Closest overtake ever

[BentMikey]

I tend to cycle in the same manner towards lights as magnatom looking for safe gap to stop in be an ASL or a gap in the queue depending on my knowledge/ visibility to the lights. If I'm in the traffic queue I try to accelerate at an equal speed to the car in front and I've never touch wood had a problem when I'm part of the queue. Sometimes at ASL's however, horns sound, some people are in a rush to get to the next traffic queue only seconds away (I don't think I ever been beeped when the road was clearD; so I'm starting to prefer the former.

It's very good advice. It's almost always better to wait a car or two back in the queue, because that takes the rush and frustration out of needing to pass the cyclist for most drivers. Not this unusually bad driver, mind.

 

[magnatom]

Hi Guys,

Busy this morning so not much time to write.

Crackle, I didn't have a great sleep last night. However, nothing to do with this. My youngest son would appear to have super diarrhea and had the biggest runniest pooh ever at about 4:30am (more info that you wanted to hear I am sure!).

Don't worry crackle, I have no problem with what you said. What I hate is people who don't normally take part in these discussions who pop their head in and make disparaging comments, suggesting that I am self righteous etc. I also hate the fact that people think I have more incidents than anyone else. I am sure I don't.

The fact is I have never got so close to an accident that I have had to emergency brake. I have always been able to slow controllably and have never felt in any real danger, except where for instance this car passed way to close. However, even here, because I had space to my left I was able to swerve into the space I had created for myself. As someone else said, had I been further over to the left, he would have passed as close. I just wouldn't have had as much room to escape into.

Have a look at this video

View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_xR9k4IAeqk


Read the comments, you will see that initially I didn't think I did anything wrong. However if you follow the comments you will see that I later realise that the lady in the car (who did overreact by waving her arms in the air) may have thought I was going to turn across her. I admit that I didn't think of that. I now don't overtake in situations like that, where I can see traffic is approaching in the other direction, or where I can't see gaps in the traffic ahead.

Hardly the actions of someone who is self righteous. I admit I made a mistake and I have learned from it.

Also to those that claim they have never had incidents. Look at my videos where cars pull in front of me at roundabouts and junctions. I was in no danger, because I ride expecting the worst, but I put them online to demonstrate what happens. There is no way that these could be my fault, apart from the fact that I am there. Can anyone tell me, honestly, that no one has ever pulled out on them like that in all their time cycling on the roads. I'd be amazed!

 

[Crackle]

You might use your experience to overrule the training, but that's simply showing two things:

Cycling isn't very dangerous, so you can get away with imperfect cycling behaviour.
Your experience lets you deal with your imperfect cycling practice in a way that reduces the risk, but perhaps not as much as if you'd been cycling properly in the first place.

And I do realise that applies to all of us, I'm sure we all do things incorrectly at least once in a while.

Imperfect? According to whom. I don't think I'm advocating imperfect technique here, just a different approach to achieving the same thing.

In this instance, for again that's all I'm passing comment on here, I don't think Magnatom handles the filtering well. Primary through the junction, yes but achieved a different way.

In one way you're right. I wouldn't advise a beginner or a slower cyclist to do this but Magnatom is neither and what we are also addressing is the reaction his cycling caused (we assume).

Quoting Cyclecraft and National Training at me as a Diktat is a bit pointless unless it tells me specifically how to deal with this situation. If it tells me to assert my road position, take certain junctions in Primary etc I couldn't disagree, how I achieve that is up to me, my confidence, the traffic, how I feel, whether it's sunny, raining, what that pedestrian is doing, what's in front, what's behind, is that driver yawning, too many variables to just say do this: Experiance counts but if you want to brush it away and just follow rules which are not law or widely known, that's up to you. To me 'that's' imperfect cycling technique.

 

[BentMikey]

You suggested secondary at and through this junction - whilst it's possible, it's definitely not good practice.

 

[Cab]

If I'd been Magnatom, the only thing I might have done differently is give a couple of fear wobbles to dissuade this guy from overtaking. If I read magnatom correctly, his danger radar was alerted beforehand, because of the looking back.

Agreed. But I think it is worth stressing that while throwing a wobble in traffic sounds simple enough, its really quite an advanced technique and requires a heck of a lot of confidence.

 

[Cab]

Quoting Cyclecraft and National Training at me as a Diktat is a bit pointless unless it tells me specifically how to deal with this situation. If it tells me to assert my road position, take certain junctions in Primary etc I couldn't disagree, how I achieve that is up to me, my confidence, the traffic, how I feel, whether it's sunny, raining, what that pedestrian is doing, what's in front, what's behind, is that driver yawning, too many variables to just say do this: Experiance counts but if you want to brush it away and just follow rules which are not law or widely known, that's up to you. To me 'that's' imperfect cycling technique.

You're not really assimilating the points put to you in making that comment.

Cycling isn't that dangerous. You can ride in a way that is less safe than really you should for years, a lifetime even, and not get splatted.

The advice given here, advice from cyclecraft for example, reduces your risk. Your perception may be that you're safe not following that advice, but thats the problem with an individuals view when compared to a bigger picture.

Of course experience comes into it, but whether or not you're experienced, you're safer in the correct road position.

 

[Trillian]

I forgot to ask: Can anyone spot what is wrong with the Mercedes in front of me?

brake lights still on until after the junction

 

[magnatom]

Agreed. But I think it is worth stressing that while throwing a wobble in traffic sounds simple enough, its really quite an advanced technique and requires a heck of a lot of confidence.

Are you suggesting I'm not advanced...

I honestly did not expect this chap to pull past me. This is not one of my 'incident hotspots'. Because I pull away here pretty quickly I tend to find I leave the trailing car behind as they expect me to pull off at 5mph! So this one caught me unawares. However, I feel that my road position was correct here as I did have a significant escape route.

 

[magnatom]

brake lights still on until after the junction

Nah, your way behind (already been answered). In fact the brake lights stay on permanently. Strange fault in what was a fairly expensive and fairly new car.

 

[biking_fox]

I still don't agree with cutting in the middle of the queue though, either be at the front or stay at the back.

"It's almost always better to wait a car or two back in the queue, because that takes the rush and frustration out of needing to pass the cyclist for most drivers."

This just isn't true. if you are 1 or two cars back then the third driver sees two cars rush off ahead of 'him' while he is held up by a cyclist in primary. The fact that he's only held up a little is irrelvant to the driver, they can see clear road ahead. If the cyclist was in the front of the queue all the drivers would be in the same position.

Primary vs secondary here. From my experiance drivers overtake as wide as they feel they can*. If you are in secondary there is more room for a driver to pass you. Obviously primary was not wide enough to block overtaking - hence it was the wrong place to be. I fully support being in primary where there is not room to overtake. If there is room, then don't be in primary, unless the road surface requires it.


*unless they are being malicious, but this doesn't appear to be the case here.

 

[Cab]

Are you suggesting I'm not advanced...

Wouldn't dream of it

Its more that it does take a fair bit of bottle to do such a thing, and whoever you are, whenever you're on the road, its not the easist manoevre, and you can't do it all of the time.

I honestly did not expect this chap to pull past me. This is not one of my 'incident hotspots'. Because I pull away here pretty quickly I tend to find I leave the trailing car behind as they expect me to pull off at 5mph! So this one caught me unawares. However, I feel that my road position was correct here as I did have a significant escape route.

The thing is, because you chose to filter you couldn't have taken any other road position. You had to claim a place in the traffic, and the subsequent overtake had nothing whatsoever to do with you having done that. Really, if you'd been third vehicle to arrive at the junction, claimed primary while waiting, that gazebo would still have done that had he been the one behind you. The whole filtering thing here is a red herring.

The only thing I would say about your riding here is that sometimes primary position isn't in the middle of the lane, it may be right of centre. In similar traffic I ride right of centre.

 

[Origamist]

Cycling isn't that dangerous. You can ride in a way that is less safe than really you should for years, a lifetime even, and not get splatted.

The advice given here, advice from cyclecraft for example, reduces your risk. Your perception may be that you're safe not following that advice, but thats the problem with an individuals view when compared to a bigger picture.

Can you point me to any data/papers that will corroborate the statement in bold?

 

[BentMikey]

"It's almost always better to wait a car or two back in the queue, because that takes the rush and frustration out of needing to pass the cyclist for most drivers."

This just isn't true.

That's simply wrong. Being at the front brings a noticeable increase in aggressive overtaking, because the driver behind sees an enticing empty road ahead of you, and feels pressure from the drivers behind to overtake you. Being one or two vehicles back makes you part of the queue, the driver behind has no empty road ahead, and doesn't feel the need to overtake nearly as much. Of course I'm assuming traffic is moving as in magnatom's video, I'd have a completely different approach with gridlock.

If you spend any amount of time trying both approaches, the difference is very obvious.

 

[BentMikey]

Agreed. But I think it is worth stressing that while throwing a wobble in traffic sounds simple enough, its really quite an advanced technique and requires a heck of a lot of confidence.

Yes, absolutely right, I should have added that.

 

[Cab]

Can you point me to any data/papers that will corroborate the statement in bold?

Start with John Forresters analysis of the stats on how many cyclists are caught out by motorists turning through them as opposed to being hit from behind/during overtaking, go back to his work "Bicycle Transportation: A Handbook for Cycling Transportation". I belive you can even get a PDF of one of the old editions for free. Chapter 2 of that edition, if memory serves, is a good starting point.