Arrogant or just plain ignorant - ?

[simongt]

On the way to work yesterday at 05.30h, I let an 18 tonner go first when the lights changed. This is habitual for me as they can get on and it prevents them from having to follow me down a road that is difficult to overtake on. Same with buses. Anyway, two 'roadies' came out from a side road a little ahead of said 18 tonner. By this time, there was an artic and several cars behind the 18 tonner. However, the roadies were riding two abreast, and continued to do so for the next 3/4 mile until they went down a slip road. There was no attempt or effort to single out to let the built up traffic past.
Opinions on a postcard - !

 

[markemark]

3/4 of a mile. Assuming reasonable pace that was 2 or 3 minutes? I’m sure they all survived the ordeal. I once waited 2 or 3 minutes at traffic lights due to traffic. Who do I write to?

 

[winjim]

Fine. It's fine.

 

[Supersuperleeds]

If I was riding with someone else I would have dropped behind them, but there was nothing wrong with what the two "roadies" did.

 

[fossyant]

Doesn't matter. I've recently hopped on a pavement to let a HGV pass. I don't have to, probably shouldn't have, but it's better having the HGV in front. Driver was happy and gave me a toot !

Nothing wrong with what they did - might have been a bit busy in conversation.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Would single file have improved or hindered an overtake? If it’s 18 tonnes the driver is going to have to give them a wide berth anyway. As in other side of white line.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

You've said that it's a difficult road to overtake on so they did the right thing.

 

[boydj]

You've said that it's a difficult road to overtake on so they did the right thing.

Yes - especially knowing they were turning off soon after.

 

[boydj]

Where does this 'arrogant' come from? I keep seeing it in relation to cyclists - especially from entitled drivers who seem to have an expectation that cyclists should immediately dive out of their way to ensure that the driver's progress is not impeded in any way.

In my experience the primary thought in most cyclists' minds is to get where they are going safely without having their lives put at risk by thoughtless, inconsiderate, impatient drivers.

Note for drivers - when the road is narrow it is safer for cyclists to ride 2-abreast to prevent close passes and so that drivers have to overtake by going completely into the other carriageway.

 

[Venod]

Anyway, two 'roadies

Opinions on a postcard

Stop labeling people would be my opinion.

 

[si_c]

You state in your original post that you let the lorry go ahead of you because it's a road that's difficult to overtake on, so why on earth would the other riders want to encourage a dangerous overtake.

Seems like prudent riding to me.

 

[sasquath]

Sometimes single file provokes near miss overtake. Better to ride 2 abreast than to get snagged up by a lorry during botched overtake.
Same reason you supposed to stay in the middle of the lane on roundabouts.

 

[Milkfloat]

My theory is that they forgot their cloth hats so could not pull over to doff them to the killers stacking up behind them.

 

[cougie uk]

If it was a tractor instead of the cyclists would you have even raised the question ?

Seems that people only get upset when it's bikes in the way. Cows, tractors, horses, learner drivers - nobody bats an eye.

Everyone is traffic.

 

[Drago]

They didn't break any laws.

Anyone that cant handle doing a mere 20mph instead of 30 (or, realistically, more, because people don't know how to obey speed limits) for 3/4 shouldn't be allowed in charge of a motor vehicle

If you have a problem with it then youll be absolutely apoplectic when all 30 zones are reduced to 20, as has been mooted, and you're perpetually stuck behind an imaginary roadie.

No one died. No one was even inconvenienced. Nothing to see here.