# Entering the box.



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

I had a minor dispute with a moton this morning. I approached a light controlled junction which had just turned red and entered the green box from the right, going round the two cars in front of me. I waited and moved off when the lights turned and took the primary as there wasn't room for a car to pass due to traffic stacking on the other side.... or so I thought. Mr.Focus (the aforementioned moton) squeezes by so I give him a tap on the side of the car with a flat palm. 

He drives off and about 400 yards down the road I see him pull in next to a shop, he gets out and is checking his car so I stop and tell him that he was too close to which he replied 'you shouldn't have ****ing cut me up at the junction' to which I replied that I was allowed to use the green box for safety. He then said that I should've entered the box from the left via the connecting cycle lane. I told him that was rubbish and that it wasn't an excuse to pass me that close. 

The discussion goes on a bit, I call him an peanut, tap on the car a bit (the car's between me and him at this point), he waves his fist at me and says 'you'll be getting this up your arse' so I happily replied 'what - a glove? Why is that scary' at which point he went in to the shop with me laughing at him. 

So it got me thinking - is the cycle lane the only approach to a green box? I naturally filter down the right side of traffic, having ridden a motorbike for years it's just the natural thing but I thought I may be doing it wrong so I had a quick check of the highway code and could only find Rule 178 - Advanced Stop Lines, which doesn't mention cyclists approach to the box, only that motorists can't move into it. I know some of you are clued up on the code, is there something I'm missing?


----------



## BrumJim (14 Jan 2010)

Apparently, technically, you can't enter the green box any other way other than via the cycle lane, as that would mean crossing the solid line whilst the lights are red. It is only because there is no stop line from the cycle lane into the green box that allows a cyclist into that territory.

In reality no Police would charge you for doing what you did, and the motorist is being a bit of a self-righteous ar*e. Well, a lot of one. But given how carefully he was checking his car and the presence of driving gloves would suggest a hint of OCD/Aspergers.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

Somewhere it says that it is illegal to cross the solid white line after the lights change - for either cyclists or cars. That is why they should have a filter lane to allow access. However the positioning of the filter lane may not always be in the best place - so for example one on my route to the office is a filter lane down the left hand side of a turning left lane - puts you in totally the wrong place.

I usually ignore the rule and approach from which ever side is safest. But technically he is correct. 

There are also some ASL's which don't have feeder lanes and therefore are technically incorrect themselves.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

BrumJim said:


> Apparently, technically, you can't enter the green box any other way other than via the cycle lane, as that would mean crossing the solid line whilst the lights are red. It is only because there is no stop line from the cycle lane into the green box that allows a cyclist into that territory.



Ah, that makes sense. I shall enter from the left in future, I'm still always wary of doing that as I've got a 'don't filter on the left' switch left over from my motorcycling days.



BrumJim said:


> In reality no Police would charge you for doing what you did, and the motorist is being a bit of a self-righteous ar*e. Well, a lot of one. But given how carefully he was checking his car and the presence of driving gloves would suggest a hint of OCD/Aspergers.



I agree, I also think he'd have passed me in the same manner if I'd entered from the left anyway. It was funny seeing him check the Focus over, I wonder if he checked where I tapped on his roof after I left!


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> Ah, that makes sense. I shall enter from the left in future, I'm still always wary of doing that as I've got a 'don't filter on the left' switch left over from my motorcycling days.



If you think its safer to enter from the right - I would continue to do so ... but each one needs to be judged individually.


----------



## BentMikey (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> Ah, that makes sense. I shall enter from the left in future, I'm still always wary of doing that as I've got a 'don't filter on the left' switch left over from my motorcycling days.



I wouldn't change this at all. Said moton was completely in the wrong. Your minor technical infraction would almost certainly never be challenged, and is no excuse anyway.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> If you think its safer to enter from the right - I would continue to do so ... but each one needs to be judged individually.



My only reason to say it's safer to enter from the right is the left is restricted due to the proximity of the cars to the kerb, the approaching cycle lane at this point isn't particularly wide however the right is open as there was no traffic in the opposite lane. It might be worth entering from the left to avoid this being an issue in the future.


----------



## Cab (14 Jan 2010)

The moton is 100% in the wrong. That we can find unintended legal technicalities why you may also, theoretically, be in the wrong is immaterial to the fact that he _risked your life_ in an unrelated, later incident.

And really, no one will do you for entering a stop box from the right. That action had _nothing to do_ with how that moton treated you, he'd have been just as big an @$$401€ however you'd entered the box. Don't take such pathetic, flimsy excuses for intimidatory driving seriously.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> Said moton was completely in the wrong. Your minor technical infraction would almost certainly never be challenged, and is no excuse anyway.



I'd agree, that was my argument put to him. Despite the incorrect approach, it's no reason to pass so closely.


----------



## BentMikey (14 Jan 2010)

Those feeder lanes are known as Death Alley anyway.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (14 Jan 2010)

Well done for actually getting to the green box in the first place, most of the time I can't because there's some twats car in it.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

My thoughts on cycle lanes are surmised in Mikey's sig: Things that look safe and aren't. (Cycle lanes) They're nearly always full of crap, potholes, snow at this time of year or badly recessed or proud service covers and often encourage motorists to pass closer than they would if the cycle lane wasn't there.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (14 Jan 2010)

Like I said in a previous thread, most cycle lanes are are just a lazy half arsed attempt at separating cars and bikes.


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

Cab said:


> And really, no one will do you for entering a stop box from the right. That action had _nothing to do_ with how that moton treated you, he'd have been just as big an @$$401€ however you'd entered the box. Don't take such pathetic, flimsy excuses for intimidatory driving seriously.



Indeed, in London, the police will not enforce ASLs if a motorcyclist, bus driver, HGV driver, WVM, car driver etc use them illegally - the chances of any police officer pulling up a cyclist with regard to this technical breach (which will soon be done away with) are infinitesimally small.


----------



## fossyant (14 Jan 2010)

Many ASL's don't have any filter or cycle lanes near them....quite a few on my route - just solid lined green boxes...


----------



## thegrumpybiker (14 Jan 2010)

Pardon my ignorance but what does ASL stand for?


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

thegrumpybiker said:


> Pardon my ignorance but what does ASL stand for?



Advanced Stop Line


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

fossyant said:


> Many ASL's don't have any filter or cycle lanes near them....quite a few on my route - just solid lined green boxes...



That's usually because the lane(s) are too narrow to accommodate one. That said, I have seen filter lanes around 60cm wide.


----------



## Lurker (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> My only reason to say it's safer to enter from the right is the left is restricted due to the proximity of the cars to the kerb, the approaching cycle lane at this point isn't particularly wide however the right is open as there was no traffic in the opposite lane. It might be worth entering from the left to avoid this being an issue in the future.



No! As others have said, generally it's safer (albeit technically illegal at the moment) to enter a cycle box by overtaking rather than undertaking. Entering the box from the left increases the risk to you of a 'left hook'.

Good to hear that the existing poorly drafted legislation on this - which refers to 'vehicles' rather than 'motor vehicles' - is likely to be corrected very soon.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

Origamist said:


> with regard to this technical breach (which will soon be done away with)





Lurker said:


> (albeit technically illegal at the moment)
> 
> Good to hear that the existing poorly drafted legislation on this - which refers to 'vehicles' rather than 'motor vehicles' - is likely to be corrected very soon.



I've obviously missed this bit of information ... I take it the law is to be amended ... has anyone a link to this?


----------



## ianrauk (14 Jan 2010)

Spot on. One in particular (As Mikey probably knows this one) in Bromley at Shortlands Station. The majority of the traffic turns left rather then go straight ahead. Anyone cyclist using the feeder lane on the left is asking for an accident. Feeder lanes into ASL should be done away with.



BentMikey said:


> Those feeder lanes are known as Death Alley anyway.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

ianrauk said:


> Feeder lanes into ASL should be done away with.



I'd agree with that. I had a bit of a 'law abiding citizen' moment thinking maybe I should approach from the left but in all honesty I know it's much safer to approach from the right, especially in this instance as I was only 2 vehicles back.


----------



## stowie (14 Jan 2010)

Lurker said:


> No! As others have said, generally it's safer (albeit technically illegal at the moment) to enter a cycle box by overtaking rather than undertaking. Entering the box from the left increases the risk to you of a 'left hook'.
> 
> Good to hear that the existing poorly drafted legislation on this - which refers to 'vehicles' rather than 'motor vehicles' - is likely to be corrected very soon.



It sounds as if the intention of the law was never to stop cyclists entering the ASL from the right, just that the legislation was poor? Typical - the small amount of infrastructure that actually gets put in for cyclists is shoddily thought out from start to finish.

I would strongly agree that entering the ASL from the far left cycle-lane when you need to be turning right is a very bad idea. The driver is an idiot - justifying a close overtake because you happened to infringe a very minor technicality of the law is pathetic. He was p!ssed off with something going in front of him and passed dangerously to prove a point. Tw@t.


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> I've obviously missed this bit of information ... I take it the law is to be amended ... has anyone a link to this?



There's a bit of info in this thread:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=21655&highlight=asl


----------



## biking_fox (14 Jan 2010)

I like feeder lanes, and feel there should be more of them - depending on the specific junction construction and traffic flows. Having a green box perched at the front of the queue of traffic that you can't get to doesn't do anyone any good. But yes you do ahve to be careful using them - as is the case when you are cycling anywhere.

I was particularly impressed to see the wheels of a bus in the box this morning - the back wheels that is. To be fair given the speed the queue had been moving the driver had probably legitimately entered while the light was green and then been caught on the red. But even so, there was a lot of bus sticking out into the road!


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

Origamist said:


> There's a bit of info in this thread:
> 
> http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=21655&highlight=asl



Thanks - obviously missed that first time around.


----------



## jimboalee (14 Jan 2010)

When I'm approaching a TL with ASL from the crownside, I try to get to the kerbside either across the ASL box or between stationary vehicles before the ASL box.

I do not however, perch myself immediately in front of the leading vehicle inside the ASL box. AND, I do not ride off from stationary 'slap-bang' infront of a motorist. I have the right of course, but it's asking for reaction and confrontation, just like what the OP got.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> When I'm approaching a TL with ASL from the crownside, I try to get to the kerbside either across the ASL box or between stationary vehicles before the ASL box.
> 
> I do not however, perch myself immediately in front of the leading vehicle inside the ASL box. AND, I do not ride off from stationary 'slap-bang' infront of a motorist. I have the right of course, but it's asking for reaction and confrontation, just like what the OP got.



Yeah, I quite agree. I did it with the intention of making sure the lead motorist passed me closely. I didn't do it to make myself as visible as possible to the lead motorist and ensure he didn't pass me closely. Good point well made, Jim.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> When I'm approaching a TL with ASL from the crownside, I try to get to the kerbside either across the ASL box or between stationary vehicles before the ASL box.
> 
> I do not however, perch myself immediately in front of the leading vehicle inside the ASL box. AND, I do not ride off from stationary 'slap-bang' infront of a motorist. I have the right of course, but it's asking for reaction and confrontation, just like what the OP got.



If you are going to use a ASL - surely the place to be is *bang infront* of the motorist - where else would you suggest?


----------



## Lurker (14 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> If you are going to use a ASL - surely the place to be is *bang infront* of the motorist - where else would you suggest?



Agreed. That's where the driver is looking, after all!

Automatically moving into the kerb increases the risk of dangerous overtaking, 'left hooks' and also 'right hooks' (because you are less visible to drivers of other vehicles). There is no hard and fast rule - you have to use your own judgement in every situation - but as has previously been discussed sometimes it's better to be two or three vehicles back in the queue, rather than moving into the ASL.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

Lurker said:


> but as has previously been discussed sometimes it's better to be two or three vehicles back in the queue, rather than moving into the ASL.



Agreed - that's why I started my sentance with IF. I'm more likely to use them if I know them, the timing of the lights, and know how the traffic tends to move at the junction.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> Agreed - that's why I started my sentance with IF. I'm more likely to use them if I know them, the timing of the lights, and know how the traffic tends to move at the junction.



In this instance, I'd just seen the lights change and I'm familiar with the timing so I knew I had plenty of time. The reason for getting in front is I know there's a pinch point, which is why I a) made myself visible and  to a defensive line through the pinch-point to stop close overtakes. Stirling's not a big place and at 7.30am there's not a huge amount of traffic at all. The gain the bloke got from overtaking at that point was negligible as he could have overtaken safely 20 yards later.

Reading that back, that's not a dig at what you'd said there, I think you're 100% in what you've been saying, I'm just giving the reasons behind my actions!


----------



## stowie (14 Jan 2010)

biking_fox said:


> I like feeder lanes, and feel there should be more of them - depending on the specific junction construction and traffic flows. Having a green box perched at the front of the queue of traffic that you can't get to doesn't do anyone any good. But yes you do ahve to be careful using them - as is the case when you are cycling anywhere.
> 
> I was particularly impressed to see the wheels of a bus in the box this morning - the back wheels that is. To be fair given the speed the queue had been moving the driver had probably legitimately entered while the light was green and then been caught on the red. But even so, there was a lot of bus sticking out into the road!



More _good_ feeder lanes would be a good idea. But the feeder lanes often (I would go so far as to say mostly) put the cyclist in a bad position, especially if they want to use the outside lane.

I regularly use 3 ASLs close to my house. The first one has no feeder lane, just two solid lines, so presumably, by the letter of the law no-one should be in them. The second one has a long feeder lane, which is slightly let down by the fact the width is slightly less than my handlebars. The third has a feeder lane that is less than a foot long. So none, in my opinion, are particularly cycle friendly facilities.

I use ASLs when I am filtering. I will filter in traffic jams so that I get through the lights in one traffic light cycle. I don't use ASLs when the traffic is light - I will just wait in primary behind the last car in the queue. When filtering, I am frequently on the outside where I can be seen - doesn't make huge sense to sweep from the outside to the inside and back across the ASL to the outside again, if I am planning to turn right. Of course each junction is different, so left filtering makes a lot more sense at some than others.


----------



## NickM (14 Jan 2010)

Cab said:


> The moton is 100% in the wrong. That we can find unintended legal technicalities why you may also, theoretically, be in the wrong is immaterial to the fact that he _risked your life_ in an unrelated, later incident.
> 
> And really, no one will do you for entering a stop box from the right. That action had _nothing to do_ with how that moton treated you, he'd have been just as big an @$$401€ however you'd entered the box. Don't take such pathetic, flimsy excuses for intimidatory driving seriously.


Quite so.

While we have to commute on roads designed by motorists, for motorists, we are perfectly entitled to do what is _safest for us_ rather than follow the letter of the law. As long as nobody else is endangered by our actions, of course.


----------



## Defy78 (14 Jan 2010)

In this situation (with only 2 cars infront and just before a pinch point) I would have taken up primary behind the cars and waited my turn. I don't see how there is any safety in cutting infront of cars, who will then try to overtake. Of course I am not condoning the motons close overtake but this would be avoided by you slotting in behind the cars. 

I do filter (either left or right depending on the options at the time) but only if there is a decent distance / safety gain. To put yourself infront of 2 cars just before a pinch point is inviting a muppet to have a go...of course this is just my opinion


----------



## jimboalee (14 Jan 2010)

Advance Stop Lines.

Think about it. They provide a 'reservoir' for cyclists at the head of a junction controlled by traffic signals.
They are predominantly at busy junctions where there is a Right turn.

While the motor traffic is flowing, there is little chance of a cyclist to merge across the lane if he/she intends to take the Right turn.

When the traffic stops at a Red light, the cyclist can ride along the feeder lane into the ASL reservoir and then get themselves in a position to take the Right turn, signalling Right to show the motorists his/her intensions.

IMHO, the ASL reservoir is NOT for cyclists who intend to continue Forward or turn Left unless there is a 'Left ONLY' lane for traffic.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

They are also useful for cyclists either turning left or going straight on.

Turning left - allows you to take the turn without a car overtaking you at the same time
Straight on - the advantage for me is that I'm out of the way of cars turning left and also get across the junction before any cars from the opposite direction start trying to turn right.


----------



## BentMikey (14 Jan 2010)

Defy78 said:


> In this situation (with only 2 cars infront and just before a pinch point) I would have taken up primary behind the cars and waited my turn. I don't see how there is any safety in cutting infront of cars, who will then try to overtake. Of course I am not condoning the motons close overtake but this would be avoided by you slotting in behind the cars.
> 
> I do filter (either left or right depending on the options at the time) but only if there is a decent distance / safety gain.



That's another good approach IMO, and one I often use myself. Mind you in London it's often better to go to the front since the queue will start again just the other side of the juction.



Defy78 said:


> To put yourself infront of 2 cars just before a pinch point is inviting a muppet to have a go...of course this is just my opinion



Careful - this is not the cyclist's fault. It's the moton's fault, and this is really a little bit of victim blaming, which is never right.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

Defy78 said:


> To put yourself infront of 2 cars just before a pinch point is inviting a muppet to have a go...of course this is just my opinion



The reason I don't hang back at this junction and get in front of the traffic is to avoid the moton behind me in the queue seeing the moton in front of me zipping off up the road and trying to squeeze by. At other ASLs I do maintain position in the queue but in this instance I think it's safer to be highly visible and as wide as possible through the pinch point.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> I wouldn't change this at all. Said moton was completely in the wrong. Your minor technical infraction would almost certainly never be challenged, and is no excuse anyway.



Yep, spot on.


----------



## Defy78 (14 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> Careful - this is not the cyclist's fault. It's the moton's fault, and this is really a little bit of victim blaming, which is never right.



As I said earlier in the post I do not condone the motons actions, nor am I saying it's the OP's fault. We all come across the must overtake muppets who have to get past no matter how stupid a place, all I'm saying is that I personally avoid being in this situation as much as possible, sometimes by hanging back where others might filter (can't avoid all motons though, I know). Meant as freindly advice (food for thought if you will) not as a criticism or balming the cyclist - as already stated it's not the cyclists fault the moton was a muppet!


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

Defy78 said:


> Meant as freindly advice (food for thought if you will) not as a criticism or balming the cyclist - as already stated it's not the cyclists fault the moton was a muppet!



I know what you mean, no offence taken. There are junctions where I do and don't use the ASL, this is one where I feel using it has more benefits than hanging back.


----------



## Defy78 (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> The reason I don't hang back at this junction and get in front of the traffic is to avoid the moton behind me in the queue seeing the moton in front of me zipping off up the road and trying to squeeze by. At other ASLs I do maintain position in the queue but in this instance I think it's safer to be highly visible and as wide as possible through the pinch point.



Fair enough, we've all got to do what we think is best for us at the time, just giving my 2p worth. Motons are gonna be there either way and some (hopefully the minority) will be muppets either way - just gotta get on with it


----------



## gaz (14 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> I wouldn't change this at all. Said moton was completely in the wrong. Your minor technical infraction would almost certainly never be challenged, and is no excuse anyway.


+2


----------



## Cab (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> IMHO, the ASL reservoir is NOT for cyclists who intend to continue Forward or turn Left unless there is a 'Left ONLY' lane for traffic.



You'll find no support for that opinion in law, in any cycle training, or anywhere else, I should think. Unless you go and ask on a moton forum.

You could get to the front and take secondary position if you plan to go straight on or turn left, I suppose. But in busy traffic you've generally got no business being in a secondary position anyway.

ASLs are, when well sited and used properly, quite unashamedly of benefit to cyclists and not of benefit to motorists. And they are the only example of road facilities that work that way. If the moton behind you doesn't like that you're using the road how you're meant to, how you're legally entitled to, and how any competent cycling instructor should recommend, then hard cheese. It isn't an excuse for endangering the cyclist in front, it isn't a coherent _reason_ for doing so.


----------



## Cab (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> The reason I don't hang back at this junction and get in front of the traffic is to avoid the moton behind me in the queue seeing the moton in front of me zipping off up the road and trying to squeeze by. At other ASLs I do maintain position in the queue but in this instance I think it's safer to be highly visible and as wide as possible through the pinch point.



I like ASL's because of numerous instances of lights turning red before I get to them, and the moton behind whizzing close past me and through the red light. If I start off in front, that doesn't happen.


----------



## Moodyman (14 Jan 2010)

Would somebody mind explaining what a 'Primary' is? with regards to junctions/lights?

I've seen it mentioned few times and want to understand what this means. 

Thanks


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

Moodyman said:


> Would somebody mind explaining what a 'Primary' is? with regards to junctions/lights?
> 
> I've seen it mentioned few times and want to understand what this means.
> 
> Thanks



Primary refers to a position in the middle of the lane, where you're effectively controlling the traffic behind. Usually used to increase your visibility and prevent people overtaking where ther is insufficient room. Needless to say, it doesn't always work, in that there's always someone who thinks his car is smaller and more important than it actually is. At junctions, it means simply going to the head of the queue and positioning yourself in the middle of the lane, the reasoning being:

a) a cyclist is usually faster over the first 50m or so from a standstill than cars
 it makes you visible to the cars behind, certainly more so than waiting next to the back of the passenger door

It's not always a good idea: I wouldn't do it unless I knew the queue wasn't going to move and I could see an escape route if it did. If you are filtering, you're usually more visible (hence safer) on the right of the traffic, rather than gutter hugging where you're reliant on drivers using that left hand door mirror - which few do - and vulnerable to people suddenly opening doors. 

Possibly someone who's read "Cyclecraft" will be along in a bit to correct me on some points, but I think that's the gist of it, and it works for me.


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Primary refers to a position about three feet out from the kerb, where you're effectively controlling the traffic behind. Usually used to increase your visibility and prevent people overtaking where ther is insufficient room. Needless to say, it doesn't always work, in that there's always someone who thinks his car is smaller and more important than it actually is.



NOOOO, RT. How long have you been here! Primary is the centre of the lane. Secondary is usually around 3 feet from the edge of the moving traffic lane...


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

Origamist said:


> NOOOO, RT. How long have you been here! Primary is the centre of the lane. Secondary is usually around 3 feet from the edge of the moving traffic lane...



Sorry, my mistake. I knew one of them was about three feet out.


----------



## Origamist (14 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Sorry, my mistake. I knew one of them was about three feet out.



I feel like Miss Jean Brodie now...


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

Origamist said:


> I feel like Miss Jean Brodie now...


----------



## jimboalee (14 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> They are also useful for cyclists either turning left or going straight on.
> 
> Turning left - allows you to take the turn without a car overtaking you at the same time
> Straight on - the advantage for me is that I'm out of the way of cars turning left and also get across the junction before any cars from the opposite direction start trying to turn right.



Junctions without ASL reservoirs.

Think about it.

You can cruise up to the front and come to a halt BEYOND the stop line where the motorists can see you.

This is my usual method and no-one gives a toss.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Junctions without ASL reservoirs.
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> ...



That's what I do as well. If there's no ASL, I make my own. It's technically RLJing, though, and anyone doing it should be aware that there is a possibility, albeit small, that you'll get nicked for it, or at the very least, attract the opprobrium of your fellow road users.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Junctions without ASL reservoirs.
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> ...



Sorry, you've confused me there. Why would that not cause issue with the motons, but doing the same thing into an ASL does?


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> Sorry, you've confused me there. Why would that not cause issue with the motons, but doing the same thing into an ASL does?



Some motorists can turn _anything_ into an issue. And not just with bikes: I find a lot of people are happy to try and squeeze past me when I'm reversing an artic into a yard from the road, then give me a load of abuse for being in the way. Don't worry about it, just revel in the fact that these people will be dead of stress long before you.


----------



## jimboalee (14 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> Sorry, you've confused me there. Why would that not cause issue with the motons, but doing the same thing into an ASL does?



All the motorist wants the cyclist to do it get out of his way.

To these ends, I roll past the solid white stop line and prop myself up on the curved kerb.
If I am turning right, I'll shift across to stand on the crown where I'm not directly infront of the traffic.

From where I'm standing, I ( more times than not ) get a view of the opposing signals and the opposing traffic. A better place to be to plan my departure.

Contributors on this chatboard seem to think motorcars are driven by the blind. They're not. They are driven by impatient commuters.

There have been rare occassions where a cyclist has been 'left hooked'. There have been rare occassions where a cyclist has been cut up the kerb. If you are concerned it might happen to you, consider whether you should be on a bike in the traffic.


----------



## eldudino (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> All the motorist wants the cyclist to do it get out of his way.
> 
> To these ends, I roll past the solid white stop line and prop myself up on the curved kerb.
> If I am turning right, I'll shift across to stand on the crown where I'm not directly infront of the traffic.
> ...



What you're describing sounds like hugging the kerb to me, I would consider this dangerous at the junction I was at as there's no room for a bike and a car and I still think being front and centre is the way to go. 

I'm still not sure what you're getting at with the passive last sentence, sounds like big-balling to me. I don't think that's a response to any point raised. You ride how you want to ride and let us know how the kerbside works out for you.


----------



## Moodyman (14 Jan 2010)

Thank you to all who responded regarding 'Primary'.

It's been very insightful.


----------



## summerdays (14 Jan 2010)

For further reading on good cycling practise the bible is "Cyclecraft". (It doesn't mention waiting on the left in the gutter at traffic lights as a good practise).


----------



## sagefly (14 Jan 2010)

Hi I'm new to cycling and use the green box to get in front of trafficm I figure that if thyey can see you thay at least have a chance of not hitting you.

In London I also use it to get ahead of the traffic at light, both for increased noticability and because the traffic will always in normal London trafffic be behind where its less likely to cause me harm.

I've, toucch wood, had no aggro from drivers as yet.


----------



## Cab (14 Jan 2010)

sagefly said:


> Hi I'm new to cycling and use the green box to get in front of trafficm I figure that if thyey can see you thay at least have a chance of not hitting you.
> 
> In London I also use it to get ahead of the traffic at light, both for increased noticability and because the traffic will always in normal London trafffic be behind where its less likely to cause me harm.
> 
> I've, toucch wood, had no aggro from drivers as yet.



Getting aggro for using the ASL is rare, but it deos happen. Worst I've had was a woman who lost her rag completely, yelled, screamed, opened her door and slammed it a few times in some kind of hissy fit, pulled up in the box alongside me, and continued to yell and rev her engine. I dismounted, she seemed to be challenging me to cycle off in front of her. I woudn't, she drove to the other side of the junction, got out, and came back to look for a fight _leaving her door open, the engine running, and a child strapped in to a baby seat in the back of the car_. As I wouldn't engage and by now she had plenty of witnesses, she backed off.

The Police, when contacted, didn't give a monkeys.


----------



## boydj (14 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> When I'm approaching a TL with ASL from the crownside, I try to get to the kerbside either across the ASL box or between stationary vehicles before the ASL box.
> 
> I do not however, perch myself immediately in front of the leading vehicle inside the ASL box. AND, I do not ride off from stationary 'slap-bang' infront of a motorist. I have the right of course, but it's asking for reaction and confrontation, just like what the OP got.



I generally find it safer to do the opposite. Most ASLs are entered from the right, if one lane, or the middle, if two lanes. Start position is bang in the middle of the lane, then moving to secondary, if appropriate, once up to speed. Knowing the sequuence and being quick off the mark helps avoid upsetting the motorists.

I find the ASLs particularly useful in a couple of places where I know I'm going to hold primary for a bit and the traffic is heavy.


----------



## jimboalee (15 Jan 2010)

> Think yourselves lucky. *Here in Brum* most of our ASLs don't have a feed-in point but a solid line the full width.
> 
> I never enter from the left. Traffic lights are were car passengers get out, because it's convenient. You're also more likely to find yourself in the path of a vehicle turning across you who hasn't seen you.
> 
> ...



I find the motorists are more agressive NORTH of the A45 & Hollyhead Rd.

The favourite place for ignorant motoring on the Outer Circle between The Crown and Cushion & the Rookery Rd turn.
And of course, past the Villa ground. B)


----------



## jimboalee (15 Jan 2010)

I've said this before, and I'll say it again...

"A cyclist can ride his/her bike ANYWHERE".

He/she might get escorted off the motorway with a severe bollocking, but it stands that only a fence across the carriageway will stop a cyclist.

Having said that, it is sensible to ride one's bike where it is most safe,
ie, out of the firing line of 1.5 tonne lumps of metal on wheels.

This is Rule 3 of "How to survive on a bicycle".

Rule 1 is "Obey the Highway Code" and Rule 2 is "Light up & dress brightly".

Oh, and teaching children to ride. Throw the Highway Code at them and if they can't understand it, they're not old enough yet.


----------



## BentMikey (15 Jan 2010)

You're just plain wrong, Jimbo.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (15 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> You're just plain wrong, Jimbo.



Indeed. What a strange post.


----------



## eldudino (15 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> You're just plain wrong, Jimbo.



I've been perplexed as to what his point has been since the start of this topic as it seems to change with every post he submits.


----------



## Cab (15 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Having said that, it is sensible to ride one's bike where it is most safe,
> ie, out of the firing line of 1.5 tonne lumps of metal on wheels.



Mikey and Rythm Thief say you're just plain wrong.

I say you're wrong with raspberry sauce and nuts on, with a 99 flake sticking out at a jaunty angle.

The safest location on the road is not 'out of the way'. Whether such a place exists anyway is dubious, but the attempt to get 'out of the way' is not something you should be striving for. You're safer in the line of sight of motorists, and with an escape route should you need it. Or, in other words, in many/most situations in traffic the correct place to be is where you're taught to be on safe cycling courses, and thats a primary position. Where traffic is starting to move off from a junction, if you've got the option of taking primary, to do so is a textbook example of good cycling.

You may act on the roads as you wish, but bear in mind that if you continue to do it your way, you're needlessly increasing risk to yourself, and pointlessly reinforcing the misapprehension in the minds of motons that this is where you _should_ be. Thats if they even register you're there at all.


----------



## Cab (15 Jan 2010)

Lee, go back and look at Jimbos comments on page 4. He's not just saying obey the highway code.


----------



## jimboalee (15 Jan 2010)

Hands up who's been on a Club run or an Audax!

When the group ( and it might only be 3 cyclists ) come to a village, town, built up area, traffic calming etc, you will hear a shout "SINGLING OUT"; which means "Get out of two-abreast and move over to the left".

Are you trying to tell me the seniors at my club, who incidentally are cycling tutors for the Council, are WRONG?

Also, on narrow lanes, you will hear "CAR UP", which means "Move over to the left and stop if necessary to let him pass".

Plonking yourself in 'Primary', whatever that is?? will simply infuriate the motorist who is following you.
Also, riding alone in the position of the rider who would take up the two-abreast offside position is in the view of Mr Plod, a "bloody silly place to ride a bike.", as per my friends at Solihull nick.

Road courtesy in my book says "Any slow moving vehicle that holds up traffic should move across to the left or stop to allow following vehicle to pass if there are three or more vehicles following".

Riding in your 'Primary' position along a busy street is just plain arrogant and disruptive to the cycling cause.

Cyclists have to be seen to be courteous and considerate, NOT 'the prat holding up the traffic'.


----------



## summerdays (15 Jan 2010)

You don't plonk yourself in primary all of the time - you use it as you need it. If you are on a narrow road with parked cars on one side and 5 cars following you then they will have to wait till I get to the other end - same way they would behind a milk float. I'm not going to get off my bike everytime I have 3 cars behind me.... I'd never get anywhere in the city. If I'm in primary its for my safety or because I'm doing the same speed they are - Very slow.

If I see a narrowing coming up and I can let them over take by cycling in secondary in advance of the narrowing I will.


----------



## Coco (15 Jan 2010)

Surely its a case of using Primary wherever it is appropriate. I often use it as the OP said when approaching pinch points or where I need to be sure the car behind has seen me and won't be tempted to overtake dangerously.

There are many points on my route home that simply would not be safe to ride in anything but Primary position. In fact its was only with experience and a bit of assertiveness that I realised that I could avoid the many near death experiences I had in my early days.

That being said, once the danger is over, I routinely move to Secondary position in order to not hold up the traffic.


----------



## BentMikey (15 Jan 2010)

That's because you don't understand the use of primary - it's not for all the time, it's for when you need the space to ensure your safety. Exactly why you shouldn't be in the gutter at traffic lights.

As for cycling clubs, many members of the clubs I've been on rides with have fairly poor traffic skills in my experience. Stuff like riding right in the door zone, sitting nicely left at times when it's appropriate, but also sometimes sitting left instead of out in the lane and closing the door when they should.


----------



## stowie (15 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Hands up who's been on a Club run or an Audax!
> 
> When the group ( and it might only be 3 cyclists ) come to a village, town, built up area, traffic calming etc, you will hear a shout "SINGLING OUT"; which means "Get out of two-abreast and move over to the left".
> 
> ...



I think club runs with multiple riders (presumably on rural roads?) will be different. Pulling over to the left and stopping sounds very polite and allows vehicles to overtake in one go.

In London however, primary is critical to maintain your roadspace at times where overtaking is dangerous

I use primary when the traffic (which is more often than not in London) is travelling at the same speed, or slower than me. It stops idiots coming alongside without being able to actually overtake. I use primary where I am overtaking parked cars and don't want to be pinched by someone opening a car door on my left and a car overtaking on the right. I use primary whilst waiting at traffic lights where I have filtered to the front, or am waiting in a queue, so the person behind can see me clearly.

In all these cases, primary is held for a short period of time until the danger has passed and I go into secondary, normally with a little wave of thanks for the vehicle behind.

I have seen a cyclist pushed into parked cars by a (Royal Mail) van who thought there would be enough room to overtake on a double parked road, when there wasn't. The cyclist was hugging the parked cars in a way that just made my heart stop. Primary stops this. As a driver, I much prefer to see a cyclist smoothly take up primary around a parked car, or other danger, than hug the kerb until the last moment and pop out.

Of course some drivers will get frustrated by the moment that they have to wait. But when I drive, I see some motorists get frustrated by cars, lorries and buses as well. Some people are idiots, and nothing can change that. In my experience most drivers are very cautious and reasonable around cyclists, and accidents happen when they don't see us, or they make a poor decision to overtake in a bad place. Responsible use of primary helps prevent both.


----------



## Lurker (15 Jan 2010)

stowie said:


> I think club runs with multiple riders (presumably on rural roads?) will be different.... Some people are idiots, and nothing can change that. In my experience most drivers are very cautious and reasonable around cyclists, and accidents happen when they don't see us, or they make a poor decision to overtake in a bad place. Responsible use of primary helps prevent both.



Couldn't agree more with all of the above.


----------



## Cab (15 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Hands up who's been on a Club run or an Audax!
> 
> When the group ( and it might only be 3 cyclists ) come to a village, town, built up area, traffic calming etc, you will hear a shout "SINGLING OUT"; which means "Get out of two-abreast and move over to the left".
> 
> Are you trying to tell me the seniors at my club, who incidentally are cycling tutors for the Council, are WRONG?



You mean, for saying that there are times to use secondary? No, of course I'm not saying they're wrong. I'm saying _you_ are wrong in this specific instance.

(cut)



> Plonking yourself in 'Primary', whatever that is??



(remainder cut unread)

Here you're displaying wilful ignorance. Why?


----------



## boydj (15 Jan 2010)

Lurker said:


> Couldn't agree more with all of the above.



+1

Good post Stowie.


----------



## tdr1nka (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> When the group ( and it might only be 3 cyclists ) come to a village, town, built up area, traffic calming etc, you will hear a shout "SINGLING OUT"; which means "Get out of two-abreast and move over to the left".
> 
> Are you trying to tell me the seniors at my club, who incidentally are cycling tutors for the Council, are WRONG?



Maybe not in the example you are quoting but you are missing the fact that there are also times where it is safer and quicker for a car to overtake ten cyclists riding in pairs rather than in a single line. 

Cyclists are asked in the HC to not travel 'more than' two abreast so unless you are holding up traffic unecessarily you are not actually in the wrong.

FWIW, Your comments on ASL boxes renders their existance obsolete.
I will, when I can, position myself at the head of the traffic at an ASL for whichever direction I intend to travel. It's what they are for.

If I am meant to hide subserviently on the left and let the traffic past before I can get up speed then why do most ASL's span the entire width of the lanes?

If I rode in London as you have prescribed I'd be better off going by bus.


----------



## trsleigh (16 Jan 2010)

stowie said:


> In London however, primary is critical to maintain your roadspace at times where overtaking is dangerous
> ..............
> Some people are idiots, and nothing can change that. In my experience most drivers are very cautious and reasonable around cyclists, and accidents happen when they don't see us, or they make a poor decision to overtake in a bad place. Responsible use of primary helps prevent both.



As a long-standing London commuter cyclist I 100% agree with Stowie's contribution.


----------



## thomas (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Hands up who's been on a Club run or an Audax!
> 
> Also, on narrow lanes, you will hear "CAR UP", which means "Move over to the left and stop if necessary to let him pass".
> 
> Cyclists have to be seen to be courteous and considerate, NOT 'the prat holding up the traffic'.



Certainly there is a different style to riding in club runs...I for instance don't yell 'car up', 'car down' when out by myself . Generally on club runs sticking to secondary is all that's needed....but then club runs are on different roads to my commute and not generally during rush hour.

I don't think anyone on here takes primary, with the view to annoy people. It's only done when we don't want to be overtaken within the skin of our teeth or to make ourselves stand out a bit more at junctions, etc. Yes, it may annoy some people but those people would get annoyed if a cyclist was anywhere.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

trsleigh said:


> As a long-standing London commuter cyclist I 100% agree with Stowie's contribution.



As a veteran commute cyclist with 45 years of cycling around Birmingham and the Black Country, I have been bumped by a car on two occasions.
After both of these incidents, I learned a valuable lesson....

"Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".

The first incident was on the Lichfield Rd, Aston where there was a 'Pinchpoint' ( centre bollards ) ahead. I rode in the 'primary' through the pinchpoint to the disgust of the following Taxicab. When through, I went back to 1 yd out whereupon the cabbie overtook and then swept across to the left leaving me no option but to stop quick.

After this incident, I checked behind me well in advance of this 'pinchpoint'. If there was a car close, I would slow to let it pass before I gave a signal and took my position.

I don't have to ride that road any longer.

The second incident was when I took 'primary' in anticiption of passing a car signalling Right and stood stationary waiting to make his move. I could see there wasn't enough room for the car behind AND I to get through the gap together so I took the lane. I effectively stopped the car following overtaking me before we reached the restriction. His reaction was to run me into the kerb when we were past the restriction.

I was, in his opinion, "The prat holding up the traffic".

I ride about 5000 miles per year and am always aware of whether I am "the prat" or not.

One of my favourite 50km rides is around Birmingham's No. 11 bus, Outer Circle route. There are all types of road conditions from dual carriageway to narrow shopping streets. 
It takes about 2 1/2 hours on my commute heavyweight, so I'm not fast. I DON'T see aggression from motorists because I try to keep out of their way rather than take a dominant 'peanut' position on the road.

All goes well and I arrive home safely for my shower with both legs still attached to my hips, and no bruises on my chin from angry motorists.

Maybe in 45 years from now, I will give up cycling.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

trsleigh said:


> As a long-standing London commuter cyclist I 100% agree with Stowie's contribution.



As a veteran commute cyclist with 45 years of cycling around Birmingham and the Black Country, I have been bumped by a car on two occasions.
After both of these incidents, I learned a valuable lesson....

"Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".

The first incident was on the Lichfield Rd, Aston where there was a 'Pinchpoint' ( centre bollards ) ahead. I rode in the 'primary' through the pinchpoint to the disgust of the following Taxicab. When through, I went back to 1 yd out whereupon the cabbie overtook and then swept across to the left leaving me no option but to stop quick.

After this incident, I checked behind me well in advance of this 'pinchpoint'. If there was a car close, I would slow to let it pass before I gave a signal and took my position.

I don't have to ride that road any longer.

The second incident was when I took 'primary' in anticiption of passing a car signalling Right and stood stationary waiting to make his move. I could see there wasn't enough room for the car behind AND I to get through the gap together so I took the lane. I effectively stopped the car following overtaking me before we reached the restriction. His reaction was to run me into the kerb when we were past the restriction.

I was, in his opinion, "The prat holding up the traffic".

I ride about 5000 miles per year and am always aware of whether I am "the prat" or not.

One of my favourite 50km rides is around Birmingham's No. 11 bus, Outer Circle route. There are all types of road conditions from dual carriageway to narrow shopping streets. 
It takes about 2 1/2 hours on my commute heavyweight, so I'm not fast. I DON'T see aggression from motorists because I try to keep out of their way rather than take a dominant 'peanut' position on the road.

All goes well and I arrive home safely for my shower with both legs still attached to my hips, and no bruises on my chin from angry motorists.

Maybe in 45 years from now, I will give up cycling.


----------



## Cab (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> As a veteran commute cyclist with 45 years of cycling around Birmingham and the Black Country, I have been bumped by a car on two occasions.
> After both of these incidents, I learned a valuable lesson....
> 
> "Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".
> ...



1 yard? So, too close to the kerb for a typical secondary, hence you invited too close an overtake and got cut up badly. Not the fault of taking primary, the fault being one of not understanding how correctly to take secondary. Sounds like that was the cause of both of those incidents.

I suspect (but I don't know) that you're also too accepting in how close you're happy with cars passing you. Thats common in someone who has been riding too passively for as long as you have.

Odds are you'll continue plodding along just fine without any major accidents. Generally thats what happens. But you _are_ increasing risk the way you ride.


----------



## Cab (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> As a veteran commute cyclist with 45 years of cycling around Birmingham and the Black Country, I have been bumped by a car on two occasions.
> After both of these incidents, I learned a valuable lesson....
> 
> "Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".
> ...



1 yard? So, too close to the kerb for a typical secondary, hence you invited too close an overtake and got cut up badly. Not the fault of taking primary, the fault being one of not understanding how correctly to take secondary. Sounds like that was the cause of both of those incidents.

I suspect (but I don't know) that you're also too accepting in how close you're happy with cars passing you. Thats common in someone who has been riding too passively for as long as you have.

Odds are you'll continue plodding along just fine without any major accidents. Generally thats what happens. But you _are_ increasing risk the way you ride.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I learned a valuable lesson....
> 
> "Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".
> 
> ...



I think you're being overly harsh on yourself here. The motorists are definitely the peanuts in both situations, without a doubt.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I learned a valuable lesson....
> 
> "Don't ride in the middle of the lane like a complete peanut".
> 
> ...



I think you're being overly harsh on yourself here. The motorists are definitely the peanuts in both situations, without a doubt.


----------



## BentMikey (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> After this incident, I checked behind me well in advance of this 'pinchpoint'. If there was a car close, I would slow to let it pass before I gave a signal and took my position.



This bit is the only bit of good cyclecraft you've posted on this topic, I think. It's what Cyclecraft teaches, and is good practice I like to follow myself.

The rest is pretty much boll0cks. The drivers were to blame, not your road position, which left you with enough room to get out of the trouble they caused.


----------



## BentMikey (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> After this incident, I checked behind me well in advance of this 'pinchpoint'. If there was a car close, I would slow to let it pass before I gave a signal and took my position.



This bit is the only bit of good cyclecraft you've posted on this topic, I think. It's what Cyclecraft teaches, and is good practice I like to follow myself.

The rest is pretty much boll0cks. The drivers were to blame, not your road position, which left you with enough room to get out of the trouble they caused.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

What you have ALL missed here is...

45 years cycling in the West Midlands metropolis and I've had TWO incidents.

The first was 15 years ago and the second 4 years ago.

You are probably correct in saying "It was the motorists who were to blame", but what caused them to get so aggrieved? It was my riding 'In their way'....

OP committed TWO fatal mistakes.

1/ He rode away in 'Primary', effectively becoming 'the prat on the bike'.

2/ He TOUCHED Mr Focus' precious metal.


To avoid getting sworn at ( or if its really bad, smacked in the teeth ) again, get out of the idiot's way and DON'T lay a finger on his paintwork.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

What you have ALL missed here is...

45 years cycling in the West Midlands metropolis and I've had TWO incidents.

The first was 15 years ago and the second 4 years ago.

You are probably correct in saying "It was the motorists who were to blame", but what caused them to get so aggrieved? It was my riding 'In their way'....

OP committed TWO fatal mistakes.

1/ He rode away in 'Primary', effectively becoming 'the prat on the bike'.

2/ He TOUCHED Mr Focus' precious metal.


To avoid getting sworn at ( or if its really bad, smacked in the teeth ) again, get out of the idiot's way and DON'T lay a finger on his paintwork.


----------



## tdr1nka (16 Jan 2010)

Jim, there is still absolutely nothing wrong with taking a primary position away from an ASL.
In most cases a cyclist has better reaction time to the change of the lights and can be upto speed before the car behind has even thought of changing up from second gear.


----------



## tdr1nka (16 Jan 2010)

Jim, there is still absolutely nothing wrong with taking a primary position away from an ASL.
In most cases a cyclist has better reaction time to the change of the lights and can be upto speed before the car behind has even thought of changing up from second gear.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> Somewhere it says that it is illegal to cross the solid white line after the lights change - for either cyclists or cars. That is why they should have a filter lane to allow access. However the positioning of the filter lane may not always be in the best place - so for example one on my route to the office is a filter lane down the left hand side of a turning left lane - puts you in totally the wrong place.
> 
> I usually ignore the rule and approach from which ever side is safest. But technically he is correct.
> 
> There are also some ASL's which don't have feeder lanes and therefore are technically incorrect themselves.



The trick is to assess the lights. THis happens on my commute. I know that there is a period of some 4 minutes where it is safe to filter as the traffic is kept by the light sequencing, yet at other times this would be a lethal maneouvre.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Jan 2010)

summerdays said:


> Somewhere it says that it is illegal to cross the solid white line after the lights change - for either cyclists or cars. That is why they should have a filter lane to allow access. However the positioning of the filter lane may not always be in the best place - so for example one on my route to the office is a filter lane down the left hand side of a turning left lane - puts you in totally the wrong place.
> 
> I usually ignore the rule and approach from which ever side is safest. But technically he is correct.
> 
> There are also some ASL's which don't have feeder lanes and therefore are technically incorrect themselves.



The trick is to assess the lights. THis happens on my commute. I know that there is a period of some 4 minutes where it is safe to filter as the traffic is kept by the light sequencing, yet at other times this would be a lethal maneouvre.


----------



## ttcycle (16 Jan 2010)

jimbo - there is nothing wrong with taking primary in an ASL- it increases visability.

I know the roads you cycle - they're different to in London - probably higher speeds but less busy.

I do think it pays to be assertive on the roads and back to the OP - overtaking into the ASL is sometimes the safest thing to do -coming through on the filter lane on the L hand side is often very unsafe due to left hooks, no space etc etc


----------



## ttcycle (16 Jan 2010)

jimbo - there is nothing wrong with taking primary in an ASL- it increases visability.

I know the roads you cycle - they're different to in London - probably higher speeds but less busy.

I do think it pays to be assertive on the roads and back to the OP - overtaking into the ASL is sometimes the safest thing to do -coming through on the filter lane on the L hand side is often very unsafe due to left hooks, no space etc etc


----------



## Rhythm Thief (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> To avoid getting sworn at ( or if its really bad, smacked in the teeth ) again, get out of the idiot's way and DON'T lay a finger on his paintwork.



Or better still, why not simply stay at home, perhaps remaining in bed with the covers pulled over your head? Then you won't be in anyone's way.
Honestly, Jimbo. If this works for you, that's fine, but it's not good to advise a new cyclist to wobble around in the gutter, keeping out of everyone's way. If you're as experienced as you claim to be you should know that it's sometimes necessary to control the traffic behind you. You should certainly not be merely trying to keep out of the way of the "proper" traffic at all times. You're part of the traffic on a bike: if you want to be taken seriously as a road user you should act like it.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (16 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> To avoid getting sworn at ( or if its really bad, smacked in the teeth ) again, get out of the idiot's way and DON'T lay a finger on his paintwork.



Or better still, why not simply stay at home, perhaps remaining in bed with the covers pulled over your head? Then you won't be in anyone's way.
Honestly, Jimbo. If this works for you, that's fine, but it's not good to advise a new cyclist to wobble around in the gutter, keeping out of everyone's way. If you're as experienced as you claim to be you should know that it's sometimes necessary to control the traffic behind you. You should certainly not be merely trying to keep out of the way of the "proper" traffic at all times. You're part of the traffic on a bike: if you want to be taken seriously as a road user you should act like it.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

I enjoy cycling and I enjoy arriving home safely, which, as I've said, has been the case for forty five years.

When I ride an Audax DIY or MidMesh, I wear my Solihull CC jersey. When I'm wearing my club colours, I'm an ambassador for the sport of cycling. 
My target speed isn't fantastic and I have to admit, I take it easy along the rural roads, and even easier in the towns.

I take it easy because I KNOW trying to ride fast lands the cyclist in all sorts of conflicts with Mr and Mrs motorist.

In the towns, eg Stratford u Avon, there are motorists. That's no surprise. Some are housewives shopping and some are WVMen trying to get their day's work done.
There are many 'pinchpoints' in Stratford; and letting the motorists go first will not only ensure I get my final control proof instead of a hospital bed, but shows this Solihull CC member is a fine chap and respectful of other road users.

You can all play it your own way, risking the wrath of Mr Focus. I'll play it mine and continue to enjoy my cycling instead of getting wound up and abused by some jerk in a car who thought I was blocking his swift passage.

In my younger years, a jovial exploit was racing the bus from Birmingham to Solihull. I mostly won.
The only problem with 'getting a stink on' in the afternoon traffic is that some motorists took it as a personal challenge to stop the cyclist getting further down the road than them.
They would overtake ( or try to ) and cut in to slow me down, or drag race me off traffic lights, which only proved they had more strength in their right foot than both my legs.

After twenty years of getting slower and slower, I've seen the attitude of motorists change from competative to appreciative when I let them go ahead first.


----------



## jimboalee (16 Jan 2010)

I enjoy cycling and I enjoy arriving home safely, which, as I've said, has been the case for forty five years.

When I ride an Audax DIY or MidMesh, I wear my Solihull CC jersey. When I'm wearing my club colours, I'm an ambassador for the sport of cycling. 
My target speed isn't fantastic and I have to admit, I take it easy along the rural roads, and even easier in the towns.

I take it easy because I KNOW trying to ride fast lands the cyclist in all sorts of conflicts with Mr and Mrs motorist.

In the towns, eg Stratford u Avon, there are motorists. That's no surprise. Some are housewives shopping and some are WVMen trying to get their day's work done.
There are many 'pinchpoints' in Stratford; and letting the motorists go first will not only ensure I get my final control proof instead of a hospital bed, but shows this Solihull CC member is a fine chap and respectful of other road users.

You can all play it your own way, risking the wrath of Mr Focus. I'll play it mine and continue to enjoy my cycling instead of getting wound up and abused by some jerk in a car who thought I was blocking his swift passage.

In my younger years, a jovial exploit was racing the bus from Birmingham to Solihull. I mostly won.
The only problem with 'getting a stink on' in the afternoon traffic is that some motorists took it as a personal challenge to stop the cyclist getting further down the road than them.
They would overtake ( or try to ) and cut in to slow me down, or drag race me off traffic lights, which only proved they had more strength in their right foot than both my legs.

After twenty years of getting slower and slower, I've seen the attitude of motorists change from competative to appreciative when I let them go ahead first.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Jan 2010)

Besides, I think that a genuine mistake has been made in the OP

Surely this read that the offending vehicle was so close you were forced to fend yourself off from the vehicle to avoid colliding with it?


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Jan 2010)

Besides, I think that a genuine mistake has been made in the OP

Surely this read that the offending vehicle was so close you were forced to fend yourself off from the vehicle to avoid colliding with it?


----------



## eldudino (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> What you have ALL missed here is...
> 
> ...what caused them to get so aggrieved? It was my riding 'In their way'....



So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine? We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.

Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong. 

I'm unsure why you're supporting dangerous driving, or maybe you empathise with Mr.Focus and drive in a similar manner if another road user gets in your way?


----------



## eldudino (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> What you have ALL missed here is...
> 
> ...what caused them to get so aggrieved? It was my riding 'In their way'....



So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine? We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.

Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong. 

I'm unsure why you're supporting dangerous driving, or maybe you empathise with Mr.Focus and drive in a similar manner if another road user gets in your way?


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> What you have ALL missed here is...
> 
> 45 years cycling in the West Midlands metropolis and I've had TWO incidents.
> 
> ...



One persons alone is not statistically relevant. More to the point, I'm now entirely convinced that you're riding very passively and merely accepting close overtakes and being cut up with no comment. Its the only way you could have very few 'incidents' riding the way you do. 

Your passive style is all too common.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> What you have ALL missed here is...
> 
> 45 years cycling in the West Midlands metropolis and I've had TWO incidents.
> 
> ...



One persons alone is not statistically relevant. More to the point, I'm now entirely convinced that you're riding very passively and merely accepting close overtakes and being cut up with no comment. Its the only way you could have very few 'incidents' riding the way you do. 

Your passive style is all too common.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> You can all play it your own way, risking the wrath of Mr Focus.



I will, thanks. Tell me, why are cyclists taught to do it wrong (in your eyes)?


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> You can all play it your own way, risking the wrath of Mr Focus.



I will, thanks. Tell me, why are cyclists taught to do it wrong (in your eyes)?


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> What exactly has he done wrong, he has his ways and he has not had any trouble, what's the problem? Some people really are to 'die hard' when it comes to road craft and positioning.



How many passive sub-secondary position cyclists do you see?

What proprotion get very regular, very close overtakes?

How many seem incensed by that?

That he is not aware of a problem does not mean that there is not one.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> What exactly has he done wrong, he has his ways and he has not had any trouble, what's the problem? Some people really are to 'die hard' when it comes to road craft and positioning.



How many passive sub-secondary position cyclists do you see?

What proprotion get very regular, very close overtakes?

How many seem incensed by that?

That he is not aware of a problem does not mean that there is not one.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> *So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine?* We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.
> 
> Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong.
> 
> I'm unsure why you're supporting dangerous driving, or maybe you empathise with Mr.Focus and drive in a similar manner if another road user gets in your way?



Here's the answer.

None, but consider this.

If a cyclist hits a motorcar at it's NORMAL speed, the cyclist might slip off the front of the saddle and hurt his doobries; and the car might get a dent in the door.

If a car hits a cyclist at it's NORMAL speed, the car might get a few dents and scratches; and the cyclist might be incapacitated to the extent of needing to move around in a wheelchair for rest of his life.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> *So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine?* We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.
> 
> Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong.
> 
> I'm unsure why you're supporting dangerous driving, or maybe you empathise with Mr.Focus and drive in a similar manner if another road user gets in your way?



Here's the answer.

None, but consider this.

If a cyclist hits a motorcar at it's NORMAL speed, the cyclist might slip off the front of the saddle and hurt his doobries; and the car might get a dent in the door.

If a car hits a cyclist at it's NORMAL speed, the car might get a few dents and scratches; and the cyclist might be incapacitated to the extent of needing to move around in a wheelchair for rest of his life.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



He's not being lambasted for his riding style. He's being lambasted for being critical of how everyone else (correctly) chooses to use ASL's.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



He's not being lambasted for his riding style. He's being lambasted for being critical of how everyone else (correctly) chooses to use ASL's.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Here's the answer.
> 
> None, but consider this.
> 
> ...



So might makes right? Sorry, no.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Here's the answer.
> 
> None, but consider this.
> 
> ...



So might makes right? Sorry, no.


----------



## Coco (17 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine? We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.
> 
> Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong.



+1

I'm also of the opinion that if you can touch their car, then they're too close. But I haven't been riding for 45 years


----------



## Coco (17 Jan 2010)

eldudino said:


> So what if I pose the question as to why it is their right to be there over mine? We're talking a matter of yards here that Mr.Focus wasn't willing to wait, this was on fairly empty roads and he was stopping 400yds ahead.
> 
> Being in the primary in poor conditions in this instance was correct, the motorists actions were wrong.



+1

I'm also of the opinion that if you can touch their car, then they're too close. But I haven't been riding for 45 years


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

Coco said:


> +1
> 
> I'm also of the opinion that if you can touch their car, then they're too close. But I haven't been riding for 45 years



The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.

A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).

The car leave 1' between it and the centre markers. The bike rides 2' from the kerb minimum.

That leaves 1 foot between the cyclist's elbow and the passing car.

If I reach out my right arm, the passing cars will hit my right hand.

This is pretty normal in the urban environment.

If I was to throw out my right arm suddenly and the passing car hits it, it would be MY responsibilty for any damage because,

1/ Riding without due care and attention, and 
2/ Causing an obstruction to traffic.

Try it.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

Coco said:


> +1
> 
> I'm also of the opinion that if you can touch their car, then they're too close. But I haven't been riding for 45 years



The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.

A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).

The car leave 1' between it and the centre markers. The bike rides 2' from the kerb minimum.

That leaves 1 foot between the cyclist's elbow and the passing car.

If I reach out my right arm, the passing cars will hit my right hand.

This is pretty normal in the urban environment.

If I was to throw out my right arm suddenly and the passing car hits it, it would be MY responsibilty for any damage because,

1/ Riding without due care and attention, and 
2/ Causing an obstruction to traffic.

Try it.


----------



## ttcycle (17 Jan 2010)

Surely Jim you'd look behind you first to see if there was a car or to determine if it was safe to indicate?


----------



## ttcycle (17 Jan 2010)

Surely Jim you'd look behind you first to see if there was a car or to determine if it was safe to indicate?


----------



## hackbike 666 (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



Aye.

There is a lot of this on here.If you don't do it my way then you are wrong.

That's why I very rarely comment on road positioning and the like but just let the usual suspects get on with it while I get on with my cycling.


----------



## hackbike 666 (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



Aye.

There is a lot of this on here.If you don't do it my way then you are wrong.

That's why I very rarely comment on road positioning and the like but just let the usual suspects get on with it while I get on with my cycling.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



Just to reiterate, Jim originally expressed the opinion that those of us who position ourselves in a primary position in an ASL box, or ride in a primary road position are asking for close overtakes, trouble from following traffic and should readily concede our place on the road to impatient motorists so as not to aggravate them.

He seems keen on advising other cyclists to be more passive toward motorised traffic, which as an instructor I couldn't disagree with more.
As cyclists we should be considered part of the traffic and it would be nice to think that was respected across the board whereas I think we know this isn't the case.

To match Jim's brag, I've cycled in this manner, where needed, in London traffic for some twenty years and, as yet, I've not had one collision because of my riding style.
Plenty of shouting and beeping from the type who say cyclists shouldn't be on the roads at all but when you're holding someone back for a few measley seconds from cutting you up where there isn't safe space to do so, you don't usually get the time or a chance to explain.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> Never said there was not a problem, my point is that Jimbo has his own style of riding, granted not to everyones own taste but it works for him. And he ends up getting lamblasted for daring to be different and say that he lets traffic through when he can.



Just to reiterate, Jim originally expressed the opinion that those of us who position ourselves in a primary position in an ASL box, or ride in a primary road position are asking for close overtakes, trouble from following traffic and should readily concede our place on the road to impatient motorists so as not to aggravate them.

He seems keen on advising other cyclists to be more passive toward motorised traffic, which as an instructor I couldn't disagree with more.
As cyclists we should be considered part of the traffic and it would be nice to think that was respected across the board whereas I think we know this isn't the case.

To match Jim's brag, I've cycled in this manner, where needed, in London traffic for some twenty years and, as yet, I've not had one collision because of my riding style.
Plenty of shouting and beeping from the type who say cyclists shouldn't be on the roads at all but when you're holding someone back for a few measley seconds from cutting you up where there isn't safe space to do so, you don't usually get the time or a chance to explain.


----------



## Coco (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).


Nah, my bike is much narrower than that.


----------



## Coco (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).


Nah, my bike is much narrower than that.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

When I raced dirtbikes, there were a couple of dozen other riders with the same idea, ‘get to the front’. It’s a bit like that at rushhour traffic lights.
There are no plastic bicycles on fake marble plinths to be won, so I just let them get on with their ‘ten to the dozen’ scramble home ( or into work, as the case may be ).

Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity.

Is this what happened to OP?

Look at it from Mr Focus’ point of view.

You’ve had slow journey in the icy weather and had to stop at a red, when a cheeky c*nt cyclist come past from the RHS and stops right in front of you. Then he rides away close to the centre of the carriageway instead of getting more to the left. “I’ll get past this awkward f*cker and get in _his_ f*cking way”.
When you pass the ‘prat on the bike’, he slaps your paintwork.
“Who the f*ck does he think he is?” “I’ll slap the bas*ard back”, so you find the next place to pull over and get out.
You have a swear at the cyclist who replies with some Highway Code which is quite correct. 
You have a good look at his face, his clothes and his bike and commit it to memory for a future occasion when you can be a bit more forceful with a large piece of timber.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

When I raced dirtbikes, there were a couple of dozen other riders with the same idea, ‘get to the front’. It’s a bit like that at rushhour traffic lights.
There are no plastic bicycles on fake marble plinths to be won, so I just let them get on with their ‘ten to the dozen’ scramble home ( or into work, as the case may be ).

Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity.

Is this what happened to OP?

Look at it from Mr Focus’ point of view.

You’ve had slow journey in the icy weather and had to stop at a red, when a cheeky c*nt cyclist come past from the RHS and stops right in front of you. Then he rides away close to the centre of the carriageway instead of getting more to the left. “I’ll get past this awkward f*cker and get in _his_ f*cking way”.
When you pass the ‘prat on the bike’, he slaps your paintwork.
“Who the f*ck does he think he is?” “I’ll slap the bas*ard back”, so you find the next place to pull over and get out.
You have a swear at the cyclist who replies with some Highway Code which is quite correct. 
You have a good look at his face, his clothes and his bike and commit it to memory for a future occasion when you can be a bit more forceful with a large piece of timber.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity.



Again you are so wrong as well as now misrepresenting a good majority of drivers.

Starting from an ASL(which incedentily is there to give you a head start over the following traffic in the first place)in a primary position is called 'holding the road'.

Also a lot of ASL's involve a left turn ahead so the need to take a primary position in order to disuade cars from cutting across you is also in order.

If we were to follow your advice to the letter, we should need to dismount at every set of lights and only proceed with our journey once all the nasty cars have gone.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity.



Again you are so wrong as well as now misrepresenting a good majority of drivers.

Starting from an ASL(which incedentily is there to give you a head start over the following traffic in the first place)in a primary position is called 'holding the road'.

Also a lot of ASL's involve a left turn ahead so the need to take a primary position in order to disuade cars from cutting across you is also in order.

If we were to follow your advice to the letter, we should need to dismount at every set of lights and only proceed with our journey once all the nasty cars have gone.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

There are two types of sportsmen. Those with natural talent and those who need a book to tell them how to do it.

The same applies to cycling in traffic. There are those who recognise danger and ride in a position well away from it, and those who ride ‘to the book’ but take so much time deciding if they really are ‘to the book’, they end up being a nuisance.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

There are two types of sportsmen. Those with natural talent and those who need a book to tell them how to do it.

The same applies to cycling in traffic. There are those who recognise danger and ride in a position well away from it, and those who ride ‘to the book’ but take so much time deciding if they really are ‘to the book’, they end up being a nuisance.


----------



## Lurker (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> ...Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity....




Like the picture of the ASL in use, illustrating HC Rule 178, here

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332


you mean?


----------



## Lurker (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> ...Standing directly in front of the queue of traffic inside an ASL reservoir when I’m not turning Right is effectively ‘joining the race’ and I’m there to be overtaken at the first opportunity....




Like the picture of the ASL in use, illustrating HC Rule 178, here

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332


you mean?


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> There are two types of sportsmen. Those with natural talent and those who need a book to tell them how to do it.
> 
> The same applies to cycling in traffic. There are those who recognise danger and ride in a position well away from it, and those who ride ‘to the book’ but take so much time deciding if they really are ‘to the book’, they end up being a nuisance.



So you are saying that no matter what the reason, it is wrong for a cyclist to hold up traffic, even if he/she is doing it for their own safety?

You make great assumptions and generalisations, fwiw, my defensive riding style came from years on motorbikes and that was nearly fifteen years before I came to read cyclecraft. The book confirmed that I was doing the best for my own safety. Be seen, make eye contact, signal clearly and pull over when it is safe to do so.

If drivers actually drove in the knowledge of how a cyclist is allowed to use the road none of this need be a problem.
A yoof on a BSO riding up the middle of the road, no hands and talking on a mobile is a problem, yes.
An experienced cyclist taking the road for mere seconds to ensure their own safety is not.

Any driver who bullies a cyclist off the line at an ASL needs re-educating(maybe not by the cyclist in question)and not the cyclist who needs to get out of the way. 

We've not even touched on the subject of priority.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> There are two types of sportsmen. Those with natural talent and those who need a book to tell them how to do it.
> 
> The same applies to cycling in traffic. There are those who recognise danger and ride in a position well away from it, and those who ride ‘to the book’ but take so much time deciding if they really are ‘to the book’, they end up being a nuisance.



So you are saying that no matter what the reason, it is wrong for a cyclist to hold up traffic, even if he/she is doing it for their own safety?

You make great assumptions and generalisations, fwiw, my defensive riding style came from years on motorbikes and that was nearly fifteen years before I came to read cyclecraft. The book confirmed that I was doing the best for my own safety. Be seen, make eye contact, signal clearly and pull over when it is safe to do so.

If drivers actually drove in the knowledge of how a cyclist is allowed to use the road none of this need be a problem.
A yoof on a BSO riding up the middle of the road, no hands and talking on a mobile is a problem, yes.
An experienced cyclist taking the road for mere seconds to ensure their own safety is not.

Any driver who bullies a cyclist off the line at an ASL needs re-educating(maybe not by the cyclist in question)and not the cyclist who needs to get out of the way. 

We've not even touched on the subject of priority.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

"Don't worry Noddy, I've read Cyclecraft".

"Yes, but the Goblins who stole my car don't give a toss about Cyclecraft and they'll run you off the road if you get in their way".


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

"Don't worry Noddy, I've read Cyclecraft".

"Yes, but the Goblins who stole my car don't give a toss about Cyclecraft and they'll run you off the road if you get in their way".


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

A good measured response there to some points of view that don't match your own there Jim.

What's really sad about your position on this is that if more cyclists actually read cyclecraft as a guide, I don't suggest everyone follows it to the letter, then there might be fewer incidents of the kind as you see them.

The overall point being, no matter how a cyclist rides in front of you, as a driver you have a duty of care to them as a vulnerable road user.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

A good measured response there to some points of view that don't match your own there Jim.

What's really sad about your position on this is that if more cyclists actually read cyclecraft as a guide, I don't suggest everyone follows it to the letter, then there might be fewer incidents of the kind as you see them.

The overall point being, no matter how a cyclist rides in front of you, as a driver you have a duty of care to them as a vulnerable road user.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

I've been out for a ride today.

Into Birmingham shopping centre ( Bull Ring ).

I rode as I usually do, ignoring ASL reservoirs, going forward at TL stoplines and giving Mr Motorist the 'benefit of the doubt' at junctions.

I got back home safe and sound. No toots, no shouts, no worries.

How do I do it?


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

I've been out for a ride today.

Into Birmingham shopping centre ( Bull Ring ).

I rode as I usually do, ignoring ASL reservoirs, going forward at TL stoplines and giving Mr Motorist the 'benefit of the doubt' at junctions.

I got back home safe and sound. No toots, no shouts, no worries.

How do I do it?


----------



## boydj (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.
> 
> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).
> 
> ...



Well I have been riding for over 45 years and can tell you that a car that passes close enough for you to touch is way too close. If you did touch it, then it is the driver who has broken the law. Check the oft-quoted picture in the highway code.

I had an incident a few weeks ago where I was passed by a stream of about six cars. All moved out and passed safely except the last, which did not deviate from his line, passed close enough to touch and got the finger as a result. He saw the gesture, pulled over at the next junction and we exchanged words - politely. He actually apologised after I explained why he should have pulled out to overtake.


I know I get far fewer close overtakes - and very little grief from motorists - since I became more assertive in my road position. Perhaps you should give that a try......


----------



## boydj (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.
> 
> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).
> 
> ...



Well I have been riding for over 45 years and can tell you that a car that passes close enough for you to touch is way too close. If you did touch it, then it is the driver who has broken the law. Check the oft-quoted picture in the highway code.

I had an incident a few weeks ago where I was passed by a stream of about six cars. All moved out and passed safely except the last, which did not deviate from his line, passed close enough to touch and got the finger as a result. He saw the gesture, pulled over at the next junction and we exchanged words - politely. He actually apologised after I explained why he should have pulled out to overtake.


I know I get far fewer close overtakes - and very little grief from motorists - since I became more assertive in my road position. Perhaps you should give that a try......


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> "Don't worry Noddy, I've read Cyclecraft".
> 
> "Yes, but the Goblins who stole my car don't give a toss about Cyclecraft and they'll run you off the road if you get in their way".









"... and then Mr Plod will tell the ignorant drivers off for not driving in a careful and proper manner."


There are two classics on my commute.... both ASLs at a T Junction and a significant proportion turning left. Failing to position yourself in "Primary" is inviting a left hook and is far more dangerous.


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> "Don't worry Noddy, I've read Cyclecraft".
> 
> "Yes, but the Goblins who stole my car don't give a toss about Cyclecraft and they'll run you off the road if you get in their way".









"... and then Mr Plod will tell the ignorant drivers off for not driving in a careful and proper manner."


There are two classics on my commute.... both ASLs at a T Junction and a significant proportion turning left. Failing to position yourself in "Primary" is inviting a left hook and is far more dangerous.


----------



## BentMikey (17 Jan 2010)

Lurker said:


> Like the picture of the ASL in use, illustrating HC Rule 178, here
> 
> http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332
> 
> ...




Look at this Jimbo - you are always harping on about the highway code:





*178*

Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, *MUST* stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you *MUST* stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.


You are this: WRONG and FAIL of paying attention to the highway code.


----------



## BentMikey (17 Jan 2010)

Lurker said:


> Like the picture of the ASL in use, illustrating HC Rule 178, here
> 
> http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332
> 
> ...




Look at this Jimbo - you are always harping on about the highway code:






*178*

Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, *MUST* stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you *MUST* stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.


You are this: WRONG and FAIL of paying attention to the highway code.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I've been out for a ride today.
> 
> Into Birmingham shopping centre ( Bull Ring ).
> 
> ...



By riding on the pavement?

No, but seriously, if you go ahead of the TL stop line you are essentially making your own ASL, if not extending the one that's there which is a bit rich considering your opinion of them.

IMO this sort of cycling can irritate motorists just as much, as well as being in contrevention of the HC.


----------



## tdr1nka (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I've been out for a ride today.
> 
> Into Birmingham shopping centre ( Bull Ring ).
> 
> ...



By riding on the pavement?

No, but seriously, if you go ahead of the TL stop line you are essentially making your own ASL, if not extending the one that's there which is a bit rich considering your opinion of them.

IMO this sort of cycling can irritate motorists just as much, as well as being in contrevention of the HC.


----------



## BentMikey (17 Jan 2010)

I'm currently chuckling at how your riding was when we met up. So unlike Jimbo's description of his own meekness!!!


----------



## BentMikey (17 Jan 2010)

I'm currently chuckling at how your riding was when we met up. So unlike Jimbo's description of his own meekness!!!


----------



## mr_cellophane (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> No, Jimbo is not wrong the motorist in the diagram is wrong - YOU ARE WRONG!


As you don't see state of the lights when the driver in the left hand picture entered the box, both drivers could be following the HC.


----------



## mr_cellophane (17 Jan 2010)

User3143 said:


> No, Jimbo is not wrong the motorist in the diagram is wrong - YOU ARE WRONG!


As you don't see state of the lights when the driver in the left hand picture entered the box, both drivers could be following the HC.


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (17 Jan 2010)

mr_cellophane said:


> As you don't see state of the lights when the driver in the left hand picture entered the box, both drivers could be following the HC.



Correct

Sometimes one finds oneself in the embarassing situation of being in the ASL with a "give cyclists room" sticker on the back, looking like the world's biggest hypocrite.

If this happens I usually try to make eye contact with the cyclist and signal that I will wait for them to set off. If not, I simply wait until the cyclist has set off (usually getting a "oi the lights have changed wake up!" beep from the car behind but bods to them)


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (17 Jan 2010)

mr_cellophane said:


> As you don't see state of the lights when the driver in the left hand picture entered the box, both drivers could be following the HC.



Correct

Sometimes one finds oneself in the embarassing situation of being in the ASL with a "give cyclists room" sticker on the back, looking like the world's biggest hypocrite.

If this happens I usually try to make eye contact with the cyclist and signal that I will wait for them to set off. If not, I simply wait until the cyclist has set off (usually getting a "oi the lights have changed wake up!" beep from the car behind but bods to them)


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> Look at this Jimbo - you are always harping on about the highway code:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?

The red reservoir area is the whole width of the lane, and as the rule states, "Allow cyclists time and space to move off".

If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".

If I'm proceeding forward, I would consider myself rude and arrogant if I deliberately went to where the chap in white is in the 'correct' picture.
It would give the motorist the idea I was turning Right, and when I pedalled away forward, he'd be puzzled, if not annoyed.
If I kept that RHS position all the way across the junction and into the exit road, he'd think I was taking the piss and then be annoyed.

Is this what happened to OP?


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jan 2010)

BentMikey said:


> Look at this Jimbo - you are always harping on about the highway code:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?

The red reservoir area is the whole width of the lane, and as the rule states, "Allow cyclists time and space to move off".

If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".

If I'm proceeding forward, I would consider myself rude and arrogant if I deliberately went to where the chap in white is in the 'correct' picture.
It would give the motorist the idea I was turning Right, and when I pedalled away forward, he'd be puzzled, if not annoyed.
If I kept that RHS position all the way across the junction and into the exit road, he'd think I was taking the piss and then be annoyed.

Is this what happened to OP?


----------



## Lurker (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?



Perhaps because he's not turning right?



jimboalee said:


> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?



OK, perhaps because there are other cyclists also travelling in same direction and he is politely giving them room? (one immediately to his left; another approaching in the lead-in lane - let's call them cyclists 2 & 3)



jimboalee said:


> The red reservoir area is the whole width of the lane, and as the rule states, "Allow cyclists time and space to move off".
> 
> If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".




Unfortunately your expectation often isn't matched by reality. There's little risk to a motorist if they 'left hook' you - and some drivers will take your positioning as an invitation to do this.



jimboalee said:


> If I'm proceeding forward, I would consider myself rude and arrogant if I deliberately went to where the chap in white is in the 'correct' picture.




Not sure why. The alternative would be to not allow enough room for cyclist 2. That would certainly be rude and arrogant.



jimboalee said:


> It would give the motorist the idea I was turning Right, and when I pedalled away forward, he'd be puzzled, if not annoyed.




Might do, might not. On the other hand, the motorist might realise that cyclist 1 was simply leaving room for cyclists 2 & 3 (if they think about it at all).



jimboalee said:


> If I kept that RHS position all the way across the junction and into the exit road, he'd think I was taking the piss and then be annoyed.




Might do, might not. A good driver would consider why the cyclist was keeping well out in the lane. The OP's difficulties seemed to be related to the motorist feeling that the cyclist shouldn't enter the ASL from the offside, regardless of the reasons behind this.



jimboalee said:


> Is this what happened to OP?



Not according to OP


----------



## Lurker (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?



Perhaps because he's not turning right?



jimboalee said:


> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?



OK, perhaps because there are other cyclists also travelling in same direction and he is politely giving them room? (one immediately to his left; another approaching in the lead-in lane - let's call them cyclists 2 & 3)



jimboalee said:


> The red reservoir area is the whole width of the lane, and as the rule states, "Allow cyclists time and space to move off".
> 
> If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".




Unfortunately your expectation often isn't matched by reality. There's little risk to a motorist if they 'left hook' you - and some drivers will take your positioning as an invitation to do this.



jimboalee said:


> If I'm proceeding forward, I would consider myself rude and arrogant if I deliberately went to where the chap in white is in the 'correct' picture.




Not sure why. The alternative would be to not allow enough room for cyclist 2. That would certainly be rude and arrogant.



jimboalee said:


> It would give the motorist the idea I was turning Right, and when I pedalled away forward, he'd be puzzled, if not annoyed.




Might do, might not. On the other hand, the motorist might realise that cyclist 1 was simply leaving room for cyclists 2 & 3 (if they think about it at all).



jimboalee said:


> If I kept that RHS position all the way across the junction and into the exit road, he'd think I was taking the piss and then be annoyed.




Might do, might not. A good driver would consider why the cyclist was keeping well out in the lane. The OP's difficulties seemed to be related to the motorist feeling that the cyclist shouldn't enter the ASL from the offside, regardless of the reasons behind this.



jimboalee said:


> Is this what happened to OP?



Not according to OP


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".



I'll give you this - you're one of nature's "glass half full" people rather than "glass half empty"

I'm more of a "my head is like glass and I'd rather it doesn't get broken than trust that the driver behind actually took any interest in the highway code except for the bare minimum for driving test sake"


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> If I'm INSIDE the red area with my foot on the kerb, I would expect the motorist to allow me time and space to move off, not 'left hook' me".



I'll give you this - you're one of nature's "glass half full" people rather than "glass half empty"

I'm more of a "my head is like glass and I'd rather it doesn't get broken than trust that the driver behind actually took any interest in the highway code except for the bare minimum for driving test sake"


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.
> 
> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).
> 
> ...



Which is too close. At high speed, at nearly _any_ speed, thats too close. If you're accepting of that then good luck to you, its your own business if you wish to ride in a way contrary to _every_ piece of advice available to cyclists from pretty nearly every source.

Bluntly, in the scenario you describe, if the cyclist is two feet from the kerb, then the car has no business overtaking without crossing the centre line of the road. At all. Ever. Even if the bike isn't moving.



> If I reach out my right arm, the passing cars will hit my right hand.
> 
> This is pretty normal in the urban environment.



No it isn't, not if you ride more assertively. Its normal for you because you're allowing it, and it means you're at greater risk than you should be. That few motons shout at you for rolling on your back and letting them tickle your belly is unsurprising; that you're needlessly increasing your own risk is undoubtedly true. Your business, of course, but if you continue to post advising other cyclists to act in a similarly passive, less safe way then you'll continue to be corrected.



> If I was to throw out my right arm suddenly and the passing car hits it, it would be MY responsibilty for any damage because,
> 
> 1/ Riding without due care and attention, and
> 2/ Causing an obstruction to traffic.
> ...



Nope. Go ask plod. If a car comes so close by that you can reach, the driver is in error.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The standard lane width is 3m, or 10 ft.
> 
> A bike is 2' and a car is 5' (nominal).
> 
> ...



Which is too close. At high speed, at nearly _any_ speed, thats too close. If you're accepting of that then good luck to you, its your own business if you wish to ride in a way contrary to _every_ piece of advice available to cyclists from pretty nearly every source.

Bluntly, in the scenario you describe, if the cyclist is two feet from the kerb, then the car has no business overtaking without crossing the centre line of the road. At all. Ever. Even if the bike isn't moving.



> If I reach out my right arm, the passing cars will hit my right hand.
> 
> This is pretty normal in the urban environment.



No it isn't, not if you ride more assertively. Its normal for you because you're allowing it, and it means you're at greater risk than you should be. That few motons shout at you for rolling on your back and letting them tickle your belly is unsurprising; that you're needlessly increasing your own risk is undoubtedly true. Your business, of course, but if you continue to post advising other cyclists to act in a similarly passive, less safe way then you'll continue to be corrected.



> If I was to throw out my right arm suddenly and the passing car hits it, it would be MY responsibilty for any damage because,
> 
> 1/ Riding without due care and attention, and
> 2/ Causing an obstruction to traffic.
> ...



Nope. Go ask plod. If a car comes so close by that you can reach, the driver is in error.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?



Because that, according to the illustration, to all cycle instruction I'm aware of and to all cycling manuals I'm aware of, is the correct place to be. The _entire_ argument against is because you think cyclists should roll over and ask to be ****ed by motorists, you want cyclists to act dangerously to make life more convenient for others.


----------



## Cab (17 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?



Because that, according to the illustration, to all cycle instruction I'm aware of and to all cycling manuals I'm aware of, is the correct place to be. The _entire_ argument against is because you think cyclists should roll over and ask to be ****ed by motorists, you want cyclists to act dangerously to make life more convenient for others.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (17 Jan 2010)

Cab has it spot on, Jimbo. As for motorists getting annoyed, I'm a professional driver and the only thing that annoys me about cyclists is when they cower in the gutter as if they're ashamed to be there instead of taking up their road space as they should be. My experience from both sides of this particular divide leads me to believe that motorists respect a cyclist who behaves confidently on the road far more than they do one who sticks to the gutter all the time.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (17 Jan 2010)

Cab has it spot on, Jimbo. As for motorists getting annoyed, I'm a professional driver and the only thing that annoys me about cyclists is when they cower in the gutter as if they're ashamed to be there instead of taking up their road space as they should be. My experience from both sides of this particular divide leads me to believe that motorists respect a cyclist who behaves confidently on the road far more than they do one who sticks to the gutter all the time.


----------



## gaz (17 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Cab has it spot on, Jimbo. As for motorists getting annoyed, I'm a professional driver and the only thing that annoys me about cyclists is when they cower in the gutter as if they're ashamed to be there instead of taking up their road space as they should be. My experience from both sides of this particular divide leads me to believe that motorists respect a cyclist who behaves confidently on the road far more than they do one who sticks to the gutter all the time.



true that. i find i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.

I also think the ASL is there for you to get in front of other vehicles for visibility. that means i want to be right in front of them and not hugging the gutter. Often you will find in london that there are easily 6+ in an ASL. two rows of 3. and the one on the far right is never going right you just all filter into a line after the lights. never had any issues with this.


----------



## gaz (17 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Cab has it spot on, Jimbo. As for motorists getting annoyed, I'm a professional driver and the only thing that annoys me about cyclists is when they cower in the gutter as if they're ashamed to be there instead of taking up their road space as they should be. My experience from both sides of this particular divide leads me to believe that motorists respect a cyclist who behaves confidently on the road far more than they do one who sticks to the gutter all the time.



true that. i find i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.

I also think the ASL is there for you to get in front of other vehicles for visibility. that means i want to be right in front of them and not hugging the gutter. Often you will find in london that there are easily 6+ in an ASL. two rows of 3. and the one on the far right is never going right you just all filter into a line after the lights. never had any issues with this.


----------



## summerdays (18 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?





gaz said:


> Often you will find in london that there are easily 6+ in an ASL. two rows of 3. and the one on the far right is never going right you just all filter into a line after the lights. never had any issues with this.



Agree with Gaz - there could be anything from 1 to 10 other cyclists sharing the ASL with me. I will position myself correctly for the direction that I'm going - so if going right then slightly further to the right - still in front of the car but allowing space for those going straight on.


----------



## summerdays (18 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The cyclist in white with a red hat. Why isn't he holding his right arm out to tell the motorist he intends to turn Right?
> If he is not turning Right, why is he all the way across on the RHS of the reservoir when he intends to proceed forward?





gaz said:


> Often you will find in london that there are easily 6+ in an ASL. two rows of 3. and the one on the far right is never going right you just all filter into a line after the lights. never had any issues with this.



Agree with Gaz - there could be anything from 1 to 10 other cyclists sharing the ASL with me. I will position myself correctly for the direction that I'm going - so if going right then slightly further to the right - still in front of the car but allowing space for those going straight on.


----------



## Alien8 (18 Jan 2010)

The problem with ASLs (cycle lanes and other _cycle enabling_ road features) is that they promote the segregation of cyclist from the rest of the traffic. In general this is bad and promotes poor road skills all round. Good/appropriate road positioning can be achieved whether an ASL is there or not. All ASLs let you do is have somewhere to go to if you want to jump a long line of stationary bumper to bumper traffic.


----------



## Alien8 (18 Jan 2010)

The problem with ASLs (cycle lanes and other _cycle enabling_ road features) is that they promote the segregation of cyclist from the rest of the traffic. In general this is bad and promotes poor road skills all round. Good/appropriate road positioning can be achieved whether an ASL is there or not. All ASLs let you do is have somewhere to go to if you want to jump a long line of stationary bumper to bumper traffic.


----------



## eldudino (18 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Is this what happened to OP?



Nope, I would say my position was between the two cyclists, on top of the bike logo, centrally placed to take the primary as I set off from the junction to inhibit close overtaking for what is really the first 60 yards or so. The junction is left turn or straight ahead only. It's pointless sending a google map as the junction has changed from the stock photo.


----------



## eldudino (18 Jan 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Is this what happened to OP?



Nope, I would say my position was between the two cyclists, on top of the bike logo, centrally placed to take the primary as I set off from the junction to inhibit close overtaking for what is really the first 60 yards or so. The junction is left turn or straight ahead only. It's pointless sending a google map as the junction has changed from the stock photo.


----------



## eldudino (18 Jan 2010)

gaz said:


> i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.



I gave a wave this morning and was awarded with one back. I could hear the car behind me as I was approaching a pinchpoint, took a glance and the motorist stayed. I was going to give them the opportunity to pass as there was plenty of space before the road tightened but she stayed behind me and I went through the tight spot in the primary, she then performed a nice, decisive overtake, giving me plenty of room so I gave a wave and got one back. Some drivers appreciate that cyclists are more vulnerable in these situations and drive accordingly. 

I also agree with Rhythmthief, if I see someone hugging the gutter - sometimes a solitary cyclist in club colours (which you tend to see more than you would like - maybe it's the same chap!), I just can't help thinking that they're doing their own thing and not moving as part of the traffic which they normally are. It encourages tight overtakes and you see that from the way other motorists treat them. As always, I give them plenty of room but other car drivers don't necessarily drive with the same appreciation.


----------



## eldudino (18 Jan 2010)

gaz said:


> i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.



I gave a wave this morning and was awarded with one back. I could hear the car behind me as I was approaching a pinchpoint, took a glance and the motorist stayed. I was going to give them the opportunity to pass as there was plenty of space before the road tightened but she stayed behind me and I went through the tight spot in the primary, she then performed a nice, decisive overtake, giving me plenty of room so I gave a wave and got one back. Some drivers appreciate that cyclists are more vulnerable in these situations and drive accordingly. 

I also agree with Rhythmthief, if I see someone hugging the gutter - sometimes a solitary cyclist in club colours (which you tend to see more than you would like - maybe it's the same chap!), I just can't help thinking that they're doing their own thing and not moving as part of the traffic which they normally are. It encourages tight overtakes and you see that from the way other motorists treat them. As always, I give them plenty of room but other car drivers don't necessarily drive with the same appreciation.


----------



## davidg (18 Jan 2010)

gaz said:


> true that. i find i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.



this 

plus a lot of you could do with thinking about what you would think from a car drivers point of view as well.....
the letter of the law is hardly going to save you and much of it is down to interpretation.

cyclist often think there is a law for drivers because of them when the sitaution is a bit of consideration for the other person will avoid more situations irrespective of "right".

It's impossible to judge the initial post, as the timings/space are unclear, but the car driver sees a cyclist go round him and then block the road for him. sometimes that sort of thing is unavoidable and just happens, but if you are in the primary and he can still get past, why not stay in the secondary and let him pass. Obviously was not a hight speed incident as you are just leaving the lights. There were only two cars which could have been long gone if you let them.

Also cyclists are so determined to get in front when it is not always necessary. See it every day when someone cycling really slowly squeezes past the artic trying to kill themselves when they could just say as part of the traffic


----------



## davidg (18 Jan 2010)

gaz said:


> true that. i find i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.



this 

plus a lot of you could do with thinking about what you would think from a car drivers point of view as well.....
the letter of the law is hardly going to save you and much of it is down to interpretation.

cyclist often think there is a law for drivers because of them when the sitaution is a bit of consideration for the other person will avoid more situations irrespective of "right".

It's impossible to judge the initial post, as the timings/space are unclear, but the car driver sees a cyclist go round him and then block the road for him. sometimes that sort of thing is unavoidable and just happens, but if you are in the primary and he can still get past, why not stay in the secondary and let him pass. Obviously was not a hight speed incident as you are just leaving the lights. There were only two cars which could have been long gone if you let them.

Also cyclists are so determined to get in front when it is not always necessary. See it every day when someone cycling really slowly squeezes past the artic trying to kill themselves when they could just say as part of the traffic


----------



## davidg (18 Jan 2010)

gaz said:


> true that. i find i get a lot more respect from drivers when i give a hand wave thanks for not overtaking me at a certain point.



this 

plus a lot of you could do with thinking about what you would think from a car drivers point of view as well.....
the letter of the law is hardly going to save you and much of it is down to interpretation.

cyclist often think there is a law for drivers because of them when the sitaution is a bit of consideration for the other person will avoid more situations irrespective of "right".

It's impossible to judge the initial post, as the timings/space are unclear, but the car driver sees a cyclist go round him and then block the road for him. sometimes that sort of thing is unavoidable and just happens, but if you are in the primary and he can still get past, why not stay in the secondary and let him pass. Obviously was not a hight speed incident as you are just leaving the lights. There were only two cars which could have been long gone if you let them.

Also cyclists are so determined to get in front when it is not always necessary. See it every day when someone cycling really slowly squeezes past the artic trying to kill themselves when they could just say as part of the traffic


----------



## Coco (18 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> ...*I'm a professional driver* ...



I see a lot of professional drivers on my commute and they are almost always polite, patient and well mannered - even when I'm slowing them down.

I can't thank them all so take a bow RT and accept my thanks on behalf of your profession.

cheers


----------



## Coco (18 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> ...*I'm a professional driver* ...



I see a lot of professional drivers on my commute and they are almost always polite, patient and well mannered - even when I'm slowing them down.

I can't thank them all so take a bow RT and accept my thanks on behalf of your profession.

cheers


----------



## Coco (18 Jan 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> ...*I'm a professional driver* ...



I see a lot of professional drivers on my commute and they are almost always polite, patient and well mannered - even when I'm slowing them down.

I can't thank them all so take a bow RT and accept my thanks on behalf of your profession.

cheers


----------



## BentMikey (18 Jan 2010)

I think Jimbo is surviving cycling not because of his incorrect approach, but in spite of it. It's a testament to how safe cycling is, and that his experience will help him to correct for and avoid the likely higher number of potential collisions his riding probably generates.

Jimbo, is there any way you can get a camera and film your riding, or get someone else to ride behind you with a handlebar/helmet camera?


----------



## BentMikey (18 Jan 2010)

I think Jimbo is surviving cycling not because of his incorrect approach, but in spite of it. It's a testament to how safe cycling is, and that his experience will help him to correct for and avoid the likely higher number of potential collisions his riding probably generates.

Jimbo, is there any way you can get a camera and film your riding, or get someone else to ride behind you with a handlebar/helmet camera?


----------



## BentMikey (18 Jan 2010)

I think Jimbo is surviving cycling not because of his incorrect approach, but in spite of it. It's a testament to how safe cycling is, and that his experience will help him to correct for and avoid the likely higher number of potential collisions his riding probably generates.

Jimbo, is there any way you can get a camera and film your riding, or get someone else to ride behind you with a handlebar/helmet camera?


----------



## jimboalee (18 Jan 2010)

I have mentioned Birmingham's No. 11 bus 'Outer circle' route.
If anyone with a helmet cam wishes to follow me round, Friday afternoon rush hour is a hoot.


----------



## jimboalee (18 Jan 2010)

I have mentioned Birmingham's No. 11 bus 'Outer circle' route.
If anyone with a helmet cam wishes to follow me round, Friday afternoon rush hour is a hoot.


----------



## jimboalee (18 Jan 2010)

I have mentioned Birmingham's No. 11 bus 'Outer circle' route.
If anyone with a helmet cam wishes to follow me round, Friday afternoon rush hour is a hoot.


----------

