|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On 6/28/2012 12:14 PM, Dan O wrote:
Anyway, that only works to the extent that everybody does what they're supposed to, which was my point. As you know, it is a wonderful feeling to take the mirrors off, and trust that everyone around you will behave well. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W Post Free or Die! |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 28, 5:22 pm, "Tom $herman (-_-)" ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 6/28/2012 12:14 PM, Dan O wrote: Anyway, that only works to the extent that everybody does what they're supposed to, which was my point. As you know, it is a wonderful feeling to take the mirrors off, and trust that everyone around you will behave well. Franco: And now my friend, the first-a rule of Italian driving. [Franco rips off his rear-view mirror and throws it out of the car] Franco: What's-a behind me is not important. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On 6/28/2012 10:36 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Jun 28, 5:22 pm, "Tom $herman (-_-)" ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: On 6/28/2012 12:14 PM, Dan O wrote: Anyway, that only works to the extent that everybody does what they're supposed to, which was my point. As you know, it is a wonderful feeling to take the mirrors off, and trust that everyone around you will behave well. Franco: And now my friend, the first-a rule of Italian driving. [Franco rips off his rear-view mirror and throws it out of the car] Franco: What's-a behind me is not important. Mirrors and brake lights are prohibited. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W Post Free or Die! |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 28, 11:00 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Jun 28, 8:40 am, Duane wrote: On 06/27/2012 09:04 PM, Wes Groleau wrote: On 06-27-2012 13:55, Dan O wrote: On Jun 27, 8:07 am, Frank Krygowski wrote: ... unless he was to do it deliberately and for no good reason... Arent' drivers supposed to do everything deliberately? Is there ever a good reason to buzz a bicyclist? Expecting drivers¹ to do everything they are supposed to do is just as irrational as expecting them all to attack you. ¹or bikers As irrational as it is to think that any time a motorist hits a cyclist it's because it was deliberate. Accidents are accidents. Thinking that you can control that is ridiculous. That's pretty simplistic, and ignores much that's well known to competent cyclists. The present case in point has covered that, but here it is again: If you're in (say) an 10 foot lane and you have (say) an 8 foot wide truck approaching from behind, you have two choices. One is to meekly ride at the extreme edge of the lane, hoping that there won't be a pothole to throw you or a twitch from the truck driver just as he's brushing your elbow. If either of those (or a number of other things happen), you'll be sideswiped. Most people would call that an "accident," I think. Your other choice is to realize there's no way the truck can safely pass you without moving left. So you position yourself at or near lane center, to make it obvious to the trucker that he'll have to change lanes. When he does that, you will have prevented an accident, or at least the strong possibility of one. You'll have done that by using your legal right to the road - something I, for one, do not want to lose. Again, here's a site explaining the benefits of leftward lane position. (Duane won't read this because he kill files people to whom he loses arguments, so perhaps someone else should point it out to him.)http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...motorists-with... BTW, I notice that the "Skulk in the gutter" crowd never seems to cite sources to justify their point of view. Why is that? Frank, I get the idea of communicating your need for road space to other operators, and I *do* position myself well into the lane (for room to maneuver but also 'cause it's cleaner and usually smoother). I also understand the idea of "controlling" the lane. But when faster traffic approaches from behind, notices* me, and wants to pass, it makes more sense to me to show a cooperative "I'll give and you give" attitude, rather than a controlling "you don't know what you're doing" attitude. Cagers are ****ed off enough as it is. You said yourself they dislike us simply because we're there. Why exacerbate it by being as "there" as you possibly can. (* On the hopefully remote chance that they don't notice me, I sure as hell don't want to happen to be in their path. I understand you mostly like to ride in fair weather. Visibility and whether you are noticed at all may become a much greater consideration when you ride a lot in all conditions and live in the jet stream of the Mighty Pacific.) I get that your precious vehicular cycling principles are great way to go for some people. They don't work for me; they would take the life out of what Ride Bike! is to me (everybody read the Charlie Sheen piece in RS a while back, right? ;-) There's a huge middle ground between hogging the lane and "skulking in the gutter". I think a competent bicyclist can have a diverse and dynamic repetoire. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On 06/29/2012 12:47 AM, Dan O wrote:
There's a huge middle ground between hogging the lane and "skulking in the gutter". I think a competent bicyclist can have a diverse and dynamic repetoire. Not on planet Boolean where everything is black OR white. Remember, on that planet, it's a mortal sin to say "it depends." |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
Dan O wrote:
On Jun 28, 11:00 am, Frank wrote: Again, here's a site explaining the benefits of leftward lane position. (Duane won't read this because he kill files people to whom he loses arguments, so perhaps someone else should point it out to him.)http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...motorists-with... BTW, I notice that the "Skulk in the gutter" crowd never seems to cite sources to justify their point of view. Why is that? Let me repeat the question: Why is that? Frank, I get the idea of communicating your need for road space to other operators, and I *do* position myself well into the lane (for room to maneuver but also 'cause it's cleaner and usually smoother). I also understand the idea of "controlling" the lane. But when faster traffic approaches from behind, notices* me, and wants to pass, it makes more sense to me to show a cooperative "I'll give and you give" attitude, rather than a controlling "you don't know what you're doing" attitude. I think you are grossly overestimating the amount of information that can be conveyed by the road position of the cyclist. It's easy to show a motorist "There's not enough room for you to squeeze by in your truck." But "You don't know what you're doing"? I doubt that many motorists ever see that as the message. Come to think of it, the only motorists who might interpret a cyclist's more centered lane position that way would be the ones thinking they could squeeze their wide vehicles through a narrow space without subjecting the cyclist to excessive risk; and those do not, in fact, know what they are doing. Cagers are ****ed off enough as it is. You said yourself they dislike us simply because we're there. Why exacerbate it by being as "there" as you possibly can. To avoid being run off the road or sideswiped; to avoid potholes, drain grates, gravel, etc.; to avoid being forced into the door zone... do I really need to go on? Again: I have a _legal_ right to safe travel, and my state (as with many) specifically grants me the right to take a centered lane position when the lane is too narrow to share. You, apparently, think I should cede that right and risk crashing or worse for the convenience of a passing cager. No matter how highly you think of yourself, that's both wimpy and anti-cyclist. I get that your precious vehicular cycling principles are great way to go for some people. They don't work for me; they would take the life out of what Ride Bike! is to me (everybody read the Charlie Sheen piece in RS a while back, right? ;-) As you might expect, I feel little in common with a person who admires Charlie Sheen, or emulates his personal style with a cycling style. But most cyclists have no idea whether vehicular cycling principles would work for them. As someone said, "It's not that vehicular cycling has been tried and found to be too difficult; it's that vehicular cycling has been assumed too difficult, and not even tried." Yet those who do try it find it simply works. http://cyclingsavvy.org/2011/05/i-am-no-road-warrior/ -- - Frank Krygowski |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 29, 7:49 am, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Dan O wrote: On Jun 28, 11:00 am, Frank wrote: snip ... do I really need to go on? It appears to be a compulsion. (... [have you] read the Charlie Sheen piece in RS a while back... ? ;-) As you might expect, I feel little in common with a person who admires Charlie Sheen, or emulates his personal style with a cycling style. I'll take that as a "no"; but if you refuse to read or learn anything... But most cyclists have no idea whether vehicular cycling principles would work for them. As someone said, "It's not that vehicular cycling has been tried and found to be too difficult; it's that vehicular cycling has been assumed too difficult, and not even tried." Yet those who do try it find it simply works. http://cyclingsavvy.org/2011/05/i-am-no-road-warrior/ http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...2b5b68964b3370 |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 27, 4:39*pm, Frank Krygowski
wrote: I'm not talking about offering him the lane you're in. *I'm talking about a cooperative stance. A "cooperative stance" in a lane too narrow to share? *Would that be cooperatively standing by the side of the road until all the cars are gone? No, it would be riding as far out of the way as practicable. *Even if the lane is too narrow to share with a passing car, this reduces how far and how long they have to leave the lane to safely pass, and how fast they have to go to do it. Dan, you still don't get it. *Riding "as far out of the way as practicable" was what my friend was trying to do (even though I'd say, and he'd now say, it was not safely practicable). *In doing that, he and his wife were subjected to unreasonable risk by many motorists who did not wait to safely pass. *When they moved to lane center, that stopped. I learned the same thing years prior. *I still recall the rainy ride on the narrow highway with tractor trailers passing a friend and me, when I made the definite (and scary) decision to ride dead center in a ten foot lane instead of at the rough edge of the pavement. *Yes, it was scary when we heard the first semi hit his brakes. *But he and all subsequent drivers waited until it was safe to pass, instead squeezing by with inches of clearance plus water spray, as the previous truckers had done. yes. perhaps the best thing to do, risky to initiate but it does work when conditions are bad. if you squeeze over the driver has less mental focus on you; and you are hidden by him to other vehicles following him; they might naturally drive closer to the curb then you get tagged. if you check and see the line up behind getting a bit long then pull over let them go by look a bit sheepish and say thanks- helps keeps the nasty comments down. Im usually really easy going mild mannered - but I can get really ticked off sometimes- and whatever happens next ain t worth it. one rule does not apply to all circumstances things depend on where you are and local conditions-a difference in the closing speed between you and other traffic is important to be aware of- if the guy is risking getting slammed from behind because you decide to drift out as he approaches is not a wise action, you risk aggravating the driver;but by being out already your safe zone is curbside. I come back at night from long rides sometimes, I tend to ride in the middle of the lane on the hump, avoiding roadkill, debris, potholes and pooling water ; when a vehicle approaches I move over as his headlights help illuminate the road better- I can be fairly confident he has seen me and by moving over he can see I am not wanting to encumber or challenge his passage- this is psychological manipulation. out in the backroads, no witnesses, anything can happen- play it safe reduce the chance having to deal with some nut. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 28, 2:00*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Jun 28, 8:40*am, Duane wrote: On 06/27/2012 09:04 PM, Wes Groleau wrote: On 06-27-2012 13:55, Dan O wrote: On Jun 27, 8:07 am, Frank Krygowski wrote: ... unless he was to do it deliberately and for no good reason... Arent' drivers supposed to do everything deliberately? *Is there ever a good reason to buzz a bicyclist? Expecting drivers¹ to do everything they are supposed to do is just as irrational as expecting them all to attack you. ¹or bikers As irrational as it is to think that any time a motorist hits a cyclist it's because it was deliberate. *Accidents are accidents. *Thinking that you can control that is ridiculous. That's pretty simplistic, and ignores much that's well known to competent cyclists. The present case in point has covered that, but here it is again: *If you're in (say) an 10 foot lane and you have (say) an 8 foot wide truck approaching from behind, you have two choices. *One is to meekly ride at the extreme edge of the lane, hoping that there won't be a pothole to throw you or a twitch from the truck driver just as he's brushing your elbow. *If either of those (or a number of other things happen), you'll be sideswiped. *Most people would call that an "accident," I think. Your other choice is to realize there's no way the truck can safely pass you without moving left. *So you position yourself at or near lane center, to make it obvious to the trucker that he'll have to change lanes. *When he does that, you will have prevented an accident, or at least the strong possibility of one. *You'll have done that by using your legal right to the road - something I, for one, do not want to lose. - Frank Krygowski- the difference is accident or deliberate murder- you are correct in my opinion but you have to know your battleground- we have a lot of dump truck drivers out here now; they are worked pretty hard; many are foriegners, so they don t have the same traffic instincts we who grow up here- it makes a crucial difference in the way they drive. they habitually run red lights at top speed while loaded. and yes they t bone and kill as you might expect. cops must be paid-off by the developers or I don t understand why they don t enforce simple speed limits to begin with- but this is what happens. have to be really careful some places- because if you get mushed its not like your word against his- it's his word only. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't help so much
On Jun 28, 11:36*pm, Dan O wrote:
Franco: And now my friend, the first-a rule of Italian driving. [Franco rips off his rear-view mirror and throws it out of the car] Franco: What's-a behind me is not important. gumball rally ! (saw that in the theaters when I was a kid and got the dvd for my kids- I liked Zoltan, the mad Hungarian) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|