The OP claimed to be irate at people “pretending to be pro racers they have absaloutley no awareness of what the fuck is happening around them.
They are bent over the handlebars staring straight ahead and going much faster then their reaction ability can handle resulting in everyone else in their vicinity having to get out of their way or risk a collision.” and that what had set him off was “reading in my local paper that one of these characters has just got himself killed by running into the side of an articulated lorry.”
Which doesn’t tally with the incident described in the paper:
" Glenn Syder was less than 20m away when the articulated lorry started to pull out of a junction and into his path.
Witnesses said the 49-year-old father of four from Fareham was left with “nowhere to go” and described how he smashed into the side of the vehicle’s cab before falling under its wheel. "
Perhaps lust4life could give us a link to the incident he’s referring to.
I don’t speak for scr4, but I’d say he was being serious. He was also being sarcastic. The OP complained about the horrific dangers caused by cyclists when cars swerve to avoid them, with the strong implication that it was all the cyclists’ fault. scr4 then asked for examples where this was the case. First came back with a driver who was both drunk and speeding. scr4 rolled his eyes at this as an example. You came back with more, but very poor examples.
And how does “reports of vehicles swerving to avoid a cyclist riding without lights” not support my comment in post #69? Another such incident ends with the motorist crashing into a tree but could have been worse.
It is at best, tenuous, especially given the type of cyclist the OP describes. He was complaining about a type of cyclist who a) rarely ventures out at night, and b) if he does is lit like a road flare. He complains about not being able to cast a wide net to include asshole drivers, yet happily casts a net over multiple types of riders while trying to cover his ass by putting the word ‘Some’ in the title. Its inconsistent, biased, and unsupported but is sadly what cyclists have come to expect from The Pit.
The number of ‘deaths’, even counting the ones caused by flagrant driver misconduct (i.e. most of them) caused by swerving is hardly worth the viritol by the OP. Yet somehow as long as you get in a few unlit cyclists in there it makes up for the outright murder of cyclists, assaults, and illegal activity performed by drivers IN THE LINKS YOU PROVIDED!
Tens of thousands of people are killed by cars each year. Yet a handful of swerves by folks overdriving their headlights and claiming to be avoiding unlit cyclists* somehow is worthy of pitting? I just don’t get it?
Yes there are tons of idiot cyclists riding at night without lights. That being said there are probably twice as many drivers who just aren’t looking or driving too fast. I myself have been accused of ‘riding with lights’ when I had two powerful units working in addition to a reflector. I have to wonder about many of these cases, no doubt some are legit but many are just folks going too fast at night.
That, through all the spit and viritol, describes racing cycists. Bike couriers don’t fit this description.
At night, typically the type of rider you encounter is a thrillseeker, a commuter, a casual rider, or a mopey singing girls and their freaky animal friends
. Racers, which seems to be what the OP is pointing at seem at, rarely remain out for night riding for the most part.
The OP is clearly pointing at riders who apparently only think they are racers but in reality are not: “They are always males and usually middle aged so I suspect some sort of mid life crisis may be part of this phenonomen.” The average Tour de France cyclist is under 30.
These guys may have the all the accoutrements for the Tour de France but the Tour is only in daylight. Having the proper accoutrements for being “lit like a road flare” after dark does not necessarily follow.
Methinks the OP is envious. Some of these folks do race and I’ve seen ones who look a little over-the-hill or creaky looking guys & gals that can smoke a rider 1/3 their age. Just because they aren’t in the Tour de France doesn’t mean they can’t ride in other, smaller races.
Certainly there are some wannabees out there, but it gets put in the same category: They are considered racers, even if they cannot race.
Hence my first qualifier: not being out at night at all. I see and encounter plenty of racers out during the daytime. But their numbers fall drastically, and when you do see them they have some serious lighting hardware.
Which means that they are not the unlit cyclists you cited as being swerved around, because again they are either a) not out at night, or b) lit up.
No, he didn’t. But he did bring up cars swerving to avoid evil cyclists and you mentioned swerving around unlit cyclists. The type of cyclist the OP described just doesn’t fall into that category. Sorry, but that’s the voice of experience.
Full disclosure: I’ve been the sort of cyclist described in the OP, except I was 17 and didn’t wear lycra. The racing bike was a Peugeot that belonged to my brother, he bought it in Europe while touring the continent by bicycle. I was often out after dark without any lights.
I know an anecdote isn’t the same as datum but there you go.
Your OP contains gross, broad brush criticism against a particular category of road user, based on prejudice and ignorance. When I did something similar in relation to motorists, you melt down.
Sure cars have mirrors. You can hear better on a bike, though. And you can see to either side better than in a car. No pillars. I have no idea what your “head restrained” comment is supposed to reference.
You were talking about reaction time. Your comment made no sense. And while I agree that cars have brakes commensurate with their horsepower, the simple fact is that the faster you go, the longer it takes to stop, whether on a bike or in a car. So there is no reason at all to single out cyclists who are generally going slower, and who will do far, far less damage if they hit someone or thing.
Sure. I just thought it was all horseshit, and still do. The only concrete example you gave was of an event that didn’t support your position, and you’ve come up with no actual examples (let alone valid statistics) that do. You can blow hot air all you like. The simple fact is though that motorists kill people all the time and cyclists don’t. Fantasies you may have notwithstanding.
And motherhood and apple pie are just great, ain’t they? What is your point?
Prejudice noted.
I’ll give you a tip on rhetoric. If you don’t want people to realise you have an irrational prejudice, don’t mix up your arguments with vitriolic comments on clothing.
No, disagree. There is nothing in that story that suggests the cyclist was doing anything wrong at all. The story says nothing of the kind. In fact, given that the story ends by saying no one was charged, it suggests that the police concluded precisely that the cyclist was doing nothing wrong.
The point that you are missing, Lute is that the only statistic that will help you is one that shows that, regularly, cyclists who are doing something wrong force motorists to take evasive action and cause accidents.
Obviously inattentive motorists sometimes swerve to avoid other road users etc, but unless that other road user was doing something wrong, such accidents are the motorists fault, not the other road user’s fault.
My review of your cites suggests that the incident of someone swerving to avoid a cyclist without lights is the only example you have come up with. And unless you can show that the guy was wearing lycra, riding a drop bar bike etc you haven’t supported the OP.
Ironic that you are attacking others’ abilities with language while not being able to understand what I wrote. Or you are deliberately strawmanning.
The point is simply that (even assuming your SWSS example is factual) one example of someone doing something stupid resulting in his own death is hardly grounds for a pitting. And certainly does not support the suggestion that every other person who rides the same sort of bike or wears clothing of similar fabric is equally as likely to do something similarly stupid.
**Printchester ** reference vitriol ,try following your own advice,I only turn nasty when people act that way to me.
And as a general point no one has ever been killed by being run over by a dog as far as I know but I wouldn’t be stunned with amazement if plenty of road traffic accidents have been caused as an indirect result of dogs being in the road,and no I’m not even going to bother to give a cite .
Further up thread,no these people AREN’T genuine racers out training,racers as far as I know tend not to train in heavy inner city,rush hour traffic.
To answer other points upthread I am not envious of cycle racers if I was then I could have joined my uncles club or taken part in the stadium races not too far from me .
Competitive cycling has never has never been of interest to me either as a spectator sport or a participant sport.
And once again I make the point that its not the gear that I am opposed to(And yes I can afford to buy it if I wished to, we’re not exactly talking mega bucks here) but the sub section of cyclists that I have described who tend to wear it somewhat like a uniform for everyday commuting just as a certain type of Motor Cyclist wear a specific kind of outfit and follow a certain type of behaviour,or youth cults or whatever.
I quite honestly cant put it any simpler then that and if anyone cant understand this point then logical debate is not within their capability.
