is idiologically attached to one approach or another; you're not going to get a reasonable sample, and so can't expect to get meaningful data.

[Helmet Head]

The EXPERIENCE of the average VC rider vs the average adaptive rider is totally relevant, ...
Please complete this thought. It's relevant to what, exactly?

In particular, how is it relevant to Beck's claim about where or not certain methods might be effective at reducing negative encounters with motorists?

[chephy]

I'd have to say, way to take the lane. ... way to go, and good luck. Thanks. :)

At first I was tempted to comment on the rest of your message, but I won't mainly because it's quite off topic. I don't think anyone in this thread mentioned words "notion" or "sin" or claimed that I will encounter no driver harrassment. So, I'm not quite sure why you bring this up. :p

Again, way to go, Chephy. I imagine Toronto is more civil than many American cities. Last time I was on Younge street I never noticed any "hills" but maybe I didn't see the whole street. Well, it happens to be in the Guinness Book of Records as the longest street in the world, so you probably didn't. :D

Chephy is spunky! On the road and on the internet. ;)

Nobody tried to "educate" you, except of some of your fellow cyclists. But I'm sure they would have done exactly the same thing. They'd have little choice, really. :) I can see clearly, however, that they aren't so much trying to "educate" me as trying to continue a somewhat off-topic flamewar. And a war is a war, you know. You gotta make sacrifices; it seems sensible riding advice was sacrificed in some of these posts. :D I would still ask the people who disagree with what I did: what would you do? Before you say "pick a different route", I'll warn you there is no route that's drastically different. I have to get on the other side of a railroad; quiet residential streets can't get me there.

---------------------------

Thanks to all the fellow cyclists who are expressing support. :)

[I-Like-To-Bike]

I would still ask the people who disagree with what I did: what would you do?
First you'd have to find one. I commented on the significance of a single short action to other situations. Others commented on your choice of mentor. No one disagreed with your bicycling action or dissappointment with your sense of accomplishment.

[chephy]

First you'd have to find one. There was one person, though he retracted his words later (erased his post). Another person suggested that I was carelessly "playing with cars" and implied that I was becoming a "martyr for VC."

I commented on the significance of a single short action to other situations. Let's take a look again at how this went. I try a certain action for a fairly short time - I get a good outcome overall. Notice that I never insisted that that action will ALWAYS produce the same outcome; in fact, in my very first post I mention the word "luck" when describing my "adventure". Nevertheless I can't deny that the situation had certain significance. In particular, I got confirmation that this action I took doesn't always produce bad results (unlike curb-hugging, which in the past ALWAYS produced bad results). However, you it seems you assumed I drew certain conclusions from the event and then began attacking those conclusions.

You also seem to insist that no insight is to be gained from my experience: I can't agree with this either. At the very least one can state that "there probably exists a set of conditions under which a cyclist taking up a lane on a busy narrow four-lane Toronto street is not likely to be harrassed or endangered by the majority of drivers. Further experimentation will probably aid in describing this set. In particular, we may conclude that conditions equivalent or sufficiently similar to the ones experienced on this short ride will likely result in absence of harrassment from the majority of the motorists." Because, you see, if fifty or over percent of motorists would harass a cyclist under these conditions, it is EXTREMELY unlikely that the thirty motorists I encountered on that ride all belong to the other fifty percent. It's no more likely than flipping a coin thirty times and getting a heads each time. (Actually, this is a rough model because coin flippings are independent of each other while motorist behaviour does depend somewhat on the behaviour of other motorists around them. The degree of dependence cannot be directly measured, but over three years of riding in traffic and observing behaviour of people who gave me car rides, I have already developed an intuitive approximation of it.)

Other conclusions can be drawn from the experiment as well (e.g. that "there likely exists a set of conditions under which the cyclist will experience a reduction in the number of close passes when moving further to the left from the curb..." Notice that this statement is based not only on a 2-minute ride in the right tire track, but on many rides a few inches away from the curb. The theory of probability will quickly convince anyone familiar with it that the reduction in close passes I experienced in those two minutes is VERY unlikely to be due to just luck.)

Others commented on your choice of mentor. Very interesting. They agree that in this particular situation HH's advice would've been exactly correct. Therefore in this particular situation listening to him would make a lot of sense. Where, then, did I go wrong with my choice of "mentor"? Perhaps those people assume that I just chose HH as my idol and will take ever his word of his as sacred? They can't be more wrong. I don't trust no one. ;)

[I-Like-To-Bike]

In this particular situation HH's advice would've been exactly correct. Therefore in this particular situation listening to him would make a lot of sense. Where, then, did I go wrong with my choice of "mentor"? Perhaps those people assume that I just chose HH as my idol and will take ever his word of his as sacred? They can't be more wrong. I don't trust no one. ;)
Trust yourself, good plan. Hardly anybody is wrong all the time. A broken clock is right twice a day. Would you rely on it for even a moment? 12 O'clock is sometimes the right answer is not much to rely on.

My advice don't rely for ANY advice from anyone who does not differentiate between facts/serious thought and just plain guessing/wishing thinking/ far-fetched theories. Neither he nor you will ever know if he knows what he is talking about since a wishful thought is the same as the truth in his dogmatic approach to cycling.