Commuting - On your LEFT!

How do you determine whether to say on your left or not to say it. I ussually say it when its someone (or two) that are drifting in and out of both lanes or have that potiential. If they are well to the right of that right lane, I just go by with using the outside of the left side. Well I was out biking saturday around the local lake here in Madison,Wi and there was all sorts of bikers and walkers. I had some older lady tell me I was rude for not saying anything, even though I slowed down and she was well away from the median. I think I would have a hard time biking if I had to notify every person that Im passing!

Nikos,

Usually I am on the road, so if I scare anyone, it's not my fault! :p

Seriously, though, there is a one-mile stretch of path I sometimes take. Joggers, walkers, dog-walkers and so-on, I always shout, "LEFT" (or "RIGHT", whichever applies.)

I have a small bell, and I ring it till I see the person cock his head, letting me know that they heard it. If they don't respond I yell "On your left" as I never pass on the right, just as if I were in a car.

Im not so sure sometimes that Im not scaring the person more by blurting out left! in a loud fashion, but one that needs to be done so that the person hears you.

Bells are useless, and should only be installed if you need to fulfill some "audible warning device" law. Otherwise, shouting is quicker, louder, and more reliable.

The problem with shouting is that if you need to allow a reaction time, and for your own speed, so the distance at which a warning can be useful is quite large. You then need to shout loud enough to cover this distance. I only do this in emergency situations, eg when a pedestrian is about to step off the sidewalk onto the road in my path. I give a very loud aggressive "OI" to grab their attention.
Shouting effectively to a pedestrian wandering on a bike path is usually taken to be a rude insult.

Often I give a 2-tone whistle, which has less aggressive connotations.

I just ride on the road. I never have any problems in this department.

B]Bells are useless, and should only be installed if you need to fulfill some "audible warning device" law. Otherwise, shouting is quicker, louder, and more reliable.[/B]


We have a bell on our tandem. It is about 50% useful around pedestrians, joggers and walkers. Around bicyclists it is much more effective.

We ring the bell and voice "On your Left" when hammering at a good fast pace. When going slower, we voice a "On Your Left", no need for the bell.

I generally yell "on your left" if is more the one person or if I think they will be scared. If I see that they have their headphones on I don't bother, I just take a wider than normal path around them. If it is a group with small kids I generally slow down to a near stop until I get past. Those tots can do the weirdest things at times ;)

On bicycle trails, some cyclists zone out and don't pay attention to the world around them. Instead of shouting "On your left!", maybe one should take a pseudo-zen approach and shout, "PAY ATTENTION TO THE PRESENT MOMENT!"

On busy city streets, I see less of the cyclists who don't pay attention. But if I do encounter them, maybe the appropriate thing to yell is, "ARE YOUR LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMS PAID UP?"

Has anyone else noticed, if you do warn a pedestrian that you are passing, they often move to "get out of your way", and sidestep into your path.
I even have problems with other cyclists on bike paths, who dont keep to the appropriate side. Even when I signal that i am keeping to the left (UK) riders try to ride on their right towards me.
There seem to be no conventions for safe use of these "facilities", so Ive had far more minor dings than I do on a proper road.

It is the passing person's total responsibility to make the overtaking maneuver in a safe and logical manner.

If the person I'm passing looks stable I'll give as much room as possible and pass without saying a word. If the person looks unstable (which is more often than not) I'll yell "on your left".

Children deserve a slow pass.

Keep your comments as short and pointed as possible. Usually, simply yelling "left", "move', or "hey" will give the best results. For people in Australia and England, "oi" may work better than "hey". As an insult, "jerk" is easily understood, and carries better than multi-syllabic profanities. Hand gestures may compromise control, but I find that an oustretched hand, palm vertical, moving from centre to left conveys my desire to oncoming cyclists that they move to the right, and works well before yelling is a possibility.

Back in my racing days, I used to ALWAYS say this on bike trails, but I've found it to be often counterproductive on this side of the pond (I live in Switzerland)

Basically, I only holler if I notice them about to do something stoopid, otherwise I just ride by carefully. *zoom*

How about "on MY right" :)

If the person looks experienced (cyclist, blader, whatever) I'll usually give them the minimum, "LEFT side!" or "on your LEFT!" but if they look a little sketchy I start off with "comin' UP . . ." (they get over their startle response) ". . .on your LEFT!" (they actually hear what I say). Seems to work.

Originally posted by ViciousCycle
On bicycle trails, some cyclists zone out and don't pay attention to the world around them. Instead of shouting "On your left!", maybe one should take a pseudo-zen approach and shout, "PAY ATTENTION TO THE PRESENT MOMENT!"

I like this, :) but it's a little wordy for such a brief encounter. I sometimes shout "WAKE UP!" at 'ignert' jay-walkers, which has essentially the same meaning. On shared paths slowing down and saying "excuse me" is remarkably effective, but usually I just ride by without saying anything (slowing to a reasonable speed and giving plenty of room, of course). I don't ride on these paths to get somewhere, the path is the somewhere I want to be, so there's no hurry.

Allister, that is an excellent bikepath philosophy.

Bike paths truly suck as avenues for transportation. The only way to enjoy them is to remind one's self, "I'm not here to go somewhere... the bikepath IS the somewhere."

>>>If the person looks experienced (cyclist, blader, whatever) I'll usually give them the minimum, "LEFT side!" or "on your LEFT!" but if they look a little sketchy I start off with "comin' UP . . ." (they get over their startle response) ". . .on your LEFT!" (they actually hear what I say). Seems to work<<<<

I try to do the same, especially when we're riding in Florida (While on vacation). Works well.

I agree with Gus and Pat O'Malley re. a bell--I have one that mounts in the bar end and find it to be effective most of the time.

I must be completely honest about this issue.

I don't think mixing cyclists and pedestrians is a good idea.

But motorists seem to think that as long as cyclists are out of their way, cyclists are in the right place.

I think you hit on a key issue, Pete. The auto industry loves bike paths, rail-trails, and mountain biking because it gets us off "their" roads. Even better lots of people will buy forty thousand dollar SUVs so they can't transport their MTB to the trail.

Once again Pete Clark makes a lot of sense. Off-road bike paths are just a waste of money that could be better spent on providing roads with a decent shoulder. I noticed this today when riding the Tweed Coast. The road already had dirt shoulders anyway, so there was no need for that other path that disappeared in the middle of nowhere. I just think the money could be better spent.

Originally posted by Chris L
Off-road bike paths are just a waste of money that could be better spent on providing roads with a decent shoulder.

Maybe the money could be spent on off-road SUV paths, and then SUV drivers would be required to use those and not the roads. This would make roads better for biking.

Historically, the earliest paved roads were paved for cyclists. Those motorists who act like they own the road are forgetting history.

P.S. Chris L., when you reach message 2000, will you oberve another 24 hour period of speaking in the third person?

Hear, Hear! on all the bike path comments. The only way we're going to be able to claim our rightful place in traffic is to be in traffic, not shunted off to some separate-but-unequal ribbon of asphalt that only reinforces the bike-toy and nonstationary exercise machine mentality.

Having said that, I'll relate a little story that convinced me to call out at all times when passing a cyclist in the roadway. I was commuting through an untrafficked suburban neighborhood when I saw that I would overtake another rider who was riding a hybrid with wire baskets and had the look a seasoned commuter. I thought to myself, I don't need to call out, I'll just swing way wide. As I got to a bicycle length behind her, she, in an exhibition of exurberance, took her feet off the pedals, stuck her legs out to the sides, and swooped in an arc across the road in front of me, shouting "wheEEE!" I came to a screeching halt, she whipped her head around, turned beet-red, and rode off much more subdued. I felt bad about putting a damper on her high spirits--after all, I "wheeee!" all the time, but mostly in my head! Anyhoo, so now I alway call out, regardless.

Originally posted by Chris L
The road already had dirt shoulders anyway, so there was no need for that other path that disappeared in the middle of nowhere.
"...disappeared in the middle of nowhere." HAHAHA! :D

Did they go for lunch and forget to finish?

I would LOVE to see a high-speed superfreeway that "disappeared in the middle of nowhere." HAHAHAHA!

Ooops! Gee, that could hurt somebody! :cry:

Originally posted by ViciousCycle

P.S. Chris L., when you reach message 2000, will you oberve another 24 hour period of speaking in the third person?

It didn't go down too well last time. Anyway, I've still got a few more posts to go before I get there.


Hear, Hear! on all the bike path comments. The only way we're going to be able to claim our rightful place in traffic is to be in traffic, not shunted off to some separate-but-unequal ribbon of asphalt that only reinforces the bike-toy and nonstationary exercise machine mentality.


The whole point is that whether the motoring primates and the oil industry prostitutes like it or not, we are traffic. The sooner that concept is belted into their thick skulls the better!

Just holler, "Comin Through" or "Heads Up" let them figure it out and hold your line.
Ride On
Pat

Originally posted by pat5319
Just holler, "Comin Through" or "Heads Up" let them figure it out and hold your line.


I'm a bit scared to try that. Most peds weigh more than the combined weight of me and my bike. And around here, most of them are just too dense to figure it out. I'll stick to the road thanks.

Originally posted by Chris L
there was no need for that other path that disappeared in the middle of nowhere.

Sounds like you're describing Schaumburg, Illinois. This summer, when I was bicycling commuting from a train station to a client in Schamburg, I was the only bicycle commuter that I ever saw on Meacham road. Parallel to the road, but not on the road, was a bicyle route that stopped in the middle of nowhere almost a dozen times within a mere 4 mile stretch. The logic of this route made no sense. (By the way, by bike route in this instance, I mean an extra wide sidewalk with bicycle symbols on signs.) If you weren't willing to ride in traffic on Meacham Road (like I was), the bike route was utterly useless, since the route kept stopping arbitrarily. On the other hand, if you're already able to ride in traffic, you don't need the bike route.

All the comments are useful, but my main view...

1. Bikepaths to nowhere or badly executed paths are obviously worthless.
2. A well-maintained path with separate, clearly marked lanes (esp. divided by barriers) for peds and bicyclists, along scenic areas, can be a pleasure. For young kids, families, and even serious bikers looking for a change of pace, they can be a godsend.
3. On roads, we are traffic, and mandatory bike lanes alongside roads tend to be in hazard areas and promote accidents. When they are well-executed, however, they can be useful during extreme traffic conditions.
4. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories that these enhancements are intended to get bikes off the road. I doubt bicycles have actually been given that much conscious attention.
When they are given attention, the paths, lanes and traffic rules are not well-thought-out because bicyclists fail to be heard in the public planning process. In places where they do make themselves heard, like my own city, and where there is a continuous conversation with city officials and the police about enforcement and traffic issues, traffic and lanes and paths and so forth can be built in a way that pleases all constituencies. Join a group that is making a difference. In NYC, there's transalt.org (transportation alternatives). I am sure there is a local group near you.

Originally posted by ViciousCycle

If you weren't willing to ride in traffic on Meacham Road (like I was), the bike route was utterly useless, since the route kept stopping arbitrarily. On the other hand, if you're already able to ride in traffic, you don't need the bike route.

Well let's face it, these things are simply not designed for the cyclist. All they do is attract votes from the motoring primates ("get those damn bikes off the road") and possibly a few environmentalists ("commitment to sustainable transport"), but in reality they are totally useless to us. If they were serious about cycling we'd get better on road facilities instead of wasting their money on this garbage.

I have read posts by cyclists who appreciate the paths they have.
It is a personal choice and I respect that. Also, paths differ widely in their design from one another. My arguments against paths are not aimed at cyclists, who are my kin.

But where I live, there is a wonderful network of asphalt I enjoyed as a motorist that I cannot swap in favor of a stupidly designed, dangerous (very dangerous), glorified sidewalk which goes miles out of my way.

Please, those of you who enjoy your paths, keep enjoying them!
Your happiness is my happiness. I know that all paths are not created equal.

As for the more shady recreational path designers who rake in millions by endangering the lives of newbie cyclists who trust you, may you waste all your profits on other bad investments.

This thread is transforming.

As a user of bike paths as my primary route, all I can say is they work for me.

I've seen and riden many different types of path, but the one I train on is right against the beach sand. This brings other dangers inherently, but I don't see a car at all or cross a road.

The real dangers, as probably on most paths, are from joggers, walkers, skateboarders, rollerskaters, sand, and dogs that can't read the five foot bold letters every 100 feet saying "BIKES ONLY" (dogs excused).

The path is my only option as I do not trust the drivers here at all. I choose to live to see tomorrow rather than be taken out by some gold plated, Prozac driven, $50,000 SUV.

I'm able to reach speeds for a length of time unachievable on the streets. I've commuted on them, trained on them and just plain enjoyed them.

Come and ride with me.

Originally posted by Greg
The real dangers, as probably on most paths, are from joggers, walkers, skateboarders, rollerskaters, sand, and dogs that can't read the five foot bold letters every 100 feet saying "BIKES ONLY" (dogs excused).

The path is my only option as I do not trust the drivers here at all. I choose to live to see tomorrow rather than be taken out by some gold plated, Prozac driven, $50,000 SUV

I don't trust the drivers here either. However, that doesn't change whether they are in or out of their car. I ride in excess of 15,000km/year, entirely on the road, and I can honestly say I hardly ever feel as though my life is in danger.

I have seen many drivers take a short cut directly across off-road paths and I feel this provides a bigger danger than the road simply because you do not expect them on a path. Then again, maybe the paths you have over there are better than the ones here.