Advocacy & Safety - What's The Deal With Joggers/Runners?

Honest curiosity here, not pointing fingers or trying to start ****. I realize this is a bicycle forum, but I'm curious to get others thoughts from the cyclists perspective.

Why do joggers and runners insist on traveling against traffic, in the shoulder or bike lane of roads? I've heard the argument that it's so they can see cars coming, but wouldn't it open them up to cross traffic not seeing them due to looking the other way not expecting any traffic going the wrong way?

I have had many confused moments when I'm riding in a bike lane and a jogger is coming along toward me. My natural instinct is to go to the right, and they will too, so we can each safely pass. That's what we do in America, we move to the right. Sometimes, though, they try to go to their left, which sets us up for a head on crash. If they do move to their right emphatically, which sometimes happens, they end up playing chicken with traffic.

It just seems like it's not a good idea, by any stretch of the imagination. I'm no more visible than a jogger, and I move with traffic, and the below article states that 50% of bicycle accidents involve a bicycle traveling against traffic, so why is it less (or perceived to be less) dangerous for joggers?

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/09/17/20110917arizona-bike-safety-plan.html

I never run in the bike lane or in the street. I run on the sidewalk. If there weren't sidewalks in NYC, I'd run on the same side of the road I ride in. I'd personally NOT like to see the car that's going to run me over. :lol:

Also, drivers seem to "respect" runners more.

With the exception of maybe high level athletes, joggers and runners are generally going a speed slow enough relative to traffic that their direction of travel is inconsequential to faster vehicles (they look like they're standing still to drivers going 45+). They insist on using the shoulder or bike lane because asphalt is easier on the knees than concrete (theoretically). Running against traffic is a good idea as long as they use the reason you stated and pay attention. They see me coming ahead of time and can fall into a line so I can pick the other line. As for moving to the right, I think it's common expectation for the pedestrian to be closest to the curb. Look at is as you passing them (even though you're going opposite directions, you are technically in a one-way lane) and you always pass on the left.

It is highly debatable, including the fact that if there is a sidewalk, the runners are legally required to be on it instead of in the street (at least here in CA), but I've had few problems with runners on the street as most of them jump up on the curb or hug the gutter long before I get there. Bike paths and MUPs, however... oh, don't get me started.

it's easier to jump on some lawn if you can see the car coming to hit you.

That's why I do it when I run.

what do you mean by shoulder?

as in sidewalk? you can jog on whatever sidewalk you want. its 2 way. it doesnt matter if your against or with traffic because youre not on the road. on the other hand, cyclists ARE on the road so they have to behave as any other vehicle.

as for the jogging in bike lanes, i have no clue. had that happen to me today actually and i got p*ssed off.

when im joggin i never am on the actual road unless im crossing streets or unless theres no sidewalk

what do you mean by shoulder?

as in sidewalk? you can jog on whatever sidewalk you want. its 2 way. it doesnt matter if your against or with traffic because youre not on the road. on the other hand, cyclists ARE on the road so they have to behave as any other vehicle.

as for the jogging in bike lanes, i have no clue. had that happen to me today actually and i got p*ssed off.

when im joggin i never am on the actual road unless im crossing streets or unless theres no sidewalk

I don't mean any offense, but do you live in the sticks? Are there no curb and gutters where you are? Sidewalks and shoulders are totally different things.

Made sense to me. I figure the "shoulder" is the part of the roadway not in the specified lane of travel. This could be the parking zone, excess pavement before the curb, or anything to the right of the fog line. I certainly didn't think you meant you were riding on the sidewalk. Maybe zazenzach was confused.

I don't mean any offense, but do you live in the sticks? Are there no curb and gutters where you are? Sidewalks and shoulders are totally different things.

lol no clue what the sticks is.

agree with urban is saying, i just dunno what you mean by "shoulder." i need to work on my english i think.

Around here the "shoulder" is synonymous with "ditch".

This is from the CA drivers handbook:

If there are no sidewalks, walk facing oncoming traffic (see graphic). Do not walk or jog on any freeway where signs tell you that pedestrians are not allowed. Do not walk or jog in a bike lane unless there is no sidewalk.

Google "jogging and traffic" and most sites tell runners to run facing traffic because its safer based on the premise two sets of eyes are better than one.

lol no clue what the sticks is.

The middle of nowhere. BFE. The boonies. The outback.

Pedestrians walk against traffic by law and custom.

This is from the CA drivers handbook:

If there are no sidewalks, walk facing oncoming traffic (see graphic). Do not walk or jog on any freeway where signs tell you that pedestrians are not allowed. Do not walk or jog in a bike lane unless there is no sidewalk.

Google "jogging and traffic" and most sites tell runners to run facing traffic because its safer based on the premise two sets of eyes are better than one.

^ This. Jogging with traffic is akin to riding a bike against traffic - just wrong.

Since you refer to "the sticks", I'm guessing you're in a city somewhere. If so, I would run on the sidewalk.

Pretty much all of the joggers in the Agoura Hills/Westlake area all run in the bike lanes...against traffic.

I run against traffic as well - and on the shoulder, if there is one: it is easier than running on the sidewalk with pedestrians.

You know how us roadies tend to think drivers shouldnt get so upset at having to slow down for a few seconds in order to pass a cyclist, and that sharing the road is good? Same goes for cyclists - share the road. Having to slow down for a few seconds to pass an incoming runner isnt the end of the world.

On military bases, when we jog in formation, it is always against traffic. This is mandated at multiple US bases I've been to all over the world.

I think this allows for both runner and driver to see/acknowledge each other

Bikers though have to follow flow of traffic

Why do joggers and runners insist on traveling against traffic, in the shoulder or bike lane of roads?

How about ........ because it is the law???

And most joggers I know will move over onto the grass, not out toward the traffic. What are you doing to confuse them?

Where I live/ride, that's how it works. The joggers move against traffic; we cyclists move with it. However, we all move right when passing... and we wave. So friendly in the the 'burbs, we.

Why do joggers and runners insist on traveling against traffic, in the shoulder or bike lane of roads?

It's actually the law in most place if not all places.

For example:

Pedestrians must travel against traffic when walking in the road, use sidewalks whenever available, and use marked crossings whenever possible. Motorists and bicyclists must yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, both marked and unmarked, when making a right turn on red, or as instructed by law enforcement or traffic control devices.

Honest curiosity here, not pointing fingers or trying to start ****. I realize this is a bicycle forum, but I'm curious to get others thoughts from the cyclists perspective.

Why do joggers and runners insist on traveling against traffic, in the shoulder or bike lane of roads? I've heard the argument that it's so they can see cars coming, but wouldn't it open them up to cross traffic not seeing them due to looking the other way not expecting any traffic going the wrong way?

I have had many confused moments when I'm riding in a bike lane and a jogger is coming along toward me. My natural instinct is to go to the right, and they will too, so we can each safely pass. That's what we do in America, we move to the right. Sometimes, though, they try to go to their left, which sets us up for a head on crash. If they do move to their right emphatically, which sometimes happens, they end up playing chicken with traffic.

It just seems like it's not a good idea, by any stretch of the imagination. I'm no more visible than a jogger, and I move with traffic, and the below article states that 50% of bicycle accidents involve a bicycle traveling against traffic, so why is it less (or perceived to be less) dangerous for joggers?

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/09/17/20110917arizona-bike-safety-plan.html

You mean you go further to the edge of the road ? If so, I don't think that's a good idea. When a runner is coming, we always move out into the road a bit more, to our left. On a group ride, we signal the riders behind to move over .... never a problem.

Vice, isnt it like 4am in AZ right now? shouldnt you be sleeping and preparing for your run-ins with sunday drivers and joggers? later.

Buddy???

I think it's probably because it's the law. Also, as a frequent runner in addition to avid cyclist, I can assure you that cyclists do things to runners that are just as stupid and irritating as what cars do to cyclists. I can't tell you the number of times I've had to jump out of the way of a cyclist who wasn't paying attention.

I run against traffic as well - and on the shoulder, if there is one: it is easier than running on the sidewalk with pedestrians.

You know how us roadies tend to think drivers shouldnt get so upset at having to slow down for a few seconds in order to pass a cyclist, and that sharing the road is good? Same goes for cyclists - share the road. Having to slow down for a few seconds to pass an incoming runner isnt the end of the world.

Well said.

On my routes, I occassionally have runners using the same shoulder as me, running towards me. I move to my left, they move to their left. Sometimes we even wave.

Joggers need to take the lane.

Cagers will just have to adjust.

I do all my running on a bike/run/rollerblade path against traffic. I also always move to the left because the chain of command on the path is horses > bikes > rollerblades > runners and I am therefore to yield. Why anyone would move to the right into the center of the road/path as a runner is stupid to me; I just step off the path into the dirt and do so early so the rider can see what I'm doing.

When it comes to running on a shoulder with no sidewalk, I do the exact same thing and get to the very edge of what is safe. the bike has to stay on the road to remain stable and when I ride, forcing me to the edge by moving right pisses me off.

You mean you go further to the edge of the road ? If so, I don't think that's a good idea. When a runner is coming, we always move out into the road a bit more, to our left. On a group ride, we signal the riders behind to move over .... never a problem.

+1. There are lots of runners around here, and no bike lanes. When I'm riding and see a runner I move left. If there is no real shoulder I'll check to make sure there isn't a car coming and then move into the road to give the runner room.

lol no clue what the sticks is.

agree with urban is saying, i just dunno what you mean by "shoulder." i need to work on my english i think.

sticks is slang for twigs and branches. it refers to being out in the wooded area.

[...]
I have had many confused moments when I'm riding in a bike lane and a jogger is coming along toward me. My natural instinct is to go to the right, and they will too, so we can each safely pass. That's what we do in America, we move to the right. Sometimes, though, they try to go to their left, which sets us up for a head on crash. If they do move to their right emphatically, which sometimes happens, they end up playing chicken with traffic.

[...]



I think your natural instincts are wrong here. The runners are only moving right to avoid you hitting them. You need to move left. Pretend the runner is a stopped car. If a car was broken down on the side of the road, you wouldn't go around on the right would you?

I hate when cyclists confuse the right-of-way between peds and bikes.

It's way more dangerous if a cyclist forgets the right-of-way than a ped, as the velocities are much higher.

Right of way is divided up by speed by priority
1. Walker
2. Runner
3. Cyclist
4. Car

You can argue all you want about how reasonable this is, but the reality is that in a court of law, if you are a car and hit a cyclist, or a cyclist and hit a runner, or runner and hit a walker, the faster vehicle is at fault unless the person at hit is egregiously and willfully ignoring traffic rules - and even so, the burden of proof is on the faster traveler to prove this.

Runners are instructed to run facing oncoming traffic. It's preferred that they take a sidewalk when available but there are no laws mandating this. If you want to force runners to always use the sidewalk, you'd better be prepared as a cyclist to be forced to use a sidewalk.

If you're a cyclist and coming head-on to a runner (which happens commonly due to the different right of way situations), you as the cyclist must yield by swinging into traffic or slowing/stopping. I've had more than a few cyclist-refusing-to-yield situations which is unsafe for both parties. You might think it's always easier for the runner to yield, but from experience, I can tell you that it's usually more predictable and safer for the cyclist to check back and if safe, slide left into the road, as that's a very typical move for a cyclist, whereas if a runner jumps into middle the road, it causes chaos for everyone.

Runners are always told to run against traffic, it is safe practice. And running on the side of the roads vs the sidewalk is a lot better for your shins, knees and ankles.

I hate when cyclists confuse the right-of-way between peds and bikes.

It's way more dangerous if a cyclist forgets the right-of-way than a ped, as the velocities are much higher.

Right of way is divided up by speed by priority
1. Walker
2. Runner
3. Cyclist
4. Car

You can argue all you want about how reasonable this is, but the reality is that in a court of law, if you are a car and hit a cyclist, or a cyclist and hit a runner, or runner and hit a walker, the faster vehicle is at fault unless the person at hit is egregiously and willfully ignoring traffic rules - and even so, the burden of proof is on the faster traveler to prove this.


I live to the guideline that the larger vehicle has the right of way.

When I'm a walker, the cyclist has the right of way.
When I'm a cyclist, the car has the right of way.
When I'm driving a car, the large truck has the right of way.

In other words, if my method of transportation is smaller than another method of transportation, and for whatever reason, the larger method of transportation is bearing down on me, or suddenly in my way ... I get out of the way or take evasive action. Doesn't matter if I'm supposedly "in the right" ... I'd rather be alive than "dead right".

I consider myself a runner before a biker (even though i am probably better at biking) all of my runs are done on the left side of the road heading towards traffic.. I get annoyed when I see others running with traffic or bikers against traffic.. as far as overtaking a runner while biking towards them.. do as you do in car.. pass them on the left..

now as for mups.. pretty sure the standard of everyone traveling on the right and passing on the left regardless of activity is the rule of thumb..

I've always run with traffic. It's much safer for the same reason cyclists ride with traffic - if you are running at 10 mph facing traffic moving anywhere from 20 - 50 mph, drivers misjudge how close you are.

Another thing I'm amazed at how many runners I see on the shoulders of roads when there is a path beside it. Shoulders are sloped for drainage and can do damage to ankles, knees and hips.

Well, in a lot of places it is THE LAW that pedestrians face traffic in the absence of a sidewalk or designated pedestrian R.O.W munch in the same way that bicycles must follow traffic. Brother-in-law who is a LEO in VA will stop a pedestrian or cyclist on the "wrong" side (always with a warning, of course)

Now, when I run, I tend to face traffic unless the the shoulder is present or better (read: wider) on the other side or where the slope (hills) or curvature of the road makes it impossible for me to be seen by oncoming traffic

On my routes, I occassionally have runners using the same shoulder as me, running towards me. I move to my left, they move to their left. Sometimes we even wave.

Yep. Not a problem. As a triathlete, I understand both perspectives. And, yes, running on the road is easier than the sidewalk which causes me knee pain because of all the angled slopes with driveways.

Rather than argue the point, I want to know why most drivers are so against us and cars are allowed to park in bike lanes??? Here in TX, I'm always dodging cars no matter what.

Vice:

Have you thought about attending some anger management classes?

In CA, thems the rules. Pedestrians (runners, walkers, and rollerbladers) are told to move against traffic.

I live to the guideline that the larger vehicle has the right of way.

When I'm a walker, the cyclist has the right of way.
When I'm a cyclist, the car has the right of way.
When I'm driving a car, the large truck has the right of way.

In other words, if my method of transportation is smaller than another method of transportation, and for whatever reason, the larger method of transportation is bearing down on me, or suddenly in my way ... I get out of the way or take evasive action. Doesn't matter if I'm supposedly "in the right" ... I'd rather be alive than "dead right".

That mentality only applies if you're on the victim end.

That concept is so obvious as the victim that nobody does NOT practice it. Nobody, confronted with a MACK truck that may not see them, will try and count on the law to prevent physics.

The discussion we're having is not really from the victim end but from the opposite site, as the larger (cyclist) approaching the runner/ped. Right of way is 100% given to the runner/ped, like it or not. You hit them, you are almost definitely going to be found at fault. Make it a car, and it doesn't even matter if they jumped into your path - you're going to be in court for a long time fighting an uphill battle.

We'll continue this discussion in A&S. Enjoy and keep up the good thoughts about what's safest.

I've always run with traffic. It's much safer for the same reason cyclists ride with traffic - if you are running at 10 mph facing traffic moving anywhere from 20 - 50 mph, drivers misjudge how close you are.



Another thing I'm amazed at how many runners I see on the shoulders of roads when there is a path beside it. Shoulders are sloped for drainage and can do damage to ankles, knees and hips.

THis is crazy no runner would run with traffic. A runner is not a moving vehical and a cyclist is. Running you must see ahead and getting hit from behind make do difference you are dead. A bike is like a car and like a car I have a review helmet mirror. I would not ever ride a bike without my helmet mirror. I look in my rear veiw mirror cycling all the time. No runner who knows what ther are doing will run "with" traffic." Sometimes I do not ever run on the sidewalk when there is one if it has lots of foot traffic, and I am not running on busy roads any more than I would riding a bike on some busy roads.

A runner explained it simply to me: he'd never, ever, turn his back to automobiles moving towards him. It makes sense and sums it up perfectly I think.

I run against car traffic, try to never run on sidewalks (concrete IS harder), and run with traffic on a MUP unless there is a soft and level spot just off of it. If there is too much car traffic to run safely in the road, I'll run somewhere else.

I run against traffic as well - and on the shoulder, if there is one: it is easier than running on the sidewalk with pedestrians.

You know how us roadies tend to think drivers shouldnt get so upset at having to slow down for a few seconds in order to pass a cyclist, and that sharing the road is good? Same goes for cyclists - share the road. Having to slow down for a few seconds to pass an incoming runner isnt the end of the world.

It can be when the *##$%^ runner forces you into traffic coming from behind.

Vice, isnt it like 4am in AZ right now? shouldnt you be sleeping and preparing for your run-ins with sunday drivers and joggers? later.

It was 4 am. Falling asleep at 7:30 has it's drawbacks.

so I should pass runners on the left, as if I'm a car. They run against traffic, on the left.

I'll just assume all runners are from the UK, then I'll remember in my mind that they do everything backwards.

Pretty much all of the joggers in the Agoura Hills/Westlake area all run in the bike lanes...against traffic.
My first response in this thread was based mostly on the roads going around the lake in Westlake. I guess it's a little unique since it's a nice wide bike lane and the sidewalk stops and starts along that route, but I rarely had any problems with them when that was part of my most common routes.



Same goes for cyclists - share the road. Having to slow down for a few seconds to pass an incoming runner isnt the end of the world.
Now this is a rare case, but it does happen. What is the best thing to do if you're on a busy road (fast traffic making it unsafe to shift into vehicle traffic) and a handful of runners are taking up the entire bike lane, side-by-side, oblivious to the presence of others? For me personally, I come to a stop and stare at them. I figure if I'm not moving, I can't be the cause of an accident. So far (I think I've done this 4 or 5 times in 19 years) they have noticed me and fell in line safely, but I'm not sure if they would have done it in time had I continued toward them at 25, 15, or even 10 mph.

I'll just assume all runners are from the UK, then I'll remember in my mind that they do everything backwards.
Whatever works.

You know how us roadies tend to think drivers shouldnt get so upset at having to slow down for a few seconds in order to pass a cyclist, and that sharing the road is good? Same goes for cyclists - share the road. Having to slow down for a few seconds to pass an incoming runner isnt the end of the world.
It's not quite the same situation - for a jogger running with traffic, I can safely wait behind him/her until traffic clears and it's safe to pass. For a jogger running against traffic, I'm forced to merge with traffic immediately.

I don't see why joggers are supposed to run against traffic while bicyclists ride with it. Avid joggers can easily maintain 10mph or more, while many cyclists ride no more than 8mph.

IMO joggers should run against traffic if no shoulder exists (I don't mind moving left in this case because I'm already "in" traffic), with traffic if they're on a shoulder or bike lane.

so I should pass runners on the left, as if I'm a car. They run against traffic, on the left.

I'll just assume all runners are from the UK, then I'll remember in my mind that they do everything backwards.

I just look at runners and walkers (no matter what direction they are heading) as obstructions or slower-moving objects, and move left into the roadway accordingly.

The reason I also run against traffic (and never bike against it!) is that while running it is easy for me to dodge/sidestep oncoming objects, since I'm not always in the roadway in clear view of traffic. If there is a sidewalk I will run on it, but if there are people with strollers, moving furniture, etc etc on the sidewalk I will hop into the roadway shoulder for brief moments.

Also, when I am running on the sidewalk or on the edge of the roadway and I come up to an intersection, running against traffic means running across the side of the road where traffic usually has a stop sign, rather than running across the side of the road where left turning traffic from the road I am on will enter. If a car happens to not see me approaching the intersection and just happens to do a quick turn left while I decide to step into the intersection, I could get hit. I will not see them unless I look back. Whereas, running against traffic, I will be in the roadway already before they cross my path, and I will have clear view of people who are turning left across my path in front of me. Picture it, it makes sense.