Originally Posted by Helmet Head
No, I don't understand your argument. In particular, I don't understand what you're saying he concluded that he should not have concluded.
Also, he clearly stated he was using road speeds following vehicular rules (which implies turning traffic is supposed to yield to through traffic), so he did make known that "when ridden at full speed and without yielding".
Okay, so his point was specific and trivial.
So how did his "experiment" morph from showing that there needs to be a tradeoff between speed and safety, to one where sidepaths are "deathtraps" in their own right? Somewhere, you all anti-facilities people pulled a fast one and started labeling sidepaths as "deathtraps" and "dangerous", when, in fact, they are just inconvenient and force you to slow down.
Now, assume I am in the modern context of anti-facility talk, and someone brings up the test to show how dangerous sidepaths are compared to the road, neglecting to mention that the dangers only occur at high speed and without yielding. Can you see my point now? Comment #2 of his Chainguard post gets all the play in modern times, while comment #1 describing the tradeoff between speed and safety (this is really what Forester has his hackles up about, not no safety issue) is neglected.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --
the tiniest sprinter