This whole RLJ thing

tstegers · June 2007

Fatbloke, you're fibbing, you read every page of the Barbican thread, some of them more than once. None of you, the anti rljers, had an answer to the differential in the rates of carnage among traffic light compliers compared to that of jumpers. That's what irritated you. But it didn't stop you reading the thread did it? Congratulations on your incident record.

Theo Stegers

Eat My Dust · June 2007

I don't see it as a safety issue. I see it as a legal issue. If I found a junction which would only be safe by jumping the lights, then I would find another route.

SNAPS

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

Fatbloke, you're fibbing, you read every page of the Barbican thread, some of them more than once. None of you, the anti rljers, had an answer to the differential in the rates of carnage among traffic light compliers compared to that of jumpers. That's what irritated you. But it didn't stop you reading the thread did it? Congratulations on your incident record.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Theo, now I know this is not the first time someone will have told you this but yet again, you are wrong. The only topic on this website that I have ever gone past 20 pages is the informative "Girls in Lycra" thread. It must really eat away at you that I have not put myself in danger by waiting at a light and therefore disprove you crajy assumption that you are safer to rlj. You don't even have the balls to admit that the only reason you do jump is because you are lazy. Go on admit it

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv

dondare · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

.... bo**ocks ..... bo**ocks...

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Ah, the Patron Saint of RLJers.

dsoutar · June 2007

Well I hope (for their sake) none of the RLJ brigade meet the bloke I encountered a couple of weeks ago. I was stopped at a set of lights beside him when a RLJ goes past. Lights go green and he's off after the RLJ like a scalded cat. Catches him up and when I pass they're having quite a discussion, or rather the non RLJ is making his considerably large presence felt. He caught me up a few sets of lights later and I was brave enough to ask him what that was about and apparently a few months back his nan was crossing a road when an RLJ went past, she lost her balance due to surprise and broke her hip.

Now he goes after any RLJs he sees and says he 'has a word' first time and if he sees the bloke do it again 'gets a bit more serious' (whatever that means). As far as he's concerned someone out there is responsible and he's not too bothered to discriminate. I'd be nervous meeting this guy in a well lit public place never mind a dark alley.

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live." ~ Mark Twain, "Taming the Bicycle"

Jacomus-rides-Gen · June 2007

tstegers - I do in fact have an answer about the differential rates of 'carnage'.

The individual cyclists styles are not taken into account.

I, along with a lot of people here, practice so called "vehicular cycling" as addressed by Cyclecraft. These are the cyclists who you will find maybe 1 or 2 cars back at the lights, filtering to the right not left, making use of road positioning to make them predictable, downshifting at lights so that they can acclerate away properly etc etc. Vehicular cyclists behave as the legitimate road users they wish to be seen as by the non-cycling public.

Utility cyclists (possibly the right word, if someone has read this too and knows the right one please correct me) - cyclists who use their bike for pure practicality reasons. Are likely to put themselves in more dangerous situations more through ignorance rather than intent, i.e. undertaking, forcing their way into ASLs, RLJing, waiting on the left of a vehicle at traffic lights and pavement cycling.

Figures about cyclists getting hit at traffic lights doesn't take account of how they ride. Proper road behaviour and positioning is by far the safest way to cycle. You cite what the BBC said a little while ago about women being safer if they RLJ... they actually said that it was safer than riding in the gutter and waiting on the left of vehicles at junctions. Women are statistically (according to what I've understood from the beeb article) more likely to fall into the "utility cyclist" catagory, and thus put themselves more at risk.

I have no doubt your riding skills are very good, in terms of fitness and technical ability, but not in terms of road behaviour.

Would you be willing to time your commute riding in the normal fashion one day, and then the next day time it again but obey traffic lights? I would be interested to see what kind of difference it makes to a cyclist I assume to be fit and fast, as so far I can virtually count on one hand the number of times I haven't overhauled an RLJer between lights. Also how you felt during the ride, more stressed, less frustrated etc etc.

_________________________
Quote: "25mph is pretty fast when you aren't wearing a car..."

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by FatBlokeFromFelixstowe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

Fatbloke, you're fibbing, you read every page of the Barbican thread, some of them more than once. None of you, the anti rljers, had an answer to the differential in the rates of carnage among traffic light compliers compared to that of jumpers. That's what irritated you. But it didn't stop you reading the thread did it? Congratulations on your incident record.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Theo, now I know this is not the first time someone will have told you this but yet again, you are wrong. The only topic on this website that I have ever gone past 20 pages is the informative "Girls in Lycra" thread. It must really eat away at you that I have not put myself in danger by waiting at a light and therefore disprove you crajy assumption that you are safer to rlj. You don't even have the balls to admit that the only reason you do jump is because you are lazy. Go on admit it

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I think we have a bit of what the psychobabblers call projection here. Trust me I am not eaten up by any aspect of your behaviour on a bike, nor that of anyone else. Sanctimony, judgmental behaviour, closed mindedness, phoney nonsense, they get me going from time to time, but otherwise? Nah. Lazy jumper? You have lost me, what has one got to do with the other? And where do "balls" come in? I can see the "bo**ocks" everywhere of course...

Peejay, Are you going to come up with something? Will you be polite and retract if you can't? 

Theo Stegers

richteacp · June 2007

tstegers, what in god's name are you waffling on about?

--
esta elefante del beb‚ me molesta

Eat My Dust · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by richtea

tstegers, what in god's name are you waffling on about?

--
esta elefante del beb‚ me molesta
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

[:D][:D][:D]

SNAPS

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by richtea

tstegers, what in god's name are you waffling on about?

--
esta elefante del beb‚ me molesta
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Which bit? A matter of the wrong thread if it's the peejay stuff. Apologies. I associate traffic lights with fatal accidents and crossed my wires with another thread.

Theo Stegers

WyS · June 2007

i gave stopping at reds a go and it stuck.. Much less stressful imo.

il_principe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jacomus-rides-Gen

tstegers - I do in fact have an answer about the differential rates of 'carnage'.

The individual cyclists styles are not taken into account.

I, along with a lot of people here, practice so called "vehicular cycling" as addressed by Cyclecraft. These are the cyclists who you will find maybe 1 or 2 cars back at the lights, filtering to the right not left, making use of road positioning to make them predictable, downshifting at lights so that they can acclerate away properly etc etc. Vehicular cyclists behave as the legitimate road users they wish to be seen as by the non-cycling public.

Utility cyclists (possibly the right word, if someone has read this too and knows the right one please correct me) - cyclists who use their bike for pure practicality reasons. Are likely to put themselves in more dangerous situations more through ignorance rather than intent, i.e. undertaking, forcing their way into ASLs, RLJing, waiting on the left of a vehicle at traffic lights and pavement cycling.

Figures about cyclists getting hit at traffic lights doesn't take account of how they ride. Proper road behaviour and positioning is by far the safest way to cycle. You cite what the BBC said a little while ago about women being safer if they RLJ... they actually said that it was safer than riding in the gutter and waiting on the left of vehicles at junctions. Women are statistically (according to what I've understood from the beeb article) more likely to fall into the "utility cyclist" catagory, and thus put themselves more at risk.

I have no doubt your riding skills are very good, in terms of fitness and technical ability, but not in terms of road behaviour.

Would you be willing to time your commute riding in the normal fashion one day, and then the next day time it again but obey traffic lights? I would be interested to see what kind of difference it makes to a cyclist I assume to be fit and fast, as so far I can virtually count on one hand the number of times I haven't overhauled an RLJer between lights. Also how you felt during the ride, more stressed, less frustrated etc etc.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Excellent post Jacomus, I agree wholeheartedly.

My Best Bike

Origamist · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Would you be willing to time your commute riding in the normal fashion one day, and then the next day time it again but obey traffic lights? I would be interested to see what kind of difference it makes to a cyclist I assume to be fit and fast, as so far I can virtually count on one hand the number of times I haven't overhauled an RLJer between lights. Also how you felt during the ride, more stressed, less frustrated etc etc.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Indubitably, jumping the red lights will make your journey time shorter. The more lights you jump (and particularly those with longer phases) the quicker you will get to your destination - assuming you don't come a cropper...

Folders

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jacomus-rides-Gen
[
Utility cyclists (possibly the right word, if someone has read this too and knows the right one please correct me) - cyclists who use their bike for pure practicality reasons. Are likely to put themselves in more dangerous situations more through ignorance rather than intent, i.e. undertaking, forcing their way into ASLs, RLJing, waiting on the left of a vehicle at traffic lights and pavement cycling.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Er, I'd dispute that bit... I'm primarily a utility cyclist, and well versed in Cyclecraft, as are most of my cycling friends. Yes, some utility cyclists are duffers, but I've seen people on fancy fast bikes, who look like serious athletes behaving like duffers too.

For the record, I've never knowingly been put at danger waiting at a red light. I once made the mistake of going down the left of a slow moving bus, when I was new to cycling, and learned my lesson, thankfully without injury. When I wait at red I either take the middle of the lane, or if I am on the left, for example in an ASL, I'm very aware of what's behind me, and will give way to anything dodgy that might be about to pass me and turn left - although I usually out-accelerate any motor vehicle.

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

cupofteacp · June 2007

Listen, a few months ago we ( I mean tstegers) got from TFL/Street the figures from 1999 to 2006. I then went through and did some analysis, I had to discount accidents from 2005 - 2006 as they changed the coding rendering them useless at this point.
As far as I could understand there were no deaths related to 204 Disobeyed ATS
i.e. going through RED lights out of 100 deaths
These figures have been reworked etc by TFL/ Street to now lay the blame for 2 deaths on RLJing, my own reading of those accidents had the police "appear" to blame the driver
In the same period
207 Disobeyed Stop Or Give Way Sign Or Marking 5
i.e. 5 cyclists were killed because they ignored a stop line not a set of lights
229 Riding Off Pavement 13
i.e. 13 cyclists were killed riding off the pavement
225 Going To Fast Having Regard To Other Road Users 2
i.e. yes, you as a cyclist were going too fast and thats why you died!
200 Drink 2
I.e as it says

As for those that are the responsiblity of the motorist
210 Turning Left 17
216 Driving Too Close To The Vehicle In Front 5
217 Driving Too Close To The Vehicle Alongside 5
223 Negligently Opening Or Closing Door 5
204 Disobeyed ATS 2
219 Overtaking On Offside Injudiciously 2
221 Changing Lane Injudiciously 2
224 Going Too Fast Having Regard To Road Environment 2
227 Emerging From Private Drive Injudiciously 2
299 Other Driver/Rider Factor 2

When "I" read these figures somethings stand out
People make mistakes and do some really stupid things
Junctions are dangerous places

This is my analaysis and as I've said it differs slightly to a more recent working of the figures by TFL/Street. The data passed to me was not laid out in a helpful manner, i.e a PDF, not in columns, not in a set format

These figures only cover the accidents to cyclists and not pedestrians.

Please don't belive me contact TFL/Street and do your own work

15 * 2 * 5
* 46 = Happiness

richteacp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

Originally posted by richtea

tstegers, what in god's name are you waffling on about?

--
esta elefante del beb‚ me molesta
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Which bit? A matter of the wrong thread if it's the peejay stuff. Apologies. I associate traffic lights with fatal accidents and crossed my wires with another thread.

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Most of it to be honest.

I do agree with you that jumping lights with your eyes closed is dangerous though.

--
esta elefante del beb‚ me molesta

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

Theo, I missed the bit earlier where you reminded us of your accident record and therefore proving your theory that jumping RLJ's was safer than waiting.

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by FatBlokeFromFelixstowe

Theo, I missed the bit earlier where you reminded us of your accident record and therefore proving your theory that jumping RLJ's was safer than waiting.

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Wow not this thread. I believe that was page 58 of the Barbican job. Six nil was the personal ratio that alerted me to the particular dangers of traffic lights. 130:2 or so, perhaps 130:0 the TfL ratio that backed up my personal experience. Why don't you nip back dig it out. Give Barbican a bump. There's clearly still life in the old thing.

Theo Stegers

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Wow not this thread. I believe that was page 58 of the Barbican job. Six nil was the personal ratio that alerted me to the particular dangers of traffic lights. 130:2 or so, perhaps 130:0 the TfL ratio that backed up my personal experience. Why don't you nip back dig it out. Give Barbican a bump. There's clearly still life in the old thing.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So with your super human 6th sense which enables you TO safely RLJ you have had 6 accidents. Yet with my outdated practice of waiting I have had zero. Am I missing something here ?

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv

Jacomus-rides-Gen · June 2007

Arch, I would classify you in the "vehicular cyclist" catagory. As I said, I don't remember the name properly for the "Utility" catagory, but it is clear from what you said, that you do not behave in the manner I described a Utility cycist to.

Can you think of a better name?

p.s. Thats not a challenge btw! [:D], was just wondering if you could think of a better / more appropriate name considering what you said. So that I can go back and clarify my definition.

_________________________
Quote: "25mph is pretty fast when you aren't wearing a car..."

dondare · June 2007

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id ... 512#g288.4

Anyone who thinks that RLJing is at all justifiable should read this. It demonstrates just how much harm it can do; it's not only pedestrians and motorists (and law-abiding cyclists) that you pi55 off it's also the people who control our legal status on the roads. This important debate degenerated into a round of anti-cyclist prejudices because their Lordships are fed up to the back teeth of all the Theostegerses out there. Every cyclist who suffers abuse or injustice can thank Theo &c. for that.

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by FatBlokeFromFelixstowe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Wow not this thread. I believe that was page 58 of the Barbican job. Six nil was the personal ratio that alerted me to the particular dangers of traffic lights. 130:2 or so, perhaps 130:0 the TfL ratio that backed up my personal experience. Why don't you nip back dig it out. Give Barbican a bump. There's clearly still life in the old thing.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So with your super human 6th sense which enables you TO safely RLJ you have had 6 accidents. Yet with my outdated practice of waiting I have had zero. Am I missing something here ?

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes the bit you are missing is the fact that all six of the whacks occured while I was proceeding through/had proceeded through green lights. I haven't come close to a whack jumping red ones. In that respect my score is as good as yours. It's the green ones what are dangerous for me. The red ones... I know what to do...

Theo Stegers

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
Yes the bit you are missing is the fact that all six of the whacks occured while I was proceeding through/had proceeded through green lights. I haven't come close to a whack jumping red ones. In that respect my score is as good as yours. It's the green ones what are dangerous for me. The red ones... I know what to do...

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hang on a minute, so now you are blaming a light that you have already proceeded through as a result of some of your accidents ?
Clutching at straws now I see.

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv

Eat My Dust · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

all six of the whacks occured while I was proceeding through/had proceeded through green lights. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

LOL, so are you saying it's dangerous to cyle through green lights?

SNAPS

FrankM · June 2007

In that case why don't you stop when the lights are green and wait until they go red?

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by dondare

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id ... 512#g288.4

Anyone who thinks that RLJing is at all justifiable should read this. It demonstrates just how much harm it can do; it's not only pedestrians and motorists (and law-abiding cyclists) that you pi55 off it's also the people who control our legal status on the roads. This important debate degenerated into a round of anti-cyclist prejudices because their Lordships are fed up to the back teeth of all the Theostegerses out there. Every cyclist who suffers abuse or injustice can thank Theo &c. for that.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Nah. What is more likely is that through the example of the majority of cyclists traffic lights will be seen for what they are. The wrong solution to a problem that ceases to exist if you get the design of the junction correct. With this realisation there will come an upwelling of gratitude by motorists for cyclists. When this happens it is to be hoped that said cyclists smile and do not spoil things by coming over all sanctimonius. In our dondare's case a big ask but you never know.

Theo Stegers

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by FatBlokeFromFelixstowe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
Yes the bit you are missing is the fact that all six of the whacks occured while I was proceeding through/had proceeded through green lights. I haven't come close to a whack jumping red ones. In that respect my score is as good as yours. It's the green ones what are dangerous for me. The red ones... I know what to do...

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hang on a minute, so now you are blaming a light that you have already proceeded through as a result of some of your accidents ?
Clutching at straws now I see.

My e bay bargain œ 31.05
http://tinyurl.com/366awv
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Fatbloke you really should go back to the Barbican thread. You seem to have missed the best bits.

Theo Stegers

Eat My Dust · June 2007

So now you're saying that people should be thankful of RLJer's as they are going to solve all that is wrong with road design. Yeah, OK. Koo koo!!

SNAPS

Jacomus-rides-Gen · June 2007

Out of interest tstegers, and to save many of us (including myself) trawling the Barbican thread to find out what happened, when you say you have been hit 6 times after proceeding through a green light, how were you hit?

Some t*t driving throguh you from behind? Lane changer? You pull a dodgy move and get wiped out? Spill the beans, help us see why you would be so against waiting at red lights, without the antagonism you and fatbloke are giving each other.

This is obviously something you feel very strongly about, but I have to say that your attitude is not currently helping me understand your point of view.

_________________________
Quote: "25mph is pretty fast when you aren't wearing a car..."

bretty77 · June 2007

You know that "Sinners and Winners" bloke who stands at Oxford Circus spreading the word of the Lord etc.? Has anyone here ever bothered stopping to talk to him and telling him you think he's wrong?

Summer route

This whole RLJ thing

Comments

Categories