Rule# -
No matter how well lit or brightly dressed you are, don't assume everyone is paying attention to their surroundings, they're not. Ride defensively when encountering a car at night.
Printable View
Rule# -
No matter how well lit or brightly dressed you are, don't assume everyone is paying attention to their surroundings, they're not. Ride defensively when encountering a car at night.
I'd add.... If you see a fellow commuter down with mech trouble, slow down and ask if they need any help.
I even do that for the roadies out in the morning when I'm making my way home from work! :lol:
They have yet to admit to needing help from a lowly commuter, even when there were two of them pulled over together apparently scratching their heads about whatever problem one of them was having as I approached!
Updates added. Starting to look like a good list.
I'm not buying the alternate equation.Quote:
Rule #12 - Velominati
The correct number of bikes to own is n+1.
While the minimum number of bikes one should own is three, the correct number is n+1, where n is the number of bikes currently owned. This equation may also be re-written as s-1, where s is the number of bikes owned that would result in separation from your partner.
If s is defined by the existence of partner p, then for n>=s, the commutinati is bound to define p_{2}. The theoretical upper limit, q, is determined by a far more rigorous and complex equation involving the differentials of square footage in the garage and a fractional of the living room, relative to annual income normalized by the current commodity market prices of green arabica, west brent crude, and an annual Rails to Trails membership. In practice, as s approaches 0, q approaches too hard to bother with so p <-- p_{2} and the whole equation is simplified again to n+1.
s-1 is like dividing by 0. It is undefined for the commutinati.
We need a rule for the cheers and jeers. The jeers are generally spontaneous outbursts reflecting the confines and limitations of motor vehicles, hence are non-sentient, impersonal and to be ignored. Cheers, obviously, are sincere expressions of respect and admiration for the commuter personally.
And one cycling tactic that deserves to be a rule, if not a law. Never should a commuter position himself to the right of a long vehicle in a right turn lane or in any lane in which the vehicle might turn right.
...if I may add my little bit here:
Rule # xx
In the eventuality of a fall, the most expensive, hard to find, impossible to tune component/add-on is always going to be the first thing broken, while the cheapest of the cheap, bargain basement, bought in a basket, components/add-on's will never have any damage.
Yeah, my latest commute route does not have nearly enough oversize vehicles operating at 20ish MPH. My old route had plenty along a 6-mile stretch and sometimes would even tempt me to wait at a red light to keep my "tow". There is nothing like whizzing along at near 25 mph effortlessly for five or six miles and arriving in the city grid rested and ready to run lights and split lanes the rest of the way in.
Up to 17 solid Rules. I'm surprised at the lack of controversy. It seems the Velominati have spent quite a bit of time debating whether the use of a small saddle bag is a violation of the rules. Are the Commutinati just better at achieving a consensus?
We don't seem to be very insistent about conformity and fashion. More about not caring than skill at reaching a consensus. Perhaps that's worthy of a negative rule?
As I was commuting this dark, torrential rain-swept, and leaf-strewn ride this morning, I recalled this rule for your consideration:
“If you cannot directly see the Road surface (due to a reflecting puddle, a pile of leaves, or whatever), a pothole may lurk.”
I learned this rule from two misfortunes, one personal, and one vicarious but fatal. It’s a specific corollary to Jim’s Law of the Road, Commutinati Rule #3a, and another argument to use a rearview mirror.
Another wet weather aphorism is “Watch out for wet painted Road markings,” perhaps not worthy of a Rule, but a good admonition IMO.
PS: Re Rule #1 :
The last time I rode in such a drenching rain, about two years ago, I got so wet that I developed a presumed blister and subsequent abscess, “down there,” and was off the bike for two weeks. So if you ride in bad weather you may be a badass in more ways than one. :o
Rule # ___
As shared by my co-worker and fellow commuter James P., in praise of fenders for city bikes:
That puddle? It's urine. ALWAYS ASSUME IT IS URINE.
Probably also hiding a pothole.
To better characterize a baddass cold ride, I would offer this definition from the Winter Cycling Forum: One on which your water bottle freezes solid---a function of temperature and distance (time). For my 14 mile one-way ride, it happens at about 15* F and below.
what will the minimum number of rides per week be?
Since these Rules are to be a Complete Compendium to Keep Cyclists Safe, I would like to amend this proposed Rule:
I was prompted by this post, and my reply:
So I recommend adding this clause:
“Even if you can see the road surface at the bottom of a puddle, at freezing temperatures and especially without studded tires, it’s best to avoid all puddles.”
Hmm. I never had this problem on rides, but I spent a winter in a drafty home with broken-out windows and a malfunctioning heater near the base of Mt Shasta. If I left any water in cups or bottles in my bedroom (as in a water bottle on my bike) it'd be frozen solid when I woke up.
I have proposed this definition of a cold, “badass” ride on several different threads about winter riding, in particular those involved with eyewear to prevent fogging. Many subscribers enthusiastically endorse their solutions with no particular reference to their riding conditions, mainly temperatures and distance (time). So the time spent on the Road necessary to freeze a water bottle solid is a function of those two variables, and IMO defines a cold ride.