John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Add new comment
54 comments
Sad to say, I had someone on a brand new bike, huffing and puffing, ride right into me just this morning. Thankfully not going to fast so I got my foot down, instead of my face. He did apologise and I accepted. Just gonna have to be more vigilant until the newbies find their wheels.
Even 1 more bike and 1 less car is an improvement.
When I get slowed down by long queues of cars I get hungry.
If I get really hungry I may have to buy a burger.
Burgers are made from cows.
Cows fart methane
Methane is a strong greenhouse gas.
This argument is incredibly dumb, but still not as stupid as Erin's.
Sam, do you have a vested interest in the "cycle to work" scheme by any chance? You talk a good talk, but the scheme is expensive, poorly targeted, easily exploited, and excludes pensioners, students and the self employed, all of whom are obliged to collectively pay for a subsidy of up to £420 (sometimes more, if the firm has a credit licence), for the purchase of bikes by many higher earners, who may not use them to cycle to work, and who may own one or more bikes already.
The thing is, it isn't "£400 to put one more bike on the road", is it? If half the scheme applicants already have a bike, and of that subset only half will ride to work, then that £400 becomes £1,600. And, if you take the ten percent figures that some believe to be more realistic, that £400 becomes £40,000.
C'mon folks, we were all first timers once. One less car on the commute is a good thing and I genuinely take delight from increasing numbers of cyclists on the commute. As far as short distance urban planning is concerned, the bicycle is the future and the sooner it becomes pub chat to talk about what you rode into work rather than what you drove, the better.
A bit of genuine advice might not be a bad thing ? When it is framed in terms of an individual's safety, I have yet to have a tricky reaction.
Anyway, soon we will be at a point where it becomes harder to ignore and thereafter it only gets better.
Sigh.
Who needs cyclist haters, Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail when we've got our very own bike snobs - who presumably already ride bikes.
Everyone might wish to cast their mind back to the launch in 2010 of London's Barclays bike hire scheme. The usual suspects - and no doubt many on here - were predicting carnage on the streets as cycling newcomers and those from abroad cycled under the wheels of buses, taxis and other motor vehicles.
News flash - it never happened.
I've noticed an increase in new commuters on my morning ride. All good.
I figure best way to turn new commuters into old commuters is to help 'em out - taking the primary off their rear wheel at pinch points, narrow lanes and junction approaches. Claiming the ASL box, and clearing packed junctions of riders on the near side. Adds to the journey time, but see less close passes and left hooks.
@Sam Saunders good point well made.
@Neil753 are you paid by the Road Haulage Association for your work on here?
@NewCommuters, using a bike is a great choice for most journeys welcome.
Except in some cases there were problems. I was taken out twice by people on those bikes, one rode into me through a gap between me and a car both stopped at lights (with no advanced box) - they weren't stopping and in order not to hit the car took me out. In a way that was lucky as a lorry came through the junction at about the time they would have been directly in front of (or should i say under) it had they not come off when hitting me. And another time they just pulled the bike out of the rack stepped back without looking and blocked half the road with it - i was unable to swerve as a car was passing me and so i hit the bike they had just shoved in front of me. Admittedly that's only 2 instances, but both i would put down to inexperience, lack of consideration and stupidity (or a combination of each). My experience with tube strike days indicates there are a lot of extra cycle commuters - which is good. However, some of them are dangerous for the same reasons. Lack of experience around traffic and other cyclists and doing wildly unpredicatable things. This is a minority.and in general it is a good thing that there are more people chosing to commute by bike. I think generally people on here have been positive about it, but wary of the minority who may/will be dangerous.
Who died and made you people the kings of Cyclandia?
Seriously - all the comments about "nodders" and "noobs" and "born again cyclist commuting to work at 8 mph"...?
So s...ing what? Every one of them is a cyclist, one of the people we're vaguely supposed to support. That 8mph commuter who goes into work every day on their bike? They do just as many miles as the lycra-clad weekender, training for his next sportive.
Newsflash - you become fit by riding. It seems a little self-defeating to start going around saying, "No - you will not ride a bike in public, on our roads until you can do the vehicular cyclist 25mph sprint and with a fixed upper body while doing it".
How about a little encouragement for the starters?
Equally surprised by some of the negative comments on here about both new cyclists and the cycle to work scheme itself.
We all had to start somewhere with our cycling, I even consider myself to still be something of a noob, having only picked it up again less than a year ago. Some of the comments do appear to be a little on the "elite" side, which can be something of a negative image associated with the sport...
As for the scheme itself, I don't think I've ever heard a single person complain about it being a waste of taxpayers' money, and I know some seriously left-wing people! As Sam Saunders points out, the few hundred quid subsidy can only be a good thing as against the net benefit to both the indvidual concerned and the population more generally arising from more people cycling.
And so what if people have the means to use it and do so to buy second/third/n+1 bikes, or bikes for family members? Whether the bike is used daily for commuting or by the wife once every few weekends in the summer months only, it's still getting/keeping people on bikes, and the more people that either cycle themselves, or know someone who cycles, the greater the likelihood that they'll be a more considerate driver around other cyclists.
I know this might come across as a "my helmet saved my life" type story, but thanks to the scheme I was able to buy myself a decent road bike which now has me out at least once over the weekend for a good two hours or more, in addition to my daily commute. My resulting enthusiasm for the sport has also got both my brother and my Dad involved too, who between them must have put around £2k into the LBS of recent months in buying bikes and gear. My Dad also now commutes to work on the bike too, so that's two people out of their cars for the price of one!
More cyclists can only be a good thing. I agree with the less snobbery, more be helpful approach. We need to encourage new cyclists by showing them other cyclists are helpful and courteous and commuting on a bike is the way forward. We have all been noobs, weaving our way along the road, unaware of how to position ourselves, too busy looking at what we're doing rather than what everybody else is doing even if that was when we were kids.
I do find myself cringing in horror at some of the close calls starting at this time of year though, I've even been run into a couple of times myself by other cyclists. This isn't just noobs but also summer cyclists being rusty in city traffic, I wish they'd just take there time for the first few weeks if they're on a bike for the first time, or the first time in 5 months. Other road traffic (vans, taxis and lorries) does seem to take a couple of weeks to adjust to the increase in cyclists too. It's my least favourite time of year to cycle.
As with everything it seems there's a minority of people with bad manners and an elevated sense of self importance spoiling the fun for most by shoaling, red light jumping, etc. I just try to be even more diligent and courteous to all other road users (including pedestrians)
I have never once seen anyone use cycle scheme to start cycle commuting. From my experience the people using it either already commute by bike or want a nice cheap bike to put in the shed for the weekend.
correct, when I started cycle commuting, I was a very blobby 17 stone just two years ago and could only cope with two at most days a week doing it.
Now 13 1/2 stone and still overweight, but a heck of a lot fitter as a result.
My first bike was bought on c2W.
I did
And everybody has to start somewhere. I did not go out on weekend/Sunday rides. I simply started by riding to my nearest station and then every fortnight moved one station closer to my destination in the case Romford to London.
I now Commute up to 4 times per week in most weather conditions.
When I started commuting I was around 19 stone and I am still a fat git but a fat git with 3 Bikes now and always looking for the next one.
Ah bless!
All the newbies at snobbery trying out their best off-the-peg snob attitudes! I suspect they are all young (at least I hope they are).
Eventually they'll get the hang of looking down on people.
(Also, I was anti-elitist _before_ it was fashionable!)
Personally I'm not bothered about being some sort of virtuoso expert 'cyclist', I'm just a non-motorist who would like to see fewer cars on the road. A less-than-brilliant cyclist is far preferable to an average motorist as far as I'm concerned.
I was just looking at the ONS 2011 Census Analysis - Cycling to Work that has just been released. In 2011 for England and Wales 741,000 people cycled to work, an increase of 90,000 in the ten years since the 2001 census.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/cycling-to-wor...
Somehow I don’t think that an extra 2 million cycle commuters will be appearing on the roads in the next few weeks !
Well pensioners, by definition, don't go to work (so don't need to commute) and anyway are being given pension money by the State every week. Obviously they could use that to buy a bike if so desired.
The self-employed could actually write the entire bike and accessories off their tax bill if they could justify that the bike was necessary to do their work. They can also buy cars and vans as a business expense too. Even if a car is largely for private use you can also write off any interest paid on a loan used to buy it.
You are also ignoring the tremendous health benefits of more people cycling regularly too. Imagine the difference in costs to the State of just one person avoiding an early heart attack or stroke and thereby continuing to work and pay their taxes ... or instead them suffering the stroke, then requiring months/years of expensive treatment, then having to leave their job and then spending the rest of their 'working life' being supported on incapacity benefits. What about fewer people being overweight and therefore requiring fewer hip operations and diabetes treatment for example? Your "£40K" guessimate is starting to look like small beer in comparison. The CTW scheme costs next to nothing compared to the potential cost savings of a healthier nation and less congested roads.
It's interesting that a behavioural impact analysis, published by the "Cycle to Work Alliance" in Feb 2011, reveals that over 400,000 cyclists "benefitted" from the scheme over roughly the same period.
Whatever the true figures, it's clear that many cyclists have abused the scheme whose purpose, as set out in the 1999 Finance Act, is to facilitate the "loan of bicycles and cycling safety equipment to employees as a tax exempt benefit for the purpose of cycling to work".
Interesting post, but not sure I agree.
Without wanting to sound glum (which is not me, generally) I would say that perhaps you are looking at it from the wrong perspective. If we applied evidence based policy to all categories of government spending, we wouldn't have the massive debt mountain that we have at the moment, that has built up over many, many decades (irrespective of the colour of the governments) and we would have a much healthier, more functional society. Instead, it seems that governments only stop a spend when the evidence is irrefutably against - and even then, sometimes short-term political gains override it.
Lets face it, our economy doesn't live within its means, just like the vast majority of western (and probably eastern) economies.
Great to read your post. Agree with all of its details and thank you for the positive tone.
No snobbery from me. Coincidentally, I had a chat with the future of cycling this morning in Hackney.
She wheeled her bike - a ~30 year old Mixte, with metal 'dork disc', and probably the original tyres and chain/gear oil - gingerly off the path and into the road. Directly onto the piece of tarmac where I was heading at ~30kph (on a slight downhill). I wafted out and around her and continued on my way. At the next lights I stopped in the ASZ; when she arrived she edged past me and stopped a good 2 metres ahead. Ho-hum, I thought. At least she stopped.
True enough, no blazing getaway was made when the lights went green. I followed her sedately for a hundred yards or so until there was space to pass, when it occurred to me that she - on her knackered old bike, in 'proper clothes', no lid, no lights and at barely above walking pace - is the future of cycling. It's not me in full Lycra, doing 20km each way at ~25kph on a shiny newish toy. It's 'normal' people, going about their day, using a bike because it's the best option. So at the next lights, I said hello. Gave her a few tips. Reminded her that she should stay at the stop line because turning vehicles swing across junctions and she should be careful about going up the inside of long and heavy vehicles. Finally, reminded her that it's not a race and sitting behind a couple of cars at lights if there's not space to pass is better than shoving through and then holding them up, and went about my way.
Be nice to newbies. You were one once.
To quote Geri Halliwell: look at me.
CAAD8 bought on CTW. 1500 miles' commuting before its untimely demise.
Pages