Is cycling with a Bluetooth speaker “rude and entitled” or is it “no different to a car engine”?; Weird debate erupts as driver claims cyclists “don’t care” – because of “bald tyres”; Cyclists slam Telegraph red light jumping story + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Shimano reveals six bikes “beyond any monetary value, having played their part in cycling history” stolen in overnight burglary at company’s Experience Centre
Don’t worry, the thieves will probably be found out when they have to take those Dura-Ace snapped cranks into the local bike shop to get fixed…
> Raid at Shimano sees “irreplaceable” bikes of Sagan, Van der Poel and Alaphilippe stolen
Accidental Partridge: UAE Team Emirates fined 1,000 Swiss Francs and handed yellow card after team car gets involved in intermediate sprint, blocking Stefan Küng
Not long before Pablo Castrillo cemented his status as the most exciting and entertaining climbing talent this side of Marco Pantani, and Primož Roglič showcased his dinner plate cassette (with the help of a lengthy tow from his Red Bull-Bora team car) at the Vuelta yesterday, UAE Team Emirates decided to act out a real-life version of Alan Partridge’s rather unique take on the 1994 Tour de France.
(If that reference confused you, I’ll explain in a moment).
Because as the breakaway approached the intermediate sprint, and Groupama-FDJ’s Stefan Küng wound up to take the points, the UAE DS inexplicably decided to pick that very moment to drive up alongside the group to hand Jay Vine a bottle.
🫣 Küng vs car
➡️ The breakaway reaches the intermediate sprint with a 2:48″ lead over the peloton. Will they make it?
➡️ Llega la fuga al sprint intermedio con 2:48″ de ventaja sobre el pelotón. ¿Lo lograrán? #LaVuelta24 | @skoda_es pic.twitter.com/b9zrGHJxmF
— La Vuelta (@lavuelta) September 1, 2024
In doing so, the DS shut the door on Küng (almost literally), leaving the Swiss rider frustrated at one of the more obvious sprint deviations we’ve seen in a while – Sagan never closed a gap on the barriers using a car, to be fair – a frustration that certainly wouldn’t have been eased by the shouts of ‘calm down’ emanating from the offending team car.
And while Wout van Aert’s extremely healthy lead at the top of the green jersey standings means Küng’s run-in with the UAE team car will have little bearing on the race itself, it almost certainly cost his Groupama-FDJ team a few pesetas in prize money, and cost UAE a 1,000 Swiss Francs fine and one of the sport’s new-fangled yellow cards for “irregular feeding”.
But hey, at least they brought to life a classic Partridge moment:
‘I don’t know what this man is playing at! Surely the judges will come down like a tonne of bricks on that. Carrying bikes on top of a car is not a sportsman-like way to run this race…’
And here I was thinking the Vuelta’s Accidental Partridge moments would be confined to Carlton Kirby’s commentary.
More from the Malvern mountain biking meltdown
The councillor at the centre of the ongoing row over riding bikes on British Camp in the Malvern Hills has responded to road.cc’s request for comment – after the cyclists involved said he started “ranting” at them and that they had not in fact cycled on the ancient hill fort – by claiming that he had “politely” informed the cyclists of the area’s no-cycling policy and that they had responded by being “aggressive and completely unreasonable towards him”.
Read more: > Cyclists hit back at “inaccurate and self-serving” account of “ranting” councillor who claims mountain bikers abused him for pointing out no-cycling zone on historic landmark
Racing round-up: Roglič rues bike change after time penalty on foggy Vuelta epic, Pidcock misses out at mountain bike worlds, and GB bag more gold at the velodrome
There was quite a bit of bike racing on over the weekend (probably to make up for yesterday’s sudden downturn in the weather, at least where I am), so here’s a quick round-up of the action you may have missed while flicking through the channels.
At one of the most chaotic and unpredictable editions of the Vuelta a España for years, Primož Roglič’s assault on Ben O’Connor’s increasingly slender red jersey lead didn’t go quite as smoothly as the Slovenian might have hoped on the savage 24 per cent slopes of the Cuitu Negru yesterday.
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
As Pablo Castrillo, looking every inch the demented cat, wrestled and cajoled his bike to the summit – after launching an audaciously stinging attack against Aleksandr Vlasov and Pavel Sivakov as they reached the climb’s steepest section – to win his second stage of a career-changing Vuelta for the 23-year-old Spaniard, Red Bull-Bora-Hansgrohe teed up Roglič perfectly to continue chipping away at O’Connor’s challenge.
However, despite a classic seated Roglič acceleration distancing the Australian quickly, O’Connor gamely battled to cede just 38 seconds to the Slovenian, who himself looked second-best to a lurking, powerful Enric Mas.
What’s more, Roglič’s decision to swap onto a 1x set-up at the foot of the final climb (complete with massive gears at the back), and take a tow from his Red Bull-Bora team car on the way back to the bunch ultimately cost him dear – 20 seconds in fact, after the UCI stepped in to penalise the three-time Vuelta winner, leaving O’Connor with a surprisingly healthy 1.03 advantage heading into the rest day, as Roglič later admitted the bike change was a “mistake”.
(Ed Sykes/SWpix.com)
Meanwhile, over in Paris, the gold rush continued on the last day in the velodrome for this year’s Paralympics, as GB’s track cyclists added three more victories, and five medals, on what turned out to be Britain’s most successful day at the Paralympics ever, with 12 golds bagged across all sports on a truly super Sunday.
In the velodrome, it all yesterday started with a gold and silver in the men’s B 1,000m time trial, as James Ball and co-pilot Steffan Lloyd secured their first ever Paralympic triumph, beating teammates Neil Fachie and Matt Rotherham.
(Alex Whitehead/SWpix.com)
Then Sophie Unwin and pilot Jenny Holl completed their Paralympic medal set with a long-awaited gold in the B 3,000m individual pursuit, overhauling Ireland’s super-strong Katie‑George Dunlevy and Eve McCrystal in the final half of the race to win a thrilling final.
And to cap it all off, there was redemption for Jody Cundy and Kadeena Cox, who both had turbulent, underwhelming starts to these games, as the pair, alongside Jaco van Gass (whose own pre-race preparation was hampered by a collision with a driver) won the C1-5 750m team sprint in an astonishing impressive manner, keeping Cundy’s equally astonishing and imperious record of winning a medal at each of his eight Paralympic Games appearances intact.
(Will Palmer/SWpix.com)
The gold rush, however, didn’t manifest itself at the UCI mountain bike world championships in Andorra, however, as Olympic champion Tom Pidcock was forced to settle for bronze in the cross-country race behind South African winner Alan Hatherly and his Paris nemesis Victor Koretzky, while Puck Pieterse won her first elite rainbow jersey in the women’s race.
And finally, over at the Renewi Tour – formerly known as the Eneco, or BinckBank, or Benelux, tour, depending on your age – Arnaud De Lie and Tim Wellens powered away on the Muur van Geraardsbergen, De Lie taking yesterday’s final stage as Wellens overhauled a 16-second deficit to young Alec Sageart to win his fourth overall title at the Belgian race.
Phew…
Box Hill? Completed it mate…
> World’s most competitive Strava KOM Box Hill smashed by pro cyclist Rory Townsend
“Want a glass G?”
As he ambled his way around the final stage of the Renewi Tour yesterday, Geraint Thomas – whose best finish during the week was 116th in the time trial – was tantalisingly offered some non-Ineos-approved refreshment from the side of the road:
Offer is still valid G. 🤷🏻♂️🥂 @GeraintThomas86 @INEOSGrenadiers #RenewiTour pic.twitter.com/Vw5FpNK9PD
— Laurens Boonen (@LaurensBoonen) September 1, 2024
“I wish,” the former Tour de France replied, having clearly thought about the prospect of champagne for a few seconds before dismissing it.
Or judging by his DNF, maybe he stopped at pub along the route for some Belgian beer instead?
ICYMI: David Millar talks new shoes, busting out of the pro cycling bubble, and trying out urban cycling sneakers while on a downhill mountain biking holiday on the road.cc Podcast
> “I’ve rediscovered my love of cycling”: David Millar and James Carnes of CHPT3 on appealing to every cyclist and designing a commuter shoe you can wear with a suit… and down a Swiss mountain
Once a ski jumper, always a ski jumper
Primoz Roglic taking a ski lift down the mountain after stage 15. #LaVuelta24 pic.twitter.com/tx0Qwjj14M
— NBC Sports Cycling (@NBCSCycling) September 1, 2024
No, I never knew that extremely fun fact about Roglič’s’s pre-cycling career, either. Can’t believe nobody ever talks about it…
It’s getting a bit nippy, isn’t it? Well, good job we’ve got a timely Autumn edition of Five Cool Things for you
> Five cool things for whatever the weather from Fizik, Michelin, Van Rysel, Jack Wolfskin and CHPT3
Rest Day, Burger Day, the Groupama-FDJ way (with knives and forks)
Rest day
Burger day 🍔😜 pic.twitter.com/LB94PNcH5g— Équipe Cycliste Groupama-FDJ (@GroupamaFDJ) September 2, 2024
Shhh, don’t tell Richard Plugge…
Why don’t cyclists use the cycle path? Part 7,902
An adventure which we did not enjoy however, was this ridiculous obstacle deep in the residential areas of Locks Heath.
I would really like someone from @FarehamBC to explain who exactly they’re trying to stop with this, while heavily reducing accessibility for people w/o cars. pic.twitter.com/ANpLNPMiRs
— Valerie van Mulukom (@herebehumans) September 1, 2024
Have to say, those barriers look perfect for a new ‘Danny MacAskill rides the NCN’ video – sorry, I mean ‘edit’…
“Wait until you hear about cars”: Cyclists respond to Telegraph’s latest story claiming “more than half of cyclists” in London jumped red lights at rush hour
Speaking of the Telegraph, this weekend saw the newspaper add to their growing collection of anti-cycling stories by plonking an unfortunate, but I imagine extremely keen, reporter at a set of traffic lights in London during rush hour, and arming them with a pen and some paper to count the number of cyclists riding through red lights.
According to the Telegraph, 1,032 cyclists were required to stop at red lights outside St Thomas’ Hospital on 29 August, between 7.45am and 9.45am, and in the two hours after 5pm.
“A total of 559 cyclists – 302 in the morning and 257 in the evening – ignored the lights,” the Telegraph says.
“That means 54.2 per cent failed to stop, with cyclists slightly more likely to flout rules in the morning when many were travelling to work. Forty-eight cyclists avoided red lights by riding on the pavement.”
The newspaper also said that the “worst incidents included a teenage cyclist mounting the pavement and screeching to a halt inches from two children”, while video footage of their four-hour stint by the side of the road showed some idiotic teenagers sailing through the lights doing wheelies.
According to the Telegraph, “no cars” whatsoever ignored the reds – though they did admit that two sightseeing tour buses went through them.
The article also highlighted that several cyclists could be spotted reading mobile phone messages and riding without holding their handlebars (though it isn’t clear how many drivers the Telegraph’s roving reporter spotted looking at their phones).
Some London-based cyclists did respond to the article by expressing exasperation with the number of people on bikes who ride through red lights in the capital – though one noted that it “has been reducing over time, and many of those in the vids are youngsters on hire bikes”.
However, others weren’t as keen on the newspaper’s latest anti-cycling foray.
“Care to share with us how many people are killed and injured by red light running drivers vs cyclists each year?” asked Bikery.
“Wait until you hear about cars,” added Gerard.
“So zero cyclist collisions, zero cyclist injuries. On the same day drivers injured 21 people in hit and runs,” said Adespoto.
“You’re not helping road safety with these distractions.”
Meanwhile, Bob concluded: “Waiting for the up-to-date article about drivers killing six people a day that you never seem to write…”
“I don’t like it, but I’ll have to go with 20 seconds more”: Primož Roglič accepts time penalty for drafting, as he eyes up third week battle with Ben O’Connor and Enric Mas
In another example of the 2024 Vuelta echoing scenes from The Day Today, Primož Roglič channelled his inner Peter O’Hanraha-hanrahan to conclude that he didn’t like the 20-second penalty handed to him by the commissaires for drafting behind his team car after a planned bike change, but he’ll have to go along with it.
“About the time penalty I got yesterday, I cannot really change it,” Roglič said in his rest day press conference today.
“They put me 20 seconds more to get back. Like I said, if I agree or disagree, for sure I don’t like it, it’s better with 20 less, but, okay, I also have to go with 20 seconds more.”
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
Reflecting on his decision to switch his bike for one with lower gears and a single chainring setup at the foot of the savagely steep Cuitu Negru, the Slovenian said: “I think now looking back we lose more than we win, eh?
“But at least, let’s say, it was as nice as it could be in the last 3km, because I had more light gears, I could spin a bit more going through the steep parts there. But looking back, I wouldn’t do it again, because it cost me way more than we gained.”
Following that 20 second penalty, Roglič enters the third and final week of this year’s Vuelta 1.03 down on red jersey Ben O’Connor, who has battled hard to retain his overall lead after a few difficult days.
“He’s in really good shape, definitely,” Roglič said about the Australian. “He’s a great rider, he already achieved some really big results, so in those terms, it’s not such a big surprise that he’s leading the race. He gained the time with an incredible performance, he just rode alone away from all of us, and for the moment he’s still riding really strong.
“It’s really hard to point out in which places you could gain some time, because sometimes it goes the opposite. Sometimes you gain more than you thought, sometimes you lose more than you thought. We’re still a good minute behind, definitely better than one week ago, but still quite some work to do. We just have to give our best from tomorrow until Sunday.”
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
If Roglič, who turns 35 at the end of October, does give his best and overhaul O’Connor, while seeing off the challenge of Enric Mas, by Madrid, he’ll become the second-oldest Vuelta winner of all time, after the suspiciously ancient (okay, 41-year-old) Chris Horner in 2013, while also drawing level with Roberto Heras on a record four GC wins at the Spanish grand tour.
“I still feel 18 inside,” the Red Bull-Bora leader insists. “But yes, when you wake up, it’s definitely not the same as when you’re 20 years old. The older you get, the more things start to come out, but for the moment it’s a pleasure to be still racing with those young guys around. It keeps me young, as long as I can be in this circle.
“Hopefully I can stay there as long as possible, or for as long as I enjoy it and like it.”
“Is that a bald tyre?” Peculiar ‘debate’ erupts as motorist claims cyclists “don’t care” about themselves or other road users… because “illegal” lack of tread on tyre
Alright everyone, I think we’ve finally got a new contender for the most inane anti-cycling argument on the internet, one that could even usurp the ‘those speeding 74mph cyclists’ diatribes so beloved by the likes of the Telegraph.
It all started when CykelTony posted on a photo on X/Twitter (who cares?) of a motorist deciding to overtake him on his commute home from work by driving on the wrong side of a roundabout:
“And yes, they went the wrong side of the traffic island too,” Tony added. Classic.
So, what kind of response did this latest example of careless driving provoke in Elon Musk’s lawless online world?
“Is that a bald tyre???” asked the holder of the CPR Cars account.
Errr, should somebody tell him? Don’t worry, Tony did: “Nope. But even if it was, it doesn’t matter as bikes don’t need tread patterns like cars.”
Did that satisfy CPR Cars? Surprisingly, no – he simply doubled down.
“And there you go showing everyone else just how much you do not care about yourself, your bikes condition, or other road users,” he continued.
“Any other vehicle, that tyre is illegal. Central tread bald where a tread once was…”
> Rolling resistance: why you need to choose your tyres carefully if you want to ride faster
Cue the ensuing hilarity in the comments.
“OMG, the energy CPR Cars is putting into being wrong… Best tweet of the week,” said James.
John concurred: “This gets my dumbest tweet of the day award. Priceless.”
“You could have Googled it faster than writing this drivel, and you might have learned something,” added Manos.
Others appeared simply exasperated by the lack of knowledge on display (which is strikingly reminiscent of our ongoing ‘speeding’ cyclists debates).
“But it’s not any other vehicle is it?” said Jaj. “Since it’s not any other vehicle and the legal requirement to have tread on tyres only applies to motor vehicles, there’s no issue. Bikes don’t need tread to stop aquaplaning because the tyres are narrow and don’t go very fast.”
Jason added: “What do the grooves do? Manage water. Why? Aquaplaning. Do bikes aquaplane? No.”
Others, meanwhile, dismissed CPR Cars as a “typical petrolhead” while some even asked if he was running a parody account.
That’s when you know you’ve messed up.
Even Cycling Mikey got involved: It’s quite normal for bicycle tyres to be bald and have no tread at all. This gives more traction on the road in both the wet and the dry. My favourite road tyres are called Kojaks for that very reason. In a bicycle this is normal and legal.”
“Cycling Twitter… Where else gives you chance to tyre troll people?!” concluded Dave.
Well, I suppose that’s one reason to keep it around for a while at least…
“Having a 2,000-watt stereo system in your car is fine, but 12 watts on a bicycle is breaking the very laws of nature”: Is cycling with a Bluetooth speaker “rude and entitled” or is it “no different to a car engine”?
Rock and roll ain’t noise pollution, AC/DC’s Brian Johnson informed us back in 1980. Except when you’re riding a bike, apparently.
While fact-adjacent drivers on Twitter struggle with the concept of bike tyres, and the Telegraph forces the intern to spend hours by the roadside counting cyclists, a massive row has broken out on a Facebook cycling group concerning the etiquette of cycling with a Bluetooth speaker playing.
Yes, really.
The, ahem, discussion, which is currently taking place on the Roadbike Cycling page and which has amassed over 800 comments so far, began after Simon Charnley and Sean Camm realised a Juice Boom Pro Bluetooth speaker (available on eBay for £25) fits perfectly inside their bottle cage.
“Finally I’ve actually found a Bluetooth speaker to fit in my water bottle cage,” Simon wrote on the page, alongside photos of his new purchase and the sleek-looking Giant that will now double as a two-wheeled turntable.
“It’s very light and very loud and does the job brilliantly, now can have tunes to spin to, best £20 I’ve spent for ages.”
Probably anticipating the reaction his new accessory would cause, Simon added: “Let me add, this is for when I’m riding alone up the mountain hills and nobody around and not upsetting anyone, so you guys saying don’t be that guy, I’m not. I don’t like earbuds and this is safer used correctly. Only weighing in at 320g, bike only 7.2kg, so won’t notice it. Sweet.”
Believe it or not, Simon’s fairly innocuous post about wanting to play some music as he rides in the hills – and a follow-up from Sean Camm, who originally recommended the speakers to his fellow Giant enthusiast – kicked off quite the debate in the group.
And it’s fair to say things have got a touch heated.
First off, in the ‘you’re ruining my day by cycling past with your speakers playing music’ corner…
“Get some bone conductor earphones. This is just noise pollution to others,” said Rosen.
“How do you know who can hear your music?” asked Mark. “Depending on topology, the sound may carry further than you think. So, someone up the road headed in the same direction that you can’t see may be subjected to your music. Just put on headphones, bro. Be cool.”
Meanwhile, Joshua described the two speaker-using cyclists as “rude and entitled”, while Gabriel declared that “people who listen to Bluetooth speakers on bikes deserve a special place in Hell.”
Bit strong there, Gabriel.
“Personally, I find listening to another cyclist’s music annoying,” said a much-more relaxed Carol. “I assume this was a joke post. With bone conducting headphones, why would someone choose to blast his playlist?”
“No matter what you play on that, your music sucks. Now everyone around you hates your guts,” said Tom, while Mike added: “Looks like people are gonna be listening to Nickelback whether they want to or not.”
Poor Nickelback, always catching some strays.
Meanwhile, Matthew asked: “Why are you giving non-cycling road users a reason to dislike cyclists even more?”
And finally, on the ‘no speaker’ side, Steve turned to the very important issue of water bottle space.
“I’d much rather have music playing for the world than hydration,” he sarcastically noted.
However, not everyone jumped on the anti-speaker bandwagon.
“I seriously don’t get why this triggers so many people,” wrote a baffled Kurtis. “Having a 2000-watt stereo system in your car is fine, but 12 watts on a bicycle is breaking the very laws of nature.”
And speaker owner Sean added: “A guy got ran over near me recently on a bike. Pretty bad accident. The cause was headphones, those ones that are meant to be open ear so you can hear stuff. Well, he didn’t hear the car next to him and swerved into it full on. Hospital. Very bad.
“I also use a speaker like this. It’s much safer as you can hear everything around you and it creates awareness like a bell would so people know you’re there too. With regards to people’s feelings about it – don’t care.”
“I stopped wearing ear buds years ago, because I would just get a headache later on, as I needed them at 100 per cent volume to hear the music (I guess not great fitting buds),” said Tommy.
“Then years without music. The other week I got a new bike bag, and tried having just my phone playing music in the mesh on top of the bag. And it’s actually great. People hear you coming (no different to a car engine) And you’re not making yourself deaf to your surroundings. So, Bike speakers should definitely be a thing.”
Meanwhile, Stu weighed up the balancing act between safety and forcing a pedestrian to listen to a few bars of Kylie Minogue’s ‘All the Lovers’ (your song choice may vary) as you pass by.
People say use headphones, but as long as you’re not blasting music, I think the safety of hearing your surroundings is more important than inconveniencing people with sound for like six seconds,” he said.
“Everyone is getting so triggered,” added Azer. “How is this any different from a car passing you by? You all make it sound like you’re riding somewhere in outer space with zero noise around you, and then one cyclist passes by, and suddenly, you hear some music.”
Meanwhile, Francisco was all for the vibes: “In my previous group there was a buddy with the same setup, it was about four hours of varied music for everyone. I don’t see anything to complain. Enjoy and mix good music!”
What do you think, Bluetooth speakers while cycling – yay or nay? Or, like me, are you wondering why this is even a debate?
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
38 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@mdavidford - bring back the edit function, at last something upon which we can all agree!
@mdavidford "laxtivist" Hmm... slacktivist? "I disapprove of what you say but I will sometimes defend 'till the next coffee and cake opportunity your right to say it"?
@IanGlasgow They can make a pass look faster, but they never make things look closer than they are If it was as simple as that, some would say you could be right, but it isn't and you're not. I have the advantage that I noticed the effect that 'wide angle makes passes look closer' and performed the experiments. It does. The fallacy in your argument arises from equating 'closeness of a pass' to 'making things look closer', when they are clearly not the same thing. The relevant thought experiment is to imagine a balloon inflated between the cyclist and the vehicle of the close passing b*****d at the moment of peak closeness. To a first approximation, the whole of that balloon is at the same distance from the lens. Then ask yourself 'does the reduced field of view image make the balloon look bigger than on the increased field of view image (which we're calling 'wide-angle')?' The answer is yes. Bigger balloon = less-close pass. QED. Conclusion: Wide-angle makes passes look closer!
There are reply chains on the main road.cc site - they haven't worked on the offroad.cc and ebiketips subsites or the forum since the same ill-fated migration that killed the edit functionality.
https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/ As a special bonus, to compensate for the mistake I made with the Sainsbury's 44-tonner above, here is the Travellers Choice attack on a pedestrian crossing. This is relevant because I am part way through the FoI process, asking LancsFilth what they actually did about the offence - this was before they invented the Lancashire Dodge, which is to ignore all reports about offences against cyclists. They actually agreed at the time to take action on this one, but at the Internal Review stage of the FoI process last week they refused to say what the action was, just as they did 3 years ago. The story continues...
I see the comment section has gotten worse again, first no editing, now no reply chains. What's next, pay by the word? @Rendel Harris "allow all demonstrations and counter demonstrations to take place without any policing?" All? No. But most could get away fine with a dozen or so shaperones, the fact the Met deploy vast swarms in riot gear and call in extra support from across the country(and if you ever want to maintain your illusions about the police, stay out of any forums or groupchats involving said bussed-in coppers, the level of gleeful anticipation they display at the prospect of being able to engage in violent thuggery against "crusties" and "stop oil nonces" is legitimately depressing even to someone who already has a low opinion of the profession) so they can have 10 officers to arrest every sign-holding pensioner has nothing to do with necessity or public order and everything to do with the fact the modern British police are an entire workforce of little Cartmans demanding you Respect Their Authoritah. It's a show of force intended to discourage protest in the first place. At least, protest of certain kinds - funnily enough they never seem to need half the coppers in the country to police farmers or cabbies blocking up the roads, and their response to fascist marches and rallies seems to be downright proportional unless there's a leftwing counter-protest planned...
https://upride.cc/incident/yn67mvj_sainsburys44tonner_closepass/ I mistakenly copied in the date from the file. I keep them in a text file with the date at the end of the line, but I should have excluded it
@wtjs link not found 😢
@wtjs wide angle lenses make things looks further away. That's why estate agents use them when taking interior photos - it makes the rooms look bigger because everything looks further away. They can make a pass look faster, but they never make things look closer than they are.
“The BBC’s Editorial Guidelines are clear that significant errors should be corrected transparently”, said Hamilton." Good luck with that one, Fabian. Having spent thirty years trying to get the BBC to correct the significant errors in their reporting of cycle helmets and failing completely, you'll need a hell of a lot of luck.
38 thoughts on “Is cycling with a Bluetooth speaker “rude and entitled” or is it “no different to a car engine”?; Weird debate erupts as driver claims cyclists “don’t care” – because of “bald tyres”; Cyclists slam Telegraph red light jumping story + more on the live blog”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0022ffp/bbc-comedy-short-films-i-am-darren
Quote:
Oh, so that’s alright then…
well if it’s in teh Telegraph
well if it’s in the Telegraph it must be well researched and err…. true……
Must be true…fat bloke down
Must be true…fat bloke down the pub told me
Telegraph comments
Telegraph comments
“Register bicycles, make them pass a driving test, subject them to an annual MOT and give them a number plate and make them take out insurance. Works for cars. “
“A court case this year established cyclists are not subject to road traffic laws because bicycles are pedal powered not engine powered. That makes no sense and must change. “
“The only way to stop this will be to license them and make them pay for insurance.”
“In my lifetime I have never seen a car being driven on the pavement…you know the area that is exclusively for the use of pedestrians and illegal for cyclists to use (immediate £30 fixed penalty notice fine) “
“Many cyclists don’t use the expensive cycle lanes, and use the road instead. To annoy motorists? “
Hirsute wrote:
To be honest, I’m impressed that they could figure out how to type comments – I thought that Torygraph readers were some kind of fossilised idiots who wouldn’t know how to download a PDF
Amazing really considering
Amazing really considering between 2019 and 2022 around 35 pedestrians were killed annually whilst walking on pavements and verges by people driving motor vehicles and I guess the person writing the comment hasn’t seen the loads of dash cam videos on YouTube show twats behind steering wheels some driving on the pavement
The cyclist on the min
The cyclist on the mini-roundabout is no angel either.
Highway Code, Rule 188
Mini-roundabouts. Approach these in the same way as normal roundabouts. **All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so.** Remember, there is less space to manoeuvre and less time to signal. Avoid making U-turns at mini-roundabouts. Beware of others doing this.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD schedule 9 parts 7 and 8
Given the rut where he might
Given the rut where he might otherwise be riding, he gets the benefit of the doubt. The clown driving on the wrong side of the roundabout and traffic island doesn’t.
Do you not like Rule 188?
Do you not like Rule 188?
Highway Code, Rule 188
Mini-roundabouts. Approach these in the same way as normal roundabouts. **All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so.** Remember, there is less space to manoeuvre and less time to signal. Avoid making U-turns at mini-roundabouts. Beware of others doing this.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD schedule 9 parts 7 and 8
I’ve already posted some
I’ve already posted some thoughts on the Torygraph cycle-baiting piece in the forum (https://road.cc/content/forum/telegraph-news-item-310117), but another way to look at it is that if there’s a huge number of cyclists ignoring red lights, but the number of collisions is negligible, then that means that most cyclists can be trusted to go through reds safely.
Conversely, according to the Torygraph, no cars go through red lights (that they saw, anyway), but the number of KSIs caused by drivers going through reds is non-negligible. This means that there is most definitely a need for traffic lights to be fitted with RLJ capturing cameras and severe penalties for drivers that do so.
Their “article” is actually promoting RLJing cyclists and making a strong case for better enforcement against RLJing drivers.
If none of the car drivers
If none of the car drivers were committing offences, but they still managed to kill people, doesn’t that mean that they’re just irremediably dangerous regardless of the rules/enforcement, and we should just ban them?
mdavidford wrote:
I like the idea, but it’s a bit of a stretch to think that they weren’t committing offences just because the police either weren’t looking, didn’t want to bother with the paperwork if they did look or didn’t think it was an offence because they’re not that familiar with the road laws.
But but but… the Telegraph
But but but… the Telegraph and it’s esteemed commenters said they weren’t, so they musnt’ve been.
It should be remembered that
It should be remembered that almost all motorists seem to think that putting your foot down when you see an amber light isn’t jumping the light
I wonder whether the Torygraph intern knows what the rules actually are?
bensynnock wrote:
One of my favourite excuses from a driver I challenged on this issue a couple of years ago:
Him: “The Highway Code says the orange light means stop if it’s safe to do so.”
Me: “Yes but you didn’t, you accelerated when it changed from green.”
Him: “Yes so when I got to the light it wasn’t safe to stop.”
I fear this is not dissimilar
I fear this is not dissimilar to the logic I employ in a different situation:
Me: the Highway Code says you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.
Them: but you weren’t crossing as I approached, you were on the pavement and then you just carried on walking across the road.
Me: but if I had stopped, then I would have been waiting, so you should have given way either way.
Just thinking about today :
Just thinking about today : two red light jumping cars, one balaclava wearing off-road motorbike riding youth on the public path, three cars in the yellow crosshatch, and zero cycles seen. You are not advised to cycle in the Bradford Met.
Concerning speakers on bikes
Concerning speakers on bikes – I’m not a huge fan as there’s enough environmental noise around the place as it is, but unfortunately that bird has flown as outside of another lockdown, we’re not going to be able to hear birdsong in cities.
I’d be a bit annoyed if I was enjoying a peaceful countryside ride and then have to encounter a noisy bicycle, but to be honest a bit of music is not nearly as bad as the near constant engine and tyre noise of motor vehicles.
It now seems pretty normal
It now seems pretty normal here in NL to see a group of kids on their transport bikes with one playing music from a speaker in the beer crate on the front. It’s a lot less annoying than the dickheads with super loud exhausts that like to drag race their Golf GTI from every red light. And the buses that seem to be completely free of a silencer on the exhaust. They’re really loud.
KDee wrote:
Despite the annoyance, I try to take the charitable view that the young’uns are sharing music that they like and think that others will like.
I’ve become a lot more aware of traffic noise since Mrs HawkinsPeter started suffering a lot from noise anxiety (she often avoids walking along main roads just because of the constant and intrusive noise). Usually it’s something that I just block out, but once m attention is drawn to it, then it does become really annoying. However, I do seem to suffer from Central Auditory Processing Disorder (or is it Sensory Processing Disorder?) which means that I have difficulty focussing on voices/conversation when there’s a high level of background noise – it’s terrible in pubs as I can hardly ever hear the person next to me if it’s noisy.
I don’t know which it is, but
I don’t know which it is, but I have the same thing. I hear every conversation around me at the pub and struggle to follow a conversation sometimes.
I’m OK with the kids playing music from their speaker on the bike. They might not be playing something I like, but they’re having fun, and they’re on bikes! Not in 2000kg of metal, plastic and glass, and driving like an arsehole.
Bloody cyclists riding around
Bloody cyclists riding around blasting their sounds…
chrisonabike wrote:
That’s different as it’s an event/party.
Bizarrely, I do enjoy driving around Night City in Cyberpunk 2077 with the radio turned up louder than the engine noise. Discovered a great Miles Davis track from that game.
Quote:
Firstly, with the number of people who seem to think this is OK now it’s not “like six seconds”, on some busy London cycleways it’s one damned person after another either passing or being passed with music blaring. Secondly, it’s not either headphones or speaker, it’s not compulsory to listen to music at all. I’m passionate about music both as a player and a listener and have it on almost constantly at home, but I can do without for half an hour’s commuting, and I certainly don’t want it on (nor to hear other people’s) when I’m out in the wonder of the countryside where the quiet and the birdsong are one of the greatest pleasures of a rural ride. Finally, and I’m sure this will upset some people, in my opinion nobody who really loves music would bother listening to it from a tinny speaker as you ride along with wind noise in your ears, traffic noise etc. It seems to me 90% at least of people using these speakers are a lot less interested in the music per se than they are in projecting an image of look at me, I’m so cool and devoted to music I can’t be without it for a second, aren’t I great? [/rant]
NB To preempt whataboutery, I hate loud music blasting from cars just as much and have had a number of lively discussions with midlife crisis bellends broadcasting their horrible AOR tastes from their roof-down Porsches and BMWs.
Don’t get mad, get even.
Don’t get mad, get even.
Now I shall spend far too
Now I shall spend far too long wondering what a unicyclist wears under the kilt – if they stick to the fine traditions of your homeland it could be somewhat painful…
Rendel Harris wrote:
I can’t say that I’ve tried unicycling like that, but it’s common to not need padding as you’re mostly not riding a long way (MTBuni riders might want proper cycling shorts though). It shouldn’t be any more painful than riding a bike without underwear though descending kerbs can be problematic if you don’t raise yourself off the saddle in preparation and use your legs to absorb the bump.
I’m sure that’s a challenge
I’m sure that’s a challenge for some! Not myself though, I hail from the south so am excusing myself pleading “nesh”.
Also I’m more a fan of the smaller pipes, valuing my hearing. But combining that with e.g. the “Drum and bass on a bike” idea I’d be delighted to be passed by someone DJing e.g. the work of the late great Martyn Bennett (the “techno piper”). The following is bike-themed and quite acceptable (Edinburgh video there) – seems to be a feature of Critical Mass rides.
But realistically it’s probably going to be kids with the latest pop or slightly older folks with “shouting music”. At least if played from a bike you get a brief snatch and gone, either way…
I’m sorry but I’m with
I’m sorry but I’m with Gabriel on this one.
The ‘special hell’ is now reserved for child molesters, people who talk in the theatre, and ‘people who choose to use a Bluetooth speaker in public instead of headphones’ 😉
Emitting noise without
Emitting noise without necessity is rude.
Reving a little engine, accerating hard from the traffic lights, starting a Porsch engine, driving an AMG V8 – that’s all rude and unnecessary – and sign of little class. It’s the same for riding/walking with bluetooth speakers or, in the 80ies, a boom-box.
Driving normally, in a sensible car, is much less noisy and often hard to avoid – so that’s mostly acceptable.
Using normal headphones is not acceptable – these zombies are a danger to themselves and others. Try overtaking one of them – they’ll never hear a bell.
For cycling, the solution seem to be bone-conducting headphones – leaving the ears free while still providing some – albeit LoFi – entertainment.
The majority of cars where I
The majority of cars where I live are parked on pavements, they must levitate if the Telegraph is correct.
Bluetooth speakers while
Bluetooth speakers while cycling
An abomination, and thankfully, against the local bye law in the Forest of Dean. and I’ve had words with pedestrians who think that blasting out their favourite noise is acceptable. People go to quiet places to enjoy the peace, to get away from the relentless muzak and noise of modern society, not to have other people’s choice of music inflicted on them.
re the speakers: I’m firmly
re the speakers: I’m firmly in the ‘stay in your lane’ camp, no one is entitled to solitude in a public space.
Car Delenda Est wrote:
Does that mean you’re for ’em or agin ’em? I thought originally you meant nobody has a right to expect not to be bothered by others in a public space (for ’em) but then you could mean nobody has a right to act in a public space as if nobody else is around (agin ’em).
Never mind the social
Never mind the social niceties of the music, given the amount of dings, spray, and other insults my bottles suffer, I don’t think I’d want to be putting speakers in there – even relatively cheap ones.
From one of the I Bike London
Re, using bluetooth/loud speakers whilst cycling.
From one of the I Bike London rides.
I don’t think this seriously bothered anyone…
https://youtu.be/VVB_MTpMP3Q
Cyclists with music are a
Cyclists with music are a heck of a lot less irritating than peds on their phones with the speakers turned on, I’d say. As I was out for a walk one warm evening last summer, I had an old codger pass me, very slowly, on a bakfiets thing with a sound system driven by what looked like a large car battery, blasting out techno. It was wonderful.