Watching an experienced cyclist on our roads

[Blue Hills]

@johnnyb47 The type of cycling style you describe seems to be how the National Cycling Standards recommend you ride. This book was recommended to me, and I would say it is a very worthwhile read:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyclecraft...TF8&qid=1525762592&sr=1-1&keywords=cyclecraft

You can get it cheaper second hand from eBay or Awesome Books if you don't want to fork out that much.

It is true as others say, that some impatient drivers will try to intimidate you into moving over, but developing the confidence to stand your ground is important as the alternative is getting trapped on the left hand side of the road, and possibly having to wait to get back into the flow of traffic, and possibly also compromising your own safety.

And yes, that thing some impatient drivers do when they try to zoom past when 25 metres from lights or a junction just to be able to wait one place ahead of you, and often end up sticking out to the right of the line of traffic, which must help them get to their destination about 5 seconds sooner (if that) than if they followed you through the junction.....grrrrr!!!!

+ 1 to cyclecraft.

My edition was I think published by Her Majestys Safety Office (does that still exist?) , but has the guts to forcefully make the point that many cycle lanes are downright dangerous, encourage bad city cycling and should be ignored.

 

[Drago]

Cyclecraft not without its faults, although generally it is quite excellent. It's advice for country road riding is deeply flawed on some areas.

The best one is The Guide to Public Safety Cycling from IPMBA. Naturally, it's aimed at cycling coppers, Holby and Trumpton, but it's nevertheless an excellent tome. Brilliant advice on road riding, particularly urban riding. Very excellent and relevant advice about cycle specific first aid and cycling defensive safety tactics if attacked. The chapter on firewrms tactics is interesting, if not especially relevant (thpugh you never know in london these days...) The only downside is that as a US tome the road traffic law differs from here, but hopefully any reader with brains can easily do the translation in their heads.

 

[Blue Hills]

Cyclecraft not without its faults, although generally it is quite excellent. It's advice for country road riding is deeply flawed on some areas.

Can you elaborate Drago?

 

[Drago]

I've not got the latest copy (mines a 2012) so it may have finally been updated but...for example, on narrow country lanes, single track roads, it advises cyclists to stay well to the side to allow faster traffic to squeeze past. It doesn't say squeeze, but that's they'd have to do. Take the lane to prevent Muppets doing just that, and periodically pull across or even off the carriageway to let them pass. Don't ride in the gutter and invite dangerous close passes like Cyclecraft advises.

 

[Alan O]

I've not got the latest copy (mines a 2012) so it may have finally been updated but...for example, on narrow country lanes, single track roads, it advises cyclists to stay well to the side to allow faster traffic to squeeze past. It doesn't say squeeze, but that's they'd have to do. Take the lane to prevent Muppets doing just that, and periodically pull across or even off the carriageway to let them pass. Don't ride in the gutter and invite dangerous close passes like Cyclecraft advises.

Ach, yes. When I lived in Dorset and used to cycle a lot on narrow country lanes, I read similar moronic advice somewhere (I can't remember where). Had I followed the advice, I reckon I'd have been (at best) forced into ditches about once a week. The locally accepted strategy for cyclists was to take primary position (which I think is possibly more important on narrow lanes than anywhere else), and indeed pull over when there's a suitable place to let people pass - I almost always used to get a friendly wave whenever I did that. I remember one time being followed by a big artic which had pulled out from a dairy farm, and it filled the lane - when I stopped and moved a few few feet away on the verge, I got a big thumbs-up from a driver who I presume had been dreading having to follow me the mile or so to the first major road junction.

 

[Blue Hills]

I've not got the latest copy (mines a 2012) so it may have finally been updated but...for example, on narrow country lanes, single track roads, it advises cyclists to stay well to the side to allow faster traffic to squeeze past. It doesn't say squeeze, but that's they'd have to do. Take the lane to prevent Muppets doing just that, and periodically pull across or even off the carriageway to let them pass. Don't ride in the gutter and invite dangerous close passes like Cyclecraft advises.

Agree with you. Somewhat surprised it says that. I always cycle well out, helps slow down approaching cars, can always pull in as they get closer/I've disciplined them.

 

[Blue Hills]

I remember one time being followed by a big artic which had pulled out from a dairy farm, and it filled the lane - when I stopped and moved a few few feet away on the verge, I got a big thumbs-up from a driver who I presume had been dreading having to follow me the mile or so to the first major road junction.

Yep, nice when that happens - and a nice little shot of endorphins or whatever pumped into the bloodstream of both parties enjoying the day/human interaction. As opposed to a burst of stress hormone/poison.

 

[classic33]

Ach, yes. When I lived in Dorset and used to cycle a lot on narrow country lanes, I read similar moronic advice somewhere (I can't remember where). Had I followed the advice, I reckon I'd have been (at best) forced into ditches about once a week. The locally accepted strategy for cyclists was to take primary position (which I think is possibly more important on narrow lanes than anywhere else), and indeed pull over when there's a suitable place to let people pass - I almost always used to get a friendly wave whenever I did that. I remember one time being followed by a big artic which had pulled out from a dairy farm, and it filled the lane - when I stopped and moved a few few feet away on the verge, I got a big thumbs-up from a driver who I presume had been dreading having to follow me the mile or so to the first major road junction.

There's the advantage to yourself doing this, that you are no longer the hold-up on the road & the risk of meeting traffic coming the other way is reduced.

 

[mjr]

+ 1 to cyclecraft.

My edition was I think published by Her Majestys Safety Office (does that still exist?) , but has the guts to forcefully make the point that many cycle lanes are downright dangerous, encourage bad city cycling and should be ignored.

Its author may have refused to work without retaining enough editorial control to keep such invective in there. It contains useful tactics for surviving awful road designs and is worth reading for them, but I warn people that some of its cycling politics points are junk bordering on ableism.

Edited to add maybe the most notorious example: "...a sprint speed of 32 km/h (20 mph) will enable you to tackle most traffic situations with ease. […]simply force yourself to pedal faster […] your leg muscles will become accustomed to the higher rate and your cadence and strength will increase." Because that's what makes difficult situations better: more speed. And if you can't get fast, get off the bike, ya gimps and wobblies.

 

[si_c]

Edited to add maybe the most notorious example: "...a sprint speed of 32 km/h (20 mph) will enable you to tackle most traffic situations with ease. […]simply force yourself to pedal faster […] your leg muscles will become accustomed to the higher rate and your cadence and strength will increase." Because that's what makes difficult situations better: more speed. And if you can't get fast, get off the bike, ya gimps and wobblies.

I agree that sentence is less than helpful in consideration of a properly integrated and safe cycling environment, one should be able to just pootle at sub-10mph without any adverse effect.

However in the present cycling environment, having a range of tools available to you to get out of trouble is helpful, even if they are not available to all. So I'd argue that having more speed can be helpful with regards to keeping safe in certain circumstances.

 

[Drago]

Yes, more speed! Then when their dodgy guidance gets you in trouble you have extra kinetic energy to add to your woes. Certainly reducing the differential velocity between yourself and the other traffic can be a good thing in many situations, but when you're in the gutter on a single track country road and a van squeezes by you and catches your elbow you may find that it's not such a desirable commodity after all.

CC does have some good stuff, but some of the flaws are fundamental. I would genuinely recommend the IPMBA book, so good that even MIAS instructors like me worship it, though it is expensive.

 

[GuyBoden]

I ride mainly on narrow Cheshire country lanes and try to be considerate and not hold up traffic, if a vehicle is heading towards me or is behind, I pull safely into the side of the road and let them pass.

The Highway Code asks slow moving vehicles to pull in when safe to allow traffic to pass. Bicycles are slow moving vehicles.

Highway Code Rule 169: “Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle.“Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.”

 

[mjr]

I agree that sentence is less than helpful in consideration of a properly integrated and safe cycling environment, one should be able to just pootle at sub-10mph without any adverse effect.

However in the present cycling environment, having a range of tools available to you to get out of trouble is helpful, even if they are not available to all. So I'd argue that having more speed can be helpful with regards to keeping safe in certain circumstances.

20mph is simply not an option for everyone, so what do you say those people should do? The bits of cyclecraft that rely on things like a fast sprint are junk that should be called out as such - the good bits of cyclecraft are helpful at any speed.

And another of the dodgy political messages in the book is the vehicular cycling claim that there's neither money nor space for good cycleways, when I hope most cycling groups have now woken up that there is both money and space for transport (as we can see from the amazing millions and then more in budget overruns spent cutting motorways-on-the-cheap through green fields) but there's simply a lack of political will in many places to give either to cycling - which is also what prevents vehicular safety measures like rat-run bollarding and 20mph motor traffic limits.

 

[mjr]

I ride mainly on narrow Cheshire country lanes and try to be considerate and not hold up traffic, if a vehicle is heading towards me or is behind, I pull safely into the side of the road and let them pass.

The Highway Code asks slow moving vehicles to pull in when safe to allow traffic to pass. Bicycles are slow moving vehicles.

Highway Code Rule 169: “Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle.“Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.”

I hope you mean you pull into a proper passing place. The Highway Code correctly says "where it is safe" and squeezing into the gutter on single-track (actual or effective) to let people pass is not safe - all it takes is a passing accelerating motorist to wobble their steering wheel and you could be seriously injured or worse.

 

[Profpointy]

20mph is simply not an option for everyone, so what do you say those people should do? The bits of cyclecraft that rely on things like a fast sprint are junk that should be called out as such - the good bits of cyclecraft are helpful at any speed.

And another of the dodgy political messages in the book is the vehicular cycling claim that there's neither money nor space for good cycleways, when I hope most cycling groups have now woken up that there is both money and space for transport (as we can see from the amazing millions and then more in budget overruns spent cutting motorways-on-the-cheap through green fields) but there's simply a lack of political will in many places to give either to cycling - which is also what prevents vehicular safety measures like rat-run bollarding and 20mph motor traffic limits.

I don't agree with your last point on cycle infrastructure. Pretty much every bit of cycle infrastructure I've seen makes my life as a cyclist less convenient, and more dangerous; doubly so if I avoid said infrastrcture, which encourages car drivers to try and punish me for such transgression by dangerous driving to teach me a lesson.
The more money is spent on it, the worse things will be.

Apparently there is some kind of theoretical cycle lane that is actually good - I've yet to see one, other than dedicated cut throughs which are in effect seperate roads via different routes entirely.