Road Positioning

[Cab]

STILL haven't answered, Jimbo.

 

[jimboalee]

You are being the Troll now.

Cycle England draw a cyclist with his tyres 500mm from the curb. If this is a forbidden zone, why didn't Cycle England draw the cyclist 750mm from the curb, or any distance you suggest Cab.

By drawing the cyclist where they did, Cycle England MUST acknowledge that is a position many cyclists will ride when there is traffic on the road with them.

The book says 'don't go there', and Cycle England say "We know cyclist ride there so that's where we'll put them on the diagram".

Cycle England however, are not advising cyclist to ride in the position they draw, but at least they have the tolerance to accept some cyclists DO ride there, unlike some members of this chatboard who show no degree of tolerance whatsoever.

If you are waiting for me to cite some document, you'll have a long wait.
The whole of the past week has been a big argument because I stated I rode in the Diagram 2 cyclist position to let cars pass because I don't like being shouted at or bumped off.

It is not WRONG, it's DIFFERENT, as Cycle England can quite happily accept.
Who am I more likely to take notice of? An organisation like Cycle England or a bunch of strange names on an internet chatroom?

If its worth stating again. I ride 'normally' in the nearside tyre tracks and shift to 600~800mm when traffic approaches from the rear.
'Primary' and 'secondary' don't appear in my cycling dictionary. If anyone has still got a problem with this, you can keep it to yourself because you will simply be wasting your time.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

It is not WRONG, it's DIFFERENT, as Cycle England can quite happily accept.

That's fine, and it also applies to those who hold a different opinion from yours. There's no need to get defensive about it and turn every thread into a "Jimbo vs The World" road positioning rant.

 

[jimboalee]

That's fine, and it also applies to those who hold a different opinion from yours. There's no need to get defensive about it and turn every thread into a "Jimbo vs The World" road positioning rant.

Granted.

But be advised... There are some nutters out there in them cars.

 

[Cab]

You are being the Troll now.

No, I'm not, and you're continuing to be evasive. Do you have any inatance of any cycling organisation or government body associated with cycling, or indeed any extant cycling manual or instruction course, advising that the position you're advocating as okay (60cm from the kerb) is a good standard position? Yes or no will do.

You're saying that people do it, thats fine. I'm saying that to do so is contrary to the good advice freely available to all cyclists; you're saying that doesn't make them wrong, I'm saying that it means that they're less safe than they would be in a better road position (you may interpret that as 'wrong' if you like).

I put it to you again that you won't find said advice given by any such body.

 

[jimboalee]

No, I'm not, and you're continuing to be evasive. Do you have any inatance of any cycling organisation or government body associated with cycling, or indeed any extant cycling manual or instruction course, advising that the position you're advocating as okay (60cm from the kerb) is a good standard position? Yes or no will do.

You're saying that people do it, thats fine. I'm saying that to do so is contrary to the good advice freely available to all cyclists; you're saying that doesn't make them wrong, I'm saying that it means that they're less safe than they would be in a better road position (you may interpret that as 'wrong' if you like).

I put it to you again that you won't find said advice given by any such body.

Yes.