"Idiot Cyclist"

Idleater

peasant wrote:

On this narrow stretch he had been overtaken by quite a few cars at speed already and had come dangerously close to being swiped off his bike.

peasant wrote:

- I was not the one holding up the traffic. It was the cyclist that was unable to go any faster

Hmm. No Offence, but from those two sentences that you wrote, it seems that the big long trail of cars that was behind you, could have gotten by the cyclist (in you opinion) if there wasn't some obstruction blocking them from doing so?

Maybe you were doing your civic duty and saving the cyclist from all those nasty bad car drivers that were all out to run him off the road. Your beep at the start was to let him know you were protecting him right?

L.

Bunnyhopper

peasant wrote:

3) I have learned from this thread to see more of a cyclists perspective and if anything like this happens to me again I promise I'll grin and bear it next time

Good It's a pity that we end up in our little camps (car driver/taxi driver/ HGV driver/cyclist/whatever) arguing with each other when really we're ALL getting a bad deal when it comes to roads and traffic. We'd be better off all ganging up on the eejits who make such a mess of road and traffic management. (As you might agree, given your remarks about the "true culprit" being whoever put the cones where they did.)

peasant wrote:

IDIOT

Now, it's just not a nice word, is it? If hoping to avoid a "heated discussion" I'd tend to leave that one out

As I think I said earlier in this thread, I'd have moved over if it had been me on the bike.

peasant wrote:

somebody said they can't see properly when cycling uphill

Yeah, I'm not too sure about that one myself: it was an N-road, not an Alpe d'Huez.

peasant wrote:

there definetly was NO traffic on the coned off section and that fact was plain to see for everybody

Still, there were points made about why he might not have wanted to go over there, some of them pretty reasonable.

peasant wrote:

yes my camper is LHD ...but I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

I fear this is the bit where cyclopath2001 finally pounces with his question about who took the pictures, and if it was you wasn't that a bit careless of you?

peasant wrote:

I do admit that on the occasions when i have cycled myself that I do occasionally bend traffic rules, if such bending keeps me (and others) safer than sticking to them.

Anyone who has broken the stupid must-use-any-cycle-track-provided-regardless-of-how-cr@p-it-is law will sympathize. Personally, if I have to use a footpath, I get off and walk. But I'd be likely to take the defensive/assertive road position that blorg mentions. does that make me a "proper" cyclist?? Cool

peasant

nereid wrote:

Hmm. No Offence, but from those two sentences that you wrote, it seems that the big long trail of cars that was behind you, could have gotten by the cyclist (in you opinion) if there wasn't some obstruction blocking them from doing so?

ok final, final post on this matter ...

You still don't get it...

Who in their right mind would willingly and knowingly squeeze themselves into a miserly two and a half meters worth of space when they know that:

a) this being an uphill section and them being a bit wobbly and strained they will occasionaly need up up to one metre (or more) of said width and

b) all of the 100+ cars behind them will at least be 1.6 - 1.8 metres wide and in a hurry and probably not patient enough to wait and rather try to squeeze past.

It just doesn't equate.
(for he not so good in maths: 1.8 + 1 = 2.8 2.8 - 2.5 = 0.3 0.3 = cyclists right leg)

And (in my humble opinion) the guy was actually lucky that a vehicle as wide as mine came up behind him so early along the stretch because he most likely wouldn't have made the six or seven kilometres without getting clipped had it been cars all the way because they would have tried to get past (and according to YOUR opinion they should have passed him ...even if it was only to prove your point that the cyclist wasn't holding up traffic)

and so to bed ...:D

HusseinSarhan

This is an awful thread isn't it..?

blorg

Just to clarify, my point about the experienced/serious cyclist was to do with obstacles that might be encountered in the works area. The speed a "serious" cyclist is likely to be going at is significantly faster than the occasional cyclist and so reacting to such obstacles is a problem.

My suggestion here is simply that people suggesting use of the works area are imagining an occasional cyclist cycling slowly and in an upright position, who would indeed have plenty of time to see and react to obstacles. On a road bike, especially going up hill, you are anything but upright, and you will be travelling faster - peasant suggested himself 20km/h.

The point is, the occasional cyclist is the archetype in most drivers' minds as to how a cyclist feels/behaves/needs. It is the extent of their knowledge of the "cyclist experience" as peasant admits himself with his post about his own cycling experience. Such drivers do not understand the needs of the more experienced cyclist and as such that cyclist's behaviour confounds and irritates them (things like taking the lane, cycling 3-5 feet out from car doors, not using unsuitable cycle lanes, not automatically yielding to the motorist if the cyclist actually has right of way, etc.)

The same consideration comes into play with cycle paths, which are designed with crazy obstacles (or have them added) - on the assumption that they will be used only by "quasi-pedestrians" travelling slowly and upright and with plenty of time to avoid the obstacles.

EDIT: And I think progress _was_ made with peasant understanding a bit more this "serious" cyclist point of view. (I would imagine most adult cyclists, serious or otherwise, do also drive and so already have experience of the motorist point of view.)

Heinrich

• The cyclist was entitled to use that road at that time!
• If you were obstructed then that is too bad you have to wait, see above.
• The use of the word IDIOT could be reserved for those who merit it, guess who?
• Why would a driver of a camper vehicle be in such a rush in the first place?
• Taking and showing photos of a cyclist or a long line of traffic will not add anything to a sterile debate.
• You don't own the road nor are you entitled to make your own rules.
• Apart from being discommoded by a cyclist doing what he is legally allowed to do what is your problem?

at the nonsense at the self righteous indignation.

Idleater

peasant wrote:

You still don't get it...

and according to YOUR opinion they should have passed him

erm, no.

You started the thread. You decided that the guy was holding everyone up. You honked at him to get him to stop. You took pictures of everyone being held up by you, as prooven by the quotes that I highlighted earlier.

I did not say that cars should pass him. I said that YOU said cars had already just passed him - albeit narrowly missing him.

I would not tell anyone to force their way by where there is no room. Each car driver that passes him makes their own decision. And they must live with the concequences of their actions. If they hit him, they are responsible. You are not a guard are you? Is yours a Garda camper van? Is it your job to enforce the rules of the road?

You showed no respect to other road users who were entitled to be in front of you already, and those behind you who could in their own right have gone faster as you already acknowledged.

L

DublinWriter

HusseinSarhan wrote:

This is an awful thread isn't it..?

Yes, I agree.

It's turning into the classic boards argument that goes something like...

OP: "I think thusly"

Poster: "I think you're an idiot for thinking thusly, and here's 4 pages of points expressed as a humongously unreadable post detailing why I think you're an idiot"

OP: "No, you are the idiot, I’ll see your gigantic post and raise you by quoting your huge post sentence by sentence in my reply and responding with at least a paragraph for each sentence quoted.”

Poster: “Obviously I did not make my point and will now call upon multiple external resources such as previous threads, youtube URLs and various home-made diagrams made hasilty using MS-Paint”.

Mod: “Thread closed”.

daymobrew

DublinWriter wrote:

Mod: “Thread closed”.

As you wish
I go away for 2 days and the thread goes mad!