Help settle an argument

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
Vantage
Posts: 3050
Joined: 24 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
Location: somewhere in Bolton
Contact:

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by Vantage »

kwackers wrote:Secondly it was entirely predictable - to anyone who's driving with their brain engaged.


Nope, it wasn't. There's no way for the driver to know what one cyclist following another is going to do, unless the driver is a mind reader.
Watching that video, I wouldn't have thought there would be an overtake from the mountain bike muppit.
Bill


“Ride as much or as little, or as long or as short as you feel. But ride.” ~ Eddy Merckx
It's a rich man whos children run to him when his pockets are empty.
reohn2
Posts: 45159
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by reohn2 »

I wouldn't describe the cyclist's manoeuvre or riding as 'erratic'.
I'd call him a fool for not looking behind before overtaking which can be fatal,though there is an outside possibility he could've had a RVM.
That said,the motorist who beeps could see him closing down and overtaking the other cyclist and should have read the manoeuvre easily IMHO.
There's the complication of the pedestrian island limiting the car's overtaking space so it's obvious to me if I were diving the car to wait until after the island as the cyclist's impending overtake was obvious.
The car driver seemingly thinks s/he should have the right to overtake,but the cyclist shouldn't,for some unknown reason.

After the beep and and the V sign it all gets quite comical.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by kwackers »

Vantage wrote:Nope, it wasn't. There's no way for the driver to know what one cyclist following another is going to do, unless the driver is a mind reader.
Watching that video, I wouldn't have thought there would be an overtake from the mountain bike muppit.

You don't need to read minds - you simply have to predict.

How can it be difficult to predict what one vehicle travelling faster than another is going to do? At what point does caution cease to be the one thing that you should exercise? At what point does sounding your horn so close to a cyclist seem like a good idea?
Lets face it a decent percentage of motorists don't even realise that a cyclist coming up on a parked car will need to move out!

I had a guy this morning, coming up to a roundabout - I'm in primary. Heard him slow down, I looked behind and he was directly behind me and slowing so I moved right another foot or so just to make sure there was no ambiguity about what I intended to do on the single lane roundabout only to have him pull into the other lane and boot it. He almost failed to overtake before having to swerve around the bollard, slam on and end up nose into the roundabout forcing a car on the roundabout to swerve around him.

Some drivers (and reading this thread some cyclists) don't appear to have whatever mental equipment allows them to make future projections based on theirs and the others around them.
This imo is a far bigger issue than the odd idiot practicing a 'punishment pass' because at least there's some calculation in the punishment pass rather than merely brainless driving.

I appreciate brainless driving is the de-facto standard these days and that is why the cyclists actions were stupid.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by kwackers »

pwa wrote:Well I do have a dictionary and I am fairly happy with the word.

Sorry either you or your dictionary is wrong. Tell me what your dictionary says and explain why the rider met that criteria.
pwa wrote:I suspect that if I had used that word about the actions of the driver, Kwackers would have been less inclined to object.

Why? I've got no idea what the driver was doing. All the information I have is that at the point they beeped they were set back from the cyclist, you can only *presume* that they wanted the cyclist out of the way.

We can however say that the horn was used quite late (if it was about the cyclist moving out into their path).
So if it was about the cyclist moving out and not just annoyance at the cyclist being in the middle of the road then you have to assume that either they couldn't find their horn button or that they weren't actually looking and didn't see the cyclist until quite late.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by Vorpal »

Vantage wrote:
kwackers wrote:Secondly it was entirely predictable - to anyone who's driving with their brain engaged.


Nope, it wasn't. There's no way for the driver to know what one cyclist following another is going to do, unless the driver is a mind reader.
Watching that video, I wouldn't have thought there would be an overtake from the mountain bike muppit.

The camera cyclist was clearly going faster than the other. He had a choice of overtaking, or braking and staying in behind the other. The motorist behind may not know which one will happen, but if it were me, I would have assumed that he was going to overtake. Not because I expected him to, but because that represented a hazard that may require a reaction. If the motorist expects the camera cyclsit to overtake and he doesn't, that does not create any additional hazards. If, on the other hand, the motorist expects the cylist to stay in the cycle lane and the motorist begins to overtake, it does create a hazardous situation if the cyclists does not do as expected.

IMO, that's what has occurred here, or nearly. I can't exactly what the motorist was doing beofre the camera looks back. Only that s/he was on the outside of the lane.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
User avatar
Vantage
Posts: 3050
Joined: 24 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
Location: somewhere in Bolton
Contact:

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by Vantage »

Well I don't know about you lot and shooting myself in the foot re predictability, but I'd have thought the MTB'er would sit in the cycle lane until past the pinch point. That's what I'd have done and it's what the driver might have thought he'd do because as already mentioned, there was no looking back or signalling from the MTB'er and therefor no indication to anyone else what he might do. No indication = no change in position. That's how I see it and I believe the majority of drivers would see it. Unless he's bloody stupid. Which as we've seen, he obviously is.
The difference in speed between the two cyclists isn't that great really. We only see it as we're viewing it from the tailing cyclists viewpoint. I imagine it would be more difficult to spot from the motorists pov, especially given that the motorist will be concentrating on everything else around him/her.
I personally wouldn't object to any motorist passing me through that pinch point as it isn't stupidly narrow enough for me to warrant taking the lane. YMMV.
I maintain for the above reasons that imv there is no possible way for any motorist to have predicted that that plonker on the MTB would have suddenly bolted to the right to overtake the bloke in front.
Bill


“Ride as much or as little, or as long or as short as you feel. But ride.” ~ Eddy Merckx
It's a rich man whos children run to him when his pockets are empty.
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by Tonyf33 »

Vantage wrote:Well I don't know about you lot and shooting myself in the foot re predictability, but I'd have thought the MTB'er would sit in the cycle lane until past the pinch point. That's what I'd have done and it's what the driver might have thought he'd do because as already mentioned, there was no looking back or signalling from the MTB'er and therefor no indication to anyone else what he might do. No indication = no change in position. That's how I see it and I believe the majority of drivers would see it. Unless he's bloody stupid. Which as we've seen, he obviously is.
The difference in speed between the two cyclists isn't that great really. We only see it as we're viewing it from the tailing cyclists viewpoint. I imagine it would be more difficult to spot from the motorists pov, especially given that the motorist will be concentrating on everything else around him/her.
I personally wouldn't object to any motorist passing me through that pinch point as it isn't stupidly narrow enough for me to warrant taking the lane. YMMV.
I maintain for the above reasons that imv there is no possible way for any motorist to have predicted that that plonker on the MTB would have suddenly bolted to the right to overtake the bloke in front.


why would you (as a cyclist) have not overtaken at the point he actually passed the other cyclist?
Why would the driver ASSUME what was not going to happen - given the pretty obvious & at a clear hazzard (i.e. the pinch point)

So, let's put this into a motorvehicle scenario, you are driving a 40 ton lorry & you see two cars ahead and one is catching the other with clear space for it to overtake, what would be your assumption/reading of what was going to happen?
Would you (in the much bigger vehicle) drive right up to the back of the rearmost vehicle sound your horn and attempt to pass it with not much leaway either side for errors?

Could you see the person in the rearmost car looking in their mirrors before overtaking and would you again bully your way up to the back of that car (in your 40 ton lorry) because he hadn't done so before he then safely overtook the car he was catching?
If not why then would it be ok to apply that situation to the much bigger vehicle following two other smaller vehicles in the situation we have in the video? :?:

The car driver was too impatient and improperly used their horn, holding back a couple of seconds and making a nice safe pass AFTER the hazard (& not sounding their horn illegally) and everyone goes on their way. :roll:
bogmyrtle
Posts: 967
Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 10:29pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by bogmyrtle »

Looks to me as though the whole thing was the result of wounded pride. The cyclist was so intent on overtaking someone who had the cheek to effortlessly sail past him.
A bike does more miles to the banana than a Porsche.
robing
Posts: 1359
Joined: 7 Sep 2014, 9:11am

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by robing »

It's quite ironic that this thread is titled 'help settle an argument ' , when it's actually caused an argument that shows no sign of being settled ;-)
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by beardy »

Using it as an example of why cyclists are stupid / shouldn't be on the road etc because he moved 'out of the lane'


An example of what? Apart from the cyclist hitting the kerb and coming off, this was a non-incident.
No close call, no emergency braking, nothing of note. No injury, no damage, no death.

A few days ago my neighbour pulled onto the road from her drive just as another car came around the corner. She was not on the road at that point but she was unable to stop from entering it. She got a beep even though no collision was on the cards, just a bit of having to lift the foot off the accelerator.

Does this make all my neighbours stupid, all Vauxhall drivers stupid, all silver car drivers stupid?
Or was it just a non-event with a driver beeping his horn because he didnt have a clear road all to himself.

Meanwhile the car drivers killed how many people on that same day?
wahoofish
Posts: 91
Joined: 20 May 2015, 10:41am

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by wahoofish »

beardy wrote:
Using it as an example of why cyclists are stupid / shouldn't be on the road etc because he moved 'out of the lane'


An example of what? Apart from the cyclist hitting the kerb and coming off, this was a non-incident.
No close call, no emergency braking, nothing of note. No injury, no damage, no death.

A few days ago my neighbour pulled onto the road from her drive just as another car came around the corner. She was not on the road at that point but she was unable to stop from entering it. She got a beep even though no collision was on the cards, just a bit of having to lift the foot off the accelerator.

Does this make all my neighbours stupid, all Vauxhall drivers stupid, all silver car drivers stupid?
Or was it just a non-event with a driver beeping his horn because he didnt have a clear road all to himself.

Meanwhile the car drivers killed how many people on that same day?


Well, you do have to admit that buying a silver Vauxhall does raise some questions about you. [emoji48]
ferdinand
Posts: 376
Joined: 31 Oct 2014, 6:59pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by ferdinand »

wahoofish wrote:
beardy wrote:
Using it as an example of why cyclists are stupid / shouldn't be on the road etc because he moved 'out of the lane'


An example of what? Apart from the cyclist hitting the kerb and coming off, this was a non-incident.
No close call, no emergency braking, nothing of note. No injury, no damage, no death.

A few days ago my neighbour pulled onto the road from her drive just as another car came around the corner. She was not on the road at that point but she was unable to stop from entering it. She got a beep even though no collision was on the cards, just a bit of having to lift the foot off the accelerator.

Does this make all my neighbours stupid, all Vauxhall drivers stupid, all silver car drivers stupid?
Or was it just a non-event with a driver beeping his horn because he didnt have a clear road all to himself.

Meanwhile the car drivers killed how many people on that same day?


Writing as the owner of an automatic silver Vauxhall, I have no comment to make, except to repeat that this video is an excellent discussion starter for instruction.

F
Postboxer
Posts: 1929
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by Postboxer »

The truck car analogy doesn't really work, even if you put them on a dual carriageway. We can't really see on the video but maybe the car driver was timing their overtake to take place after the pinch point, had slowed before it, then accelerated so that they would catch up with the cyclists just after the pinch point, then had to slam their brakes on when one of the cyclists moves out in front of them, without checking or signalling. Maybe the car driver had also witnessed the cyclist overtake the camera cyclist and so assumed that the camera cyclist would have no need to then overtake the first cyclist. The first cyclist does slow down, perhaps because the truck is going past. If the car driver doesn't beep, the cyclist may be entirely oblivious to the peril they put themselves in by changing lanes without checking it is safe to do so, maybe next time they do the same manoeuvre, they will check it is clear before moving out, perhaps without the motorists helpful bleep, they would have pulled out and caused an accident.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by MikeF »

The car driver would have a clear view of the cyclists in front and should be driving appropriately, but he's not. He should have been aware that before the island (34') the cyclist is preparing to overtake the cyclist in front and is outside the cycle lane as he goes past the island (39'). The cyclist then starts overtaking the cyclist in front and is about 1/3way past when the motorist beeps. Beeping at this point is utterly pointless and is just a reinforcement of "get out of my way I'm a motorist" and "you shouldn't be anywhere except the cycle lane" attitude. The car driver is aggressive. However so is the cyclist who seems intent on overtaking the cyclist in front and giving a "V" sign to the driver.

Edit Is this the A3 London Road? Does anyone cycle this road? I've just looked on Streetview. The A3 has compulsory bus and cycle lane in parts, but there doesn't look that much room for a bus to pass a cyclist, and awful provision for cyclists at bus stops.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
AlanJ
Posts: 57
Joined: 1 Aug 2013, 6:44pm

Re: Help settle an argument

Post by AlanJ »

MikeF wrote:Beeping at this point is utterly pointless and is just a reinforcement of "get out of my way I'm a motorist" and "you shouldn't be anywhere except the cycle lane" attitude. The car driver is aggressive.


Good piece of mind reading there.
Post Reply