The cyclist's exasperation

Hacketry

I need to get this off my chest.

I have been cycling throughout Dublin since I moved here in 1999 and I have just come across this forum. My line of work demands that I can get around the city swiftly and at short notice so I think the bike is best. (I'm the fast fella on a slicked Schwinn ATB accelerating past the couriers on their racers )

Over the past six to nine months I have noticed a surge in the number of commuters using bicycles in the mornings and evenings. That's great because it may be taking cars off our roads and that's to be welcomed.

With the increase in the number of cyclists, I have noticed an increase in the number of accidents and near misses - I see them every week, if not every day - usually due to the cyclist not knowing the rules of the road, and the motorist (there's always a car or van involved) not using his/her mirrors and generally not concentrating.

However, what's twisting my melons is the increase in the number of crashes caused by cyclists hitting into each other. I saw two on the same stretch of road seconds apart last week.

May I offer this piece of advice to any new cyclists who are venturing onto the capital's already dangerous streets: LOOK OVER YOUR RIGHT SHOULDER BEFORE YOU GO AROUND AN OBSTACLE! Other bikes don't make any noise!!

Anyway that's my rant.
Thanks for listening.

And yes, some idiot decided to pull around a parked bus right in front of me this morning and for the first time in years I came off the horse whilst on the road. The cyclist who caused me to smash into her at considerable speed kindly took her iPod plugs out of her ears to tell me she was wasn't hurt, and that where she comes from they cycle on the other side of the road, "and sometimes I forget where I am with the music on."

Cabaal

I know how you feel, twice in one week I had the same cyclist come out of the same junction nearly smash into me because he didn't bother his hole to stop or even look before he pulled out.

He just missed me the first time and kept on going, the second time he turned at a crazy angel to avoid me and then fell of the bike onto the path, muppet deserved it both times imho

On Friday I was leaving work and I was stopped at red lights, up comes a builder on a bike behind me, breaks the red light, cuts across the lane to the left that has green lights and almost gets hit by a SUV, then he continues to cycle down the road at speed on the path and then cut out onto the main road without looking and cuts traffic to go to a right hand lane.

All this without any lights and a reflective jacket, what a ****en muppet!
Given everyone of us a bad name :mad:

RainyDay

I share your exasperation with the crap cyclists, particuarly the ones who get ahead of me by breaking red lights and then I'm struck trying to manoevre around them again (and again, and again in some cases). I've also seen cyclists in busy Dublin commuter traffic while texting on their phones - incredibly dumb!

I do confess that I've probably pulled out around cyclists without checking behind me for other bikes occasionally, on the (admittedly false) assumption that I'm that fastest cyclist in Dublin and no-one would ever be passing me out. I'm making a note now to check over my shoulder in future.

Trojan

I disagree. Yes, every road user should be taking care to ensure they know what's going on around them.

I believe that in cycling, just like in skiing, the overtaking party has the responsibility of ensuring they do not hit the slower cyclist. If they swerve to avoid something, then the overtaking party should be far enough away or react with brakes in time to to avoid a crash. (This is assuming we're talking about single lane travel).

Hacketry

Trojan wrote:

I believe that in cycling, just like in skiing, the overtaking party has the responsibility of ensuring they do not hit the slower cyclist.

Fair point.

To continue your analogy: the guy with two skis pointed adamantly downhill has to anticipate that with his accumulating momentum, velocity and adrenalin; allied with increasing stopping distances and generally continually reducing space to manouvre - he has to think about the possible actions, vectors and mistakes other piste users below him may make.
If he doesn't, he's gonna do himself - and, more importantly, someone else - potentially lasting damage.

At the same time though, if cyclists on the highway ocasionallly imagined they're moving on a slope (particularly when they are coming from the kerb onto a road, or around an obstacle into the thoroughfare) then the importance of what comes from behind ('above') might elicit a fraction of life's time to turn around and cast a glance over one's shoulder to make a judgement on whether the horse/bike/icrecream van heading inbound warrants any attention.

It don't matter to the skier if it's an amateur or an avalanche thst hits her at speed.

Bikes and buses do damage from behind.

daymobrew

My handlebar mirror is extremely useful in these situations.
It's always frustrating when other cyclists break the law. They erode any good name the rest of us have earned.

hunnymonster

I've never understood the thinking of people who move ahread of you at a red traffic light when they know you are cycling faster than them. Almost every day I end up having to overtake the same guy several times between Clontarf and Trinity College. If he wasn't so much bigger than me and grumpy looking, I would just ask.... maybe I should anyway, there are so many guards on operation free flow, he's unlikely to thump me :-)

Mark Byrne

hunnymonster wrote:

I've never understood the thinking of people who move ahread of you at a red traffic light when they know you are cycling faster than them. Almost every day I end up having to overtake the same guy several times between Clontarf and Trinity College. If he wasn't so much bigger than me and grumpy looking, I would just ask.... maybe I should anyway, there are so many guards on operation free flow, he's unlikely to thump me :-)

Couldn't agree with you more, irritates the shíte out of me that particular behaviour.

Civilian_Target

I own a mirror Great to have although it can be a bit deceiving at times because it doesn't cover all angles.

For all major pullouts its worthwhile looking over the shoulder anyway, if only as a warning to vehicles behind you that you're about to make a move!

And as Troj says: safe over taking's entirely your responsibility. Usually I block a lane when I need to overtake another cyclist.

gzoladz

On the cars account I try to decide myself when they have room to overtake me. That avoid the problem of them just "trying" with the car to check if they can make it.
This means that if I consider that there is no room for a car, I will cycle more in the middle to avoid them trying at all.
Having said that, I do let them go through as soon as the opportunity arises.

daymobrew

hunnymonster wrote:

I've never understood the thinking of people who move ahead of you at a red traffic light when they know you are cycling faster than them.

You credit them with a lot more intelligence than they use when doing this.

Victor

Hacketry wrote:

The cyclist .... took her iPod plugs out of her ears to tell me ..... "and sometimes I forget where I am with the music on."

Did you punch her for either part of this?

stipey

And yes, some idiot decided to pull around a parked bus right in front of me

Completely her fault - you should never anticipate that another cyclist might foolishly try to maneuver around a hazard without looking.

souter

hunnymonster wrote:

I've never understood the thinking of people who move ahread of you at a red traffic light when they know you are cycling faster than them. Almost every day I end up having to overtake the same guy several times between Clontarf and Trinity College. If he wasn't so much bigger than me and grumpy looking, I would just ask.... maybe I should anyway, there are so many guards on operation free flow, he's unlikely to thump me :-)

Pees me off as well, but what you gonna do? Not quite so bad, but stangely annoying are the guys how saunter thru red lights, then you have to overtake. You have the moral high ground but there's a childish voice saying "He thinks he burned me, b*****d!"

And I often don't look over my shoulder when pulling out for parked cars etc. I'm may not be the fastest, but I'm in the upper percentile, and when overtakiing another cyclist I'll always be anticipating their move - I assume the few (heh!) cyclists able to overtake me would do the same.

John

daymobrew

souter wrote:

And I often don't look over my shoulder when pulling out for parked cars etc. I'm may not be the fastest, but I'm in the upper percentile

Just be careful that those above you e.g. cars, aren't right behind you.

souter

daymobrew wrote:

Just be careful that those above you e.g. cars, aren't right behind you.

Sorry, should have clarified - I would always be aware of cars, either through sound, or if noise levels don't permit, over the shoulder. The danger with overtaking bikes are they are nearly silent. Especially as per OP if some gobsh1te has earphones on.

Harkev

I have two options on my commute to UCD: a gradual downhill all the way (through Dundrum to Bird Avenue then over to UCD) or else up and down two steep hills (via Kilmacud and Mount Anvil). I always choose the hills because I find it avoids all those annoying cyclists!

The last time I went through Dundrum a really slow cyclist passed me at a red light. I passed her nearly straight away then got stuck behind a truck moving fairly slowly. She came up behind me, jumped up on the narrow path, squeezed past me and the truck :eek: . It only took a few seconds for the traffic to clear again, at which point I was stuck behind her again. ARGH!

Its probably good for my fitness choosing the hills anyway, not to mention my blood pressure

Sangre

I was the exact same, avoided the dual carriage for the hills because of all the fecking cyclists, cards and redlights (every 2 seconds!). Also the cyclist past to UCD is hilarious bad beacuse it goes over driveway exits, up and down, up and down.

RainyDay

Harkev wrote:

I have two options on my commute to UCD: a gradual downhill all the way (through Dundrum to Bird Avenue then over to UCD) or else up and down two steep hills (via Kilmacud and Mount Anvil). I always choose the hills because I find it avoids all those annoying cyclists!

The stretch of Dundrum Road between Taney cross (the LUAS bridge) and Bird Ave is murderous in heavy traffic. The road is quite narrow, and about 1 in 20 drivers hugs the kerb on the left-side, making it impossible for cyclists to progress. I've taken to pulling up beside the driver, knocking on the window, and asking them if there was any particular reason for them to block my path. I reckon I'll train them into good habits, one driver at a time. For one genius, he the stereo so loud that it took 3 sets of knocks (on the window that is about 3 inches away from his ear) to get his attention.

Alkers

If you're going that way again: take the right hand turn just after the mental hospital and cut through the estates. Leaves you out in Clonskeagh, just at the end of bird avenue. Much faster than staying on the main roads.

RainyDay

Simona1986 wrote:

If you're going that way again: take the right hand turn just after the mental hospital and cut through the estates. Leaves you out in Clonskeagh, just at the end of bird avenue. Much faster than staying on the main roads.

I go the other way, towards Milltown. So I pull off Dundrum Road into Columbanus just opposite the mental hospital, and go through the back lanes and down a grassy slope to come out beside the Dropping Well. It keeps me away from traffic and speed bumps as far as possible.

Gavin

I would like to make the, no doubt devisive, point that cycling with earphones may in fact improve ones cycling. As people have mentioned, bicycles are nearly silent, apart from the rattling bangers that hippy women seem to cycle. If one relies on their hearing alone, which can be come habit, then splat, two squashed cyclists, one of whom is not a hippy woman.

However, if with the earphones on, one can only assume that they can't hear anything coming from behind and so much _always_ check behind them before attempting a potential cyclist squashing maneouver.

Gav

Bunnyhopper

Verb wrote:

I would like to make the, no doubt devisive, point that cycling with earphones may in fact improve ones cycling. As people have mentioned, bicycles are nearly silent, apart from the rattling bangers that hippy women seem to cycle. If one relies on their hearing alone, which can be come habit, then splat, two squashed cyclists, one of whom is not a hippy woman.

However, if with the earphones on, one can only assume that they can't hear anything coming from behind and so much _always_ check behind them before attempting a potential cyclist squashing maneouver.

Gav

Divisive? Yeah, dividing the daft from the sensible

I can't agree that wearing earphones is likely to improve your cycling. If you're careful about shoulder checks then you're careful about shoulder checks whether you have earphones on or not: a cretin with earphones on is still a cretin. The sort of person who relies on hearing alone isn't going to be transformed into a safe cyclist by the addition of some earphones and a blaring iPod or whatever. Someone who's very much concerned with safety probably wouldn't have earphones on in the first place, and if they only start doing decent observations after they've put the earphones on then they're probably not too safe anyway.

For me, the advantage of earphones on another cyclist is that it marks them out as someone to whom I need to give a wide berth.

RainyDay

Verb wrote:

I would like to make the, no doubt devisive, point that cycling with earphones may in fact improve ones cycling. As people have mentioned, bicycles are nearly silent, apart from the rattling bangers that hippy women seem to cycle. If one relies on their hearing alone, which can be come habit, then splat, two squashed cyclists, one of whom is not a hippy woman.

However, if with the earphones on, one can only assume that they can't hear anything coming from behind and so much _always_ check behind them before attempting a potential cyclist squashing maneouver.

One could extend your logic to recommend wearing of blindfolds and handcuffs in addition to the earphones, as this would ensure that cyclists always check before/behind them before moving at all.`

Gavin

Well I had thought of that, but then I realised it was totally without merit.