'Conspicuous and predictable'. It's as good as an ear tag. When you hear those words you can be pretty sure you're dealing with someone who doesn't actually ride very much.

People, move left to maximize space to inevitable right-side hazards like speeding Mercedes. Move left to maximize your own sightlines and space. There is thus no need to think about maximizing visibility for motorists ('conspicuous and predictable'), who will inevitably overlook cyclists even if they're in prime lane position (that is, if they look at all). Those who feel comforted by maximization of 'conspicuity and predictability' are in for a wild ride, for sure. And, although I am writing in something not too far from an armchair right now, I assure you I speak from experience.

The proof is in the pudding, as they say. HH brought up accident rates. Armchair bloviating is not compelling. I'd be more than willing to admit that my riding style is not as safe as some other riding style -- say, HH-style 'best practices,' whatever they are this week -- if someone can present some good evidence to bolster their pronouncements. Even personal experience might be compelling to me; I always listen to those with as much or more experience than I have. But there aren't any VCist followers whose experience comes close, that I know of. Once a rider becomes experienced, they have already shed their dogmatic visions of traffic cycling. Experience does that. It ruins dogma. It spoils VCism.

That's why relative inexperience is a common trait among those who tout 'Vehicular Cycling' as a comprehensive system. Something to think about for those capable of thought.

Robert