The advantage of cycling on the wrong side of narrow ways and one-ways

On Friday, December 13, 2013 3:08:27 AM UTC, SMS wrote:

the crazy San Francisco traffic. I haven't ridden this

particular street down to the Caltrain station before (4th Street) and

was surprised to see other cyclists all riding on the left (it's a one

way street) rather than the right. I followed their example and soon

understood why they did this.

For the sake of clarity: In San Francisco drivers drive on the right and the steering wheel is on the left of the car. Where I live drivers drive on the left and the steering wheel is on the right of the car.

Your experience rings a bell with me, Scharfie. I've several times described, here and elsewhere, how on the narrow lanes hereabouts, on which there really isn't space for a car to pass a cyclist with a metre (think a yard) of space, I take the lane to slow the car and then go to the right, so the driver, in the righthand seat, can see precisely how much space there is between his car's paintwork and my bike.

I also conducted a psychological experiment on a short piece of much wider road for fast through traffic. This has parking on the left and a thin garden strip on the right; between them is a wide lane, wide enough for a bike and a car, but not wide enough for two cars. If you ride where you should if you follow the rules of the road, that is, as far to the left as practicable, cars pass so close that you are forced into the door space of parked cars; in self defense you then take the lane, and desperate drivers start doing stupid things like trying to pass in a too-narrow space, or revving their engines behind you, or hitting their horns (to which I respond by stopping in the middle of the lane and taking a photo of the offending driver's plate and face). If you ride on the right, the drivers move over to give you much more space, precisely because they can see how close they are to an expensive scrape along their shiny paintwork. The whole process becomes much calmer and less stressful for all concerned.

I also tried carrying my 12in long hefty U-lock in the hand nearest to the drivers. It instantly gained me another 24 inches. (Doesn't the NRA say, "An armed society is a polite society"?)

That said, I don't actually ride there, in the first instance because I ride for relaxation and therefore choose the least stressful places to ride, but mainly because beside the garden strip is a small river and across the river is another road with just about zero traffic and a better view of the family of herons I settled on this river (I lived on it a bit further up until I moved to a hill above a bigger river for the salmon fishing), so I dawdle along and here and there put my foot on the flood wall to talk to the ducks and the swans and my heron.

Andre Jute

On 12/13/2013 2:06 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

For the sake of clarity: In San Francisco drivers drive on the right and the steering wheel is on the left of the car. Where I live drivers drive on the left and the steering wheel is on the right of the car.

Or as we say, "In America we drive on the right side of the road. In
England, Australia, India, Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, New Zealand etc.,
they drive on the wrong side of the road." Hopefully more left-drive
countries will follow Sweden's example and move to right-drive, "In
1967, Sweden switched over to right-side driving, after years on the
left, and everyone steeled themselves for a spike in accidents. Instead,
incidents plummeted." This _proves_ that right-hand driving is safer (of
course it really doesn't, but I'm following the approved FKRBT standard
of proof).

Your experience rings a bell with me, Scharfie. I've several times described, here and elsewhere, how on the narrow lanes hereabouts, on which there really isn't space for a car to pass a cyclist with a metre (think a yard) of space, I take the lane to slow the car and then go to the right, so the driver, in the righthand seat, can see precisely how much space there is between his car's paintwork and my bike.

It's more than that, it's also that buses are all in the right lane, and
there are a lot of buses in San Francisco. They are moving in and out of
bus stops into traffic. The freeway entrances are usually on the right
as well and these can be especially hazardous if you're on the right and
suddenly the right lane(s) are freeway only lanes (occasionally this is
on the left, but much less often). You also have people making right
turns on red without taking the precautions they are supposed to take
(left on red is also allowed from one one-way street into another
one-way street but this isn't so common and many drivers don't even
realize that it's legal).

I also conducted a psychological experiment on a short piece of much wider road for fast through traffic. This has parking on the left and a thin garden strip on the right; between them is a wide lane, wide enough for a bike and a car, but not wide enough for two cars. If you ride where you should if you follow the rules of the road, that is, as far to the left as practicable, cars pass so close that you are forced into the door space of parked cars; in self defense you then take the lane, and desperate drivers start doing stupid things like trying to pass in a too-narrow space, or revving their engines behind you, or hitting their horns (to which I respond by stopping in the middle of the lane and taking a photo of the offending driver's plate and face).

I would advise you not to do that in the gun-crazed U.S.!

If you ride on the right, the drivers move over to give you much more space, precisely because they can see how close they are to an expensive scrape along their shiny paintwork. The whole process becomes much calmer and less stressful for all concerned.

That is true. Most drivers really don't want to sideswipe you but many
have a very hard time judging how close the non-drive side of their
vehicle is to you.

I also tried carrying my 12in long hefty U-lock in the hand nearest to the drivers. It instantly gained me another 24 inches. (Doesn't the NRA say, "An armed society is a polite society"?)

Well you don't need a U-Lock to gain that extra 24 inches or so of
clearance. http://www.flashback.ca/cycling_accessories.html. Yes, it's
nerdy, but for commuting and "vehicular cycling" the effect is amazing.
Vehicles make a wide arc around you even though the reality is that only
a few really need to modify their position in order to pass without
hitting the flag.

That said, I don't actually ride there, in the first instance because I ride for relaxation and therefore choose the least stressful places to ride, but mainly because beside the garden strip is a small river and across the river is another road with just about zero traffic and a better view of the family of herons I settled on this river (I lived on it a bit further up until I moved to a hill above a bigger river for the salmon fishing), so I dawdle along and here and there put my foot on the flood wall to talk to the ducks and the swans and my heron.

I could have taken a much more leisurely and scenic route from downtown
SF to the train station, but with only one train per hour at that time
of day I did not want to do that. http://oi41.tinypic.com/mb48ap.jpg

POSITIVE ID

THEY can clearly ID you for assault

POSITIVE ID

YOU can see THEY for defensive reactions


if nothing else, eliminates paranoia fatigue ( PF )

Per SMS:
"In 1967, Sweden switched over to right-side driving, after years on the left, and everyone steeled themselves for a spike in accidents. Instead, incidents plummeted."

When I attended a family reunion in England some years ago, I asked
everybody I spoke with about driving on the left vs driving on the right
and how that played out with frequent trips to and from the continent.

With everybody, it started out the same way: "Oh, no problem...".

But after awhile, with a little probing, it turned out that everybody
had a story.... *Everybody*.... "Well, it was 2 in the morning and I
was really tired....."

In the light of that, Sweden's experience makes a certain amount sense.

What seems problematic to me is all those right-hand-drive cars that
will be around for however many years it takes for a car to wear out.
Seems like sitting in a right-hand-drive car makes one prone to driving
on the left side
--
Pete Cresswell

On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:37:07 AM UTC-5, SMS wrote:

Or as we say, "In America we drive on the right side of the road. In
England, Australia, India, Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, New Zealand etc.,
they drive on the wrong side of the road." Hopefully more left-drive
countries will follow Sweden's example and move to right-drive, "In
1967, Sweden switched over to right-side driving, after years on the
left, and everyone steeled themselves for a spike in accidents. Instead,
incidents plummeted." This _proves_ that right-hand driving is safer (of
course it really doesn't, but I'm following the approved FKRBT standard
of proof).

The experience of Sweden is interesting for what it tells us about perception of risk and it's interaction with actual risk. Risk Compensation is one (but only one) aspect of that interaction.

Those who want to learn more about Sweden's experience will find it covered pretty thoroughly in the excellent book _Risk_ by John Adams. Those experiences can teach us things about other hazardous situations.

Having said that, I'm absolutely positive that Mr. Scharf will never bother to seek out a copy.

- Frank Krygowski

On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:07:19 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Those who want to learn more about Sweden's experience will find it covered pretty thoroughly in the excellent book _Risk_ by John Adams. Those experiences can teach us things about other hazardous situations.

Having said that, I'm absolutely positive that Mr. Scharf will never bother to seek out a copy.


You're probably right, Franki-boy, and it demonstrates a colossal amount of self-knowledge, for you anyway, to admit at last that a recommendation from you is as good a warning-off as a declaration of anathema from the Pope is to a practising Catholic. Some people just get born negative, and you're one of them.

Andre Jute

On 12/13/2013 9:11 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SMS:
"In 1967, Sweden switched over to right-side driving, after years on the left, and everyone steeled themselves for a spike in accidents. Instead, incidents plummeted."

When I attended a family reunion in England some years ago, I asked
everybody I spoke with about driving on the left vs driving on the right
and how that played out with frequent trips to and from the continent.

With everybody, it started out the same way: "Oh, no problem...".

But after awhile, with a little probing, it turned out that everybody
had a story.... *Everybody*.... "Well, it was 2 in the morning and I
was really tired....."

In the light of that, Sweden's experience makes a certain amount sense.

What seems problematic to me is all those right-hand-drive cars that
will be around for however many years it takes for a car to wear out.
Seems like sitting in a right-hand-drive car makes one prone to driving
on the left side

One reason China rejected an elegant solution for switching traffic
switching drive sides between Hong Kong and the rest of China was that
they did not want a system that was so streamlined that drivers would
not even think about the fact that they had just switched drive sides.

Personally, the only left hand drive country I've driven in is Thailand.
The reality was that the sides of the road were so rutted that everyone
drove in the middle. This was down around Phuket and Krabi.

On 12/13/2013 12:59 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:07:19 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Those who want to learn more about Sweden's experience will find it covered pretty thoroughly in the excellent book _Risk_ by John Adams. Those experiences can teach us things about other hazardous situations.

Having said that, I'm absolutely positive that Mr. Scharf will never bother to seek out a copy.


You're probably right, Franki-boy, and it demonstrates a colossal amount of self-knowledge, for you anyway, to admit at last that a recommendation from you is as good a warning-off as a declaration of anathema from the Pope is to a practising Catholic. Some people just get born negative, and you're one of them.

It's not impossible that something that he recommends might be useful.
However the authors probably would likely prefer that he not endorse
their works. It's like when a political candidate receives an
endorsement from an individual that is not well-respected, i.e. Mitt
Romney could have lived without endorsements from Donald "Birther" Trump
or Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell, but he could not control who
endorsed him.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:12:39 -0800, sms
wrote:

On 12/13/2013 9:11 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SMS:
"In 1967, Sweden switched over to right-side driving, after years on the left, and everyone steeled themselves for a spike in accidents. Instead, incidents plummeted."

When I attended a family reunion in England some years ago, I asked
everybody I spoke with about driving on the left vs driving on the right
and how that played out with frequent trips to and from the continent.

With everybody, it started out the same way: "Oh, no problem...".

But after awhile, with a little probing, it turned out that everybody
had a story.... *Everybody*.... "Well, it was 2 in the morning and I
was really tired....."

In the light of that, Sweden's experience makes a certain amount sense.

What seems problematic to me is all those right-hand-drive cars that
will be around for however many years it takes for a car to wear out.
Seems like sitting in a right-hand-drive car makes one prone to driving
on the left side

One reason China rejected an elegant solution for switching traffic
switching drive sides between Hong Kong and the rest of China was that
they did not want a system that was so streamlined that drivers would
not even think about the fact that they had just switched drive sides.

Personally, the only left hand drive country I've driven in is Thailand.
The reality was that the sides of the road were so rutted that everyone
drove in the middle. This was down around Phuket and Krabi.

Strange. I find Phuket roads to be mostly well paved with rather broad
paved shoulders, and in fact the worst roads on the island aren't "so
rutted that everyone drives in the middle of the road". And Krabi. is
very much the same. In fact, more than twenty years ago my wife and I
toured South Thailand over Christmas and New Year and didn't encounter
any roads such as you describe.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:23:57 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
On 12/13/2013 12:59 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:07:19 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:



Those who want to learn more about Sweden's experience will find it covered pretty thoroughly in the excellent book _Risk_ by John Adams. Those experiences can teach us things about other hazardous situations.



Having said that, I'm absolutely positive that Mr. Scharf will never bother to seek out a copy.





You're probably right, Franki-boy, and it demonstrates a colossal amount of self-knowledge, for you anyway, to admit at last that a recommendation from you is as good a warning-off as a declaration of anathema from the Pope is to a practising Catholic. Some people just get born negative, and you're one of them.

It's not impossible that something that he recommends might be useful.
However the authors probably would likely prefer that he not endorse
their works.

Scharf, read the book: _Risk_ by John Adams. If you're going to spout off on people's reactions to risk, you really ought to learn from sources other than your own weird imagination.

You are really _not_ the "world's greatest authority" on anything. Learn from your betters.

- Frank Krygowski