This whole RLJ thing

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

<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

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

Just for you and FrankM, What I have said is that it is dangerous to abdicate responsibility for your safety to a traffic light, whatever its colour. Look for traffic not lights was one of the ways I put it. I am pleased to be asked to repeat myself but in so asking, and thereby giving me the opportunity, you will irritate a high proportion of the anti jumping brigade. In the early days of my cycling I lowered my guard if the lights were green and started being whacked. In an opposite way I believe the dramas at red light/changing lights are caused by driverscyclists not paying attention and to some degree abdicating responsibility for their behaviour to traffic lights.

Theo Stegers

Archcp · June 2007

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

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

Oh, I see, you mean 'utility' to be defined by poor skills, because good skills mean 'vehicular'... I sort of misunderstood then. I see 'utility' and think "someone who rides for practical reasons", rather than any level of skill...

And we need to be careful of too many labels. It all gets confusing. One could classify cyclists as utility (day to day using a bike), sports (audaxes and racing), touring (day rides or long holidays), MTB (proper off road stuff, and maybe to include stunt riding, so BMXs as well (I don't fall into this, so can be a bit cavalier!)[;)]) and leisure (nice weekend pootles on tracks). Of course any one cyclist might fit into one or more or all of these categories, and might have excellent roadskills, or appalling ones...

A better name... Tricky. I, and others, have referred in the past to POBs (People or Pedestrians On Bikes), in order to distinguish them from 'us cyclists'. But that's not a black and white definition either... 'Numpties' is a term often used, but that's just a general insult...

How about: "Good Cyclists", "Bad Cyclists" and "Downright irresponsible cyclists", irrespective of raison d'etre?[;)]

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

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Fatbloke you really should go back to the Barbican thread. You seem to have missed the best bits.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I very much doubt that. Come on man, tell us all about these dangerous green lights and how far you were away from them in your attempt to hold them responsible.

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

Unknown · June 2007

Look reality is red light means stop. Car, bus, lorry, van, motorbike or cyclist it has the same command for us all. No excuse.

RLJ by cyclists is irresponsible not only to other cyclists but also to the poor sods that have to either scrape you off the road or care for you for the rest of your life.

Be bright Be seen

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by bretty77

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

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

You think that's Theo ?? You could be right.

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 Jacomus-rides-Gen

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

Left hooks: 2. Right hooks 2. From behind: 1. Road rage: 1 The road rage job was interesting for being precipitated by a wannabe master of the universe in a powerful car who was basically irritated by the fact I could proceed on two wheels across a green light junction where traffic had held him, his overpwered company owned car, and his squeeze up. This lot does not include a pedestrian job on Bishopsgate that was light related and caused me to break my wrist. That was a right hook.

Theo Stegers

Eat My Dust · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
In the early days of my cycling I lowered my guard if the lights were green and started being whacked.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Maybe you should have taken those pesky stabilizers off, that might have helped. BTW you've been hit 6 times by cars, I've only managed 2 in around 26 years. Sounds more like you were just a sh*t cyclist "in the early days"

SNAPS

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by bretty77

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

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

Betty, How did you know? I went shopping with my daughter and spent about 15 minutes outside the shop listening to his female associate. She was kitted out with am amplifier. What a row. I politely asked her to stop. She said she was "working". I disagreed. The conversation took a few minutes. While we were talking she turned off her loudhailer and gave us all a rest. It was about a year ago. Were you there? Perhaps you have had words with him/her too.

Theo Stegers

tstegers · June 2007

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

Look reality is red light means stop. Car, bus, lorry, van, motorbike or cyclist it has the same command for us all. No excuse.

RLJ by cyclists is irresponsible not only to other cyclists but also to the poor sods that have to either scrape you off the road or care for you for the rest of your life.

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

Gazzaput. Keep up old man. The people scraped off the road are not the jumpers, it's the stayers that get crushed. That's what 130:0 is about. CupofT help me out please.

Theo Stegers

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Left hooks: 2. Right hooks 2. From behind: 1. Road rage: 1 The road rage job was interesting for being precipitated by a wannabe master of the universe in a powerful car who was basically irritated by the fact I could proceed on two wheels across a green light junction where traffic had held him, his overpwered company owned car, and his squeeze up. This lot does not include a pedestrian job on Bishopsgate that was light related and caused me to break my wrist. That was a right hook.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That amount of hooks seems to be incredibly high. Were you riding in primary position ??

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 Eat My Dust

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
In the early days of my cycling I lowered my guard if the lights were green and started being whacked.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Maybe you should have taken those pesky stabilizers off, that might have helped. BTW you've been hit 6 times by cars, I've only managed 2 in around 26 years. Sounds more like you were just a sh*t cyclist "in the early days"

SNAPS

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

That's it. Fast but sh*t. I used to think lights counted for something other than danger.

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">
Left hooks: 2. Right hooks 2. From behind: 1. Road rage: 1 The road rage job was interesting for being precipitated by a wannabe master of the universe in a powerful car who was basically irritated by the fact I could proceed on two wheels across a green light junction where traffic had held him, his overpwered company owned car, and his squeeze up. This lot does not include a pedestrian job on Bishopsgate that was light related and caused me to break my wrist. That was a right hook.
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That amount of hooks seems to be incredibly high. Were you riding in primary position ??

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

Primary most of the time and er'so primary some of the time. I was/I am a bit reckless. So what? It's the comparison red to green that is critical.

Theo Stegers

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
I was/I am a bit reckless. So what?
Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I would suggest then that the accidents you have had could be contributed to this statement and in today's blame culture you are looking to blame something else for your recklessness. Would you not agree ?

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

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

That was a real debate recently concerning a problem which is imminent. The situation right now is that most cyclists and non-cyclists alike hate RLJers and most non-cyclists hate all cyclists because of RLJers and that affects the way cyclists get treated on the streets and in the courts and in the Houses of Parliament.
You are weeing in the well that we all drink from and there is no justification for it anywhere. You are worse in your way than Mr. Blankety Blank and his "motorists are safest ignoring speed limits" campaign.

You're not the boss of me.

Eat My Dust · June 2007

Now you are admitting to being a reckless cyclist. I think you might as well throw any argument you had out of the window, as I think the point most people are making, is that RLJing is reckless.

SNAPS

tstegers · June 2007

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

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

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

That was a real debate recently concerning a problem which is imminent. The situation right now is that most cyclists and non-cyclists alike hate RLJers and most non-cyclists hate all cyclists because of RLJers and that affects the way cyclists get treated on the streets and in the courts and in the Houses of Parliament.
You are weeing in the well that we all drink from and there is no justification for it anywhere. You are worse in your way than Mr. Blankety Blank and his "motorists are safest ignoring speed limits" campaign.

You're not the boss of me.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

DD Stop drinking, it's not water. The proportion pi**ing in the well in south London at junctions in and around the A23 has been recently measured by TfL at 76%. What goes for south London probably goes for the rest of London. The BBC is onside, The Standard is onside The Times and Sunday Times scooped the confidential TfL report recently about the extraordinary over representation of women cyclists among those killed at traffic lights. Give up, the tide is against you. Jump lights and start to enjoy/spread the benefits of non compliance.

Theo Stegers

tstegers · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

Now you are admitting to being a reckless cyclist. I think you might as well throw any argument you had out of the window, as I think the point most people are making, is that RLJing is reckless.

SNAPS

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

The trouble is it's not and this is supported by the KSI stats. You are ignoring the comparative red to green point I am making. You should start jumping them. I think it is part of the anti RLJers problem that in this matter they don't have enough experience. This is why you think it's dangerous. It's safer. Try it.

Theo Stegers

FatBlokeFromFelixstowe · June 2007

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

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

Now you are admitting to being a reckless cyclist. I think you might as well throw any argument you had out of the window, as I think the point most people are making, is that RLJing is reckless.

SNAPS

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

The trouble is it's not and this is supported by the KSI stats. You are ignoring the comparative red to green point I am making. You should start jumping them. I think it is part of the anti RLJers problem that in this matter they don't have enough experience. This is why you think it's dangerous. It's safer. Try it.

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

Theo I would agree that I do not have as much experience as getting knocked off my bike as you. Maybe it's because I am not a reckless cyclist.

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

Jacomus-rides-Gen · June 2007

Unfortunately tsegers you have just lost me. You say that you were and are a bit reckless, but that you RLJ specifically for personal safety.

Am I correct in saying that if you tempered your riding style, you would lower your risk at trafficlights when behaving in a legal manner? Based on your past cause of accidents.

Ergo the debate about the saftey aspect of RLJing to the general cycling population is rendered void as it only becomes safer to RLJ when you ride in a reckless fashion.

In effect this means that most of us here are arguing (purely taking the saftey aspect of the argument) that it is safer not to RLJ, based on our more refrained cycling style. You are arguing the counterpoint from the perspective of an aggressive/adrenalin-esque style of cycling. This puts both pro and anti-RLJ camps on diverging tracks.

RLJing will allways be safer for you personally, due to a reckless cycling style. This does not apply to those of us who choose to cycle in a more restrained manner.

The real debate here isn't the safety of RLJing, it should be the manner in which you ride putting yourself at unneccesary risk. A result of which is you non-lazy form of RLJing.

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

dondare · June 2007

The TfL noticed that more women cyclists were being killed by lorries and guessed a reason for it which was picked up on by a lot of ignorant hacks. The Standard's campaign has been a complete travesty which might do more harm than good.
It is impossible to raise the subject of cycling anywhere without people getting worked up about RLJers (and pavement cyclists, what are your views on that) and it is worrying to think that these same people will be driving vehicles and hating cyclists or implementing laws and hating cyclists. All you're posts are really saying is "Fvck everyone, I don't give a toss".

You're not the boss of me.

cupofteacp · June 2007

And dondare the real crime is that in a cyclist's life it's irrelevant.

We get killed in bigger numbers buy lot of other thing, that we and the government don't seem interested in.

Sitting at light is dangerous, look at the figures I've provided.
However and I think this is also important, cycling through Red's is also dangerous.

It's up to you to decide whether you accept the risk of you making a mistake or someone else making the mistake for you.

15 * 2 * 5
* 46 = Happiness

dondare · June 2007

The consequences of visibly defying the law are far more wide-reaching than that.
As someone who has been cycling in London for nearly 30 years I know damn well that RLJing is not a matter of safety, it's a matter of can't be @rsed to stop.
If you are skillful enough to get through a red light then you're skillful enough to wait at it without a lorry parking on your head.

You're not the boss of me.

Roastie · June 2007

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

If there are pinch points, and the road has heavy enough traffic for it to be worth you getting a jump, then you need to be out in primary position and no scootling through traffic to a red light. Claim your place in the lane and keep it, require that the other road users treat you as an equal and act as an equal.

To do otherwise is what encourages more vitriol from other road suers than anything else.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yeah dude, make a conclusion based on ony a brief verbal description. I ride in the primary blah blah fishpaste when it makes sense, in this case it would put me in more danger and induce a great degree of unhappiness.

But why let that bother you. Instead of making helpful comments just keep flinging from that high horse of yours.

Roastie · June 2007

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

I think we both know that it has everything to do with not being bothered to wait. I know, I have done it myself. From personal experience I have never encountered any set of lights where it would be safer to jump rather than wait.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You should get out more.

rgisme · June 2007

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

If you are skillful enough to get through a red light then you're skillful enough to wait at it without a lorry parking on your head.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That might sound clever but it is not actually true. The former relies almost entirely on your own actions and observation, the latter relies largely on someone else's. Yes you can position yourself so as to minimise risk among traffic already present. But you can't stop someone who wasn't there before you got there coming up afterwards in a manner that endangers you, whereever you happen to have put yourself before they got there.

Roastie · June 2007

A further comment in reply to Cab and FatBloke:

At this particular point where I go through the red pedestrian crossing, I have previously tried covering my ground on my way up the to "pinch points", and more often than not, this has put me on the receiving end of abuse from the WVM who I share the road with at this time of the morning (despite getting up to around 30km/h-ish as quickly as possible).

Interestingly, if I hop the light as soon as the pedestrian has crossed, and give it horns as per normal (thus getting past the two pinches before the vans catch up with me), on a few occasions I have got friendly waves or "thank you"s from the WVM. I think they are sensible enough to understand that I am just trying to make life easier for all. It seems some often forget the value of common sense!

I should also add that I have been forced into the mesh fence at the pinches TWICE, despite being well into the primary - I'm not about to argue with a Transit closing me in from the side.

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

99 Pages!

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv

dondare · June 2007

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

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

If you are skillful enough to get through a red light then you're skillful enough to wait at it without a lorry parking on your head.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That might sound clever but it is not actually true. The former relies almost entirely on your own actions and observation, the latter relies largely on someone else's. Yes you can position yourself so as to minimise risk among traffic already present. But you can't stop someone who wasn't there before you got there coming up afterwards in a manner that endangers you, whereever you happen to have put yourself before they got there.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You aren't talking to someone who doesn't cycle in London. You aren't talking to someone who can't see what goes on at traffic lights. The cyclists I see jumping the lights are just thoughtless, ignorant selfish people who'd be safer if they waited.

You're not the boss of me.

BentMikey · June 2007

Come on stegers, stop smoking turbo lettuce. You're just arguing against the facts.

My bikes
My skates

If I had a baby elephant, I'd teach it to skate.

Adam_57 · June 2007

Apologies if this has already been covered, but it seems to me that one thing that doesn't get enough attention is the indirect impact of RLJing on cyclists' safety, because of its effect on motorists' attitudes.

Whatever the arguments in favour of RLJing, they are lost on the average motorist. Many motorists get very irritated by RLJing, and one can only suppose that this translates into a general negative feeling towards cyclists. Surely this increases the chances that motorists will drive in an aggressive and dangerous manner when they perceive themselves to be inconvenienced by a cyclist sharing the road?

This whole RLJ thing

Comments

Categories