To the cyclist of Superhighway 7 tonight

gaz545

I have no idea if you come on any of the forums, but if you do. I hope you're ok. The driver was an idiot, I wanted to have a quick chat with you about it but it seemed you turned off straight away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frdeRNX9FSY

further

He'd lost his head. The way he makes to run you off the road was like a scene from Duel.

jonny_trousers

Nicely shamed sir. Some pretty dangerous cycling there though. Amazingly clear picture quality.

dilemna

Two men fighting over a damsel ............

Nice of you to be so chivalrous Gaz or should it be Sir Gallaghad knight in shining armour.

The driver didn't appear to start off agressively as he got out of his car. I think he had the wind knocked out of his sails as he may have been expecting a male rather than a female cyclist, which would have meant he could shout at, abuse and threaten them with or indeed use violence .............. but a woman.

Anyway no one got hurt which is the important thing, just a few raised temperatures.

Perhaps the lady cyclist should have made an obvious look behind before she passed the slower cyclist in front. Perhaps the driver of the car didn't even realise she was moving out slightly to pass hence the close pass. He could maybe have had better road positioning slightly more to the right and the central line.

Good quality from your head cam Gaz front and rear. Perhaps you could get a Petzl head torch that you could use as light to illuminate the immediate foreground subjects when dark like real outside broadcast TV crews do although they use well powerful lights.

Nice one none the less.

Maxticate

Maybe the only reason he got out is because the cyclist tapped on his window to complain about the pass? That probably did more to annoy him than the near pass earlier.

The lady cyclist appear to change lanes with no indication and was very poorly lit. Is a cyclist allowed to flit between the cycle super highway and the main carrigeway like that with impunity?

If I'd been the driver of that vehicle I would have not expected the cyclist to pull out over the white cycle lane markings with out giving ay sign of intention. I don't see anything wrong with his lane positioning.

Isn't the onus on the person changing lanes to make sure it is safe to do so?

gaz545

I'm not saying the cycling was perfect. but no need for the driver to get out of a car. That imo is the start of a bad situation.

il_principe

Nice work Gaz. Sure this has been done to death, but what camera's are you using, and do you have any pics showing how they are mounted?

Cheers.

Maxticate

Maybe he wouldn't have gotten out of the car if noone had interfered with his vehicle.

His actions after the confrontation are undefendable but I can't help feeling that the situation was escalated in this incident by the actions of the cyclist needlessly tapping his window.

She must know she'd pulled out without looking so shouldn't have been surprised to have a vehicle overtake so closely, if he'd been 2 seconds quicker she'd have pulled into the side of his vehicle. Who'd have been in the wrong then?

Well done for keeping the situation as cool as possible though.

rjsterry

Indeed. Not great driving, but not great cycling either to pull round someone without a shoulder check. Unfortunately, tapping on a window does seem to inexplicably enrage some motorists - it shouldn't, but it does - but he does seem to have thought better of it once out of the car. Nicely defused.

Clever Pun

ok so there's 2 different incidents there right?

the first pass as he overtakes a cyclist who's overtaking, he's a little close but not really that bad

the 2nd? incident when he cuts right in on a different cyclist is a disgrace

I assume the set to was after both incidents or did the other guy get cut up afterwards?

el_presidente

If the lady cyclist bangs on the window after those sort of overttakes she must do it 10 times every commute. The pass was close but not too bad imho given the speed of traffic and the traffic situation.

spasypaddy

there was nothing wrong with that pass by the motorist. and people wonder why cyclists get the reputation of a chip on their shoulder.

terrible bit of cycling from the cyclist in question though, no regard for their own safety.

daviesee

What happens at the end with the driver cutting up the cyclist is inexcusable.

But


If you are going to overtake anything without looking over your shoulder first you are asking for trouble. What was a close encounter could very easilly have been an off.

snooks

Maxticate wrote:

The lady cyclist appear to change lanes with no indication and was very poorly lit. Is a cyclist allowed to flit between the cycle super highway and the main carrigeway like that with impunity?

She's not well lit and doesn't check behind her before overtaking and if she'd pulled out few seconds later she might have pulled out into the car. However she's entitled to overtake another cyclist, move out to avoid man hole covers and pot holes etc, or take the primary position on the road if she feels the need to.

As I understand it the superhighways are just a fancy blue cycle lanes with less pot holes and are part of the carrageway. Cyclists don't have to use them, and can happily flit in and out of them as the fancy takes them (not the brightest of ideas obviously, but there is no law against it)

The driver should (in an idea world) have observed what the cyclist was doing, and not attempted to overtake her.

Has this been reported to the police? - Just curious

el_presidente

snooks wrote:

Has this been reported to the police? - Just curious

what crime or incident is there to report?

PBo

My take - might cause a bit of controversy.....I'm ready to be flamed

The original overtake was 50/50. The overtaking cyclist was right on the line before moving out, so the pass would have been clos-ish. But the cyclist just pulls out without indicating or looking, making it a lot closer..... (as an aside its a close overtake by the cyclist too - and the rear light on her backpack is useless as soon as she bends forward. if it wasn't for the refelective strips on back of legs, she'd be ninja)

The cyclist is then the one who taps on the window and begins the confrontation. The guys' car is old - no way he has electric windows - so if a cyclist is allowed to engage the driver about what they did wrong, why isn't he allowed to respond with his (in this case probably valid) criticism of her cycling?

I'm really sorry Gaz- but your confrontation with him is what really seems to raise the stakes. He doesn't run out of the car, he doesn't shout and scream, and his original tone is fairly level and reasonable - he even calls her madam.....

Your voice and attitude is much more aggressive, and confrontational, and gets him wound up.

Gaz, I don't mean this to have a major go at you - I wasn't there to really read the situation as you were, and I understand your concerns. I can only go by what I see on the vid, and just based on that, this likes like cyclist/anti car myopia somewhat.

Sorry, but just MHO.

On the other hand, the cut into CS7 after all that was really bad. Maybe that is "careless driving"?

Flame away......

Maxticate

I think you have a made some good points PBo.

The default is too assume someone getting out of their car is going to be aggressive.

However from his point of view he maybe feels that he has been confronted by 3 cyclists all tearing strips off him for his driving when he didn't do anything wrong. If someone is being shouted at by three people and being prevented from making their point it is not surprising that they then feel frustrated and aggressive.

mybreakfastconsisted

terrible driving. The cycle lane is a distraction, the cyclist is free to stay within it or overtake using the lane- her lane. She has begun to move out before the car overtakes, the car drriver has at least ten feet on his offside which he chooses not to use and instead passes much to closely. The first time may be just sloppy, careless driving, the second time looks deliberate.

gtvlusso

PBo wrote:

My take - might cause a bit of controversy.....I'm ready to be flamed

The original overtake was 50/50. The overtaking cyclist was right on the line before moving out, so the pass would have been clos-ish. But the cyclist just pulls out without indicating or looking, making it a lot closer..... (as an aside its a close overtake by the cyclist too - and the rear light on her backpack is useless as soon as she bends forward. if it wasn't for the refelective strips on back of legs, she'd be ninja)

The cyclist is then the one who taps on the window and begins the confrontation. The guys' car is old - no way he has electric windows - so if a cyclist is allowed to engage the driver about what they did wrong, why isn't he allowed to respond with his (in this case probably valid) criticism of her cycling?

I'm really sorry Gaz- but your confrontation with him is what really seems to raise the stakes. He doesn't run out of the car, he doesn't shout and scream, and his original tone is fairly level and reasonable - he even calls her madam.....

Your voice and attitude is much more aggressive, and confrontational, and gets him wound up.

Gaz, I don't mean this to have a major go at you - I wasn't there to really read the situation as you were, and I understand your concerns. I can only go by what I see on the vid, and just based on that, this likes like cyclist/anti car myopia somewhat.

Sorry, but just MHO.

On the other hand, the cut into CS7 after all that was really bad. Maybe that is "careless driving"?

Flame away......

+1

1st incident - not that bad....she made a move without a shoulder check - in all reality 50/50 at best. She should have been more aware of her surroundings when making the move - any car driver would have just wanted to get by (we know that by default!), proper preparation prevents pi$$ poor performance - hold line/draft, shoulder check, get a gap and peg it. Assume all car drivers are dumb - ultimately, with his rolling speed, he had a clear road and the she appeared; he would have had to brake for her move.

She had no real reason "talk" to the driver, IMO.

It would appear that Gaz wound the bloke up, probably holding him back seemed to raise the level - If you would have touched me as I got out of a car (not that I drive anywhere or get that upset), I would probably have knocked you out though as you have no reason to hold me back - It was not necessary. This "possibly" leading to the second incident as the guy is now pi$$ed off.....

IMHO.

If it was me making the initial overtake, I would have just moved on and thought nothing of it.....possibly "ooh, that was a bit close"...."ah well".

Secondly, this is now on youtube for all to view - I disagree with doing that as this guy has initially done nothing, IMO, worthy of note and now he is being made to look like a criminal - pretty clear face shot. Shows the power of cams/movie editing and why I think that they are a bad idea - they are just one perspective and in this instance i believe that you are in the wrong, however, your video shows this guys car reg, face and so on - not fair is it?!.....IMO you should take this down as it is just your opinion of what this guy did wrong....whereas a few opinions on here differ.

However, I am all for chivalry, so I would agree with defending the laydee...just disagree with your methods and in this instance, it was not necessary.

And so...burn me!

Monkeypump

Agree 100% with the points made by PBo and gtvlusso.

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

snooks

el_presidente wrote:

snooks wrote:

Has this been reported to the police? - Just curious

what crime or incident is there to report?

It was mentioned in the video

mybreakfastconsisted

Monkeypump wrote:

Agree 100% with the points made by PBo and gtvlusso.

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

What would you do if you saw a driver bully a female cyclist then go to confront her? Why do you imagine he got out of his car?

PBo

Monkeypump wrote:

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

A similar observation was made on the comments section of a Yehuda Moon cartoon the other day, by an (it seems) American referring to Brit cyclists with webcams being very aggressive and confrontational.

Gaz - that is not a dig at you, just a general point. Also, my comments above are based purely on that one video, I'm not accusing you of anything in general.

garrynolan

PBo wrote:

My take - might cause a bit of controversy.....I'm ready to be flamed

The original overtake was 50/50. The overtaking cyclist was right on the line before moving out, so the pass would have been clos-ish. But the cyclist just pulls out without indicating or looking, making it a lot closer..... (as an aside its a close overtake by the cyclist too - and the rear light on her backpack is useless as soon as she bends forward. if it wasn't for the refelective strips on back of legs, she'd be ninja)

The cyclist is then the one who taps on the window and begins the confrontation. The guys' car is old - no way he has electric windows - so if a cyclist is allowed to engage the driver about what they did wrong, why isn't he allowed to respond with his (in this case probably valid) criticism of her cycling?

I'm really sorry Gaz- but your confrontation with him is what really seems to raise the stakes. He doesn't run out of the car, he doesn't shout and scream, and his original tone is fairly level and reasonable - he even calls her madam.....

Your voice and attitude is much more aggressive, and confrontational, and gets him wound up.

Gaz, I don't mean this to have a major go at you - I wasn't there to really read the situation as you were, and I understand your concerns. I can only go by what I see on the vid, and just based on that, this likes like cyclist/anti car myopia somewhat.

Sorry, but just MHO.

On the other hand, the cut into CS7 after all that was really bad. Maybe that is "careless driving"?

Flame away......

+1.

Ginjafro

I notice the driver's reg was R69, kind of appropriate for such a c*ck !

PBo

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

Agree 100% with the points made by PBo and gtvlusso.

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

What would you do if you saw a driver bully a female cyclist then go to confront her? Why do you imagine he got out of his car?

1) How did he bully her? she pulled out in front of him.
2) How would he know it was a female?
3) Who knocked on the window and began the confrontation?
4) He got out the car too see why she knocked on his window?
5) Why can't you change your tedious, anti-car, myopic record?

Maxticate

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

Agree 100% with the points made by PBo and gtvlusso.

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

What would you do if you saw a driver bully a female cyclist then go to confront her? Why do you imagine he got out of his car?

I didn't see any bullying, just a close overtake precipitated by the female cyclist changing lane without looking and /or indicating.

The female cyclist then chose to confront him by tapping on his car. I doubt he would have stepped out of his car at all without that action.

snooks

Monkeypump wrote:

Agree 100% with the points made by PBo and gtvlusso.

I would also add (and it's been said before) that the people who ride with helmet cams and/or write blogs about this kind of thing mysteriously seem to 'find' more incidents than the rest of us. Coincidence? I think not.

I think peeps with helmet cams just have a record of what has happened, and time to go through the videos once they get home or to work.

I don't ride with a camera, I just forget about any close encounters and don't dwell on them. If another cyclist wants to take it a step further, by tapping on windows, it's up to them. But the car driver wasn't allowed to get a word in edgeways. (not that that excuses him from deliberately driving at a cyclist) Don't get me wrong I'll shout at people who pull out in front of me or cut me up and who I feel have endangered my life, but most of the time I just look at them and wave "hello" in a non confrontational or aggressive manner, which usually gets an apology.

I do sometimes wonder whether, as cyclists, we aren't a little responsible for the close distance that cars overtake us. We do after all overtake them, by filtering or getting to an ASLs by going through gaps that are just wide enough for a bike.

The woman who over takes the cyclist leaves roughly the same amount as the car leaves her. The difference is that the car is big metal and heavy, but some drivers don't realise that and don't realise how vulnerable we as cyclists are.

They just see us squeezing though gaps at 10mph faster than they are going, and monkey see monkey do, they think they can pass us at the same distance if they are going 10mph faster than we are going.

It doesn't make it right of course.

Stu T

garrynolan wrote:

PBo wrote:

My take - might cause a bit of controversy.....I'm ready to be flamed

The original overtake was 50/50. The overtaking cyclist was right on the line before moving out, so the pass would have been clos-ish. But the cyclist just pulls out without indicating or looking, making it a lot closer..... (as an aside its a close overtake by the cyclist too - and the rear light on her backpack is useless as soon as she bends forward. if it wasn't for the refelective strips on back of legs, she'd be ninja)

The cyclist is then the one who taps on the window and begins the confrontation. The guys' car is old - no way he has electric windows - so if a cyclist is allowed to engage the driver about what they did wrong, why isn't he allowed to respond with his (in this case probably valid) criticism of her cycling?

I'm really sorry Gaz- but your confrontation with him is what really seems to raise the stakes. He doesn't run out of the car, he doesn't shout and scream, and his original tone is fairly level and reasonable - he even calls her madam.....

Your voice and attitude is much more aggressive, and confrontational, and gets him wound up.

Gaz, I don't mean this to have a major go at you - I wasn't there to really read the situation as you were, and I understand your concerns. I can only go by what I see on the vid, and just based on that, this likes like cyclist/anti car myopia somewhat.

Sorry, but just MHO.

On the other hand, the cut into CS7 after all that was really bad. Maybe that is "careless driving"?

Flame away......

+1.

+1

W1

Stu T wrote:

garrynolan wrote:

PBo wrote:

My take - might cause a bit of controversy.....I'm ready to be flamed

The original overtake was 50/50. The overtaking cyclist was right on the line before moving out, so the pass would have been clos-ish. But the cyclist just pulls out without indicating or looking, making it a lot closer..... (as an aside its a close overtake by the cyclist too - and the rear light on her backpack is useless as soon as she bends forward. if it wasn't for the refelective strips on back of legs, she'd be ninja)

The cyclist is then the one who taps on the window and begins the confrontation. The guys' car is old - no way he has electric windows - so if a cyclist is allowed to engage the driver about what they did wrong, why isn't he allowed to respond with his (in this case probably valid) criticism of her cycling?

I'm really sorry Gaz- but your confrontation with him is what really seems to raise the stakes. He doesn't run out of the car, he doesn't shout and scream, and his original tone is fairly level and reasonable - he even calls her madam.....

Your voice and attitude is much more aggressive, and confrontational, and gets him wound up.

Gaz, I don't mean this to have a major go at you - I wasn't there to really read the situation as you were, and I understand your concerns. I can only go by what I see on the vid, and just based on that, this likes like cyclist/anti car myopia somewhat.

Sorry, but just MHO.

On the other hand, the cut into CS7 after all that was really bad. Maybe that is "careless driving"?

Flame away......

+1.

+1

Agreed. I used to be fairly "ragey" and then realised it got you absolutely no-where apart from a slanging match where neither party leaves any the wiser. Now, unless it's really serious and instinctive to shout a "hands off" approach sometimes produces a more useful conclusion.

kelsen

W1 wrote:

Agreed. I used to be fairly "ragey" and then realised it got you absolutely no-where apart from a slanging match where neither party leaves any the wiser.

W1 wrote:

Well this is another DDD attention wh*ring thread - you're kindly making all my points for me. You LOVE the attention, you just pretend you don't so you can chuck out a few internet warrior-esque threats. Come on DDD, admit it (again) - you love this sort of stuff.

Does it eat you up that no-one really commented on your enormous "this is the opinion of the awesome DDD" post in the "students" thread, that must have taken you all morning to type? That your "FACTS" are so often far from facts?

It's not that I follow you DDD, it's that you post so much (and so often) that almost every thread is "your" thread (and you say so much that's wrong that I can't help but put you right). It's also fun to watch you tie yourself in knots and then get your handbag out. It's irresistible.

As for Sewinman - meh. Apart from supporting violence and vandalism I can't recall anything you've said. That's real irony - the most noticeable thing about you is that you never say anything noticeable.....

I see what you mean