If only it were true that reps were the only problem !!

Regards
SW (a rep)


"David Martin" wrote in message
...
On 22/11/04 1:20 pm, in article ,
"Drinky"
wrote:

In a previous post (What does it all mean?), JLB wrote:

A couple of decades ago in Bristol (perhaps elsewhere also) cyclists
were officially advised "Be Bright - Wear White". More than a few of us
responded "Fight Back - Wear Black". This inoculated us against any
dangerous delusion that we were visible and therefore somehow safe from
motor vehicles.

I am intrigued by this as I cycle a lot in the dark and despite being
lit up
"like the outside of a council house at christmas", I have a near-miss
incident on practically every ride.

Although I'm under no delusions that I'm safe from motor vehicles, do
people
believe that the number of near misses would reduce and my overall
safety
increase if I switch on the stealth instead of my lights?

It isn't so much teh number of the lights as the overall impression of
your
place on the road.

Ever wondered why a car will scrape past a wobbling cyclist with inches to
spare, then leave 6ft clearance to pass a pretty much immobile and
unlikely
to jump out or fall over skip? If so, then you need to read up on the
theory
of BIG.

http://www.bikereader.com/contributors/misc/big.html

..d