4 ms·

> > There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m > Cars have momentum too. Physics makes

> > There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m > Cars have momentum too. Physics makes it so they can't come to an instant stop. Then cyclists wonder why they get hit by cars when they run red lights. While the justification does not make any sense whatsoever, the way he explains it also doesn't, since it fails to capture the difference between cars and bicycles: Cars don't fall over when they stop. The thing that makes intersections a little annoying when you have to stop at them is not the effort of stopping and starting, it's the physical AND mental effort required to evaluate all the possible options for stopping and then balancing the bike, then choosing and encating the right one. Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.) That said, there are no justifications for running a red light as a bike, only excuses made by fuckheads.

dllthomas 11y ago
"Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.)" Arses can leave the saddle, and - more importantly - bikes can tip (substantially shortening the distance from saddle to ground).
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  You're pointing out the obvious that i was implying in my post in the hope that it already was obvious. Getting out of the saddle is both a slightly strenuous thing to do, and also moderately dangerous, since you have to balance on a vehicle that is devoid of inherent balance at low speeds. Dangerous since you run a small risk of "tipping" into the car that's half a meter left of you, sometimes less. As for the tipping comment, yes, that is valid, but also highly depends on the anatomy of the rider. At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Many intersections have affordances like light poles, rails or just the curb that i can use, but sometimes stopping at an intersection for me means i have to entirely get off the thing.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Why would you need to put more than one foot down? Front wheel, back wheel, and one foot provides a tripod. EDIT: To expand, even most motorcycle advice I've seen advises using one foot except when necessary because you have a particularly heavy motorcycle; I don't imagine that it should ever be a necessity for a bike (I can see why it might be a preference at some times, but the cases where it would be a preference would also be times when you wouldn't want to blow through a red light if the opportunity present itself.)
    - Mithaldu 11y ago
      Actually, you're right. My train of thought was off-track. My height/bike combination makes it difficult to properly tilt even with one foot on the ground. On flat ground i can't even keep my right foot on the pedal while standing on my left and the mental image i had in mind was standing over the middle bar with both feet on the ground without hanging off it off my groin, and the tilt required even for that is way too much. Narrow spaces excacerbate this. And before you ask: Yes, i tried the next-smaller bike type, they're considerably slower for me in transit.
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > And before you ask: Yes, i tried the next-smaller bike type, they're considerably slower for me in transit. I wouldn't look so much at a smaller bike as a flat-foot design, but, yeah, there is still probably a performance tradeoff.
        Mithaldu 11y ago
        I didn't know that was a thing. Thanks for mentioning it, i'll have to try and find one of those! :D
    - soneil 11y ago
      I frequently stop on two feet. I see it as a form of communication. The safest thing you can do on a bicycle is be predictable - what ever you're planning on doing, look like you're planning on doing it. It's just signalling, but expanding "wave your arms around" to whole-body language. Stopping on one foot, with the other on the drive side ready to go, says I'm ready to go. Standing on two feet makes it clear I'm stopped, and going to remain stopped while I'm in this stance. It works out - if whoever I'm waiting for has to brake because they think I'm about to kill myself, they take longer to get out my way.
Nadya 11y ago
If you begin braking at the proper time there's very little to consider. If biking takes such a toll on your mental processes, I suggest to quit biking. If a car is able to safely stop - so can a bike. Unless you're travelling at an unsafe speed downhill. For proper safety, practice tipping in the opposite direction of car traffic. Losing balance or misjudging your tip results with you falling onto a curb rather than in front of a car. I also question how often an experienced cyclist loses their balance when coming to a stop... As a skateboarder, a single pebble that's impossible to see while in movement can get caught in my wheel and send me flying into traffic. Cyclists take for granted that a small pebble they can't see won't send them tumbling onto their faces and into traffic. Learning how to fall is extremely important and doesn't seem to be something practiced by cyclists. Worse - a skateboarder doesn't have any practical way of stopping when going downhill or at high speeds. You can grind your heel onto the ground or jump off the board. This means you have to control your speed and make sure you're not going too fast, you don't always have the space needed to carve when you get speed wobbles. This is something many cyclists don't consider while they haul full-speed downhill: they're travelling at an unsafe speed and refuse to slow down until it's too late.
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  > If biking takes such a toll on your mental processes, I suggest to quit biking. That is an amazingly dickish comment and shows me you're not even attempting to see my side. Then again, as a skateboarder you're likely operating at a completely different level of physical control in comparison to the average citizen that you couldn't see my side even if you tried. Do note that the important point is not the question of "how to stop in time?" but of "ugh, the procedure of stopping here is quite annoying, i'd rather go on". Edit: Actually, i have a question: > Learning how to fall is extremely important and doesn't seem to be something practiced by cyclists. How exactly do you propose a cyclist train falling?
  - Nadya 11y ago
    >How exactly do you propose a cyclist train falling? The same way most people learn to ride without training wheels. Slow, wobbly, tilting, and falling often. Except this time, it's on purpose. I suggest using safety pads. >That is an amazingly dickish comment and shows me you're not even attempting to see my side. I'm sorry, but I don't think maintaining balance on a bike, even at slow speeds, is a problem for the majority of the population. It's a problem that usually only presents itself in children and those learning how to bike. If you suffer from an innate lack of balance (ie. most people would consider you a 'clutz') I would suggest walking over biking for you own, and other people's, safety. >Do note that the important point is not the question of "how to stop in time?" but of "ugh, the procedure of stopping here is quite annoying, i'd rather go on". Rotating the pedals backwards or squeezing in the right handle isn't what I'd call a "procedure" anymore than moving your foot from the gas to the brake in a car is. Does it suck to have to stop at intersections? Sure. That's not an excuse to blow right through it (not that it seems you think it's an excuse either). Driving a stick-shift car is far more of a hassle to brake. Especially when going up hill. Yet cars are still expected (and often do) come to a stop.

dllthomas 11y ago

"Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.)" Arses can leave the saddle, and - more importantly - bikes can tip (substantially shortening the distance from saddle to ground).

Mithaldu 11y ago
You're pointing out the obvious that i was implying in my post in the hope that it already was obvious. Getting out of the saddle is both a slightly strenuous thing to do, and also moderately dangerous, since you have to balance on a vehicle that is devoid of inherent balance at low speeds. Dangerous since you run a small risk of "tipping" into the car that's half a meter left of you, sometimes less. As for the tipping comment, yes, that is valid, but also highly depends on the anatomy of the rider. At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Many intersections have affordances like light poles, rails or just the curb that i can use, but sometimes stopping at an intersection for me means i have to entirely get off the thing.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Why would you need to put more than one foot down? Front wheel, back wheel, and one foot provides a tripod. EDIT: To expand, even most motorcycle advice I've seen advises using one foot except when necessary because you have a particularly heavy motorcycle; I don't imagine that it should ever be a necessity for a bike (I can see why it might be a preference at some times, but the cases where it would be a preference would also be times when you wouldn't want to blow through a red light if the opportunity present itself.)
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    Actually, you're right. My train of thought was off-track. My height/bike combination makes it difficult to properly tilt even with one foot on the ground. On flat ground i can't even keep my right foot on the pedal while standing on my left and the mental image i had in mind was standing over the middle bar with both feet on the ground without hanging off it off my groin, and the tilt required even for that is way too much. Narrow spaces excacerbate this. And before you ask: Yes, i tried the next-smaller bike type, they're considerably slower for me in transit.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > And before you ask: Yes, i tried the next-smaller bike type, they're considerably slower for me in transit. I wouldn't look so much at a smaller bike as a flat-foot design, but, yeah, there is still probably a performance tradeoff.
      - Mithaldu 11y ago
        I didn't know that was a thing. Thanks for mentioning it, i'll have to try and find one of those! :D
  - soneil 11y ago
    I frequently stop on two feet. I see it as a form of communication. The safest thing you can do on a bicycle is be predictable - what ever you're planning on doing, look like you're planning on doing it. It's just signalling, but expanding "wave your arms around" to whole-body language. Stopping on one foot, with the other on the drive side ready to go, says I'm ready to go. Standing on two feet makes it clear I'm stopped, and going to remain stopped while I'm in this stance. It works out - if whoever I'm waiting for has to brake because they think I'm about to kill myself, they take longer to get out my way.

Nadya 11y ago

If you begin braking at the proper time there's very little to consider. If biking takes such a toll on your mental processes, I suggest to quit biking. If a car is able to safely stop - so can a bike. Unless you're travelling at an unsafe speed downhill. For proper safety, practice tipping in the opposite direction of car traffic. Losing balance or misjudging your tip results with you falling onto a curb rather than in front of a car. I also question how often an experienced cyclist loses their balance when coming to a stop... As a skateboarder, a single pebble that's impossible to see while in movement can get caught in my wheel and send me flying into traffic. Cyclists take for granted that a small pebble they can't see won't send them tumbling onto their faces and into traffic. Learning how to fall is extremely important and doesn't seem to be something practiced by cyclists. Worse - a skateboarder doesn't have any practical way of stopping when going downhill or at high speeds. You can grind your heel onto the ground or jump off the board. This means you have to control your speed and make sure you're not going too fast, you don't always have the space needed to carve when you get speed wobbles. This is something many cyclists don't consider while they haul full-speed downhill: they're travelling at an unsafe speed and refuse to slow down until it's too late.

Mithaldu 11y ago
> If biking takes such a toll on your mental processes, I suggest to quit biking. That is an amazingly dickish comment and shows me you're not even attempting to see my side. Then again, as a skateboarder you're likely operating at a completely different level of physical control in comparison to the average citizen that you couldn't see my side even if you tried. Do note that the important point is not the question of "how to stop in time?" but of "ugh, the procedure of stopping here is quite annoying, i'd rather go on". Edit: Actually, i have a question: > Learning how to fall is extremely important and doesn't seem to be something practiced by cyclists. How exactly do you propose a cyclist train falling?
- Nadya 11y ago
  >How exactly do you propose a cyclist train falling? The same way most people learn to ride without training wheels. Slow, wobbly, tilting, and falling often. Except this time, it's on purpose. I suggest using safety pads. >That is an amazingly dickish comment and shows me you're not even attempting to see my side. I'm sorry, but I don't think maintaining balance on a bike, even at slow speeds, is a problem for the majority of the population. It's a problem that usually only presents itself in children and those learning how to bike. If you suffer from an innate lack of balance (ie. most people would consider you a 'clutz') I would suggest walking over biking for you own, and other people's, safety. >Do note that the important point is not the question of "how to stop in time?" but of "ugh, the procedure of stopping here is quite annoying, i'd rather go on". Rotating the pedals backwards or squeezing in the right handle isn't what I'd call a "procedure" anymore than moving your foot from the gas to the brake in a car is. Does it suck to have to stop at intersections? Sure. That's not an excuse to blow right through it (not that it seems you think it's an excuse either). Driving a stick-shift car is far more of a hassle to brake. Especially when going up hill. Yet cars are still expected (and often do) come to a stop.