Advocacy & Safety - Definition of a right hook

My understanding has always been that a right hook necessarily entails actually being hit by a right-turning vehicle. Common usage on BF however seems to favor close calls and other such non-hitting-of-cyclist-able type events.

So what's a right hook anyway?

I think if you would have been right-hooked except for the fact that you took emergency evasive action, then you've been right-hooked.

I think when most people use it, it means almost right hooked, but does it really, ultimately matter? Is there such a different meaning between the two?

I think if you would have been right-hooked except for the fact that you took emergency evasive action, then you've been right-hooked.

^^^This. If you didn't have to do anything except maybe stop pedaling, then it's not a right hook. But if any braking or turning is involved, you were right hooked.

There's being right hooked, and then there's a collision as the result of being right hooked. See Fend off the "Right Hook" in Wayne Pein's Road Vogue (http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/RoadVogue.htm).

violation of a bicyclists' ROW by an overtaking vehicle turning right. Contact not required, evasive action or braking yes.

motorists don't care about your road position, sometimes hooks happen when you are fully controlling the outside lane.

"the bumper lateral" is a hook evasion technique.

Car, you, side by side, motorist turn signal, slowing and moving right, turn just ahead?

slow, lateral directly behind the bumper, ride on left of car, curse or wave at motorist.

My understanding has always been that a right hook necessarily entails actually being hit by a right-turning vehicle. Common usage on BF however seems to favor close calls and other such non-hitting-of-cyclist-able type events.

So what's a right hook anyway?

If you would have been hit if you did not take avoidance measures... it's a right hook.

If it is merely a close call... then they were just rude.

I vote for the "close call" thing, you have to actually be hit, people just like to call it right hook because it sounds more dramatic, and A&S is about the drama yo.

To take evasive action but not actually hitting them is what the rest of us in the vehicular world call "being cut off".

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

Sorry if i'm getting on your nerves, but I seriously doubt dutch/danish cyclists pay any attention to cars trying to turn right across their path.

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

Can you elaborate on this?

I vote for the "close call" thing, you have to actually be hit, people just like to call it right hook because it sounds more dramatic, and A&S is about the drama yo.

To take evasive action but not actually hitting them is what the rest of us in the vehicular world call "being cut off".

being cut off with a right hook, correct.

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

that's truly the most idiotic thing I've seen on BF. You win.

I have never been hit during a right hook. What happens is that a motorist will be passing, and before completing the pass, will inexplicably slow down. At this point you better be ready to turn right or you are going to be under the rear wheel.

I draw the distinction between being cut off when all I have to do is brake and I can go around to the left. To me, a right hook means that the driver is too far back, and is going to hit you if you don't do anything.

A "right hook" is a driver making a right turn anywhere in the presence of an A&S poster.

And thanks for asking!

Right hooks are employed by motorists trolling for cyclists.

Whether you take the bait (get hit) or take evasive action they've still thrown the hook in the water. Therefore the right hook exists whether you get caught on it or not.

Can you elaborate on this?

With proper vehicular cycling, it is impossible to be hooked by anything but the thrill of cycling like a vehicle.

With proper vehicular cycling, it is impossible to be hooked by anything but the thrill of cycling like a vehicle.

Nevermind. I went back and read some other posts from uke and got my answer. :o:twitchy:

Sorry if i'm getting on your nerves, but I seriously doubt dutch/danish cyclists pay any attention to cars trying to turn right across their path.

incorrect.

I didn't vote because I'm not a boxer.

But I'll be excited to hear what's to be done with the poll results.
Wiki? Urban Dictionary? I'm on pins and needles.

incorrect.

Why? There's a pretty reasonable expectation that right turning cars will yield to them, so they have no issue passing on the right. (Not that there's a problem with that in that context)

I vote for the "close call" thing, you have to actually be hit, people just like to call it right hook because it sounds more dramatic, and A&S is about the drama yo.

To take evasive action but not actually hitting them is what the rest of us in the vehicular world call "being cut off".

Generally being "cut off" means continuing in the same direction of travel.

Often, to avoid being right hooked, means making a sudden right turn, thus an involuntary change of direction.

I vote for the "close call" thing, you have to actually be hit, people just like to call it right hook because it sounds more dramatic, and A&S is about the drama yo.

To take evasive action but not actually hitting them is what the rest of us in the vehicular world call "being cut off".
The difference between a "right hook" and being "cut off" is that nobody runs to "carforums.net" to whine about getting "cut off".

It happens every day...people are rude, ignorant, etc. regardless of what they or you are driving/riding...you move on.

i think if you would have been right-hooked except for the fact that you took emergency evasive action, then you've been right-hooked.

+1

The difference between a "right hook" and being "cut off" is that nobody runs to "carforums.net" to whine about getting "cut off".


You mean that drivers never get angry when another driver cuts them off? :lol:

I don't consider any of these 'right hooks' Some are close to being such.

Fast Right Turn in front of cyclist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu1wOyS6UAQ)

Cyclist passes on left to avoid possible Right Hook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7jKckRlwV0)

Motorist stops short of a right hook, cyclist does too (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iibXnV4AU)

Right turning motorist cuts corners sharply while turning right in front of right turning cyclist who was turning from BL to BL (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kQJyZmcBVM)

The difference between a "right hook" and being "cut off" is that nobody runs to "carforums.net" to whine about getting "cut off".

It happens every day...people are rude, ignorant, etc. regardless of what they or you are driving/riding...you move on.
I take it you're not a member of any car sites?

Though typically we take being cut off as a normal occurrence, the real idiots we still ***** about, but it's all in one megathread of *****ing.

being cut off with a right hook, correct.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v177/Strange_will/forums/cdf661c8945f0cd4bc6409f1a1b90052df1.jpg

I don't consider any of these 'right hooks' Some are close to being such.

Fast Right Turn in front of cyclist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu1wOyS6UAQ)

Cyclist passes on left to avoid possible Right Hook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7jKckRlwV0)

Motorist stops short of a right hook, cyclist does too (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iibXnV4AU)

Right turning motorist cuts corners sharply while turning right in front of right turning cyclist who was turning from BL to BL (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kQJyZmcBVM)
I don't consider those to be right hooks either. I'm impressed with the one motorist that was going to pull a right hook and has the situational awareness to stop in time. The last one shows the problem with bike lanes and right turns very well. When I'm driving, I am not sure I would expect to be overtaken on the right.

I think the people that don't think there is such a thing as a right hook just don't ride enough. It takes a very rare driver with the correct level of tunnel vision.

Why? There's a pretty reasonable expectation that right turning cars will yield to them, so they have no issue passing on the right. (Not that there's a problem with that in that context)

incorrect.

This morning an SUV started to overtake me in the left lane, then we both made a right turn (as in, I made a right turn from the right lane, he made the right turn from the left lane).

It almost would have worked if he didn't have run up within two feet of the curb in the apex of his turn. Which is of course where I now was.

A little bit of yelling solved this issue nicely.

Was this a right hook? No idea.

This morning an SUV started to overtake me in the left lane, then we both made a right turn (as in, I made a right turn from the right lane, he made the right turn from the left lane).

It almost would have worked if he didn't have run up within two feet of the curb in the apex of his turn. Which is of course where I now was.

A little bit of yelling solved this issue nicely.

Was this a right hook? No idea.

Was it a bit like the fourth video I posted above? I just hung back and let the motorist turn ahead of me.

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

You have obviously never had your right-of-way violated by a motorist illegally turning right from an inappropriate lane. I have actually dutifully taken the center of the lane on a 2-lane, 2-way street, only to have a motorist cross the center divide to pass me and immediately execute a right turn from the oncoming traffic lane. I avoided contact through appropriate fast braking and steering because I was paying attention, but I would still classify this as a right hook.

You have obviously never had your right-of-way violated by a motorist illegally turning right from an inappropriate lane. I have actually dutifully taken the center of the lane on a 2-lane, 2-way street, only to have a motorist cross the center divide to pass me and immediately execute a right turn from the oncoming traffic lane. I avoided contact through appropriate fast braking and steering because I was paying attention, but I would still classify this as a right hook.

John, apparently you weren't paying enough attention. :D

Yeah, I've had motorists turn right from center and left turn lanes... I too call that a right hook.

I don't consider any of these 'right hooks' Some are close to being such.
. . . .
Right turning motorist cuts corners sharply while turning right in front of right turning cyclist who was turning from BL to BL (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kQJyZmcBVM)

This is self-induced exposure to being right-hooked. If you filter up behind a vehicle, (or overtake them in a bike lane) they're not too likely to notice you. What were they taught at drivers' ed when getting ready to make a turn at an intersection? Look left, look right, etc. but "look in the right rearview mirror to see if a bike rider is overtaking you?" Not when I took the class! [BTW, a good example of why riding in a bike lane can be hazardous to your health ... need to be ready to brake at all times]

As far as the definition goes, I'd agree with Bekologist.

There's no such thing as a right hook; only cyclists who aren't paying enough attention.

So you're at fault that there is an impatient driver that makes a right turn, from the left of you, without signaling?

This is self-induced exposure to being right-hooked. If you filter up behind a vehicle, (or overtake them in a bike lane) they're not too likely to notice you. What were they taught at drivers' ed when getting ready to make a turn at an intersection? Look left, look right, etc. but "look in the right rearview mirror to see if a bike rider is overtaking you?" Not when I took the class! [BTW, a good example of why riding in a bike lane can be hazardous to your health ... need to be ready to brake at all times]

Of course it is. That is why I was ready for and took evasive action. The narrow FOV of the camera doesn't show that the warning signs came earlier than seen in the resulting video. That's why I didn't get clipped. The reasons the video is posted is as a demonstration of the risk of riding in a BL. I'm a strong advocate of not using one at intersection approaches, but also have just to get examples of why.

Al

Was it a bit like the fourth video I posted above? I just hung back and let the motorist turn ahead of me.

He was overtaking me and making a somewhat illegal turn from the left lane, but the solution was sort of the same.

This is self-induced exposure to being right-hooked. If you filter up behind a vehicle, (or overtake them in a bike lane) they're not too likely to notice you. What were they taught at drivers' ed when getting ready to make a turn at an intersection? Look left, look right, etc. but "look in the right rearview mirror to see if a bike rider is overtaking you?" Not when I took the class! [BTW, a good example of why riding in a bike lane can be hazardous to your health ... need to be ready to brake at all times]

As far as the definition goes, I'd agree with Bekologist.


tonight I had a driver do a strange one on me.

quiet single lane residential street that T intersects with a busy cross road. I'm riding behind a car with my bright lights and reflective shirt, he looks and sees me coming up behind him in his rearview mirror as we slow to the stop sign. I don't want to move around him on either side, of course, especially since he's not signaled his intention to go right or left so I sit behind him and wait. He looks in the mirror at me and I'm wondering if he's waiting for me to go around him and go first or something but when I don't understand a motorist's intention I stay put until it's clear, so I wait. Finally he turns on his right hand signal and pulls slightly to the right as he waits for it to be clear so he can go. I start to go to his left so that I can take advantage of the same break in traffic and go left. As the break in the traffic comes he puts his left signal on and goes left right in front of me.

Despite his bozo-like maneuver I was able to easily anticipate it because I'm in the habit of doing something else when anywhere near a car at an intersection- I watch the front wheels. This is so habitual and second nature with me at this point but it has saved my butt many a time. Often, and this case was no exception, the wheel will begin to turn before the signal light has gone on. Watching the wheels not only lets you know the driver intention but is far more reliable than a turn signal. A driver can signal anything but I never trust it, the best turn signal is the front wheel.

Cars can also be right hooked - when a motorist makes an unsignalled right turn from the left lane. I have experienced this type of right hook as a motorist, a cyclist and a pedestrian. Fortunately evasive manouvers have been effective to date.

This circumstance is, of course, more of a hazard than the garden variety right hook (aggressive right turn from the right lane without regard to road users to the right), but both are unpleasant.

I finally decided to vote. In my opinion a right hook must involve contact between vehicles - a clear and non ambiguous definition. Of course a cyclist can avoid a right hook thru awareness, evasive action, etc. that itself can be very unpleasant (or not depending how the hook was averted). So one can be right hooked and have a collision or one can have a narrowly avoided right hook either because the cyclist or the motorist (or both) realized in time the situation that was developing.

I finally decided to vote. In my opinion a right hook must involve contact between vehicles - a clear and non ambiguous definition. Of course a cyclist can avoid a right hook thru awareness, evasive action, etc. that itself can be very unpleasant (or not depending how the hook was averted). So one can be right hooked and have a collision or one can have a narrowly avoided right hook either because the cyclist or the motorist (or both) realized in time the situation that was developing.

So if I put my hand on a car, to maintain my balance in my evasive action, as it "right hooks" me, does that count?

It is not "contact between vehicles." ;)

...Despite his bozo-like maneuver I was able to easily anticipate it because I'm in the habit of doing something else when anywhere near a car at an intersection- I watch the front wheels. This is so habitual and second nature with me at this point but it has saved my butt many a time. Often, and this case was no exception, the wheel will begin to turn before the signal light has gone on. Watching the wheels not only lets you know the driver intention but is far more reliable than a turn signal. A driver can signal anything but I never trust it, the best turn signal is the front wheel.

Typical Bostonian manuever. Is visualizing turn signals as useless anywhere else as in Boston, especially since they are so little used anyways?

Good tip about watching front wheels and I will try it. Currently, though I've never thought about it, I think I watch for the forward progression of the front of the car.