'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by leftpoole »

Real Cyclists in my area have to endure some nasty car drivers because the perception (due somewhat to the local Councils putting cycle lanes on some pavements) is, that cycles belong off the road. Those who advocate cycle lanes in UK are simply dreaming a dream (in my opinion as a former motor driving instructor ADI) and should make more of road riding.
They should also behave sensibly on the road. I was out yesterday and along came a large 'bunch' of CTC type cyclists 3 and 4 abreast aimlessly riding along with a long queue of motor vehicles behind them. Ignorance for some is bliss?
These yobs who make up large numbers of cycle riders rather than cyclists have done this. Now the cycling on road in the area will be even worse than it is!

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... _Boscombe/

Regards,
John
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Bicycler »

Likewise I find I have a problem with people driving motor vehicles rather than motorists. Some might say they are the same thing but I only count myself among the latter :wink:

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it segregation focussed cycle campaigning, your local council's poor attempts at cycle provision or the bad behaviour of some cyclists (ahem, sorry, people riding cycles)? Are the CTC yobs you mentioned not yet worthy of 'real' cyclist status? At what point does one earn that dubious honour?
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by leftpoole »

Bicycler wrote:Likewise I find I have a problem with people driving motor vehicles rather than motorists. Some might say they are the same thing but I only count myself among the latter :wink:

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it segregation focussed cycle campaigning, your local council's poor attempts at cycle provision or the bad behaviour of some cyclists (ahem, sorry, people riding cycles)? Are the CTC yobs you mentioned not yet worthy of 'real' cyclist status? At what point does one earn that dubious honour?


The CTC group which is a fairly local group behave as though they own the road. Riding 4 abreast or even 2 when a queue of vehicles is following is not good and in fact lawless.
I am opposed to cycle segregation yes, but if done correctly (properly?) I suppose with great reluctance I may (might?) conform.
A cyclist is a person riding a bike and abiding by the rule of the road. A person riding a bike on a pavement not only breaks the law but is idiotic, usually rude and does not care about anyone but him/herself.
I behave and abide by the law as it is at present. I tolerate no person breaking the law. I guess as a former ADI that I know a little more than most regarding road law. But that is not the point. The point I was/am trying to make is that we should behave on the road and perhaps in time (a long time?) we would be treated better by those motoring who do not do so at the present time?
Regards,
John
Psamathe
Posts: 17647
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Psamathe »

I am unsure about the "segregation" without a lot of education.

There are many different types of cyclists who would not mix well on limited width dedicated cycle paths. You get the family out for an afternoon dawdle enjoying the weather, maybe with one of their children still using stabilisers; and mix that in with somebody out training needing to go at 30+ m.p.h. get get any gain from the training; plus all sorts of variations in-between. And all are excellent uses for bikes, all to be encouraged. And as commented above, once you get a dedicated cycle path (or worse, shared use with a pavement), so the drivers think all cyclists should be using it and getting off their roads.

There is even a risk that a painted section of road next to the kerb for cyclists is interpreted by drivers as meaning cyclists MUST stay in "their lane" (after-all, drivers are not allowed in the cyclists lane).

Of course we need dedicated decent cycling facilities (dedicated cycle paths/lanes), but I think there probably also needs to be a massive education drive at the same time to inform motorists about how they work and that cyclists can still use the other lanes, etc. Education plays a massive role in getting these facilities to work properly.

Though, I am unconvinced that shared pavement/cycling works.

Ian
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by leftpoole »

Psamathe wrote:I am unsure about the "segregation" without a lot of education.

There are many different types of cyclists who would not mix well on limited width dedicated cycle paths. You get the family out for an afternoon dawdle enjoying the weather, maybe with one of their children still using stabilisers; and mix that in with somebody out training needing to go at 30+ m.p.h. get get any gain from the training; plus all sorts of variations in-between. And all are excellent uses for bikes, all to be encouraged. And as commented above, once you get a dedicated cycle path (or worse, shared use with a pavement), so the drivers think all cyclists should be using it and getting off their roads.

There is even a risk that a painted section of road next to the kerb for cyclists is interpreted by drivers as meaning cyclists MUST stay in "their lane" (after-all, drivers are not allowed in the cyclists lane).

Of course we need dedicated decent cycling facilities (dedicated cycle paths/lanes), but I think there probably also needs to be a massive education drive at the same time to inform motorists about how they work and that cyclists can still use the other lanes, etc. Education plays a massive role in getting these facilities to work properly.

Though, I am unconvinced that shared pavement/cycling works.

Ian


Hello,
I am in FULL agreement with the above.
John
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14648
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by gaz »

The yob in the Bournemouth Echo article is a yob, nothing more.

leftpoole wrote:The CTC group which is a fairly local group behave as though they own the road. Riding 4 abreast or even 2 when a queue of vehicles is following is not good and in fact lawless.

"Not good", well I won't be arguing that with regard to four abreast but there are certainly many situations where I and many others would be happy to discuss the merits or riding two abreast over singling out.
leftpoole wrote:I guess as a former ADI that I know a little more than most regarding road law.

"Lawless", I trust you can enlighten me on that one.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Bicycler »

I largely agree with that too. Psamathe makes the important distinction between different types of cyclist and their needs. Forcing us all onto the pavements would be silly, forcing those uncomfortable onto the roads just forces them off their bike. Psamathe also points out the issue of education, it was interesting that as someone who had a role in educating drivers you see their lack of awareness of cyclists' right to use the road as a result of off-road cycle provision and not a failing in driver education. Education is the key.

...and yes a lot of cyclists (which includes anybody on a bike :) ) could also be educated on road rules and etiquette. Let's use that as a positive call for greater provision of training rather than a criticism of the minority who are willing to take to two wheels on our country's roads
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Si »

Whilst I would agree that cyclists should obey the law (as long as it doesn't put them in danger) and that they should not inconvenience other road users when it gives them no benefit themselves, I really don't think that taking a snobbish 'them and us' attitude over who is a real cyclist is going to forward the debate in any way.

It's something that we've been through before and the definitions always fall apart as soon as they are subjected to any interrogation....it is never the fact that some people always ride perfectly and others always ride badly, rather people ride in the way that they can justify to themselves as the most reasonable for their circumstances. Making cycling sound elitist is hardly beneficial to promoting it. Indeed, one could look at the definitions the other way - for example the OP is certainly not a real cyclist as he uses his bikes only as a toy for his amusement, whereas those that use their bikes only to get to work are real cyclists despite their bikes costing a fraction of the OP's, their having no lycra on, and them hopping on and off the pavement as they see fit.

Nope, this thread has virtually no chance of changing the attitudes of the OP's unreal cyclist (even if we all might agree that some need to change), but does stand a chance of making the CTC, or real cyclists, seem a bit snobby.


Regarding cyclepaths, different people have different needs. So, if we eradicate all pavement use and shared use paths, and put all cyclists on the road we get....

Image
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by TonyR »

leftpoole wrote:I was out yesterday and along came a large 'bunch' of CTC type cyclists 3 and 4 abreast aimlessly riding along with a long queue of motor vehicles behind them.


I was out yesterday and along came a large 'bunch' of AA type motorists queued aimlessly line astern blocking the road for any cyclists. A far more frequent occurrence than yours. And I suspect your motor vehicles could have passed the cyclists quite easily if they hadn't insisted on lugging three empty seats around with them.
mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by mrjemm »

Bracketing everyone as cyclists is fine. But as with all aspects of human activity there are varieties of behaviour.

Yes that guy in the Echo article, as Gaz said, is likely simply a 'yob', apparently (not read the article), and this is what the 'us' in our lives sees as cyclists.

Remember though, how this compares with bad motorists, who are still motorists. Compare the numbers of news items about driving crime and accidents with those relating to cycling. Think about the media interest- how many shows are there every day along the lines of 'Road Wars', 'Cops with Cameras', etc., and they're all full of folk in cars driving like... But in the last couple of years, I think I am aware of maybe 2 shows on telly regarding the same matter with cycles. 2 shows, not series.

However... Mr J. Public and his good lady wife also see the folk in cars on the dark side as 'them', not 'us', they separate drivers, yet simultaneously, will not do so for cyclists. We are 'them'. As a cycle rider it's easy to do the same thing. We're all very keen on labelling. It's a particularly British notion, along with being negative.

We're all people. We're all individuals. We can all be put into groups. We can all re-arrange those groups.

That person riding on a pavement is being a prat. That person cutting you up on a motorway is also being a prat. That does not equate to 'cyclists' are prats, or 'motorists' are prats. People are prats. Some are not.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Cunobelin »

Si wrote:Image


Which really rather raises the question as to why this image should cause concern?

With considerate drivers driving responsibly with due respect for other road users... there should be no problem with this.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Cunobelin »

leftpoole wrote:Real Cyclists in my area have to endure some nasty car drivers because the perception (due somewhat to the local Councils putting cycle lanes on some pavements) is, that cycles belong off the road. Those who advocate cycle lanes in UK are simply dreaming a dream (in my opinion as a former motor driving instructor ADI) and should make more of road riding.
They should also behave sensibly on the road. I was out yesterday and along came a large 'bunch' of CTC type cyclists 3 and 4 abreast aimlessly riding along with a long queue of motor vehicles behind them. Ignorance for some is bliss?
These yobs who make up large numbers of cycle riders rather than cyclists have done this. Now the cycling on road in the area will be even worse than it is!

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... _Boscombe/

Regards,
John


John, this is NOT a personal dig, so please don't take it that way.

Part of the problem is the press Agenda and sales of newspapers.

This is really a non-cycling story.

A dozen yobs are misbehaving and are asked to behave ... they then become aggressive and injure someone.

The headlines than make it a Screaming demented cyclist issue.

The transport mode her should be irrelevant.

If they had parked on the pavement, got out of a car and misbehaved, would we have seen "Screaming demented motorist attacks OAP"?
If they had been loitering with no vehicle at all and been asked to behave, would we see "Screaming demented pedestrian attacks OAP"?

This story is about a small group of antisocial and aggressive yobs, and nothing at all to do with cyclists
mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by mrjemm »

Cunobelin wrote:Which really rather raises the question as to why this image should cause concern?

With considerate drivers driving responsibly with due respect for other road users... there should be no problem with this.


It's the VW with a duff headlight that concerns me. And the Vauxhall driver looks to have the newspaper open...
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by Cunobelin »

mrjemm wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:Which really rather raises the question as to why this image should cause concern?

With considerate drivers driving responsibly with due respect for other road users... there should be no problem with this.


It's the VW with a duff headlight that concerns me. And the Vauxhall driver looks to have the newspaper open...


OT...

The Portsmouth News had a headline and full front page spread about a cyclist without lights a few years ago

It was brilliant.

By the time it had been pointed out that there was no legal requirement as it was still light with no streetlights, that the car behind him had only one light, and three other cars in the picture had no lights on either questioning why they had picked on the cyclist, there was almost an apology and there have been no repeats of the exercise
mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Post by mrjemm »

Cunobelin wrote:
mrjemm wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:Which really rather raises the question as to why this image should cause concern?

With considerate drivers driving responsibly with due respect for other road users... there should be no problem with this.


It's the VW with a duff headlight that concerns me. And the Vauxhall driver looks to have the newspaper open...


OT...

The Portsmouth News had a headline and full front page spread about a cyclist without lights a few years ago

It was brilliant.

By the time it had been pointed out that there was no legal requirement as it was still light with no streetlights, that the car behind him had only one light, and three other cars in the picture had no lights on either questioning why they had picked on the cyclist, there was almost an apology and there have been no repeats of the exercise


:D
Post Reply