Being yelled at and perceptions of cyclists....

[Rhythm Thief]

Stop it now, Jimbo. It's getting dull and you're straying into troll territory.

 

[Cab]

What you are misunderstanding is THE ONLY TWO TIMES I HAVE BEEN ABUSED is when I did.

And as for being statistically significant, when the shape of my nose is threatened by some big bloke, it is.

I suggest you go look at some stats, and consider why the standard advice for cycling is to be more assertive. That you've been given lip a couple of times doesn't mean that its a more dangerous way to ride, it means only that you have been given lip.

 

[Origamist]

I assess each situation as it aproaches. If I think there is enough room for a car and my bike, I won't go blocking the lane at 15 mph when the traffic flow is 20 or even 25 mph.

Don't be daft - if the lane is wide enough to share Cyclecraft does not recommend taking primary! You're fighting imaginary battles here, Jim.

 

[jimboalee]

Stop it now, Jimbo. It's getting dull and you're straying into troll territory.

Right you are.

 

[BentMikey]

Why would you leap to the conclusion that it's the way I ride that causes toots and shouts? Anyone riding with me would very quickly realise that it's totally obvious when it's the recumbent causing this behaviour. Unless they were rather thick!!

 

[BentMikey]

There's no sense of superiority on my part. I'm always ready to learn more about good riding and I actively try to improve my skills. I'm also far more aware of my own mistakes than I have been in the past thanks to this.

How about you?

Your non-answer will be a no then, but then I guess that was fairly obvious from your posts on this topic.

 

[jimboalee]

Why would you leap to the conclusion that it's the way I ride that causes toots and shouts? Anyone riding with me would very quickly realise that it's totally obvious when it's the recumbent causing this behaviour. Unless they were rather thick!!

May I suggest I come to Biggin Hill and commute with you?

You will need to slow down a lot and fit a telescopic rearview mirror because I will be riding a Sturmey 3 speed, 39lb gent's heavyweight and we will average 12 mph at best.
Due to this slow speed, I won't be taking 'primary' very often.

Then, you come to Brum and take up my offer of the 26 mile lap of the City.
I will again be on my commute heavyweight so you'll have to keep slow 100ft feet behind me. Motorists behave differently when two cyclists are together.

 

[BentMikey]

You're welcome to come commute with me any time. I take it that's your capitulation on the issue of why people shout so much for recumbents.

 

[brokenbetty]

Another case where you haven't been reading.

Yes, I do take primary when conditions dictate, but usually not.
What you are misunderstanding is THE ONLY TWO TIMES I HAVE BEEN ABUSED is when I did.

Jim - can you clarify whether on these occasions when you were abused
1. would it have been safe to remain in secondary amd allow the car(s) past?
2. was there a steady stream of cars passing the obstruction?

You see, I suspect this is what happened:

Jim's view
Cyclecraft advises riding in primary when ever possible
I only ride in primary when it is necessary given the road conditions
I tried to ride as Cyclecraft advises and took Primary when it wasn't necessary.
This caused unwarranted obstruction to drivers who then abused me
Conclusion: Riding as Cyclecraft advises leads to abuse from motorists

Reality
Cyclecraft advises riding in primary when it is necessary given the road conditions
Jim rides in this way anyway
Jim misunderstood Cyclecraft and decided to ride in Primary when it wasn't necessary
This caused unwarranted obstruction to drivers who then abused him
Conclusion: Riding in Primary when it isn't necessary leads to abuse from motorists

 

[ttcycle]

I am also stumped at what you are continuuing to argue with Jimbo? You'[re not doing yourself any favours here.

I suspect the two issues are:

You are taking primary when there is no need to which caused the upset- ie when there is room for car and bike to pass together - ie no safety issues. This also strikes me as a possibility as you mentioned taking primary up a hill- why did you do this apart from an experiment in causing a nuisance so that you could post evidence which fit your skewed view?

I also think that you average speed 12mph as you say combined with the faster speeds (30/40 if people are even keeping to the speed limits) of motorists may be an irksome factor as you may not be flowing with the traffic in primary and unfortunately some motorists are very impatient.

If you are able to head down this way I would offer to cycle with you too (if my health is up to it at the moment) and maybe return the favour back in the Midlands.

Jimbo I don't understand what you're still fighting against.

 

[jimboalee]

What I really do detest are people who dive in with "I suspect that...." when they weren't at the scene and didn't see what happened.

You can look at as many polls and surveys of motorists as you like, and you will read >2/3 of motorists think cyclists should keep to the left AT ALL TIMES, as per 1960s and 70s National Cycling Profficiency training.

It only needs one of these motorists to be in a bad mood and meet a cyclist 'taking the road' that abuse gets thrown.

The cyclist could be there because the cyclist has assessed it is safest, but the motorist thinks otherwise.

Is this TOO obvious?

 

[Rhythm Thief]

What is obvious is that you appear to be taking examples of poor driving and putting the blame for them squarely on the cyclist. I for one don't understand why you're doing so.

 

[ttcycle]

If that's not the case please tell me what happened to clarify the situation instead of going off on one. but what it the point in what you're saying? Have you read my earlier posts at all?
It is not always safest to be on the left - some motorists would also want cyclists to cycle in the gutter -it's about safety of vulnerable road users not what motorists think we should be doing- that won't change unless more people ride correctly rather than being too leftwards out of fear.

So what if the motorist thinks otherwise? I don't live every waking moment worrying about every little thing that 'someone else' thinks -especially if it is wrong and unsafe.

So your point is?

 

[brokenbetty]

The cyclist could be there because the cyclist has assessed it is safest, but the motorist thinks otherwise.

Is this TOO obvious?

It's so obvious that I said it several pages ago.

Here: http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=1091815&postcount=114
and here: http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=1091867&postcount=118
and here: http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=1090347&postcount=62

I suspect you read what you think is there, not what is.

 

[jimboalee]

If that's not the case please tell me what happened to clarify the situation instead of going off on one. but what it the point in what you're saying? Have you read my earlier posts at all?
It is not always safest to be on the left - some motorists would also want cyclists to cycle in the gutter -it's about safety of vulnerable road users not what motorists think we should be doing- that won't change unless more people ride correctly rather than being too leftwards out of fear.

So what if the motorist thinks otherwise? I don't live every waking moment worrying about every little thing that 'someone else' thinks -especially if it is wrong and unsafe.

So your point is?

The increasing number of cyclists shouted at by motorists, appears to me, to be in line with the popularity of a book called CycleCraft.