Originally Posted by
I-Like-To-Bike
My agenda? Manipulation and misunderstanding of numbers and poorly defined/gathered stats to misrepresent risk, especially bicycle riding risk,raises my hackles. I used to give instruction on managing risk in an industrial setting; the numbers, stats and analyses bandied about on BF to demonstrate relative risk and "sell" the effectiveness of various countermeasures usually only demonstrates the posters' obtuseness or ignorance of the subject of risk determination.
I'm not trying to 'sell' anything. The nightmare scenario...being run down from behind by a motorist...is a relatively small fraction of accidents involving cars and bikes. It's the scenario that we cyclist fear the most and plan for the most. Ask anyone what kind of accident they fear and that's the one the will come to mind first and foremost. Night riders plan for it the most by having a whole bunch of illumination to the back (I do so myself). However, there are other accident modes that occur in higher percentages. Even the summary shows that. Left turns in front of cyclist, pull outs from side streets and driveways and failure to yield right-of-way (on both parties part) are all far more common. Even if you lump right hooks and mergers in with being hit from behind, the other modes have a higher frequency.
I don't include right hooks and merging errors in with run down type of accidents for the simple fact that I don't consider them as "accidents". If a motorist runs over a bicycle from directly behind, I can see it as being inattentive and truly an accident. The motorist isn't blameless but it's still an accident. A right hook or merger "accident" is a decision by the motorist to pass the bicycle and turn in front of them. That isn't an "accident" but a blatant move by the motorist.
Originally Posted by
I-Like-To-Bike
Extrapolating anything about "most riders" from what you read from the narrow, self selecting slice of the bicycling population found on BF, especially the Commuting or A & S lists may be leading you astray. From what I see on BF Commuting, the posters are for the most part, quite unrepresentative of the bicycling population as a whole in almost every metric both in personal and equipment characteristics, as well as typical cycling routines.
By the statement "At least not from what I see here," I didn't mean here as in the Bike Forums but physically here in Denver. Sorry for the confusion. However, I find the posters here on the Bike Forums to be about as representative in terms of riding styles and equipment as the mix in the Denver Metro area.