Cyclist plague spreading

Dimple said:
Left hooking means the driver will still be moving but has turned left up a street immediately in front of you.
I agree, if a driver comes past and has been able to come to a stop at the side of the road then 'on paper' it does seem ridiculous that you would cycle into it.
Click to expand...

From what the two articles I have read on this state, the incident was not a left hooker...which is why my opinion is what it is. Maybe with more information we can make a more definitive and clearer opinion, but given what we are being told, I would say that the cyclist in the OP at least bares some responsibility for hitting the car in front...not that the driver is not responsible for braking the law, because he is.
 
Castiel said:
I don't see how a car would overtake me in heavy traffic in the first place..where would he go?

I slow when they pull out to overtake, when they complete their overtaking and the distance is safe I increase speed accordingly.
Click to expand...

I assume you don't ride on The Embankment then?

Castiel said:
The original piece states that the Car pulled away and then stopped sharply in front of him, there is not mention of overtaking at all, or implication of such..the cyclist then stated that he rode directly into the rear of the vehicle. I am going by what he said, I am not making anything up....If the facts are different then my opinon would be accordingly different, but at the moment, given the assumption you have to make due to a lack of information I would maintain that if the car was pulling away from he cyclist to begin with and then broke sharply, there should be at least some time for the cyclist to react. Unless the cyclist was riding at speed and was unable to stop, in which case the personal responsibility still applies as he should maintain a safe distance.
Click to expand...

When it says 'pulled away' it means that he pulled away from the junction you can see in the pictures onto the road the cyclist was using, which has priority.
 
Castiel said:
From what the two articles I have read on this state, the incident was not a left hooker...which is why my opinion is what it is. Maybe with more information we can make a more definitive and clearer opinion, but given what we are being told, I would say that the cyclist in the OP at least bares some responsibility for hitting the car in front...not that the driver is not responsible for braking the law, because he is.
Click to expand...

You have also been making sweeping statements about left hooking and saying you should slow down and be prepared when every vehicle comes past just in case it decides to turn left which is BS.
I agree that on paper, if a vehicle comes completely past you and has time to come to a full stop then it does seem stupid that a cycle can smash into a stationary vehicle however I'm not denying it can't happen.
 
Dimple said:
You have also been making sweeping statements about left hooking and saying you should slow down and be prepared when every vehicle comes past just in case it decides to turn left which is BS.
I agree that on paper, if a vehicle comes completely past you and has time to come to a full stop then it does seem stupid that a cycle can smash into a stationary vehicle however I'm not denying it can't happen.
Click to expand...

I have consistently made the point that if a vehicle pulls into you then he hits you, not the other way around. You should be aware of the potential however and ride or drive accordingly.

And it certainly can happen...when I was a teen I rode into the back of a stationary car because it was raining and I wasn't looking where I was going.
 
Last edited:
[DOD]Asprilla;24940271 said:
I assume you don't ride on The Embankment then?
Click to expand...

Occasionally. And vehicles generally don't overtake in heavy traffic exactly, more drive alongside...I had another cyclist once almost have me off by trying to squeeze, at great speed I might add, between me an a car alongside me. I am not denying that drivers can be stupid and often don't consider cyclists appropriately, but that doesn't negate our own responsibility for our safety, regardless of what the other road users might potentially do. I do not ride fast enough in slow moving or heavy traffic not to be able to stop in all by the most immediate of incidents..(i.e..the vehicle hits me.)

[DOD]Asprilla;24940271 said:
When it says 'pulled away' it means that he pulled away from the junction you can see in the pictures onto the road the cyclist was using, which has priority.
Click to expand...

An assumption then?

If he pulled out into the path of the cyclist and the cyclist hit him, then he is in the wrong and the cyclist would be unlikely to do anything about it...but did he not pull out ahead of the cyclist and then stop on the side of the road?...was the cyclist watching the traffic ahead? How fast was the cyclist going that he could not stop before hitting the now stationary vehicle? did the cyclist anticipate and adjust for the new vehicle now on the road ahead?

Is the cyclist entirely have no responsibility here?
 
Last edited:
I cant believe the bickering about who,s right and who,s wrong.

If you are on a bike YOU are vulnerable to idiots in cars, you need to be very careful.
Castiel gets this and people here are having a go at him, this just shows up how dumb some cyclists are.
Road users are human and will make mistakes , its your arse on the line as Castiel keeps pointing out.
 
altus said:
I cant believe the bickering about who,s right and who,s wrong.

If you are on a bike YOU are vulnerable to idiots in cars, you need to be very careful.
Castiel gets this and people here are having a go at him, this just shows up how dumb some cyclists are.
Road users are human and will make mistakes , its your arse on the line as Castiel keeps pointing out.
Click to expand...

So says the troll who started a thread deliberately abusing Cyclists and our greatest ever Olympian.
 
Nexus said:
So says the troll who started a thread deliberately abusing Cyclists and our greatest ever Olympian.
Click to expand...

Surely you mean I offended them, well I am offended by them.
My vote would go to Daley Thompson, and asking if riding in circles is a valid reason to be Knighted is abuse?
I don't live under a bridge either.
 
Castiel said:
Steve Redgrave is mentioned in the OP? :p
Click to expand...

altus said:
Surely you mean I offended them, well I am offended by them.
My vote would go to Daley Thompson, and asking if riding in circles is a valid reason to be Knighted is abuse?
I don't live under a bridge either.
Click to expand...

Sir Chris Hoy is the most successful British Olympian of all time in terms of gold medal wins, as a result of last year's wins in London he surpassed previous Brits who held that accolade.


Your thread title is "Cyclist plague spreading" and go on to say "Can it be stopped", thats a deliberate attempt to be offensive. You then link to a story about a Cyclist being hit by a driver who left the scene. Chris Hoy may have retweeted the story, but surely if your issue is with him, perhaps you should have created a different thread with a link to a different story, discussing honours and who deserves them.

You also claim cycling is a 'fad'. You're crazy. You are exactly the kind of person it worries me are behind the wheel of a car, whether I'm on foot, on my bike or in my car.
 
Castiel, do you slow down every time a car passes you? How do you judge when a car might be about to do something stupid when you've had ten car's pass you on a 40 mph section of road and you are doing 30mph as they pass you? I'm sorry, but I simply do not believe you brake each and every time a car passes you, or that you look to the right to check the car passing rather than at the road ahead every single time. In fact, if you decided to rapidly slow down each and every time with multiple car's passing you, you would rapidly become a danger to other and in danger yourself.

altus> Have you achieved something greater than Sir Chris Hoy? Something worthy of national praise so that we all know about you? Something worthy of a Knighthood?

The essence of the story is that this smug idiot thought he would get away with whatever happened due to his plates, and that's the story. Who is to blame is actually still out there....
 
Scougar said:
Castiel, do you slow down every time a car passes you? How do you judge when a car might be about to do something stupid when you've had ten car's pass you on a 40 mph section of road and you are doing 30mph as they pass you? I'm sorry, but I simply do not believe you brake each and every time a car passes you, or that you look to the right to check the car passing rather than at the road ahead every single time.
Click to expand...

I ensure there is a safe distance, IF that means I need to slow down, then I do... Slowing down doesn't always necessitate braking either, or rapidly slowing down for that matter. It is about awareness and maintaining the ability to react if something happens, and I do check my surroundings regularly, if a car comes up behind me and proceeds to overtake then I look to see where he is, this doesn't mean I am not also aware of the road ahead, I do not suffer from tunnel vision. It also isn't necessary to slow down every time a car passes, it depends on the individual overtaking and whether a safe distance is maintained in the specific conditions of each example. I assume they are all going to do something stupid and apply caution accordingly, if there are plots of cars overtaking then I am more cautious than if it is only one for example. I don't ride a push bike at 30mph either...I'm not a Tour De France calibre of cyclist, far from it.
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
Occasionally. And vehicles generally don't overtake in heavy traffic exactly, more drive alongside...I had another cyclist once almost have me off by trying to squeeze, at great speed I might add, between me an a car alongside me. I am not denying that drivers can be stupid and often don't consider cyclists appropriately, but that doesn't negate our own responsibility for our safety, regardless of what the other road users might potentially do. I do not ride fast enough in slow moving or heavy traffic not to be able to stop in all by the most immediate of incidents..(i.e..the vehicle hits me.)



An assumption then?

If he pulled out into the path of the cyclist and the cyclist hit him, then he is in the wrong and the cyclist would be unlikely to do anything about it...but did he not pull out ahead of the cyclist and then stop on the side of the road?...was the cyclist watching the traffic ahead? How fast was the cyclist going that he could not stop before hitting the now stationary vehicle? did the cyclist anticipate and adjust for the new vehicle now on the road ahead?

Is the cyclist entirely have no responsibility here?
Click to expand...

No one is arguing that cyclists don't have a responsibility for their own safety. I don't think anyone has.

What people are bringing up here is the assumption that they cyclist could have avoided the situation.

I've been following this since it first popped up on twitter and there was plenty of information from the eyewitness accounts. The driver pulled out of the junction and then stopped whilst the cyclist was travelling along the main road.

I also think that differentiating between overtaking and 'driving along side' is splitting hairs.

Castiel said:
I ensure there is a safe distance, IF that means I need to slow down, then I do... Slowing down doesn't always necessitate braking either, or rapidly slowing down for that matter. It is about awareness and maintaining the ability to react if something happens, and I do check my surroundings regularly, if a car comes up behind me and proceeds to overtake then I look to see where he is, this doesn't mean I am not also aware of the road ahead, I do not suffer from tunnel vision. It also isn't necessary to slow down every time a car passes, it depends on the individual overtaking and whether a safe distance is maintained in the specific conditions of each example. I assume they are all going to do something stupid and apply caution accordingly. I don't ride a push bike at 30mph either...I'm not a Tour De France calibre of cyclist, far from it.
Click to expand...

I thought you said you started slowing as soon as they commence their overtaking manoeuvre? How do you know whether you'll ned to slow down or not when the vehicle is behind you?
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
Chris Hoy is a nobber, the cyclist is at fault, he hit the car in front, not the car hit the cyclist. If anything the car owner should claim off the cyclist (who doesn't have insurance I suspect) for any damage to his vehicle.

(He shouldn't have driven off though, that is illegal. Although he did stop and speak to the cyclist, so I don't know what the procedure would be for a cyclcist, who has no insurance details to give over and where there is clearly no injury?)
Click to expand...
this is true. sad, but true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom