# Cyclecraft



## nasserblue (22 Oct 2010)

What is it? Where is it?


----------



## ianrauk (22 Oct 2010)

Here you go - *Cyclecraft*


----------



## summerdays (22 Oct 2010)

Very useful book especially for beginners / returning to cycling.


----------



## jimboalee (22 Oct 2010)

The Author attempts to re-write ( using different terminology ) the Auto Cycle Union's handouts for their Moped ( 50cc 30 mph restricted motorised bicycle ) instructionals, except the vehicle hasn't got an engine and generally travels at half the speed.

A 30 mph restricted moped in a 50 mph limit is no different from an 18 mph pedal cycle in a 30 mph limit.


----------



## Origamist (22 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The Author attempts to re-write ( using different terminology ) the Auto Cycle Union's handouts for their Moped ( 50cc 30 mph restricted motorised bicycle ) instructionals, except the vehicle hasn't got an engine and generally travels at half the speed.
> 
> A 30 mph restricted moped in a 50 mph limit is no different from an 18 mph pedal cycle in a 30 mph limit.



You do seem to have an unhealthy obsession with this book and author, Jim. I'd recommend strategically placing some Reader's Digests and short stories by Somerset Maugham in every room of your house and then pick them up and read them at regular intervals throughout the day - it will take your mind off that crazeeeee guy Franklin and his absurd views on cycling.


----------



## Davidc (22 Oct 2010)

Uncle Mort said:


> It's not the kind of thing you'd ever return again to for reference and I personally didn't learn anything new from it. I'd just borrow it from the library.



I do (return again for reference) and I did (learn plenty new from it) and I'm hardly a novice cyclist!

Useful book for any cyclist at any level. IMO.


----------



## summerdays (22 Oct 2010)

Uncle Mort said:


> It's not the kind of thing you'd ever return again to for reference and I personally didn't learn anything new from it. I'd just borrow it from the library.



I have returned to it on occasions and reread sections. When I was advised to get it (on the old C+ site), I didn't understand for example how to stop a car from overtaking me at a junction and was tending to cycle in / near the gutter.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Oct 2010)

bought it.
Read it.
Couple of useful things I learnt.
Gave it away


----------



## StuartG (22 Oct 2010)

I found it useful as an input. IMHO the problem is the people who treat it as gospel.

The authors main thrust is to get people out of the gutter. That's where he and everyone of my generation began riding. It was natural and on well maintained roads with less traffic and even less road engineered traffic management - it was not a real problem.

You just can't cycle safely that way these days. Hence the 'primary' position. While you can't understate the potential value of using primary - you can easily underestimate how counter intuitive it appears to the new or frightened cyclist. That's why I believe Franklin pushes it so hard. Like others I believe being justifiable able to take primary doesn't imply you should every time. It has to be a balance with other road users and tempered also with experience. But such nuances are difficult to convey in an instruction manual and Franklin presumably thinks, and I agree, it would obscure the main thrust.

I read it. I have learnt from it. I follow much of it. And when I don't - it helps me clarify my reasons for not doing so.


----------



## nasserblue (22 Oct 2010)

ianrauk said:


> Here you go - *Cyclecraft*



Thanks.

I feel a lunch hour visit to Weatherspoons Waterstones coming on...


----------



## Norm (22 Oct 2010)

StuartG said:


> I found it useful as an input. IMHO the problem is the people who treat it as gospel.
> <<snip>>
> I read it. I have learnt from it. I follow much of it. And when I don't - it helps me clarify my reasons for not doing so.


Excellent, sums up just how I feel too.


----------



## HJ (22 Oct 2010)

summerdays said:


> Very useful book especially for beginners / returning to cycling.



I am neither a beginner nor returning to cycling, but I found it a very useful read before my instructors course, there is something in it for everyone...


----------



## dave r (23 Oct 2010)

I read it in 2007 when laid up for three weeks following a crash. Most of it I knew, there were one or two things I didn't and a few things he was doing differently. I used it to ditch some bad habits and generally refine my technique a bit.


----------



## Chutzpah (23 Oct 2010)

I borrowed it from the library a couple of months ago - it taught me that it was my choice where I rode, and that secondary position was more to allow the flow of traffic than anything else, and that primary was an excellent way of controlling the traffic behind me from doing anything that endangered mine (and their!) safety. Was a great resource for a relative novice.

Happy that I borrowed it rather than bought it though.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

Two cyclists, as seen from the cab of a truck. Which one will get the biggest "Thanks"?


----------



## summerdays (24 Oct 2010)

Equally which one will he notice and give a few moments thought to?


----------



## Origamist (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Two cyclists, as seen from the cab of a truck. Which one will get the biggest "Thanks"?



More good art, Jim. 

The answer is the first pic.


----------



## HJ (24 Oct 2010)

Wrong question, it should be which one will live longer? The one in the first pic, that is the one which is most easily seen and avoided. Everybody has the right to use the road as a pedestrian, a cyclist or a horse rider, drivers are only there by licence. We do not need to apologise for being there, riding in the primary position is about safety, again there is no need to apologise for being there. Bullies should never be tolerated!



edit: typo


----------



## marmalade400 (24 Oct 2010)

HJ said:


> a house rider



Is this some new trend I don't know about?


----------



## snorri (24 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> Is this some new trend I don't know about?



It's a Scottish thing.


----------



## snorri (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Two cyclists, as seen from the cab of a truck. Which one will get the biggest "Thanks"?



The second.

If you magnify the image you can see the second cyclist is facing the oncoming traffic and about to hold up a Yorkie bar in an outsretched hand.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

Motorist looking right at traffic island to check its clear to go.






Looks ahead and "Wotthefu..!!"






Some cyclist in the middle of the lane.


----------



## Lurker (24 Oct 2010)

HJ said:


> <br />Wrong question, it should be which one will live longer? The one in the first pic, that is the one which is most easily seen and avoided. Everybody has the right to use the road as a pedestrian, a cyclist or a house rider, drivers are only there by licence. We do not need to apologise for being there, riding in the primary position is about safety, again there is no need to apologise for being there. Bullies should never be tolerated!<br />


<br /><br /><br />

+1


----------



## Lurker (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Motorist looking right at traffic island to check its clear to go.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Lurker (24 Oct 2010)

Good sketches. But the Highway Code is clear - the onus is on you as a driver to look where you're going.

See 

*Roundabouts (184-190)*

*185*
When reaching the roundabout you should

.....look forward before moving off to make sure traffic in front has moved off




http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070338


----------



## brokenbetty (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Motorist looking right at traffic island to check its clear to go.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm very worried this motorist hadn't noticed a cyclist in front of them any earlier.

Are you implying the cyclist swerved at the last minute? If so I don't see your point. Late, unpredictable manoeuvring is clearly dangerous but that doesn't have any bearing on whether a cyclist should move safely into primary in the approach to a pinch point or not.

If, on the other hand, the cyclist was there all along and the driver failed to see them you have just illustrated that the safest place to be when the road narrows is right in front where the driver has to look.

Jim, could you explain the run up to this scenario?


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

Lurker said:


> Good sketches. But the Highway Code is clear - the onus is on you as a driver to look where you're going.
> 
> See
> 
> ...



Here stands a man who is prepared to swap his bike for a wheelchair to prove a point of law.

As we know, motorists don't always look where they're going.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

brokenbetty said:


> I'm very worried this motorist hadn't noticed a cyclist in front of them any earlier.
> 
> Are you implying the cyclist swerved at the last minute? If so I don't see your point. Late, unpredictable manoeuvring is clearly dangerous but that doesn't have any bearing on whether a cyclist should move safely into primary in the approach to a pinch point or not.
> 
> ...



Actually,,,, I should have put a time and place on this. Summer 1994 at Salford Circus ( underneath Spaghetti Junction ). 
I wasn't the cyclist. He was some unfortunate who got taken away by the Paramedics. 

Since seeing the state of his bike, I've NEVER approched an island in the centre of the lane.


----------



## brokenbetty (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Actually,,,, I should have put a time and place on this. Summer 1994 at Salford Circus ( underneath Spaghetti Junction ).
> I wasn't the cyclist. He was some unfortunate who got taken away by the Paramedics.
> 
> Since seeing the state of his bike, I've NEVER approched an island in the centre of the lane.



Thank you for the date, but that wasn't what I asked. Did the cyclist serve late in front of the car?


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

brokenbetty said:


> Thank you for the date, but that wasn't what I asked. Did the cyclist serve late in front of the car?



I don't know. I arrived when the Parameds had him strapped to a stretcher. The copper on the scene said he was "in the middle of the lane". 
The motorist was completely to fault. 'Without due care and attention". But even so, I would prefer a dozy motorist to give me a close pass rather than a full-on rear end up my jacksee.


----------



## marmalade400 (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Since seeing the state of his bike, I've NEVER approched an island in the centre of the lane.



If you always approach a roundabout in the gutter, what happens when you want to go straight on and all the cars to your right want to turn left?


----------



## brokenbetty (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I don't know. I arrived when the Parameds had him strapped to a stretcher. The copper on the scene said he was "in the middle of the lane".
> The motorist was completely to fault. 'Without due care and attention". But even so, I would prefer a dozy motorist to give me a close pass rather than a full-on rear end up my jacksee.



So would I. But you don't know whether it would have been just a close pass. The driver was unable to notice a cyclist right in front of him so it's a big assumption that he would have just sailed safely by one cowering in the gutter.

If the driver's next manoeuvre was a left turn, a cyclist in the gutter could have been dead.


----------



## Origamist (24 Oct 2010)

brokenbetty said:


> Thank you for the date, but that wasn't what I asked. Did the cyclist serve late in front of the car?



Betty, the narrative is of little consequence in one of Jimbo's reductive and fanciful road safety anecdotes as they invariably equate the primary position with instant death or at the very least, a hideous, life-changing injury.


----------



## mgarl10024 (24 Oct 2010)

On the advice of people on this forum (when I asked a few questions about junctions), I recently took part in some cycle training provided by the council.
The emphasis was very much about 'owning your bit of road', being noticed, and _taking primary at junctions_ etc.
My colleagues at work sneered that taking primary was more likely to annoy the motorists and get you squished, but I reckon it'd be safer than both me and a car trying to squeeze through.


----------



## snailracer (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Motorist looking right at traffic island to check its clear to go.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Statistically, cyclists are more likely to get hit by a left hook, than rear-ended.


----------



## HLaB (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Motorist looking right at traffic island to check its clear to go.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




At least there the driver see the cyclist and there's a greater chance they can stop, its the poor other cyclist thats approximately 1.5m further left and the driver never saw them untill a few seconds later by then it was too late they'd alread squished them


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> If you always approach a roundabout in the gutter, what happens when you want to go straight on and all the cars to your right want to turn left?




You're the first member to mention the word "gutter". You assume because I don't take a mid-lane position, I'm in the gutter.

Have you ever heared of "Hand Signals". A cyclist can signal 'Right' on the entrance to an island and then abandon that signal when he's passed the penultimate exit.
That's a nice little 'cheat' in crowded situations.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

Knock me over. I dare you....


----------



## marmalade400 (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> You're the first member to mention the word "gutter". You assume because I don't take a mid-lane position, I'm in the gutter.



I may be the first to mention riding in the gutter, but not the first to draw it!


----------



## jimboalee (24 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> I may be the first to mention riding in the gutter, but not the first to draw it!



Ahh, that's where I was going wrong. It's 'Primary' and 'gutter'.

What happened to 'Secondary'?


----------



## ufkacbln (24 Oct 2010)

Cyclecraft is a book that like many others tries to address an issue or problem and come up with solutions.

It may not suit everyone, but it can give ideas,offer advice and help

If this helps you improve or reaffirms what you are already doing then it will have achieved something.

I have found it useful for helping to educate others.

A couple of people I know who are drivers have taken on board the primary and are now aware of the dangers of the left hook after reading this

However if you feel it is not for you then that is up to you


----------



## HJ (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Here stands a man who is prepared to swap his bike for a wheelchair to prove a point of law.
> 
> *As we know, motorists don't always look where they're going*.



Which is why, as you have illustrated the primary position is safer that the secondary position on the approach to a pinch point, put your self where you will be seen. Cyclist have been killed while gutter hugging...


----------



## marmalade400 (24 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Ahh, that's where I was going wrong. It's 'Primary' and 'gutter'.
> What happened to 'Secondary'?



Yes, what did happen to 'Secondary'? Looks like the gutter to me...


----------



## ufkacbln (24 Oct 2010)

The primary works for me on several levels.

One I wasn't aware of when I was behind a colleague at a junction....

They were impressed that by being directly behind them they had no fear of my moving inside them and had clearly signalled my intention not to do so.


----------



## jimboalee (25 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> Yes, what did happen to 'Secondary'? Looks like the gutter to me...



If you hadn't noticed, the cyclist is stopped at the curb and looking round to watch the the 40 ton truck roll past. 

In Franklin's book, does he suggest that if you have 40 tons of Artic following you, it would be sensible to pull over and let the truck pass, or move to 'Primary' and 'take the road' at a miserable 15 mph? 

We all know humans make mistakes. The truck driver, in his anguish of having a 15 mph cyclist in front of him, unintentionally treads on the accellerator instead of the brake.

Now I shall sit here and wait for someone to respond with another "What if".


----------



## summerdays (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If you hadn't noticed, the cyclist is stopped at the curb and looking round to watch the the 40 ton truck roll past.



You stop to let the lorry move past!!!! Have you thought that van drivers might like you to do that... and what about large people carriers ... then there are those large cars ... and even a few of the small cars might like this feature.... I don't think you have thought out the full potential of this scheme  

Me I prefer cycling.


----------



## fozy tornip (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Some cyclist in the middle of the lane.


Some motorist getting a blowjob from Penfold.


----------



## marmalade400 (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If you hadn't noticed, the cyclist is stopped at the curb and looking round to watch the the 40 ton truck roll past.
> 
> Now I shall sit here and wait for someone to respond with another "What if".



I apologise then, in that case I misinterpreted your drawing. I will agree with you that in some circumstances it is better to stop at the curb and let a large truck past.

Unfortunately I have one more question! If you think approaching roundabouts in primary is a bad idea because drivers won't look in front of them and drive into the back of you, then how is your method any better? If the driver is only looking right until he starts moving, to the extent he would not notice a cyclist in front of him, then surely he won't see you or your signal either?


----------



## jimboalee (25 Oct 2010)

summerdays said:


> You stop to let the lorry move past!!!! Have you thought that van drivers might like you to do that... and what about large people carriers ... then there are those large cars ... and even a few of the small cars might like this feature.... I don't think you have thought out the full potential of this scheme
> 
> Me I prefer cycling.



I've increased the gearing on my BSA because I found I was doing this too often. Top was 56", I loaded a 21 sprocket to give 58", but that wasn't enough yesterday afternoon so I loaded a 20 to give 61".
Now I can do a respectable 15.5 mph on the flat. 

I went on a little trip to Wolverhampton on Saturday and found delivery vans not in the best of moods. I was just too damned slow. So instead of holding up the traffic, I paused at the curb and let him through. Maybe that's one van driver who's opinion of cyclists has changed for the better.


----------



## John Ponting (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> ... instead of holding up the traffic, I paused at the curb and let him through. Maybe that's one van driver who's opinion of cyclists has changed for the better.



Well done. Also follows Highway Code advice to ALL road users on letting faster traffic through WHEN APPLICABLE.

I don't commute in heavy traffic so don't meet many of the problems that others do but I do make space when safe. Seldom need to stop but just move over a bit.


----------



## Origamist (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If you hadn't noticed, the cyclist is stopped at the curb and looking round to watch the the 40 ton truck roll past.
> 
> In Franklin's book, does he suggest that if you have 40 tons of Artic following you, it would be sensible to pull over and let the truck pass, or move to 'Primary' and 'take the road' at a miserable 15 mph?
> 
> ...




If you were going to stop and pull in, I'd do it much further back from the pinch point than your drawing seems to suggest. 

As for the "what ifs" - they seem to be your forte...


----------



## jimboalee (25 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> If you were going to stop and pull in, I'd do it much further back from the pinch point than your drawing seems to suggest.
> 
> *As for the "what ifs" - they seem to be your forte...
> *



Of course  . I ask "What if" at every junction and everytime I hear an loud engine type noise behind me.

On that subject, I was approaching a junction in Olton , Solihull yesterday, I gave a quick glance back to check the traffic and there was a Toyota Prius up my derriere making no noise at all....


----------



## Origamist (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Of course  . I ask "What if" at every junction and everytime I hear an loud engine type noise behind me.
> 
> On that subject, I was approaching a junction in Olton , Solihull yesterday, I gave a quick glance back to check the traffic and there was a Toyota Prius up my derriere making no noise at all....



Which should tell you to prioritise looking rather than listening on the approach to a junction...


----------



## snailracer (25 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Of course  . I ask "What if" at every junction and everytime I hear an loud engine type noise behind me.
> 
> On that subject, I was approaching a junction in Olton , Solihull yesterday, I gave a quick glance back to check the traffic and there was a Toyota Prius up my derriere making no noise at all....


I find, amazingly, that buses can be sneak up, unheard, behind me, probably because they are rear-engined, have freewheeling gearboxes and quiet tyres.

PS I use a helmet mirror.


----------



## CotterPin (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I've increased the gearing on my BSA because I found I was doing this too often. Top was 56", I loaded a 21 sprocket to give 58", but that wasn't enough yesterday afternoon so I loaded a 20 to give 61".
> Now I can do a respectable 15.5 mph on the flat.
> 
> I went on a little trip to Wolverhampton on Saturday *and found delivery vans not in the best of moods*. I was just too damned slow. So instead of holding up the traffic, I paused at the curb and let him through. Maybe that's one van driver who's opinion of cyclists has changed for the better.



I am not inclined to get into a discussion on primary vs secondary vs stopping on the side road but I think your point I have put in bold sums up a common attitude amongst many cyclists. They fail to recognise that there is a person operating the other vehicles on the road and see them as independent and rather randomly moving objects that need to be kept out of the way of rather than other human beings with whom they can negotiate space on the road.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

I have on occasion been cycling along an arterial route out of Birmingham when I come up behind a 'Flourocoat Hybridian' doing 12 – 13 mph in secondary. There is a stream of traffic passing us and he wanders across to a broader position when we approach central bollards. As per the 'Book', and all the traffic slow up with me at their side and I shrug my shoulders at the guy in the leading car.

Past the central bollards I call "Rider up!" but he just glances at me and continues on his merry slow way as if he's all the right in the world to hold up faster traffic.



As the chap who wishes to overtake, I have to judge my move which doesn't happen for quite a while. When it does, he gets a glare that would freeze hell's basement.



Where he got his cycling sense from, I don't frigging know?


----------



## MartinC (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> As the chap who wishes to overtake, I have to judge my move which doesn't happen for quite a while.



Ah, but according to your logic this chap should consult with the chap behind to see if they want to go faster and be prepared to pull over and let them rather than blocking them. Presumably the chap behind should do the same too. Ad infinitum.

You must spend an awful lot of time parked by the side of the road whether you're riding or cycling.  

What do you do when you're on the bus?


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I have on occasion been cycling along an arterial route out of Birmingham when I come up behind a 'Flourocoat Hybridian' doing 12 – 13 mph in secondary. There is a stream of traffic passing us and he wanders across to a broader position when we approach central bollards. As per the 'Book', and all the traffic slow up with me at their side and I shrug my shoulders at the guy in the leading car.



WTF. The guy didn't get killed, maimed, or even harrassed and he rode in the middle of the lane! 

He seems to have been remarkably fortunate to escape with only one of Jimbo's withering, squinty-eyed stares


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> WTF. The guy didn't get killed, maimed, or even harrassed and *he rode in the middle of the lane*!
> 
> He seems to have been remarkably fortunate to escape with only one of Jimbo's withering, squinty-eyed stares



I didn't notice you there. That's an assumption.


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I didn't notice you there. That's an assumption.



Jim, you said he was in secondary, "wandered" to a broader position as he approached "central bollards", and held-up traffic - hence why you gave him the evil-eye, you big tough guy you! It thereofre seems a reasonable asusmption that this guy was riding in the centre of the lane, or thereabouts as this manoeuvre always seems to get you agitated.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

Over the last seven days, I've ridden 200+ miles around the West Midlands conurbation on a slower-than-death 20" shopping bike. Half of those miles were following my usual cycling traffic techniques, and the other half 'Cyclecraft' recommendations.

Solihull to Walsall twice, Solihull to Wolverhampton twice. Solihull to Merry Hill Decathlon twice and Solihull to Harbourn twice.

Evening twylight, Friday afternoon rush-session, Saturday, Sunday and last night in the sunset.

And d'ya know what? Cyclecraft recommended technique didn't make a scrap of difference. In fact, it made me feel more vunerable, riding 'in the middle of the lane' at every junction and narrow section.

Thanks, but no thanks.


----------



## theclaud (26 Oct 2010)

fozy tornip said:


> Some motorist getting a blowjob from Penfold.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> Jim, you said he was in secondary, "wandered" to a broader position as he approached "central bollards", and held-up traffic - hence why you gave him the evil-eye, you big tough guy you! It thereofre seems a reasonable asusmption that this guy was riding in the centre of the lane, or thereabouts as this manoeuvre always seems to get you agitated.



Re-read my post.

I called "Rider up!".

I KNOW YOU ride your bike 'to the book'.

Sometimes thare are situations where a slow cyclist should have the dignity to let a faster cyclist through. 
I do on that 'slower-than-death' 20" shopper.

I presume you don't.


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Re-read my post.
> 
> I called "Rider up!".
> 
> ...



You sound like a pompous, Mr Toad-type cyclist. I would not expect another cyclist to get out of my way because I was faster than them - particularly if they were proceeding in a manner that they thought maximised they're safety (whether you agree with their road positioning or not). What's more, not every cyclist can hear or understand some impatient cycle-hog shouting "Rider Up" as they probably don't come from a club background.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

I don't have a flouro coat. Will bright red suffice?

BTW, when riding to my own technique I wore a black sweatshirt to render myself more invisible than usual....


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> You sound like a pompous, Mr Toad-type cyclist. *I would not expect another cyclist to get out of my way because I was faster than them* - particularly if they were proceeding in a manner that they thought maximised they're safety (whether you agree with their road positioning or not). What's more, not every cyclist can hear or understand some impatient cycle-hog shouting "Rider Up" as they probably don't come from a club background.



So presumably, you wouldn't get out of the way of a faster cyclist, you pompous RoadHog ! 

And in Origamist's book, a fast cyclist who shouts a Nationally recognised signal of warning from one cyclist to another, is an "impatient cycle-hog".

Warning to all. Don't ride up behind Origamist.


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> So presumably, you wouldn't get out of the way of a faster cyclist, you pompous RoadHog !



I'll happily defer to faster cyclists, Jim. However, I don't expect *others* to do this for me - if you ride in this more cautious manner you don't get stressed or feel the need to give other cyclists a nasty stare...


----------



## theclaud (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> So presumably, you wouldn't get out of the way of a faster cyclist, you pompous RoadHog !
> 
> And in Origamist's book, a fast cyclist who shouts a Nationally recognised signal of warning from one cyclist to another, is an "impatient cycle-hog".
> 
> Warning to all. *Don't ride up behind Origamist*.



Well, you could _try_...


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> And in Origamist's book, a fast cyclist who shouts a Nationally recognised signal of warning from one cyclist to another, is an "impatient cycle-hog".
> 
> Warning to all. Don't ride up behind Origamist.



If you want to shout club warnings at utility cyclists (for example), you won't get far, apart from most likley frightening them. 

You were impatient as you wanted to overtake at a pinch point with a cyclist in front of you in the centre of the lane - just relax, Jim.


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Seems we're diametrically opposite.
> 
> I give way to faster cyclists and ( somehow with politeness ) expect the same gesture from slower cyclists.
> 
> ...



Do keep up: 



> I'll happily defer to faster cyclists, Jim. However, I don't expect others to do this for me


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

"Past the central bollards I call "Rider up!" but he just glances at me and continues on his merry slow way as if he's all the right in the world to hold up faster traffic.



As the chap who wishes to overtake, I have to judge my move which doesn't happen for quite a while."


'Quite a while' was almost two miles, which throughout he knew of my presence.

Remembering the occasion, he seemed reluctant to look round at me. Am I THAT frightening????

Was it an 'anti-scalp' tactic which is written in coded texts within Cyclecraft and only decipherable by the inner circle?


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> "Past the central bollards I call "Rider up!" but he just glances at me and continues on his merry slow way as if he's all the right in the world to hold up faster traffic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ahhh, the usual seepage of additional information that (not so coincidentally) supports your anti best practice stance, Jim. 

If I were you I'd have embroidered the tale still further by throwing in some dialogue when you finally overtook the cyclist - maybe he shouted "I'm cycling the Cyclecraft way, Origamist told me to - xxxx you, buddy" when you finally made it past?


----------



## clarion (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Warning to all. Don't ride up behind Origamist.



I rather think that Origamist is most often the faster rider in his interactions. Hundreds of them every ride, at a guess. And very polite & careful he is too.

In your example, the rider you cite doesn't seem to be following Cyclecraft guidelines, so you've got a bit of a straw man there.

If a faster vehicle of any kind comes up behind a slower, it is up to them to respond appropriately, wait for the opportunity to overtake safely and legally. If that doesn't happen, then you should wait, not blast your horn or shout (depending on which vehicle you are in), until it _is_ safe.

There is an obligation on the slower not to swerve or speed up while being overtaken, but they should not be intimidated.


----------



## marmalade400 (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I have on occasion been cycling along an arterial route out of Birmingham when I come up behind a 'Flourocoat Hybridian' doing 12 – 13 mph in secondary. There is a stream of traffic passing us and he wanders across to a broader position when we approach central bollards. As per the 'Book', and all the traffic slow up with me at their side and I shrug my shoulders at the guy in the leading car.
> 
> Past the central bollards I call "Rider up!" but he just glances at me and continues on his merry slow way as if he's all the right in the world to hold up faster traffic.
> 
> As the chap who wishes to overtake, I have to judge my move which doesn't happen for quite a while. When it does, he gets a glare that would freeze hell's basement.



I don't understand why you had so much trouble overtaking someone doing 12mph, and why you seem to think it was their fault that you couldn't deal with it very well.

Try to spot slow moving cyclists in the distance instead of waiting until you are right behind them.
Check the flow of traffic on your right, try and spot a gap coming up and adjust your speed to time the arrival of this gap with the time you will reach the slow moving cyclist.
Signal and move out into the main flow of traffic, putting on a good burst of speed to get past the slow cyclist quickly.
You have the whole lane so you can leave the slow cyclist plenty of room in case they need to avoid potholes etc.
Move back to your usual road position once you are safely past the slow cyclist.
No-one is held up much, no-one feels threatened, no-one gets angry and there is no shouting involved.
It is so much easier that way.


----------



## summerdays (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> "Past the central bollards I call "Rider up!" but he just glances at me and continues on his merry slow way as if he's all the right in the world to hold up faster traffic.



I don't know the meaning of rider up ... though I'm presuming it means I'm coming by? 

We can't presume what riding experience another road user has or background.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> I don't understand why you had so much trouble overtaking someone doing 12mph, and why you seem to think it was their fault that you couldn't deal with it very well.
> 
> Try to spot slow moving cyclists in the distance instead of waiting until you are right behind them.
> Check the flow of traffic on your right, try and spot a gap coming up and adjust your speed to time the arrival of this gap with the time you will reach the slow moving cyclist.
> ...




Well hush my mouth. Is it that simple?


----------



## marmalade400 (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Well hush my mouth. Is it that simple?



Yes, less stressful too!


----------



## brokenbetty (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Well hush my mouth. Is it that simple?



Yes Jim, it's what most of us do as a matter of course all the time, and it certainly fits in with what Cyclecraft advises (that's "advises", not "prescribes" by the way).

Some of the advice you are giving seems to me to be downright dangerous. Earlier in the thread you recommended hanging left til the last minute before crossing the road to take a right turn. Cycling like that would be literally suicidal where I live, hand signals notwithstanding.


----------



## snorri (26 Oct 2010)

summerdays said:


> I don't know the meaning of rider up ...


Neither do I, but I seem to have managed OK, so far.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Oct 2010)

Oh I give up. The Cyclecraft police are out.

If any more Cyclecraft threads start, mark me down as a "Doesn't float my boat".


----------



## Norm (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If any more Cyclecraft threads start, mark me down as a "Doesn't float my boat".


Norm likes this


----------



## brokenbetty (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Oh I give up. The Cyclecraft police are out.
> 
> If any more Cyclecraft threads start, mark me down as a "Doesn't float my boat".



Well it's definitely an improvement on what I had you down as before, "weirdly obsessed by a book he hasn't read"


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Oh I give up. The Cyclecraft police are out.
> 
> If any more Cyclecraft threads start, mark me down as a "Doesn't float my boat".



Why you are so preoccupied with this book and the primary position is beyond me - let it go and accept that you have your own MO and be happy with that...


----------



## Norm (26 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> Why you are so preoccupied with this book and the primary position is beyond me - let it go and accept that you have your own MO and be happy with that...


 If I may offer a response to that, it's because so many advocates of Cyclecraft don't accept that it is just one MO and that there are alternatives. It is almost always put forward as something which has to be read by beginners and followed religiously.

For me, read it when you are already confident and competent on the road. I reckon that a beginner who tries to try to mix it with the cars in primary would be put off cycling for life.


----------



## magnatom (26 Oct 2010)

Humful, mummmful, whoosma, mushma.....oh, sorry about that, I really shouldn't try talking with my mouth full of popcorn.


----------



## Origamist (26 Oct 2010)

Norm said:


> If I may offer a response to that, it's because so many advocates of Cyclecraft don't accept that it is just one MO and that there are alternatives. It is almost always put forward as something which has to be read by beginners and followed religiously.
> 
> For me, read it when you are already confident and competent on the road. I reckon that a beginner who tries to try to mix it with the cars in primary would be put off cycling for life.



I agree, some best practice advocates like to quote chapter and verse and bash others around the head with their dog-eared 2nd edition Franklin like it's the way, the truth, and the life. Then again, a number of posters seem to deliberately misrepresent what is written or in Jim's case not comprehend or even read what is written. 

On the second point, much cycle training is predicated on Cyclecraft and they deal with absolute beginners. From reading testimonials by cycling newbies, many found it an empowering experience when they are taught not to be shackled to the gutter when their safety is at stake. However, if you were a novice and foolish enough to ride around in the centre of the lane without a care in the world - you would certainly learn the hard way...


----------



## HJ (27 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If you hadn't noticed, the cyclist is stopped at the curb and looking round to watch the the 40 ton truck roll past.
> 
> In Franklin's book, does he suggest that if you have 40 tons of Artic following you, it would be sensible to pull over and let the truck pass, or move to 'Primary' and 'take the road' at a miserable 15 mph?
> 
> ...



Hey, why not just get off and walk, if that works for you... 

Your attitude seems to be that cyclist don't belong on the road and should keep out of the way of people in motor vehicle who are far more important, cyclist should know their place, in the gutter...


----------



## henshaw11 (27 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Knock me over. I dare you....




Since I don't think anyone's picked up on this - that works if you're got a driver with some degree of decent road manners/consideration behind you.
I've had a few cases where I've been in secondary rather than primary, with about 20 ft or so the roundabout giveway line or rear of the vehicle in front *and* travelling at the same speed as the traffic, yet you still get the occasional prat trying to overtake or drift over into you - the only way to deal help prevent it *is* to be in primary - or possibly further over to help discourage a late overtake (last time it was on a miniroundabout approach, I was turning right and signalling well before and I still got a bunch of verbal for my trouble  )


----------



## jimboalee (27 Oct 2010)

I once rode past ( back in the late seventies ) a young lady stood in the road sobbing her eyes out because she'd trod on the throttle instead of the brake and ploughed into the back of the car waiting at the red lamp.

In that year, Cyclecraft didn't exist, it wouldn't be on the shelves for another ten years, so I couldn't make a comment.

All I could think at the time was "**** me, if I'd have been behind that car, I'd be a deadun."

NOTHING, repeat NOTHING will intice me to perch myself in the middle of the lane at a junction. FULL STOP.


----------



## Chutzpah (27 Oct 2010)

But if, in her surprise, she grasped the wheel hard and it veered left (a not entirely unrealistic situation) then you'd still be brown bread?


----------



## jimboalee (27 Oct 2010)

HJ said:


> Hey, why not just get off and walk, if that works for you...
> 
> Your attitude seems to be that cyclist don't belong on the road and should keep out of the way of people in motor vehicle who are far more important, cyclist should know their place, in the gutter...



As a matter of fact HJ, I was returning to Solihull from Birmingham along the Stratford Road ( A34 ) approaching the junction of Highgate Road and Walford Road. Traffic lights.
It is a two lane road with a bus lane. Like the ignorant gits they are, some cars had occupied the bus lane and I was quickly approaching. I looked over my shoulder and there was a van approaching ME, in the bus lane. The second lane was jammed.

In a quick moment of thinking, I stopped and pulled my bike onto the pavement and walked it up to the traffic lights whare I found a curbside space at the head of the queue.
I got eye contact with the driver of the car who was at the head with me. I allowed him across before I proceeded in full view of the second car.

The van looked reckless, overtaking on the curbside in a bus lane. I wasn't going to hang around and wait for it to stop. I was going to get out of its way pronto.

Call me a chicken, but I'm not a dead chicken.


----------



## jimboalee (27 Oct 2010)

Chutzpah said:


> But if, in her surprise, she grasped the wheel hard and it veered left (a not entirely unrealistic situation) then you'd still be brown bread?



Is a 'but if' as good as a 'what if'?


----------



## Chutzpah (27 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Is a 'but if' as good as a 'what if'?



But your anecdote is still a what if. "What if I was in there instead of that car?"


----------



## jimboalee (27 Oct 2010)

Chutzpah said:


> But your anecdote is still a what if. "What if I was in there instead of that car?"



Well if I was there instead of the car, I'd have had a pair of broken legs at least.... or worse.

All you cyclists riding into work in the morning who come to a halt in Primary behind a stationary car, keep your fingers crossed the driver of the car behind you doesn't do the same as the tearful young lady.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (27 Oct 2010)

Jimboalee - sounds to me like cycling is just a bit too scary and other people just too frustrating for you. Cyclecraft or no Cyclecraft - and I have never read the book - the behaviour you advocate is the kind of behaviour that does not result in fewer cyclists getting injured and killed, it is the kind of behaviour that, if carried out more widely, adds up to cyclists getting forced off the roads and drivers increasingly asserting their 'rights' over us and the roads in general becoming a more hostile place for cyclists. Cycling that is safe for the individual and for other cyclists and more vulnerable road users collectively, is cycling that is legal, clear and done with confidence (and good humour if necessary).


----------



## brokenbetty (27 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Well if I was there instead of the car, I'd have had a pair of broken legs at least.... or worse.
> 
> All you cyclists riding into work in the morning who come to a halt in Primary behind a stationary car, keep your fingers crossed the driver of the car behind you doesn't do the same as the tearful young lady.



You've seen it what - once in 30 years? I'll take my chances


----------



## jimboalee (27 Oct 2010)

Somewhere,,,,,


----------



## brokenbetty (27 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Somewhere,,,,,



That's pretty much the only thing we can all count on...


----------



## fozy tornip (27 Oct 2010)

brokenbetty said:


> That's pretty much the only thing we can all count on...



That somewhere there's a dildo with our name on? 
I'm strangely reassured by that.


----------



## campbellab (27 Oct 2010)

Has anyone read the IAM How to be a better cyclist? How does it compare to Cyclecraft?


----------



## brokenbetty (27 Oct 2010)

fozy tornip said:


> That somewhere there's a dildo with our name on?
> I'm strangely reassured by that.


----------



## jimboalee (28 Oct 2010)

marmalade400 said:


> I don't understand why you had so much trouble overtaking someone doing 12mph, and why you seem to think it was their fault that you couldn't deal with it very well.
> 
> Try to spot slow moving cyclists in the distance instead of waiting until you are right behind them.
> Check the flow of traffic on your right, try and spot a gap coming up and adjust your speed to time the arrival of this gap with the time you will reach the slow moving cyclist.
> ...



Top tip for overtaking slower cyclist.

Do not get right up behind, hang back about 3 metres.
Change up gear so you are doing 55 - 60 rpm.
Repeatedly look behind to spot a gap in the traffic.
When you see a gap,....
Stand up on the pedals, waggle the handlebars from side to side and put all of your weight on the downward moving pedal many times until you have passed the slower cyclist, saying a cheerie 'Mornin' as you pass.

Its so much easier that way.


----------



## gaz (28 Oct 2010)

Being a good cyclist isn't about position, it's about mentality. Jim, your mentality is strange, your scared of anything with an accelerator and will do anything to get out of their way. To most cyclists that is highly impractical!


----------



## PhunkPilot (28 Oct 2010)

Hi all, New here and returning to cycling after quite sometime!

CYCLECRAFT is not concerned with setting examples to others. Although a skilled rider will often do this as a matter of course, a cyclist is too vunerable to follow rigid rules irrespective of the risk. CYCLECRAFT shows how to respond to actual conditions,not to a rule book........

Page 2 last chapter in 'CYCLECRAFT'

Seems to make it clear early on.


----------



## jimboalee (28 Oct 2010)

What you don’t know is, when he was a schoolboy, Jimbo rode ‘Devil take the hindmost’ on the track.

When you play that game, you have to be totally aware of what’s happening around you. You have to see where gaps are opening and where gaps are closing, and not do anything stupid to dump your opponents and yourself on the woodwork, or tarmac, as the Birmingham track was.

Another skill that must be learned is to make the rider ahead unaware of your intentions, while passing him. Seems a strange thing to say because he should be aware of your position. 

To avoid elimination, you MUST be able to overtake. Not only simple overtaking, but taking the rider ahead by surprise. You don’t want him to sprint away and leave you to be eliminated.



This game, strangely, is similar to riding a bike on a busy Birmingham Inner ringroad, or Coventry Inner ringroad. Anticipating when gaps open and foreseeing when gaps close. The difference is the size of my opponents. They won’t ‘dump’ on the woodwork, they will carry on moving while I tumble. 

The other difference is when riding with other traffic on the road, you MUST make them aware of your intentions. Sign, shout, waggle ass around, anything.



When I worked in central Brum, I would take a lap or two of Queensway, just for fun to mix-it with those internal combustion engined carriages.



I have no fear of large vehicles, it is that I know what damage they can cause. When one is approaching from behind me, I don’t wish to end up mincemeat.



I rode a 100km DIY today to take my mind off this, but I was thanked by so many truckers on the road to Shipston on Stour, I couldn’t forget the silly ‘take primary through pinch points’.


----------



## Origamist (28 Oct 2010)

PhunkPilot said:


> Hi all, New here and returning to cycling after quite sometime!
> 
> CYCLECRAFT is not concerned with setting examples to others. Although a skilled rider will often do this as a matter of course, a cyclist is too vunerable to follow rigid rules irrespective of the risk. CYCLECRAFT shows how to respond to actual conditions,not to a rule book........
> 
> ...



Welcome to the forum...

I made this very point to Jim a few months ago (see: https://www.cyclechat.net/), he didn't get it then, and I'll doubt he'll get it now....


----------



## gaz (28 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I have no fear of large vehicles, it is that I know what damage they can cause. When one is approaching from behind me, I don’t wish to end up mincemeat.


Take the above and apply the below. All from your own mouth Jimbo




jimboalee said:


> The other difference is when riding with other traffic on the road, you MUST make them aware of your intentions. Sign, shout, waggle ass around, anything.


----------



## marmalade400 (28 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Top tip for overtaking slower cyclist.
> 
> Do not get right up behind, hang back about 3 metres.
> Change up gear so you are doing 55 - 60 rpm.
> ...



Sounds good to me, although there really isn't any need for the waggling about in such a high gear.
So I take it from this you'll now be overtaking sensibly and being friendly to other cyclists rather than sucking their wheels, shouting at them and giving them dirty looks?

Also, 3 metres is still a little close, you should be planning your overtake quite a bit before you get that close.


----------



## jimboalee (28 Oct 2010)

gaz said:


> Take the above and apply the below. All from your own mouth Jimbo



This afternoon. Truck aproaching behind and slowed to my speed cus the lane was narrow.

Jimbo is aware of his prescence.

Jimbo spots a private driveway 50 or so yards ahead. Signals LEFT and looks round at truck.

Jimbo pulls into driveway and lets truck pass.

Driver gives short toot of thanks.

When truck has passed, jimbo gets on with his 100km DIY.

Jimbo notices truck was from the Netherlands ( NL ).


Just one of about half a dozen occasions where I gave way to faster traffic.

Another occasion of near identical description was up the incline between Stratford u Avon and The Stag at Redhill.


I'm pretty sure someone will criticise my riding techniques. That a given.


----------



## jimboalee (28 Oct 2010)

[QUOTE 1225152"]
How heavy is a double decker?

I rode out of town up the Pershore Rd this afternoon. I met a bus at the bottom of Hurst St, and we kept up with each other all the way to Stirchley. It included multiple passes, none of which caused anyone a problem. I passed him at lights and stops, he passed me when he caught up, giving plenty of room. No riding in the gutter, no holding anyone up. Perfect harmony. And that's one of the reasons I commute.

If I had to pull over every time anything bigger than a Transit approached, the bike would be pointless.


Your truck example Jim is irrelevant, because it's about the driver's attitude and not the correct way to ride on the road.



I've got Cyclecraft by the way. It's been on a bookshelf for about 12 months. I've not had the time to open it.
[/quote]

I'm no stranger to playing 'Leap frog' with buses.  

Coventry Road, Stratford Road, Warwick Road, Yardley Wood Rd, Outer circle, Birchfield Rd, Aldridge Road, College Rd, Soho Rd, Hollyhead Road; and yes, the 'piece of p*ss' Pershore Road.
That's just Brum. Arterial routes in and out of Cov' Leamington, Redditch, Bromsgrove and Wolverhampton.

The Western Avenue from The Target to Hanger Lane, you should try that in the rush hour. North Circular Road from Ealing Common to the Ace Cafe in late afternoon after work.

How about Mission St and El Camino Real. They drive on the wrong side of the road there. And they right turn on red.

I've seen lots of cars smacking into other cars, and I've seen trucks smacking into cars. And, I've seen a bus nudging the bumper of a car.

Now don't tell me its safe. Its never safe. You just have to play it as it happens.


----------



## jimboalee (28 Oct 2010)

PhunkPilot said:


> Hi all, New here and returning to cycling after quite sometime!
> 
> *CYCLECRAFT is not concerned with setting examples to others*. Although a skilled rider will often do this as a matter of course, a cyclist is too vunerable to follow rigid rules irrespective of the risk. CYCLECRAFT shows how to respond to actual conditions,not to a rule book........
> 
> ...



That means "Follow the advice you have just read at your own risk".

Perfect legal disclaimer.

He has to say this because when some newbie cyclist is crushed by a truck while riding in the 'Primary' position through a narrow bollard constriction, his/her next of kin and the trucking company will employ lawyers to pin the blame on CYCLECRAFT because the desceased read about 'taking primary' in the book.

Its the difference between 'Death by misadventure' and Franklin going up for 'Negligent manslaughter'.

Its the same when you go Indoor Karting. They show you where the accelerator and the brake pedals are, and a few hints and tips on taking bends. Then they tell you "What you do out there is your own responsibility", and make you sign a disclaimer to absolve the karting Co. of any dreadful happening that might take place. 

So read between the lines. Franklin ( or the publishers ) puts in the disclaiming sentence because THEY KNOW, some time in the future, someone will come to grief and they will have fingers pointed at them.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (28 Oct 2010)

'jimbo', I am sure you are a very nice guy, but you seem to be under the impression that anything that comes into your head is worth posting. I am sure I am not the only one who can tell the difference between a rational, well-presented argument and verbal incontinence.


----------



## gaz (28 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> This afternoon. Truck aproaching behind and slowed to my speed cus the lane was narrow.
> 
> Jimbo is aware of his prescence.
> 
> ...



i'm not saying thats a bad thing to do, i've done it plenty of times my self, not because i fear the driver or because of some rule you talk about 'give way to faster vehicles' i think you mentioned.
But because i knew i would hold them up for a few hundred meters going up a steep hill, and i thought it would be nice to let them go.

But i don't do this to over vehicle that comes up behind me, depends 100% on the road. (all the times i have done it are on country lanes)


----------



## jimboalee (29 Oct 2010)

[QUOTE 1225151"]
Top tips for overtaking slower cyclists.


Give them plenty of room.

Cycle faster than they are.

K.I.S.*S*.
[/quote]

When someone calls me stupid, I will perpetuate.

Now go away and forget me.

Respond and I will return with more cycling anecdotes on when I saw a cyclist under a car.


----------



## jimboalee (29 Oct 2010)

Oh BTW.

CYCLECRAFT by John Franklin is "The Cyclist's Bible".


----------



## Origamist (29 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Oh BTW.
> 
> CYCLECRAFT by John Franklin is "The Cyclist's Bible".




Jim, I was saying the same thing a couple of years ago: 



> If anyone wants to tackle the Old Testament of vehicular cycling, John Forester's "Effective Cycling" (6th Ed) is accessible online:
> 
> http://tinyurl.co.uk/9zpq
> 
> Whilst it's aimed at a US audience, it was a key source for Franklin's "Cyclecraft" - the New Testament of vehicular cycling.



https://www.cyclechat.net/ 

Some people seem to obsess over the primary position - you seem to be tormented by it. Perhaps it's time to do a little less reading/posting and a little more riding - I always find that clears my head. 

I think we've established that very few people seem to think the approach you advocate is generally sensible, practical or safer. However, it could be that you are CC's very own Cassandra and your prognostications of "apocalypse primary" will one day come true.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (29 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> However, it could be that you are CC's very own Cassandra and your prognostications of "apocalypse primary" will one day come true.


----------



## jimboalee (29 Oct 2010)

[QUOTE 1225164"]
It's a commonly used term Jim, don't take it personally. Have you never been in a management meeting? 

I was merely pointing out that overtaking another cyclist is very easy. You just give them room and cycle faster. There's no need to go on about weight distribution and pulling on handlebars. You just confuse people when you start rambling unnecessarily, and it's not helpful.
[/quote]

This is not argumental.

The 'waggling of handlebars' and standing up on the pedals are visual clues to other roadusers of my intentions. Signaling with a straight arm out sideways lessens the amount of acceleration one can effect.
A short signal to following traffic is the first sign after the rearward eye-check. Then, standing up and making it look like I am sprinting for world glory is icing-on-the-cake to give the motorist an undisputed idea of what is going to happen next.

This works very effectively when I'm on a dropped handlebar sports or race bike. On a straight bar bike, the mere sight of me standing up is enough to get the message across that I'm going to accelerate. Trouble is, with such low gears on my Sturmeys, its difficult to overtake in a hurry. If I stand up and dump my weight on the pedal of my BSA, I 'spin out' after 3 seconds  

Yes, I have been in Management meetings.
"OK, so were all singing off the same hymn sheet" means 'There's no room for independant thinking here.'


----------



## JoysOfSight (29 Oct 2010)

I cycle a lot, and so I overtake people a lot (this isn't London, I am a big fish in a small pond). I just do it by not braking and turning the bar if necessary so I don't ram them, but instead go around the side.

I'm now very concerned that I have been doing it wrong all these years. I don't stand up, or thrash the bars from side-to-side, or anything fancy really. Have I been living on borrowed time?

Same applies to traffic position. If I'm going to be going at the same speed as the cars, I have to say I prefer to be in front of one, and in their mind, than beside one, and out of it. Just seems like simple commonsense to me - after all, by far the majority of crashes in town are conflicting junction movements, right? - like left and right hooks and people pulling out because they missed you bumping along in the gutter. 

Better avoided if you ask me.


----------



## jimboalee (29 Oct 2010)

OK, I admit it. I was riding along a quiet country lane north of Warwick when I saw the slow cyclist ahead.

Just as I was approaching him, a pair of bunny rabbits looked up to see what the commotion was, so I stood on the pedals and waggled my ass to impress Flopsy and Mopsy.

Caught red handed. 

Does anyone want to see the cartoon version?


----------



## Origamist (29 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> OK, I admit it. I was riding along a quiet country lane north of Warwick when I saw the slow cyclist ahead.
> 
> Just as I was approaching him, a pair of bunny rabbits looked up to see what the commotion was, so I stood on the pedals and waggled my ass to impress Flopsy and Mopsy.
> 
> ...



Yes, they're always entertaining and Fozy Turnip's interpretations are priceless...


----------



## jimboalee (29 Oct 2010)




----------



## PhunkPilot (29 Oct 2010)

I interpret that as 'trying to split hares!' 


Thanks for the welcome Origamist. Mighty impressed with your riding on Gaz's youtube vid! Fast and safe...........................


----------



## the snail (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> This is not argumental.


great word that, I like it; argumentative + mental, sort of describes your posts perfectly


> The 'waggling of handlebars' and standing up on the pedals are visual clues to other roadusers of my intentions.


maybe you should thump your chest and yodel like Tarzan for full effect.
wtf are you smoking???


> ... Then, standing up and making it look like I am sprinting for world glory is icing-on-the-cake to give the motorist an undisputed idea of what is going to happen next.


can I buy some???


> the mere sight of me standing up is enough to get the message across that I'm going to accelerate.


or you could look behind you, indicate, then cycle past.... works on any type of bike


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

the snail said:


> great word that, I like it; argumentative + mental, sort of describes your posts perfectly
> 
> maybe you should thump your chest and yodel like Tarzan for full effect.
> wtf are you smoking???
> ...



Do I know you?


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> Jim, I was saying the same thing a couple of years ago:



The Bible, as we all know, is a collection of myths and here-say stories no one can substantiate.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 Oct 2010)

Jimbo's lost it. 

Although when I overtake another truck from now on, I'm going to waggle the steering wheel about and get the trailer shimmying over two lanes of motorway. This sends an unequivocal message as to what my intentions are, far more so than simply switching the indicator on, pulling out and getting on with overtaking like normal people do.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Jimbo's lost it.
> 
> Although when I overtake another truck from now on, I'm going to waggle the steering wheel about and get the trailer shimmying over two lanes of motorway. This sends an unequivocal message as to what my intentions are, far more so than simply switching the indicator on, pulling out and getting on with overtaking like normal people do.



I don't give toss what you think ( as I see the sentiment is reciprocated ). It works for me in crowded Birmingham. I shall continue to use my own strategies when riding in three lane traffic round Birmingham's central area.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I don't give toss what you think ( as I see the sentiment is reciprocated ). It works for me in crowded Birmingham. I shall continue to use my own strategies when riding in three lane traffic round Birmingham's central area.



I don't believe anyone has a problem with that. Personally, I say that if it works for you, then you carry on. But it's probably going a bit too far to advise new cyclists to overtake in such a way. Much more sensible to say something like, before starting to overtake, have a look over your shoulder, then signal and pull out. That seems to me to cover everything.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

the snail said:


> great word that, I like it; argumentative + mental, sort of describes your posts perfectly
> 
> maybe you should thump your chest and yodel like Tarzan for full effect.
> wtf are you smoking???
> ...



[ This is not argumental.

The 'waggling of handlebars' and standing up on the pedals are visual clues to other roadusers of *my* intentions. Signaling with a straight arm out sideways lessens the amount of acceleration one can effect.
A short signal to following traffic is the first sign after the rearward eye-check. Then, standing up and making it look like *I* am sprinting for world glory is icing-on-the-cake to give the motorist an undisputed idea of what is going to happen next.

This works very effectively when *I'm* on a dropped handlebar sports or race bike. On a straight bar bike, the mere sight of *me* standing up is enough to get the message across that *I'm* going to accelerate. Trouble is, with such low gears on *my* Sturmeys, its difficult to overtake in a hurry. If *I* stand up and dump *my* weight on the pedal of *my* BSA, *I* 'spin out' after 3 seconds  ]

If you read this through again with a bit more care, you will comprehend it is an explanation of why I imitate raceboys in heavy traffic.
You will also notice I refer to the rider as MYSELF in the first person singular.

Nowhere do I suggest anyone else 'should do' what I describe.

Before you publish a 'piss take' post, maybe you should learn to read, assess and evaluate what you are reading first.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> I don't believe anyone has a problem with that. Personally, I say that if it works for you, then you carry on. But it's probably going a bit too far to *advise new cyclists to overtake in such a way. *Much more sensible to say something like, before starting to overtake, have a look over your shoulder, then signal and pull out. That seems to me to cover everything.



Please see my latest post. 

You assumed I had written an Instructional. I had written a description of how *one* experienced city cyclist deals with traffic while overtaking a slower vehicle.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> We all know humans make mistakes. The truck driver, in his anguish of having a 15 mph cyclist in front of him, unintentionally treads on the accellerator instead of the brake.



 I'm genuinely amused by this, it's a little light relief from what appears to be Jimbo actively trolling a thread. Most truck drivers (yes, yes I know you don't consider us to be professional drivers because all we do is drive the things rather than design and build them) know which one is the brake and which the accelerator (one "l"). It takes a bit more than a cyclist in the road ahead to make us get them mixed up.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Oh I give up. The Cyclecraft police are out.
> 
> If any more Cyclecraft threads start, mark me down as a "Doesn't float my boat".



In fairness, this thread started as someone asking what Cyclecraft is. No one asked you to start posting cartoons clearly designed to get a rise out of people.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The Bible, as we all know, is a collection of myths and here-say stories no one can substantiate.



Almost - Cyclecraft is a distillation of the current received wisdom on how best to ride a bike on the UK's roads, but it is not a "myth" that the most common form of collision involving cyclists and HGVs happens when the HGV turns left - would you disagree with the advice not to undertake a lorry that is signalling left a junction? Do you recommend cycling 1 foot from car doors at 08.30 etc etc? 

What is considered best practice has changed over the years and will continue to evolve. It appears that your views on cycling are set in stone as they are based solely on your own experience.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> Almost - Cyclecraft is a distillation of the current received wisdom on how best to ride a bike on the UK's roads, but it is not a "myth" that the most common form of collision involving cyclists and HGVs happens when the HGV turns left - would you disagree with the advice not to undertake a lorry that is signalling left a junction? Do you recommend cycling 1 foot from car doors at 08.30 etc etc?
> 
> What is considered best practice has changed over the years and will continue to evolve. It appears that your views on cycling are set in stone as they are based solely on your own experience.



So you'd better change you description to "CycleCraft is the cyclist's Origin of Species".

The ones who ride up the inside of trucks eventually become extinct due to failed trial and error, while the ones who hang back and let the truck go ahead ( or even get out of its way completely ) survive.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> So you'd better change you description to "CycleCraft is the cyclist's Origin of Species".
> 
> The ones who ride up the inside of trucks eventually become extinct due to failed trial and error, while the ones who hang back and let the truck go ahead ( or even get out of its way completely ) survive.



So you agree with Cyclecraft that it's better to hang back! This is progress. Perhaps there are other areas of agreement between the all knowing Jimbo and Cyclecraft


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

My cycling techniques have evolved over the years. I have become more ready to get out of what I consider dangerous situations rather than ride directly in front of heavy vehicles.

Sitting here typing this post, I like to think of myself as a 'survivor'.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> My cycling techniques have evolved over the years. I have become more ready to get out of what I consider dangerous situations rather than ride directly in front of heavy vehicles.
> 
> *Sitting here typing this post, I like to think of myself as a 'survivor'.*



[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O01kDSs-xzA&feature=player_embedded#![/media]


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> So you agree with Cyclecraft that it's better to hang back! This is progress. Perhaps there are other areas of agreement between the all knowing Jimbo and Cyclecraft



You have this psycology that all cyclists, including the 'all knowing jimbo' should agree with CycleCraft without question.

You still have The Bible on your mind.

I might be at the next Critical Mass in London. Bring your thumbscrews.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

[QUOTE 1225187"]
It doesn't work for you though Jimmy. I ride the same roads as you and overtake using the normal method, which helps because everyone else understands it. Doing your thing doesn't make it more effective or safer, so your extra jiggles are unnecessary and pointless.
[/quote]

Ahh. Mr Paul has woken up and re-entered the fray by throwing the 'bold statement' hat in the ring.

Your typing was "unnecessary and pointless" because I'm not going to stop 'doing my own thing' . From my viewpoint, it works and that's enough justification for me.

If your method works for you, do it.

And BTW, my name is not Jimmy.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> You have this psycology that all cyclists, including the 'all knowing jimbo' should agree with CycleCraft without question.
> 
> You still have The Bible on your mind.
> 
> I might be at the next Critical Mass in London. Bring your thumbscrews.



Jim, it's your weird fixation with the book that is the problem - it's almost as if you can't bring yourself to agree with *anything* that is written in it. This leads you to proffer alternative strategies that get picked apart, dismissed or laughed at. I can see why this is frustrating, but it's because your theories often don't stand up to much scrutiny.

Everyone should question and examine what is written in Cyclecraft, but it seems a bit odd (to say the least) to throw the baby out with the bath water, because you struggle with the primary position!


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

[QUOTE 1225189"]
I've read, assessed, and evaluated. And I'd like to quote your full post below-



Note my bold. It's a definite suggestion that others should follow your wiggly behaviour.
[/quote]

Someone once said in this chatroom "Take jimbo's comments with a pinch of salt".

The OP asked "Where can I purchase CycleCraft?" He got his answer and no doubt he will read it and follow its advice. That's good.

When someone subsequently posts 'Top Tips" according to their experience, he can compare the Chatroom comments with CycleCraft and make up his own mind. He will most probably dismiss my 'Top Tip' as a one persons view and follow CycleCraft.
Or he may try the technique himself and make his own choice.

It is the devotees of Cyclecraft who insist on turning subsequent postings into a moral battle to defend their holy book.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> Jim, it's your weird fixation with the book that is the problem - it's almost as if you can't bring yourself to agree with *anything* that is written in it. This leads you to proffer alternative strategies that get picked apart, dismissed or laughed at. I can see why this is frustrating, but it's because your theories often don't stand up to much scrutiny.
> 
> Everyone should question and examine what is written in Cyclecraft, but it seems a bit odd (to say the least) to throw the baby out with the bath water, because you *struggle with the primary position*!



I don't "struggle" with 'Primary'. I know where it is and choose not to use it. Where's the law against that?

In *MY* experience, it promotes aggression from motorists.

I forward my opinions and the result is they are 'picked apart, dismissed or laughed at'.

They may be contrary to popular belief and many of you might respond by stating your experience, or what's written in that book.

I will continue to recount *MY* experiences, and if you still have problems with that, you'd better speak with Admin.

He'll most likely say jimbo's not breaking any laws or rules of the forum.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> It is the devotees of Cyclecraft who insist on turning subsequent postings into a moral battle to defend their holy book.



Jim, it's not an ethical conflict, but usually a failure of comprehension on your part - only a few months ago you were confusing the terms primary and secondary, and in this thread you continue to misunderstand the central tenet of the text: it is not a strict rule book...


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I don't "struggle" with 'Primary'. I know where it is and choose not to use it. Where's the law against that?
> 
> In *MY* experience, it promotes aggression from motorists.
> 
> ...



LOL - you never find yourself in the middle of the lane! How do you pass stationary cars - bunnyhop them?  

I have to cycle with Cyclecraft strapped to my handlebars otherwise I crash 6 times a day - I'm helpless without it...

Oh, I have no problem with you expressing your opinions - this is the commuting forum after all - everyone talks shoot here...(but some far more than others  )


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

Origamist said:


> LOL - you never find yourself in the middle of the lane! How do you pass stationary cars - bunnyhop them?
> 
> I have to cycle with Cyclecraft strapped to my handlebars otherwise I crash 6 times a day - I'm helpless without it...
> 
> Oh, I have no problem with you expressing your opinions - this is the commuting forum after all - everyone talks shoot here...(but some far more than others  )



LOL - You can't accept there is someone who doesn't entirely agree with CycleCraft.

You have to be sarcastic and rediculous.

If you did have no problems with me expressing my opinions, you would not respond with shoot of your own. 


Oh BTW, I couldn't see that vid you posted, there was too much of a smokescreen.


----------



## Origamist (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> LOL - You can't accept there is someone who doesn't entirely agree with CycleCraft.
> 
> You have to be sarcastic and rediculous.
> 
> ...



I have no issue with you becasue you disagree with parts of Cyclecraft; it's simply because 4/5 of what you write on here is nonsense. I hope that's clear.

The "Curb Your Enthusiasm" vid is very funny, Jim - as a "survivor", you'll be sure to appreciate it.


----------



## brokenbetty (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> It is the devotees of Cyclecraft who insist on turning subsequent postings into a moral battle to defend their holy book.



Whereas your approach is more Da Vinci Code: hints, secrets, false clues and misdirection, with the true story only revealed through patient unteasing and no small amount of luck  Do you really think giving advice that only makes sense taken in conjunction with a comment made in a completely different part of the site is an effective approach? And you an engineer! 

More seriously, I think you fundamentally misunderstand where the people disagreeing with you are coming from. There are no "Cyclecraft devotees". I skimmed it briefly a while ago, thought "yup, that's good advice, it's pretty much what I'd advise a nervous cyclist", and put it back on the shelf. It's main value to me is in providing a handy common terminology.

As Paul says, people aren't disagreeing with you because you disagree with cyclecraft. They are disagreeing with you from their own experience.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

I've had quite an interesting afternoon.

My son and I went into Birmingham on the train and he persuaded me to pre-order Call of Duty, Black Ops for Xbox 360.

Then we went back to his place and played Call of Duty, Modern Warfare II.

Then we went to Game in Solihull to look at XBox Kinect and how it will interface with Call of Duty, Black Ops; and then into John Lewis to look at a 47" telly.

Exhillerating, heart pounding, sweat producing.... with NO risk of physical injury or need to wear a helmet.


I think I will give up cycling.


----------



## jimboalee (30 Oct 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I've had quite an interesting afternoon.
> 
> My son and I went into Birmingham on the train and he persuaded me to pre-order Call of Duty, Black Ops for Xbox 360.
> 
> ...



Can you believe a fifty year old bloke who has ridden a bicycle for forty four years can, in the space of forty eight hours, be completely turned of cycling and onto 'Shooter' video gaming?


----------

