5 ms·

> Sure, that's the theory. But in practice some drivers will see it as an aggressive move to take 'their' lane. Having commuted by bicycle for almost a decade,

by stouset 10y ago

> Sure, that's the theory. But in practice some drivers will see it as an aggressive move to take 'their' lane. Having commuted by bicycle for almost a decade, this is the theory. In practice, if you take the lane, virtually every driver will simply move over one lane to pass. Some consideration needs to be taken, of course — if doing this is causing traffic behind you, you should move over and let cars pass (or bike faster, or find an alternate route). But doing this causes an immediate and unmistakable difference in the behavior of drivers. If you're driving in the gutter, you will get buzzed multiple times in a day as drivers attempt to squeeze by you in the lane. If you're claiming the lane, you might get buzzed once a month. No joke. I know which I prefer.

jacquesm 10y ago
You are likely young and able to keep up with traffic. But not everybody is young and able to keep up with traffic. Older people will cycle slower (and are far more vulnerable if they should fall or get into an accident), and kids are going to get clobbered if they should occupy whole lanes. Keep in mind that any advice that you give for a class of traffic should apply equally to all members of that class, not just to you. And once a situation develops (such as causing traffic behind you) it is a little late to 'bike faster' (which may simply not be possible depending on age / wind / other conditions) or 'find an alternate route'.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- scottishfiction 10y ago
  Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That a car approaching from the rear will see them riding assertively and simply plow in to them? If not that then what? That the cars will pass them closely as they are forced to move further in to the other lane? If that's your assertion then as others have stated, an assertive lane position is exactly what will save you in this situation - as you have the room on the inside to avoid the passing car.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    > Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. If that's what you got out of it then you're entirely wrong. I cycle a few thousand Km / year. > Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That the only way in which you can keep cyclists - of all ages - safe is by separating the various traffic streams. By forcible mixing them you are simply asking for trouble. I'm trying hard to imagine Amsterdam cycling traffic without the separation of low speed and high speed traffic into different lanes and with people cycling like suggested above. The carnage would be terrible. > That a car approaching from the rear will see them riding assertively and simply plow in to them? Accidents are called accidents for a reason. That car approaching them from behind may not see them at all due to some momentary distraction. You can attempt to make yourself 'large' and 'visible' but you may still be missed and given the relative difference in strength and weight the outcome is predictable. The best way to stay safe as a cyclist is to stay out of the way of faster and heavy traffic. > That the cars will pass them closely as they are forced to move further in to the other lane? There may not even be another lane. And a fairly large number of motorists will not see that as a huge obstacle in trying to pass a cyclist that occupies a whole lane. > If that's your assertion then as others have stated, an assertive lane position is exactly what will save you in this situation - as you have the room on the inside to avoid the passing car. Well, in that case you didn't need to take up more room than you needed in the first place... It's kind of weird how all this seems to center around having a 'safe' place to go to in case the assertive driving ('brave' was the word, why is it considered 'brave' if all it is is safe?) policy fails. Better to recognize your fragility and play it safe from the get go.
    - scottishfiction 10y ago
      The point is that the non-assertive position isn't 'playing it safe'. You're no more out of the flow of traffic unless the lane is extra wide, you're signalling to following cars that they are welcome to overtake, and you have robbed yourself of any margin for error when a car misjudges their pass and squeezes you in to a parked car or railing. You're right that the assertive approach is no substitute for segregated infrastructure, but in an imperfect world of mixed-use roads, it's the best way to stay safe, and is the method taught and recommended by many bodies here in the UK. https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/skills/article/izn20130830-Effective-traffic-riding-part-1-0 https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/skills/article/i...

by stouset 10y ago

jacquesm 10y ago

You are likely young and able to keep up with traffic. But not everybody is young and able to keep up with traffic. Older people will cycle slower (and are far more vulnerable if they should fall or get into an accident), and kids are going to get clobbered if they should occupy whole lanes. Keep in mind that any advice that you give for a class of traffic should apply equally to all members of that class, not just to you. And once a situation develops (such as causing traffic behind you) it is a little late to 'bike faster' (which may simply not be possible depending on age / wind / other conditions) or 'find an alternate route'.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
scottishfiction 10y ago
Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That a car approaching from the rear will see them riding assertively and simply plow in to them? If not that then what? That the cars will pass them closely as they are forced to move further in to the other lane? If that's your assertion then as others have stated, an assertive lane position is exactly what will save you in this situation - as you have the room on the inside to avoid the passing car.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  > Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. If that's what you got out of it then you're entirely wrong. I cycle a few thousand Km / year. > Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That the only way in which you can keep cyclists - of all ages - safe is by separating the various traffic streams. By forcible mixing them you are simply asking for trouble. I'm trying hard to imagine Amsterdam cycling traffic without the separation of low speed and high speed traffic into different lanes and with people cycling like suggested above. The carnage would be terrible. > That a car approaching from the rear will see them riding assertively and simply plow in to them? Accidents are called accidents for a reason. That car approaching them from behind may not see them at all due to some momentary distraction. You can attempt to make yourself 'large' and 'visible' but you may still be missed and given the relative difference in strength and weight the outcome is predictable. The best way to stay safe as a cyclist is to stay out of the way of faster and heavy traffic. > That the cars will pass them closely as they are forced to move further in to the other lane? There may not even be another lane. And a fairly large number of motorists will not see that as a huge obstacle in trying to pass a cyclist that occupies a whole lane. > If that's your assertion then as others have stated, an assertive lane position is exactly what will save you in this situation - as you have the room on the inside to avoid the passing car. Well, in that case you didn't need to take up more room than you needed in the first place... It's kind of weird how all this seems to center around having a 'safe' place to go to in case the assertive driving ('brave' was the word, why is it considered 'brave' if all it is is safe?) policy fails. Better to recognize your fragility and play it safe from the get go.
  - scottishfiction 10y ago
    The point is that the non-assertive position isn't 'playing it safe'. You're no more out of the flow of traffic unless the lane is extra wide, you're signalling to following cars that they are welcome to overtake, and you have robbed yourself of any margin for error when a car misjudges their pass and squeezes you in to a parked car or railing. You're right that the assertive approach is no substitute for segregated infrastructure, but in an imperfect world of mixed-use roads, it's the best way to stay safe, and is the method taught and recommended by many bodies here in the UK. https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/skills/article/izn20130830-Effective-traffic-riding-part-1-0 https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/skills/article/i...