Was this cyclist bad?

[gbb]

Depending on the circumstances of the day, ive been known in the past to advance beyond the reds like the guy in the video (not that far forward BTW)
Why....
I believe the most dangerous time in a situation like that is wobbling as you pull away. If you do get a wobble, youve also got all and sundry pulling away at the same time...it can be bl00dy dangerous and scary to a less experienced cyclist.
I worked on the principle i'd get some speed up BEFORE the advancing hordes of cars got in my way...i felt safer doing that.

Its easy to forget...not all cyclists are as proficient, experienced or confident as some of us are.


The boots on the other foot now...like you Magnatom, i'd assume your position and i have the strength and confidence to deal with the traffic.

Undertaking the lorry ??? I'd probably do that myself.
The lights ahead are red...he shouldnt be going anywhere. Hes in the 'straight ahead' lane and IF hes not signalling to turn left, i'd assume hes waiting like everyone else....and 99.9% of the time. i'd be right.

The other 0.1 % of the time...i'd be using eyes, experience and care while undertaking him...not just blindly ploughing ahead with gay abandon.
We dont know he (the cyclist in your footage) may be using the same care and caution.

Wrong behaviour...of course it is. But whos perfect in EVERY aspect of life ?

I work on the principle that i dont (or try not to) p1ss people off, dont behave overtly dangerously and respect other road users.

 

[BentMikey]

I believe the most dangerous time in a situation like that is wobbling as you pull away. If you do get a wobble, youve also got all and sundry pulling away at the same time...it can be bl00dy dangerous and scary to a less experienced cyclist.
I worked on the principle i'd get some speed up BEFORE the advancing hordes of cars got in my way...i felt safer doing that.

Wobbling shouldn't be a problem, just own the lane across junctions. No cyclist should be riding tight to the left like that.

Undertaking the lorry ??? ... The other 0.1 % of the time...

That's the 0.1% of the time that causes the most cyclist deaths?

 

[Crackle]

The point is very simple. The cyclist put himself in potentially far more danger than Mag did (who was in a safe position in the traffic), and what did he gain from it? Nothing.

Did he? What if he is not confident enought to take the same position, doesn't have the speed, doesn't have the bike control. Where's his best position then; in a car? Sorry I don't think the point is very simple.

I don't normally come in on these threads because I don't commute anymore but really: Did he do anything wrong, or let me phrase it another way, did he do something which was wrong for him not for you?

BentMikey: I don't think there's anything wrong with my perceptions, I see it as 'I' saw it, ergo our perceptions are different.

 

[gbb]

Wobbling shouldn't be a problem, just own the lane across junctions. No cyclist should be riding tight to the left like that.




That's the 0.1% of the time that causes the most cyclist deaths?

Thats the point...wobbling shouldnt be a problem for an experienced and confident cyclist...how do we know if he meets either of those criteria ?
Is this his way of dealing with what he sees as a potentialy dangerous situation ?

0.1% of the time ?....take any situation on a bike...anywhere...and something can go wrong...by your hands or someone elses.

Dont get me wrong, you are quite right to encourage 'correct' behaviour on the bike...i'd hope the guy in question will learn.
Undertaking the lorry ? Suppose it were a car ? Suppose it made that turn..and still didnt see you. You would potentially still be on the recieving end of hospital food.
Are you never going to undertake anything ?
Proceed with care and caution...or youre never going to get anywhere.

But thats my opinion....yours is correct..mine is realistic, based on experience and confidence.

 

[BentMikey]

Crackle, it seems that in this case the cyclist did have enough speed and control to ride properly, going by the riding you see in Magnatom's video. The cyclist just chose to ride with poor strategy.

 

[BentMikey]

gbb, your point of doing that with a car and likely also leading to hospital is wrong as that would be significantly less risky than with a lorry, though you are right in that undertaking is usually the less safe option. Lorrys are what kill the most cyclists of all.

Are you saying my and magnatom's views are correct, but unrealistic and not based on experience? Because that would also be incorrect. It's the work of really experienced and expert cyclists that lead to proper practice.

 

[Crackle]

It seems that in this case the cyclist did have enough speed and control to ride properly, going by the riding you see in Magnatom's video. The cyclist just chose to ride with poor strategy.

OK. I may be accused of being pedantic here.

The original question was 'was this cyclist bad' - my answer; No.

Change the question. Could he have done it better? Yes.

Did he do anything dangerous - We can't tell without assuming he hadn't considered what the lorry might do. We all agree he went way too far past the stop sign but perhaps that's his way of dealing with that junction. He could have done a lot worse. I wouldn't on those grounds say his positioning was bad, I've chosen similiar options myself in the past, I don't ride to a prescription.

 

[Crackle]

Being unconfident is a ridiculous excuse

OK, badly phrased. Let me say that he chose that method to cross the junction 'cause it works for him.

The cyclist could have stayed behind the truck, for a start.

Maybe; I can't answer that without knowing the junction and knowing how long the lights had been on red as I approached. If he had stayed at the stop line, I would agree he should not have gone past the truck. He didn't stay at the stop but went some way past and therefore, in my view, mitigated any danger from the truck passing him again at a wide junction

Did he do something wrong, or did he take a more dangerous option than he needed to?
Yes on both counts.

I disagree on both points, as per my previous post to Bentmikey.

 

[gbb]

gbb, your point of doing that with a car and likely also leading to hospital is wrong as that would be significantly less risky than with a lorry, though you are right in that undertaking is usually the less safe option. Lorrys are what kill the most cyclists of all.

Are you saying my and magnatom's views are correct, but unrealistic and not based on experience? Because that would also be incorrect. It's the work of really experienced and expert cyclists that lead to proper practice.[/QUOTE]


Yes
No
Absolutely

But the trouble is, 70% of cyclists are not aware there is a better way, maybe dont care if there is, or dont have the capacity to learn.

Sadly, we are not all equal, thats where being a realist comes into play. I accept some people are deficient in the way they cycle, drive cars, go about their daily work...whatever. The world will never be a perfect place.

We are all making assumptions about why he behaved the way he did. Not one of us may be right.

I'd apply the same principles to him as i do myself.
Did he endanger anyone ?
Was he reckless ?
Did he p1ss anyone off ?

No on all three accounts (although i concede he was distracting to the traffic crossing the lights)

Posts like these should make good reading for newbies or those wishing to learn a better way...your sentiments are absolutey right.

But i'm still a realist, and sadly, a huge percentage of cyclists havnt even thought (and never will)..there may be a better way. They will merrily continue their way...nothings going to change them.

 

[Crackle]

Ok. So it worked this time. Safe cycling is about risk assessment. Obviously a cyclist cannot predict the time he's going to get hit by a lorry. But he can learn about the signs, and the possible actions of other road users. We can see from the video that the lorry couuld move left at any time, as it's precisely what he did. If there's any chance of him doing that at all, then the cyclist shouldn't ride up the inside of him.

I take this point but equally the cyclist could have been filtering left in the outside filter lane and the lorry still have moved over into him and I also still say you can't tell from that whether the cyclist had eyeballed the driver in the mirror or seen another indication of what he might do.

Now if we go on to examine what he did next at the junction and with his riding position, then we may 'assume' that his skills may not have been good enough to anticipate the lorry manouevre and he was just lucky. That would be a guess though.

You're thinking too far ahead. Because you know that he got past the truck without it turning. you need to go back a step.

I'm thinking that if I'd chosen to go up the inside of the lorry and ahead at the junction I wouldn't have done it without knowing I had time to get past, assuming I judged it safe.

So you really don't think that he had a safer option?

you know I reallly don't know the answer to that. I was addressing the original question about him being a bad cyclist, which I answered above. As for safer, they're the kind of decisions you make of the moment. Make the right decision in the wrong way and it comes out wrong. Make the wrong decision with confidence and it turns out OK. He made it through the jct as he probably does every week so what is safe?

 

[Crackle]

I retract my rather grouchy statement about Magnatom being sanctamonious and superior and apologise for it, written when I was feeling grumpy.

 

[Cab]

I take this point but equally the cyclist could have been filtering left in the outside filter lane and the lorry still have moved over into him and I also still say you can't tell from that whether the cyclist had eyeballed the driver in the mirror or seen another indication of what he might do.

I agree with you on this point; it is possible that the driver waved him through. The lorry driver may have indicated, looked, saw the cyclist, and waved the cyclist to come past before turning. I've certainly come across that in the past. So its harsh to criticise the cyclist for that alone. That said, I'd wager a pound to a penny thats not what happened, because such occurrences are rare.

Now if we go on to examine what he did next at the junction and with his riding position, then we may 'assume' that his skills may not have been good enough to anticipate the lorry manouevre and he was just lucky. That would be a guess though.

There were safe, legal road positions. To take an illegal position in such circumstances... Why? I mean, does it really gain you anything? Its not about safety, its about believing that your own progress along the road is more important than the law. Its odious behaviour that gets all cyclists a bad reputation.

I'm thinking that if I'd chosen to go up the inside of the lorry and ahead at the junction I wouldn't have done it without knowing I had time to get past, assuming I judged it safe.

Reasonable, if you're intent on claiming an illegal road space well in front of the white line.

Thing is, I don't believe thats what he was thinking. A safety conscious rider (by which I mean actually clued up about safe riding) doesn't then progress along the road within three inches of the outside of the double yellow lines. Looking at his road position, at his behaviour at the lights, I just don't believe he thought it through that well. Okay, I'm probably being horribly judgementa, but do you think it likely that he's realy had that much foresight?

you know I reallly don't know the answer to that. I was addressing the original question about him being a bad cyclist, which I answered above. As for safer, they're the kind of decisions you make of the moment. Make the right decision in the wrong way and it comes out wrong. Make the wrong decision with confidence and it turns out OK. He made it through the jct as he probably does every week so what is safe?

I'd say that life is too short to make all of the mistakes yourself. Don't just learn from your own mistakes, learn from other peoples too. Those lessons hurt less.

And for road safety that means that you can't just say 'I do it this way every time', because odds are you can do it wrong every time and still only have very few accidents. Regardless of that, you're still less safe than you would be if you did whatever it is right every time.

In my view, that was poor cycling on that guys part. Whether or not the lorry driver let him past (seems unlikely, but you're right, its possible), the rest of his behaviour netted him no gains and clearly didn't improve his safety either; any advantage he might imagine he has from being so well forward he has more than forfeited with terrible road positioning after the lights changed.

 

[Cab]

written when I was feeling grumpy.

Now you're feeling Happy?

Won't the other dwarves start getting jealous?

 

[Crackle]

Now you're feeling Happy?

Won't the other dwarves start getting jealous?

I treat them all equally

Thing is, I don't believe thats what he was thinking. A safety conscious rider (by which I mean actually clued up about safe riding) doesn't then progress along the road within three inches of the outside of the double yellow lines. Looking at his road position, at his behaviour at the lights, I just don't believe he thought it through that well. Okay, I'm probably being horribly judgementa, but do you think it likely that he's realy had that much foresight?

No you're right I don't think he did but I'd pull short of calling it 'bad' cycling. If the lorry had squished him, it would have been the lorries fault but all of us know that going up the inside of a lorry is potentially dangerous. Equally cycling that close to the kerb leaves him few options should somehting make him swerve or similiar.

To take an illegal position in such circumstances... Why? I mean, does it really gain you anything? Its not about safety, its about believing that your own progress along the road is more important than the law.

Moving forward of the white stop line is forgivable in my view, if it's done in the right circumstances. When I last commuted on a bike there were few advance stop zones for bikes and i would often filter ahead and then turn and make eye contact with the driver behind me but I did admit earlier that I do not and have not commuted in a city in some time and am aware that things change.

 

[Amanda P]

Mag (if you're still reading after all that) - is that you shaking your head as the other cyclist trickles through the red light in the first 20 seconds or so?