Brian Ratliff

Sometimes to fight a bully, you need a bully on your side. Right?

genec

Nah, it's still available on Amazon... I just checked.

Although Hurst's book was right out on the shelves there in Powells. (great place BTW... got one of their red and black T shirts and a few other books the last time we were there)

bmike

The definition of the VC subforum on BF is arguing about the same things over and over expecting different results.

LittleBigMan

that is unnecessary, Galen

noisebeam

This is no different than any other sub-BF, or any other internet forum for that matter.
That said I have seen opinions and ideas of some forum member change over time.
I know mine has.
I may need to buy this JF book after all, so I can participate with knowledge in debate about this character and his ideas. Its folks like Bek, randya and sbhikes making me think I ought to read it, not its proponents. They are the ones making the sale.

Al

rando

Amazon has EF for $27.74. and also a glowing review by our own helmut head.

"I found this book to be nothing short of a godsend. With over 30 years of cycling experience, I felt comfortable and competent cycling in traffic, at least in most circumstances. But this book was recommended so many times, I decided to read it anyway. At first, it didn't seem like a big deal. It all made sense, and seemed to describe how I already rode, perhaps with a few subtle differences.

But as I began to incorporate these subtle changes in my own riding the results were amazing. My relationship with car drivers completely changed. Instead of interacting with them once in a while -- only when necessary -- I became an integrated participant with the rest of traffic.

It is impossible to explain in words how just subtle lane positioning changes, and a new attitude, can make such a radical difference in one's cycling experience in traffic. But consider what Forester conveys in this simple statement: "Between intersections, position yourself according to speed; at intersections, position yourself according to destination". You may think you do this already, but based on the fact that I almost never see any cyclists do this consistently, I can almost assure you that you don't. And I'm not talking about kids and "recreational cyclists". I'm talking about experienced commuters, and experienced club riders and racers. Only a very small percentages of cyclists actually behave like a (slow) vehicle driver consistently. Much of the time on the road is spent in space "left over" by motorists, riding too far to the right, not positioning at intersections according to destination (THINK about what that means), etc. etc.

"Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles" - John Forester

This book is for you if any of the following is true:

* You want to learn to LOVE to ride your bike in traffic, not just tolerate it.
* You're tired of motorists passing you and then cutting you off when they turn in front of you, or motorists coming from the other direction cutting you off when they turn in front of you (believe it or not, if you read this book you will learn how to stop them from ever doing this to you again!).
* You are comfortable riding in bike lanes passing stopped or slow car traffic on their right.
* You think that you should assume that you're invisible to motorists, and ride accordingly.
* You don't think you should position yourself away from the edge of the road, often in the path of motorists coming from behind, in order to be more visible and predictable.
* You don't feel safe riding in traffic.
* Your greatest fear is that you will be hit from the rear.
* You don't know that almost all bike-car collisions are caused by, or could have been prevented, by the cyclist.
* You feel safer riding on shoulders and in bike lanes than "out" in the regular traffic lanes.
* You're rusty on what the laws are regarding cycling.
* You believe the best thing that can be done for cycling is building more bike lanes and bike paths.
* You've never taken any courses on cycling in traffic (like LAB's Road 1 course - see bikeleague.org).
* You don't believe cyclists have the same rights on the road as do motor vehicle drivers.
* You ride on the side of the road opposing traffic (like a pedestrian should walk).
* You ride on sidewalks.
* You value your life and want to ride your bike accordingly.

This is not the perfect book. Forester does tend to ramble, and some of the advice I don't agree with (like you don't really need a rear light at night, just a rear red reflector and a good front light). Also, some of the material, like on equipment and racing, is dated. But the chapters on riding in traffic are timeless and priceless, and so TRANSFORMATIONAL that they alone make this a 5-star book.

bmike

Quite possibly, but over in the LD forum where I usually hang out we tend to be a little more helpful to each other. (with exception of a few crusty, grumpy types)

noisebeam

Right, but I'm sure, even with very casual reading, you know the hot buttons to press in most of the other more heavily visited forums.
Al

bmike

carbon, steel, campy, shimano, LSD training, intervals, Floyd Landis, aero wheels, weight weenie, Euro, bikes direct, fixie, hipster, retrogrouch, poseur, cafe racer, bar end shifter, brifter, STI, compact crank... yawn. this is hard work.

[edit: i forgot titanium, anatomic bars, seated vs standing climbing, ...]

invisiblehand

Should I be boorish and cantankerous to get better results?

Anyway, this is silly. I hope that you have better things to do and can move on. I find this unproductive and distasteful. If somehow I insulted you along the way, then I apologize. If what I write is offensive, then please place me on ignore.

-G

I-Like-To-Bike

There is zero correlation between any rating on the Forester Cycling Proficiency Score Sheet with any other cycling metric, be it safety, efficiency, fun, or anything else. Forester does not gather or provide an iota of evidence or data about these "rated" individuals' safety record or anything else related to their cycling. The cyclists' experiences, safety record, or daily cycling environment/experiences, (i.e. where, when, or how often any of these randomly selected cyclists cycle) was never measured yet Forester makes all sorts of conjured Reasonable Assumptions about his sample population.

All that the above observations and measurements amount to are just Forester's arbitrary rating scheme, period. A rating scheme which when included with a quarter is worth exactly 25 cents, given its correlation with nothing. Except maybe Forester's definition of cycling skill which is also correlated with nothing except Forester Brand Reasonable Assumptions.

Blue Order

What a tool...

I-Like-To-Bike

Some like to go along to get along; others agree with everything the bully says as a means of ingratiating themselves and think that such behavior will mellow out bully boy.

Others do not allow themselves to be backed down with bogus claims of science/engineering hocus pocus that consists mostly of ranting, insults and over-the-top sophistry.

I-Like-To-Bike

What isn't?

Raiyn

That would work if we could keep them in here, but they have this need to push their agenda in the main forum rather than stay here.
I'm sorry, Are we being "glib"?
Just as I recognized John Forester for the idiot he is back in 1999, or whenever it was when I first saw more than his basic tenants on the web. I didn't predict, though, that he would become a world-wide cult leader; he was just too absurd. But then, absurdity doesn't prevent a cult from forming, it just makes it a cult rather than a "engineering discipline" as so claimed.
Really? When was this? Do you have any documentation?
Ok now you've officially lost all credibility. Hubbard "a good science fiction writer"? Hubbard wouldn't know "good" if it resurrected his ass and showed him.
I don't believe it is, especially since you've yet to show me the "distancing" you claim. Now I will admit that Hubbard didn't follow his own beliefs (majorly into the psych drugs) and that may be what you're after, but I don't recall any disavowment of his cult
My belief system isn't challenged. In fact I actually agree with the basics of EC however, I'm not going to sit here and and create 15 page threads on "and = or" and not listen to a damn thing that's said that conflicts with my preconceived notions. Or to blindly follow the tenants of VC without acknowledging that most drivers won't understand that a "look back" signals intent to turn. Do to that would be akin to me believing a bad science fiction writer who claims that "The Dark Lord Xenu" brought billions of people to Earth 75 million years ago, in spacecraft resembling Douglas DC-8 airliners, stacked them around volcanoes and blew them up with hydrogen bombs. It would have made for a dicey novel at best but to sell Scientology as a religion or VC as the best method of cycling in anything less than a perfect world is sheer insane genius.

Helmet Head and John Forester - welcome to my ignore list. I-Like-To-Bike welcome back from the ignore list

rando

an embarrassingly fawning tool, too.

galen_52657

But the truth must be told....

I-Like-To-Bike

Should be, but I doubt it. Do you think the fawning tool is embarrased or proud? Time for a poll?

rando

Poll...Poll...Poll...Poll!!!

I-Like-To-Bike

LBM prefers his truth covered in sugar.

John Forester

You support your claim that I lead a cult with no evidence except that you think my recipe for cycling is "just too absurd". Consider your one specific statement, "that most drivers won't understand that a "look back" signals intent to turn." Well, of course it doesn't. Nobody I know has ever made that claim.

The claim that is made regarding looking back is that it signals the desire to move laterally, into another line of traffic. The accuracy of that statement is easily determined, and has been determined over a span of years. Turning the head to look back convinces a very large proportion of motorists who are in a position to slow down, to slow down and let you in. The proportion of drivers who do so is so high that it is reasonable to conclude that most drivers understand the signal, even if some of them either cannot or will not accede to your request.

Many years ago there was a study made of this, in New York state, as I remember, in which motorists were shown pictures of cyclists with left arm extended and other pictures of cyclists with head turned to look back. A high proportion of these motorists were more confident about the intent of the cyclists with head turned than were confident about the intent of the cyclists with arm extended.

noisebeam

I had an experience this AM of making a merge from BL to outer lane (eventually crossing another to get to LTOL)
I saw in mirror a long line of vehicles. No gaps, but a early in line small one I needed to negotate into. I glanced back quickly, I signaled with arm, no response, again several seconds no response. The only way to get driver to yield was to stop signalling and solidly look back at them.

Al

Raiyn

LittleBigMan

I don't give a rat's ass if people believe what you just said.

I-Like-To-Bike

That's not nicey-nice. But not to worry I have no ignore list; only certain posters who have earned credibility and you are on the right list for your intelligent comments, despite your moderator wannabe efforts.