Who is at fault, cyclist or driver?

[d.vader123]

Hey guys. I've been doing a lot of research on cycling etiquette and trying to ride on the roads safely and legally.

I found this video on youtube and would like your input on who's at fault, the driver or cyclist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyzhW8acdds

My opinion is that the cyclist is at fault because I felt that he should have been off to the side a bit more. Do you guys agree? Just want your opinion because I do believe cyclists have the rights to the road, but out of courtesy they should yield to cars coming from behind.

Of course, the cursing and threats of violence aren't ever condoned.

[Mike748]

Cyclist was all over the place but there was no oncoming traffic... Car should have slowed and given more room. Both could have done better.

[thegunner]

why isn't it safe to cross with a lil bit of water? :p

[djg21]

Hey guys. I've been doing a lot of research on cycling etiquette and trying to ride on the roads safely and legally.

I found this video on youtube and would like your input on who's at fault, the driver or cyclist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyzhW8acdds

My opinion is that the cyclist is at fault because I felt that he should have been off to the side a bit more. Do you guys agree? Just want your opinion because I do believe cyclists have the rights to the road, but out of courtesy they should yield to cars coming from behind.

Of course, the cursing and threats of violence aren't ever condoned.


I didn't see any problem with the car passing. The cyclist seemed to pull over to the right side of the road when he presumably heard the automobile behind him. The vehicle did not buzz him.

The only things I thought inappropriate were (a) the driver apparently waiting and scolding the cyclist, (b) the cyclist's willingness to engage the driver in silly dialogue, and (c) the cyclist posting of the video on the internet (why?). I even question whether the cyclist was looking for something to happen (hence the video) and wanted to precipitate a confrontation with a driver.

[buldogge]

The whole thing seems a little overblown...

I don't think either party would last very long dealing with urban commuting...IMHO.

Also, what was the big deal with the streaming water?...What do they do when it starts raining hard??

-Mark in St. Louis

[learlove]

Why can't he ride in a straight line? and about the water, not very deep - you can see the road center line so it can't be more than and inch or two. This guy is a complete pussy.

[Fivethumbs]

I appreciate it when I am driving and cyclists get as far to the right as they can. When I ride my bike I try to do the same. Unfortunately not all cyclists feel the same way. I think the "I am just as entitled to this road as a car" mentality that is displayed by some cyclists invokes too much of a negative response from drivers. The result is threads with titles like, "Anybody get stuff thrown at them when they ride?"

[Kontact]

Automobile drivers in 2 ton vehicles have an obligation to not kill people that are in the road, whether they are riding a perfect line or not. The car passed at a speed that would have killed a pedestrian and cyclist instantly, the driver saw that the cyclist was not going perfectly straight, yet chose to pass close by. I don't see how that's much different than any other behavior that will earn you a reckless homicide charge when it goes wrong.

All this talk about etiquette and good cycling habits misses the central point - anyone driving a car or truck must assume that any unprotected human on the road is essentially unreliable and give them enough clearance so they don't kill them.

In contrast, there is virtually zero risk of a bicyclist or pedestrian killing the passenger or driver of a car. That puts the responsibility squarely in the hands of the driver.


I started riding bikes on streets, legally, when I was five. Every driver should treat every cyclist as if they are as trustworthy as a five year old when it comes to passing, because simply being on a bike doesn't guarantee anything about your competence. But a driver's license does have a standard.

[rugbysecondrow]

There is not fault because there was no incident. That car didn't buzz him, it didn't even seem close in slow motion when I was specifically looking for it. The driver was being a dick, but oh well.

The cyclist go over, the driver safely passed. What it doesn't show is whether the cyclists was blocking the road for a while before the motorist passed.

[Peter P.]

The cyclist was too far out in the lane for not rational reason. He only moved to the right when he heard the car coming or perhaps he was using a cyclist's mirror.

The concept of taking up more of the lane and pulling over when cars approach is selfish. Also, even if the cyclist pulls to the right at point in time "X" before the car passes, the first impression the car driver will have when he initially makes eye contact with the cyclist is, "that cyclist is too far into the lane".

The driver likely passed the cyclist at high speed to piss him off. The cyclist obviously had some agenda because of the video cam and of his measured words in his exchange with the driver; he probably has in the back of his head the idea of using such footage for legal purposes. The cyclist obviously recognized the driver lying in wait at the puddle and anticipated the outcome, but to me it's because the cyclist knew he was antagonizing drivers by his position in the lane.

So I guess to answer your question: The driver was at fault for buzzing the cyclist but the cyclist was at fault for failing to ride to the ride more to the right (the legal wording varies by state) and initiating the confrontation.

I always try to envision the road space as being able to fit a car AND a cyclist side by side SAFELY, then choose my spot in the lane as a result. The new 3 Foot Rule being implemented in many states changes things somewhat regarding passing vehicles but shouldn't change how I ride.

[Bob Loblaw]

I think you're asking the wrong question. The right question is, what could the rider have done to avoid making the driver angry? The answer is: nothing. The driver was already angry. Maybe he has an ongoing beef with cyclists, or maybe he lost his job, or maybe he just found out his wife is screwing his kid's orthodontist. Whatever it was, the bike rider was just an easy target for a tiny little man in a great big car.

The rider was all over the place, but still there was plenty of room to pass safely. If it was me I'd have been closer to the side, but it probably wouldn't have mattered. In fact, the rider dodged to the right just before the car passed...if he hadn't he might very well have been hit.

Drivers like that are out there, especially in a pressure cooker like the greater LA area, and no 3 Feet Law is going to keep certain kinds of people from having crappy days, or stressful jobs, or miserable lives, or just hating bikes. That's life.

The only thing the rider really did wrong was whine about "Why are you being so mean to me?" I usually keep my trap shut so the driver has nothing to listen to but himself. Sometimes the things they hear themselves say snap them out of it.

Be careful out there.

BL

[avalonracing]

There is not fault because there was no incident. That car didn't buzz him, it didn't even seem close in slow motion when I was specifically looking for it.

I thought the same thing. Hell I get "buzzed" closer than that EVERY time I ride. Really. Of course I'm not all over the place like the rider in the video. Maybe it is just that Rugby and I live in the same town so our definition of getting buzzed is different. I call it getting buzzed if I can stick out my elbow and touch the car. And it happens often. Like yesterday.

[wss]

Automobile drivers in 2 ton vehicles have an obligation to not kill people that are in the road, whether they are riding a perfect line or not. The car passed at a speed that would have killed a pedestrian and cyclist instantly, the driver saw that the cyclist was not going perfectly straight, yet chose to pass close by. I don't see how that's much different than any other behavior that will earn you a reckless homicide charge when it goes wrong.

All this talk about etiquette and good cycling habits misses the central point - anyone driving a car or truck must assume that any unprotected human on the road is essentially unreliable and give them enough clearance so they don't kill them.

In contrast, there is virtually zero risk of a bicyclist or pedestrian killing the passenger or driver of a car. That puts the responsibility squarely in the hands of the driver.


I started riding bikes on streets, legally, when I was five. Every driver should treat every cyclist as if they are as trustworthy as a five year old when it comes to passing, because simply being on a bike doesn't guarantee anything about your competence. But a driver's license does have a standard.

I agree 100 %.
I know that all drivers don't think like you do.

[benb]

I swear this video was argued about previously here.

My thoughts:

- the driver is a dick, in such a hurry to get somewhere, but so eager for a confrontation that he turned around and wasted far more time then any delay the cyclist could have caused

- we dont hear a honk, the suv probably wasn't held up long, surely this driver would have honked given his other behavior

- the cyclist is using a very wide angle lens, this makes it look like he is further out in the middle of the road then he actually is, and makes the buzz look less severe then it actually was. It also makes the hill look less steep which explains the rider's weaving. Many people have trouble riding straight at the edgeof the road at their climbing limit

- people who ride with a video camera seem to be looking for confrontation

- when he whines the cyclist sounds like Napoleon Dynamite

[rugbysecondrow]

- when he whines the cyclist sounds like Napoleon Dynamite

"Why are you being mean to me?" Candy ass.

[Pyramor]

Has anyone considered the possibility that the whole scene was staged? I can't put my finger on it, but the whole thing seems contrived. The car, although passing at a higher speed than perhaps it should have, moved over to the yellow line, giving the cyclist plenty of room. I also question as to why the cyclist stopped where he did, at the intersection, which would allow the car to exit the scene in full camera view. Finally, I can't believe that the amount and velocity of the water would be a major impediment.

[tannhauser]

National Forest road, not much traffic, rider was weaving a bit, the driver is a dick and tried to "teach the rider a lesson".

Doesn't mean you should ride like this in an urban area.

Any questions?

[Fixed]

just another day riding when i was a messenger ..
my goal was to never put a foot down on the ground

cheers

[learningtoride]

Has anyone considered the possibility that the whole scene was staged? I can't put my finger on it, but the whole thing seems contrived. The car, although passing at a higher speed than perhaps it should have, moved over to the yellow line, giving the cyclist plenty of room. I also question as to why the cyclist stopped where he did, at the intersection, which would allow the car to exit the scene in full camera view. Finally, I can't believe that the amount and velocity of the water would be a major impediment.
That was totally where my mind went as I watched. I am glad that others heard the "Napoleon Dynamite" voice as well. Clearly all of the opinions stated are valid points made, however, it seemed like a reinactment was happenning. I for one, having been reaquainting myself to riding during monsoon season, know that I can definiately navigate thru that type of water. The driver was a douche, and I couldnt say that I'd be able to keep my cool if I was intentionally splashed with a water drive by but all the same this scenario seems to be both parties at fault. We ride our bikes where drivers drive their cars. It is as simple as that. Just as a driver should take heed that we may be no more coordinated to share the road than a five year old, we as riders should know that although they give drivers license tests, I think most drivers are also in the mindset of five year olds. Unless they drive for hours every day most people will take advantage of the wheel now and again. Stay safe gang!

[bironi]

I definitely would not refer to this guy as a cyclist. As has been stated, the guy can't ride straight. He looks like he's riding a pogo-stick on the climb. Totally worthless video. :beer:

[DogpawSlim]

The driver is at fault for passing at that speed. Other than that, he gave plenty of room considering the rider was on the white line at the time he passed.

The rider is at fault for weaving in the middle of the road until the car came, and his willingness to talk to an asshole in the middle of an empty country road in Santa Clarita.

And I'm not sure whether it was really the driver's plan to splash the rider.

In the end, nobody got hurt, and nobody got wet. :beer:

[Aaron O]

I've watched this several times now...

The road itself is terrible for cyclists...it's narrow with almost no shoulder. I don't know what the speed limit is there, but the car looked like it was going a lot faster than I'd want to be sharing a road with. I'm generally very much a to the right rider who extolls the virtue of courtesy, but I can understand why he'd want to take the center of the lane here and than pull off when being passed. That being said, if I were a driver behind him, I'd be annoyed.

The fault is nearly 100% with the driver IMO...and I'm not the anti-car rhetoric activist many here are. The speed he passed at looked unreasonable (I say this without knowing the speed limit) and the distance to the bike is closer than I think people realized...it forced him over to the right. Yes - the rider should have moved to the right BEFORE the pass...and we don't get to see behind to know how long the car was waiting, but regardless of what the bike did wrong, that pass was unsafe and aggressive.

The post-pass behavior bothers me less than the pass...he didn't do anything to him other than yell and I certainly get frustrated with self important, inconsiderate drivers/riders/pedestrians. We don't know how long he waited to pass and some people deserve to be yelled at. I yell at inconsiderate jerks from time to time. Yelling is fine...passing closely, aggressively and at speed isn't. The kick your ass comment was ignorant stupidity, but people get frustrated and say stupid things.

This does not look like a road I'd want any part of.

[Ti Designs]

I thought it was always the other guys fault - that does seem to be the american way...

Take some responsibility for yourself. The cyclist was weaving around like a drunk, if I rode like that I sure as hell wouldn't post it on the internet. Does the driver have enough control to pass that close or that fast? No way for me to know that. Then they got in an argument to blame each other...

[bagochips3]

I feel sorry for the diver's wife/kids/dog or whoever he beats/kicks when there isn't a cyclist around.

[Kontact]

Man, I'm pretty sure I swerved the other day while riding uphill. Good thing the Serotta Forum "real cyclist" police didn't catch me.

[vqdriver]

seems to me the driver has more going on than just this cyclist.

and yeah, i wasn't aware that we were only allowed to ride in perfectly straight lines.

[malcolm]

Has anyone considered the possibility that the whole scene was staged? I can't put my finger on it, but the whole thing seems contrived. The car, although passing at a higher speed than perhaps it should have, moved over to the yellow line, giving the cyclist plenty of room. I also question as to why the cyclist stopped where he did, at the intersection, which would allow the car to exit the scene in full camera view. Finally, I can't believe that the amount and velocity of the water would be a major impediment.

I had the same thought, the interaction at the water crossing seemed scripted.

[tuscanyswe]

The car isent that close imo. I get more close encounters every day tbh.
The driver is a dick tho no doubt. Other than seems like a nice ride imo.

[blantonator]

here's my take:

The biker seemed to be weaving a bit. When I ride on public roads I try to keep within a foot of the white line. The driver passed at too high rate of speed, but seemed to give ample room, although it's tough to tell. After that the driver went full retard, and the biker acted like a dumbass. If a driver stopped like that for me, I would probably exploded with a series of curse words, but I don't take crap from idiots like that driver.

[bironi]

Man, I'm pretty sure I swerved the other day while riding uphill. Good thing the Serotta Forum "real cyclist" police didn't catch me.

And did you swerve with every pedal stroke? Come on, the guy can't ride. It looks like he has a shock fork that is unlocked and very loosely adjusted.

There is a responsibility to ride predictably. You wouldn't find me anywhere near this guy. If you want to get run over from behind, jump on his wheel.

[Kontact]

And did you swerve with every pedal stroke? Come on, the guy can't ride. It looks like he has a shock fork that is unlocked and very loosely adjusted.

There is a responsibility to ride predictably. You wouldn't find me anywhere near this guy. If you want to get run over from behind, jump on his wheel.
Actually, there isn't a responsibility to ride predictably. This whole responsible cyclist thing is a fiction that cyclists have propogated in an attempt to "earn" rights that we already have.

We are unlicensed road users - there are almost no restrictions on who or how bicycles, horseback riders, joggers, roller bladers, motorized skateboards, buggies or dog walkers use the roads. The only people that are licensed and highly regulated are motor vehicle drivers. That should be a hint.

If car drivers come to expect that everyone on the road is going to act perfectly predictably, they are going to assume that no bike is ever going to swerve around glass, get a flat or sway a little going up hill; and drive as close as possible to us.

But we (cyclists) are not an army of replica team garbed weekend racers who spend most of our time in pelotons. We are old ladies with baskets, hipsters with trailers, little kids riding to the swimming pool and tired ex-racers struggling up steep hills at the end of long rides out in the country. Drivers need to avoid all of them - and not by inches.

[rugbysecondrow]

Being responsible has nothing to do with a sanctioned license. By using the road, we accept our role and the responsibility that goes along with us commingling with vehicles X Times larger than us. This is regardless of ones level of training, sophistication or fitness.

It is laughable that you wouldn't even consider blaming the untrained, irresponsible users of the road for their own poor behavior that might cause an accident. Of course it is the motorists fault, they ought to cow-tow to every asshole on two wheels and a couple pedals. :rolleyes:



Actually, there isn't a responsibility to ride predictably. This whole responsible cyclist thing is a fiction that cyclists have propogated in an attempt to "earn" rights that we already have.

We are unlicensed road users - there are almost no restrictions on who or how bicycles, horseback riders, joggers, roller bladers, motorized skateboards, buggies or dog walkers use the roads. The only people that are licensed and highly regulated are motor vehicle drivers. That should be a hint.

If car drivers come to expect that everyone on the road is going to act perfectly predictably, they are going to assume that no bike is ever going to swerve around glass, get a flat or sway a little going up hill; and drive as close as possible to us.

But we (cyclists) are not an army of replica team garbed weekend racers who spend most of our time in pelotons. We are old ladies with baskets, hipsters with trailers, little kids riding to the swimming pool and tired ex-racers struggling up steep hills at the end of long rides out in the country. Drivers need to avoid all of them - and not by inches.

[rustychisel]

Actually, there isn't a responsibility to ride predictably. This whole responsible cyclist thing is a fiction that cyclists have propogated in an attempt to "earn" rights that we already have.

We are unlicensed road users - there are almost no restrictions on who or how bicycles, horseback riders, joggers, roller bladers, motorized skateboards, buggies or dog walkers use the roads. The only people that are licensed and highly regulated are motor vehicle drivers. That should be a hint.

If car drivers come to expect that everyone on the road is going to act perfectly predictably, they are going to assume that no bike is ever going to swerve around glass, get a flat or sway a little going up hill; and drive as close as possible to us.

But we (cyclists) are not an army of replica team garbed weekend racers who spend most of our time in pelotons. We are old ladies with baskets, hipsters with trailers, little kids riding to the swimming pool and tired ex-racers struggling up steep hills at the end of long rides out in the country. Drivers need to avoid all of them - and not by inches.



Damn you're good. Well elucidated.

I don't ride in the traffic: I AM THE TRAFFIC.

And rugbysecondrow, I can see where you're coming from - any reasonable person can - but this is akin to assigning blame to victims ("you shouldn't have walked on that street dressed like that"). The world is not as black and white as your view permits. Laws (like the 3 foot rule) and response are usually enacted and debated to cover just such variables, as it happens.

[Kontact]

Being responsible has nothing to do with a sanctioned license. By using the road, we accept our role and the responsibility that goes along with us commingling with vehicles X Times larger than us. This is regardless of ones level of training, sophistication or fitness.

It is laughable that you wouldn't even consider blaming the untrained, irresponsible users of the road for their own poor behavior that might cause an accident. Of course it is the motorists fault, they ought to cow-tow to every asshole on two wheels and a couple pedals. :rolleyes:
My man, you completely miss the point.

It isn't that we shouldn't be responsible, but the idea that any cyclist not riding a straight line is unfit to ride on roads is "laughable", as comments in this thread reflect.

Cyclists are responsible to take care of themselves, as much as they are capable. Drivers have a much greater responsibility, but it is just as self serving - it is no picnic killing someone with your car.


Your kowtow (cow-tow?) comment just reflects the fiction I mentioned. Drivers and cyclists don't interact or have relationships. They just pass each other, safely or not. Drivers who assume some sort of high standard on the part of cyclists are more likely to take passing us for granted.

[tannhauser]

This is a joke, right?

You guys are re-enacting the video.

[Lifelover]

I wish riders like that did not exist.

Complete Fn dweeb that has no business on a public road.

Part of me thinks the whole thing was staged and is a joke.

[Lifelover]

Cyclists are responsible to take care of themselves, as much as they are capable. Drivers have a much greater responsibility.

I disagree 100%. I'm responsable for my own safety 1st and foremost.

If your safety is primarily dependent on the habits of the drivers, you are a fool and will survive on mere luck.

As a cyclist MY responsibility for MY safety is exponentially greater then when I'm driving.

This is mostly likely a gap we will never be able to bridge because it is a complete philosophical difference in out thinking.

[Fivethumbs]

Since this happened in California these are pertinent...

Vehicle Code Section 21200. (a) A person riding a bicycle or operating a pedicab upon a highway has all the rights and is subject to all the provisions
applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this division...

Vehicle Code Section 21202. (a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle
proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a
private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but
not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.

[Kontact]

I disagree 100%. I'm responsable for my own safety 1st and foremost.

If your safety is primarily dependent on the habits of the drivers, you are a fool and will survive on mere luck.

As a cyclist MY responsibility for MY safety is exponentially greater then when I'm driving.

This is mostly likely a gap we will never be able to bridge because it is a complete philosophical difference in out thinking.
Dude, you've survived road biking so far due primarily to the habits of drivers. Cyclists get killed all the time who do everything perfectly correctly.

No one would ride a bike on roads anymore if drivers didn't make at least the effort they do. We are incredibly vulnerable and have no way of preventing being rear ended - just decreasing the chances. If you think you've lived this long because of your awesome cycling skills, you're deluding yourself.

Every driver who ever passed you chose to avoid hitting you, not the other way around.

[bironi]

- just decreasing the chances

That is all we can do, and this moron is not even making an attempt.

[Don49]

I ride that road occasionally, and the video has spoiled it for me. Now I gotta watch for the idiot on the bike and the one in the car.

On a side note, the Curtlo shop used to be right off Sand Canyon before he moved to WA.

[rugbysecondrow]

we are talking past one another.

have a nice week.


My man, you completely miss the point.

It isn't that we shouldn't be responsible, but the idea that any cyclist not riding a straight line is unfit to ride on roads is "laughable", as comments in this thread reflect.

Cyclists are responsible to take care of themselves, as much as they are capable. Drivers have a much greater responsibility, but it is just as self serving - it is no picnic killing someone with your car.


Your kowtow (cow-tow?) comment just reflects the fiction I mentioned. Drivers and cyclists don't interact or have relationships. They just pass each other, safely or not. Drivers who assume some sort of high standard on the part of cyclists are more likely to take passing us for granted.

[sc53]

Car didn't look that close--maybe it was the cycist's wide angle lens as someone suggested. More importantly--he appears to be using Handlebra in Too Tall Black! Wise choice, at least for his bars. :hello:

[schneiderrd]

Five Thumbs hit the nail on the head. The road where this video was shot is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to ride side by side safely. In short the cyclist, pussy that he is, was entitled to the whole lane. The motorists complaint that the cyclist was at fault for taking the whole lane was in error. The cyclist was a jerk for flipping off the motorist when his best shot was, "why are you being so mean to me?" If you are going to do the hand signal thing, you had best be prepared to have a better come back when that when the one in a hundred motorists turns around for a discussion.

[Ti Designs]

But we (cyclists) are not an army of replica team garbed weekend racers who spend most of our time in pelotons. We are old ladies with baskets, hipsters with trailers, little kids riding to the swimming pool and tired ex-racers struggling up steep hills at the end of long rides out in the country. Drivers need to avoid all of them - and not by inches.

As we have one side defending the right to suck at what we do, I'll take the other side...

You have no control over what drivers do, you have no control over what other riders do. There is exactly one person you have control over ('cept for us tandem captains) and that's yourself. If you decide to suck at what you do you should have no expectations of other people. If you're good at what you do there's one less driver/rider I need to worry about. It's called responsibility - I hear that term may be banned soon.

[Fixed]

Actually, there isn't a responsibility to ride predictably. This whole responsible cyclist thing is a fiction that cyclists have propogated in an attempt to "earn" rights that we already have.

We are unlicensed road users - there are almost no restrictions on who or how bicycles, horseback riders, joggers, roller bladers, motorized skateboards, buggies or dog walkers use the roads. The only people that are licensed and highly regulated are motor vehicle drivers. That should be a hint.

If car drivers come to expect that everyone on the road is going to act perfectly predictably, they are going to assume that no bike is ever going to swerve around glass, get a flat or sway a little going up hill; and drive as close as possible to us.

But we (cyclists) are not an army of replica team garbed weekend racers who spend most of our time in pelotons. We are old ladies with baskets, hipsters with trailers, little kids riding to the swimming pool and tired ex-racers struggling up steep hills at the end of long rides out in the country. Drivers need to avoid all of them - and not by inches.
nice post
thanks
cheers

[rugbysecondrow]

As we have one side defending the right to suck at what we do, I'll take the other side...

You have no control over what drivers do, you have no control over what other riders do. There is exactly one person you have control over ('cept for us tandem captains) and that's yourself. If you decide to suck at what you do you should have no expectations of other people. If you're good at what you do there's one less driver/rider I need to worry about. It's called responsibility - I hear that term may be banned soon.


Booya! You are correct.

[Tom]

If we apply to motorists the same standard as to poor bicyclists, that they should not be on the road, there would be a whole lot less traffic.

Everybody has the same responsibility, and that is to be exhibit all the skills that they possibly can when motoring or cycling. Anybody else should be pelted with rotten fruit and aged fish.

[Kontact]

As we have one side defending the right to suck at what we do, I'll take the other side...

You have no control over what drivers do, you have no control over what other riders do. There is exactly one person you have control over ('cept for us tandem captains) and that's yourself. If you decide to suck at what you do you should have no expectations of other people. If you're good at what you do there's one less driver/rider I need to worry about. It's called responsibility - I hear that term may be banned soon.
There is a big difference between taking responsibility for yourself, and telling everyone that your community is going to uphold an unreasonable level of predictable competence. I don't understand how you can read what I wrote and take away from that a celebration of poor cycling skills.

I don't want drivers to believe that every cyclist is predictable and reliable. They aren't. And given the right conditions, you aren't either.

[rugbysecondrow]

There is a big difference between taking responsibility for yourself, and telling everyone that your community is going to uphold an unreasonable level of predictable competence. I don't understand how you can read what I wrote and take away from that a celebration of poor cycling skills.

I don't want drivers to believe that every cyclist is predictable and reliable. They aren't. And given the right conditions, you aren't either.

That is the difference in our views, I think that predictable competence is a reasonable standard.

[Kontact]

That is the difference in our views, I think that predictable competence is a reasonable standard.
You think that a seven year old on a BMX bike is going to hold a line like you or I? :confused:

[zap]

That is the difference in our views, I think that predictable competence is a reasonable standard.

Rugby, do you bunny hop?

It's a reasonable skill for roadies to have.

[SamIAm]

You think that a seven year old on a BMX bike is going to hold a line like you or I? :confused:

I wonder if drivers already figure this into the equation. I have read reports that cyclists that don't wear helmets or typical cycling clothing are given a wider berth by passing cars. I am sure the same would go for a driver overtaking a 7 year old on a bike.

At any rate, I mostly agree with you that where there is a life on the line, drivers must bear responsibility for passing with a safe margin.

[rugbysecondrow]

You think that a seven year old on a BMX bike is going to hold a line like you or I? :confused:


What is predictable for a 7 year old on a BMX would not be predictable for a middle aged fella on a cervelo or a grandmother on a Townie. For the BMX kid, I predict he doesn't know what the ???? he is doing. For the grandmother, I predict she will be slower, maybe more hesitant and uncomfortable. For the Cervelo cyclist, I predict he looks proper and should know what the hell he is doing out there. This is no different than predicting a wider right turn for a semi or a tighter lane change or shoulder over taking by a motorcyclist. Different vehicles types behave differently in traffic, bikes are a type of vehicle. As a motorist, split second decisions are necessary for their own safety as well as others, this is not in dispute. What appears to be in dispute is that some feel cyclists ought not be responsible. This is not a smart position to hold, it might earn you a Darwin Award.

For me, I will be responsible for how I ride. Yes Zap, I practiced bunny hops because of debris and bridge crossings that might cause issues. I have read and thought about what if scenarios and how I would respond. I try to be prepared. This also means I ride with people who are not douche bags and who know what they are doing.

Simply put, if you don't have the skills to navigate safely in traffic, then you ought not be in traffic. You are a vehicle, the law offers you protections but also holds you responsible for operating in a safe manner. You should work up to it, practice on paths, neighborhoods with less traffic, off road etc. Just because you can afford a bike doesn't mean you should ride it. Just because we don't need a state drivers license doesn't mean ought not take our role seriously.

This seems basic to me, so basic I am surprised this is even a discussion.
This also applies to motorcyclists.

[Ti Designs]

There is a big difference between taking responsibility for yourself, and telling everyone that your community is going to uphold an unreasonable level of predictable competence. I don't understand how you can read what I wrote and take away from that a celebration of poor cycling skills.

Let's start with "Actually, there isn't a responsibility to ride predictably." As soon as you give in to that point it becomes OK to ride on the left side of the road at night, wearing all black while drunk. There is a responsibility, it has to start somewhere and the individual is the logical place to start.

I don't want drivers to believe that every cyclist is predictable and reliable. They aren't. And given the right conditions, you aren't either.

The difference is that I take responsibility for myself. In 31 years of driving I've gotten zero violations. I take competence in driving to a different level as I'm an autocross driver and I take pride in my car control. In competition I get within inches of cones while in 4 wheel drifts. I look at my own driving ability and think the car in that video wasn't that close - but I don't know the driver so... I'm better on the bike than I am behind the wheel of my car. I coach new riders who aren't skilled and aren't predictable, it's my own responsibility to be able to handle anything that gets thrown at me. If I get taken down by a car, the first question in my mind is if there was anything I could have done that would have prevented that.

Last year I got taken down by a driver. I was on the main road which curved to the left. There is a side street which comes off straight, but there are signs which clearly indicate that 2A curves to the left. I was riding at a good clip, probably around 25MPH, the speed limit there is 30MPH. I looked back, noticed a white car in the distance, thought I had plenty of room and banked into the curve. The driver took the side street, in the process taking me right out of the turn I was in. I crashed, the driver never stopped. It was clearly the driver's fault, but in some strange way it was mine too. The car was a Prius which is quieter than most other cars. I judged distance based on a quick glance and my hearing. As there are more hybrid and electric cars out there I know I need to gauge distance by sight from now on.


As for the example of the 7 year old on a BMX bike, I think the responsibility part come in as soon as they venture out onto public roads. Not far from me there is a woman who yells at the cars going down the street to slow down 'cause she has kids playing in the yard. She's been doing that for years. So my question is, does she warn every driver in the world not to hit her kids or does she teach her kids how not to get hit? Those kids are going to leave the house at some point and get hit by a train, and the whole community is going to say it's a tragedy. I'll just think it was predictable...

[zap]

For the Cervelo cyclist, I predict he looks proper and should know what the hell he is doing out there.

Bold = oh boy........... :beer: :bike:

[JMerring]

yes, we all need to be responsible for our actions. however, when we commandeer a multi-ton vehicle that can easily kill or seriously injure, we have a greater responsibility to make sure we don't in fact kill or seriously injure anyone, even if they happen to be an irresponsible narcissistic self-involved prick. why is that so hard to appreciate?

from the vid posted, it's tough to tell who did what to whom and when.

[Fixed]

due care . the conduct that a reasonable man or woman will exercise in a particular situation, in looking out for the safety of others. If one uses due care then an injured party cannot prove negligence. This is one of those nebulous standards by which negligence is tested. Each juror has to determine what a "reasonable" man or woman would do.
cheers

[William]

I give all cyclists a wide berth, but riders who are squirrley and can't hold a straight line - mainly kids, casual riders, and tri-athletes I give more room as I go by.




William

[Kontact]

I give all cyclists a wide berth, but riders who are squirrley and can't hold a straight line - mainly kids, casual riders, and tri-athletes I give more room as I go by.

The very simple point I'm making is that every rider, regardless of their fancy bike and gothic aero helmet, may need all the clearance given to triathletes, children and other undesireables. Receiving "road bike passing clearance" at the moment you need to swerve around a pothole will not have a positive outcome. It is better for drivers to get and keep the impression that ALL cyclist require the same clearance, no matter how fancy.


Not addressing this to William, but the thread in general:
It appears that "responsible" is a confusing term. When I first used it I meant from the point of view of DRIVERS, not cyclists. Drivers should not expect a high standard from such an inclusive group as "people on bikes". And if they don't, we're all safer. Drivers will pass slower and with more clearance if they don't have preconceptions about our capabilities or competence. How could that be a bad thing?


Personal responsibility is... personal. I'm for it, and take it. Do whatever you want, no one will ever tell you not to take responsibility for yourself - and no one in this thread has yet. By the same token, I don't tell other people what their personal standards should be.


If anyone here wants to rage about our "nanny" society, I agree with you. So there's no need to quote me like I'm part of the problem. It isn't shirking responsibility to say that drivers have more influence on cyclist safety than cyclists can ever have. That's just the reality of sharing the road with something much bigger, faster and made of metal.

[dhoff]

here's my take:

The driver passed at too high rate of speed, but seemed to give ample room, although it's tough to tell.

How can we really tell that? If the rider was going 4 MPH uphill and the driver passed at 5 times his speed, that would be 20. If 10, then 50. Speed is all relative. The bigest factor in perceived speed in film (or video) is the focal length of the lens. A wider angle will make a passer appear faster. Telephoto, slower.

The video is mostly interesting because we all just spend so much time answering questions we dont have enough info to answer and after all, nothing really happened.

I am intrigued by how much extra time I must have on my hands to spend it on this. And think, I sometimes think I dont have enough time!!!

[rugbysecondrow]

The benefit, or drawback, of being able to take your Iphone to the restroom.
:beer:

[Lifelover]

blah, blah, blah...
If anyone here wants to rage about our "nanny" society,blah, blah, blah.

It's not about raging against anything. It's about understanding (accepting) what you can control.

You/I/we can not control how other drivers act. All we can control is how we act.

[Kontact]

It's not about raging against anything. It's about understanding (accepting) what you can control.

You/I/we can not control how other drivers act. All we can control is how we act.
Hmmm, I could have sworn I was talking about how cyclists CAN influence driver's expectations.

[erector]

I've gotten to the point, over about a decade of riding, of switching to mountain shoes for the road bike, installing the spikes, and getting rubber grips for the shoes, because IF someone in a car ever did stop and get out, I wouldn't want to slip on a carbon sole with that pathetic heel-cap and a Look cleat.
I ride considerately, always in the bike lane (assuming there is one) and with a dedicated ear open for cars coming up from behind, but when cars do get upset, I can't help but engage back. At that point, be it verbal communication or I-talian style gesticulation, the car is usually stopped or slowed, and poses little threat.
Has anyone ever REALLY gotten into it with a driver? and if so, what was the outcome?

ps.
I also think the KimberPepperBlaster is a good idea - that MTB guy in Africa definitely could have used one. (not so much during a race situation I guess)

[tugrul]

The cyclist is guilty of some horrible video editing. If you are going to do slow motion to demonstrate something, don't leave 15 seconds of irrelevant video before the moment of interest.

[Fivethumbs]

Harumpf!!!!