“The must get in front is just irresistible”: Cyclist overtaken by driver who gets to sit in traffic two seconds sooner; He’s back… Tadej Pogačar returns to Strava with 30km/h mountain epic; Dan Walker talks about “hairy” crash + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
1x... Why the pros are using it? Should you be considering it?
Jamie and Mat have been out at the Dauphiné, snapping pics of unreleased bikes (I know, they’ve got a tough life)…
> New Ridley road bike breaks cover at Critérium du Dauphiné
> BMC prototype aero superbike spotted at Dauphiné
They also spotted a certain defending Tour de France champion’s Cervélo, with some rather eye-catching SRAM 1x à la Primož Roglič at the Giro…
And so I guess the natural next question is… should we be copying the world’s best and ditching our front mechs?
He's back... Tadej Pogačar returns to Strava with 30km/h mountain epic
In example number 17,549 of ‘professional cyclists showing just how much better they are than us’, here’s how Tadej Pogačar eased himself back into outdoor training post-wrist fracture…
Just the 97 miles there, at altitude, in 40°C heat, climbing more than 4,000m of elevation at an average speed of 19mph (30.5km/h)… oh, and titled ‘Vrum vrum’, of course. Only fair to point out the two-time Tour champ hasn’t been sat on the sofa for the last two months (well, he might have been outside of training hours, to be fair) getting a bit of work done on the home trainer and by running…
“I lost some training and couldn’t do much on the road in the last four weeks. So I need to focus more on the intervals and long training sessions outside,” he said on Friday.
“I’ve been training quite well on the home trainer and running. The shape is not as bad as I thought it was going to be after training on the rollers, and the wrist is getting better every day. And now I’ll try to get as much as possible out of this camp here.
“Hopefully I will be 100 per cent for the Tour. Maybe the wrist will not be at 100 per cent, but I think the legs can be – you don’t need wrists to train the legs.”
On the racing front, the 24-year-old has scrapped his usual Tour of Slovenia tune-up appearance and instead will stay at altitude with his team at Sierra Nevada and Alpine training camps, only pinning on a number twice – at Slovenian TT champs and the national road race – before the Grand Départ in Bilbao.
Dan Walker: "Quite a big thing to go through and then come out the other side of and get back on a bike and enjoy it again"
Dan Walker has spoken to the Mirror about the incident which saw him knocked off his bike in Sheffield back in February…
“It’s probably the shock of seeing my face, it was quite badly damaged, wasn’t it? I remember lying on the tarmac and coming round after 20 minutes or so, and I saw the faces of the two ambulance guys and the police officer.
“And I remember the first thing I did was I shook my arms, shook my legs, and I sort of moved my back, and thought, ‘It hurts a bit and it aches and I can feel sort of blood in my mouth, I can feel wetness in my mouth, but I don’t think I’ve broken anything’.
“And then in the days after that, I think you do have a bit of self-reflection and you do think about your priorities and things you’ve said or things you haven’t said and things you want to do. When you’re told you’re 50 centimetres away from having your head run over and you think, okay, there’s a time to reset and take stock and think about what you want to do.
“I had my head and back scanned, went through a concussion protocol and was back at work within a fortnight and back on a bike a week after that. The first roundabout I came to was a bit hairy, but I don’t even think about it now. I am really thankful I was wearing a helmet, thankful I didn’t break anything and thankful that I’m still around.
> Why is Dan Walker’s claim that a bike helmet saved his life so controversial?
“So I think that is quite a big thing to go through and then come out the other side of and get back on a bike and enjoy it again. That’s where I’m at.”
Astana Qazaqstan development rider suspended by UCI over Russia support
Astana development team rider Savelii Laptev has been suspended by the UCI over online support of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Insidethegames reports. Laptev, from Ekaterinburg in Russia, has been defended by his father who said it is all “a misunderstanding” and his social media was hacked.
Riders from Russia and Belarus can compete as neutral athletes as long as they do not show support for the invasion on social media or in interviews. Laptev’s father explained how the UCI contacted his son after he “allegedly liked posts on social networks regarding the political situation”.
“Savelii has already sent a letter to the international union, in which he explained that he had nothing to do with this. I don’t understand how this could happen, probably his account was hacked.
“As far as I understand, the trial is underway, but for Savelii and the whole team, the letter that came on Friday about the impossibility of confirming the neutral status caused great surprise. He has no starts planned for the next 10 days, so it’s hard for me to say whether he can continue to continue to ride for Astana.
“The team is also dealing with this issue, all the necessary explanations were provided by its representatives.”
Drum & Bass on the Bike — London
Simon was on the ground to catch all the action…
> Joining Dom Whiting for a Drum & Bass On The Bike ride – a glorious afternoon in every sense
While Jack caught up with Dom ahead of the event…
Fancy winning a Giro d'Italia-ridden Cannondale SuperSix Evo?
EF Education-EasyPost have teamed up with Los Angeles Bike Academy to raffle off Jonathan Caicedo’s Cannondale SuperSix Evo from the 2021 Giro d’Italia… of course including the customary EF switch-out paint job from the race…
Tickets are $25 a pop, although even at that price I’d be attempting to (unsuccessfully) negotiate a new chain and perhaps even some fresh rubber pre-delivery. Shimano Dura-Ace and Vittoria Corsa tyres ain’t cheap… unlike me.
2x or not to 2x?
Plenty of your thoughts on the 1x question…
> Should you run a 1x set-up on your road bike?
For the layman: ditching your front mech and using just a single front chainring partnered with a wider spread of gears at the back.
I’ve seen at least five of you expressing your disgust at the idea with one, single ‘no’. Efficient commenting. HoldingOn’s being tempted by the fact it’s one less thing to clean is very relatable. I have to admit considering it during one particularly infuriating front derailleur saga, but have been put off by the amount of time I spend at both ends of my gear ratio. Not sure I could bring myself to give up one or the other.
mrmusette: “Loved the look, concept and simplicity of 1x so built a road bike around it for London’s flat geography. After a year or so I am going back to 2x mechanical.
“The range of gears, better chainline and the ability to use a front mech to nudge the chain back on without getting off the bike if it ever does drop (not that it did with a narrow-wide chainring and a clutched rear mech) all completely outweigh the pros of 1x for road. Try it if you really need to scratch the itch, otherwise, don’t bother.”
Off the back: “The thing that puts me off a single front ring setup is I ride such a varied type of terrain. I could be on a very flat ride one day but the next ill decide to go up some hills. My bike has a 52/36 and a 11-28 ratios. I can get up most things on that and still have a decent range on the flat.
“A pro racer knows exactly what they are riding that day, they know the gears they need to be in in most cases so can make that decision. Oh and they have a mech to do it all for them.”
Matthew Acton-Varian: “I think 1x makes sense if you are a commuter, or riding really flat terrain. Otherwise the jumps between gears are just too big to get an ideal cadence.”
Runs silent like a belt drive, no cross chaining or ugly front mechs, 12 speeds, and a Classified hub to top it off. *Chef’s kiss*
— Bobbleoff (@tristramc) June 7, 2023
Our Twitter followers are, in general, more positive about 1x, another reader saying: “Been commuting on mine for 5/6 years. It’s practical and simple, but if I know I’m going to do a much longer commute + climbs, I’ll take another bike with a wider range of gears. Each to their own on this one.”
Well, some of them are more positive…
No. Don’t want a dinner plate sized cassette on my road bike
— Stuart Houston (@UltimateWeevil) June 6, 2023
How to make your bike lighter — save a kilo or more from your road or gravel bike with these affordable upgrades
Geraint Thomas headlines National Road Championships startlist
British Cycling has announced some of the riders heading to Redcar and Cleveland at the end of the month for the British National Road Champs, where the wearer of the bands will be decided for the next 12 months.
Geraint Thomas, Ben Swift, Pfeiffer Georgi, Fred Wright and Elinor Barker, along with returning 2022 national champions Alice Towers, Sam Watson, Matt Bostock, Josie Nelson and Leo Hayter will all be present as the road race, time trial and circuit race titles are all up for grabs between Wednesday 21 June and Sunday 25 June.
“I’m really thrilled to be back and racing at Nationals, which will be the first time for me in the road race, at least, in about 10 years,” G said. “It looks like a tough course that will make it a very hard race. It’s going to be great to be back out and racing after recently completing the Giro d’Italia – I can’t wait to get out there!”
Mikkel Bjerg wins Critérium du Dauphiné time trial, takes race lead (compatriot Jonas Vingegaard looms large)
Well that turned into a brutal time trial in the French heat. A power climb off the start ramp, followed by a sapping, seemingly never-ending uphill drag to the finish. More than a few went off too hard and found their legs turning to mush, faces contorted with pain by the end.
Your winner…
🏁 🇩🇰@mikkelbbjerg fracasse le chrono et approche les 50km/h ! 🚴🏻♂️💨
⏱37’28” (49,8 km/h).🏁 🇩🇰@mikkelbbjerg is flying! He approaches 50kph! 🚴🏻♂️💨
⏱37’28” (49.8 km/h).#Dauphiné pic.twitter.com/2LK8wuHsOz— Critérium du Dauphiné (@dauphine) June 7, 2023
Quite ridiculous speeds considering the climbing involved. Bjerg takes the lead of the race from Christophe Laporte, Jumbo-Visma letting UAE Team Emirates take control of proceedings ahead of this weekend’s climbing.
Jonas Vingegaard will be even more so now the heavy favourite to win the pre-Tour tune-up after that. He’s just 12 seconds behind his compatriot, but 29 seconds clear of the next GC rider. Fred Wright’s fourth place on the stage means he moves up to third on GC ahead of tomorrow’s lumpy day to Salins-les-Bains.
Injured cyclist calls for drivers to pay attention after motorist hit her from behind, throwing her into ditch – but escaped police action
British Cycling partner's adverts banned over misleading clean energy claims
Oil and gas giant Shell, made relevant for this cycling live blog’s purposes by being British Cycling’s partner, has seen some of its adverts banned for misleading claims about how clean its overall energy production is, the BBC reports.
The ban applies to a YouTube advert and a poster displayed in Bristol, which the Advertising Standards Authority ruled left out information of Shell’s polluting work with fossil fuels.
Shell says it “strongly” disagrees, but the ads cannot be used again. ASA ruled the YouTube ad wrongly gives the impression that low-carbon energy products make up a significant proportion of Shell’s energy products.
The selection of ads were likely to mislead consumers as they “misrepresented the contribution that lower-carbon initiatives played, or would play in the near future” compared with the rest of the company’s operations.
"The must get in front is just irresistible": Cyclist overtaken by driver who gets to sit in traffic two seconds sooner
A classic of the genre…
The MGIF is just irresistible 🤦 pic.twitter.com/idu3xGID8r
— Jim’s Wheels (@JimsWheels) June 6, 2023
Having seen the footage, CyclingMikey said the phrase that comes to mind is that the driver would struggle to organise an alcohol-based festivity in a brewery. Another viewer suggested they “can’t resist the quick glance in, the look of utter contempt, and then the shake of the head as I cycle on” when this inevitability of cycling on British roads unfolds to them.
Admittedly not often as dangerous as a high-speed close pass or ‘sorry mate I didn’t see you’, the must get in front (MGIF) is a more confusing experience and will leave you questioning: ‘why?’ Whether it is to get ahead at a junction, with a red light looming or, in this case, simply to sit in traffic two seconds sooner.
Anyone got any theories? What is it about a person riding a bicycle from A to B that requires a select few to feel the need to always get in front no matter what’s ten metres ahead?
7 June 2023, 08:04
7 June 2023, 08:04
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 £1.99. 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.
79 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
The defence may well have argued that, and the magistrate may have accepted it, but that's not what the law says. It says that you have only driven without reasonable consideration for others if someone is inconvenienced. But the offence is committed if you drive without due care and attention, OR without reasonable consideration for other person. You have done the first if the driving falls below what would be expected of a careful and competent driver, regardless of whether anyone was inconvenienced. And CPS guidance specifically cites driving too close to another vehicle as an example.
Some years ago (before there was a cycle lane) I used to commute on Sidmouth St. But only because I worked on the London Road campus, from anywhere else there are better alternatives. As a cycle route it runs from between two busy roads, neither of which are exactly cycle friendly. So it's hardly surprising that no cyclists use it.
The officer's comments unfortunately reflect the reality of UK law. While the Highway Code guidance indeed refers to 1.5m, that is not anywhere in the law. And the criteria in law for proving a charge of careless driving does in fact rest on whether the rider is being "inconvenienced", as the discovered several years ago when the Met prosecuted a taxi driver who nearly hit me when cutting into my lane from the left near Marylebone. The prosecution lawyer was a barely competent newbie who fumbled over his words. The court computer was barely capable of playing the video footage, which kept freezing and crashing. The cabbie had an highly assertive defence lawyer who immediately seized on this point, and argued to the magistraite that I clearly hadn't been "inconvenienced" because I had not stopped or swerved, and had carried on my journey. Never mind that didn't have time to do either of those things, or that I was centimetres from being hit - the magistraite acquitted him on those grounds. That is unfortunately the outrageous reality of actually prosecuting a close pass incident. I know it's popular to blame the police and the CPS for not prosecuting enough close passes ... but the fact is the law is inadequate, and if the driver has a good lawyer then they can likely get off most close pass prosecutions.
Let's not forget the protruding "side" mirror...
HTML rules are clearly only partially implemented
please can we have the ability to use bold and italics for emphasis back as well?
As a Reading resident and cyclist, I can say I cannot think of a single occasion when I have seen a cyclist using the Sidmouth St cycle lane, nor can I think of any reason I'd use it myself. It doesn't connect to any other useful cycle routes. I don't rejoice that some of it is going back to motor traffic but I can see why the council is proposing to do that. Reading could really do with a cycleway to cross the town centre west to east and east to west but I'm not holding my breath on that.
Giant are one of the most trustworthy brands out there when it comes to manufacturing components given that they actually own their own production facilities. None of that matters though when it comes to road hookless, I and most other people won't touch it with a barge pole. We're surely at a stage now where it's toxic amongst consumers and it's only a matter of time before the UCI ban it for racing.
Filling the road with one person per car is using the road space more efficiently, amazing, I never realised that.
I bought a Giant Defy recently and immediately sold off the hookless wheels at a pretty big loss and won't ever do that again. I'm not buying hookless for road ever. Giant in particular has very short list of what tires they test with their rims so it's way too restrictive even if I was going to ride hookless wheels. Which I won't. Very short sighted by Giant.
79 thoughts on ““The must get in front is just irresistible”: Cyclist overtaken by driver who gets to sit in traffic two seconds sooner; He’s back… Tadej Pogačar returns to Strava with 30km/h mountain epic; Dan Walker talks about “hairy” crash + more on the live blog”
I think 1x makes sense if you
I think 1x makes sense if you are a commuter, or riding really flat terrain. Otherwise the jumps between gears are just too big to get an ideal cadence.
My bike is a commute bike,
My bike is a commute bike, with 2×8 setup. I haven’t moved to the smaller front gearing in a couple of months now.
I have just purchased a new chainwheel, which is still 2x – but that is mostly because I am not skilled enough yet to convert it to a 1x. (I also took the opportunity to jump from 46T to 50T so I want to see how that goes)
My commute is relatively flat
My commute is relatively flat but does have a gravel section, I run a 50/34 and a 13-26 cassette and don’t really use the smaller ring even with fully loaded panniers. At some point I might use the bike for some touring at which point having lower gears will help, and in the grand scheme of things the weight saving of not having a front mech is tiny, and could easily be achieved by me eating less!
I am contemplating moving to
I am contemplating moving to 1x purely because its one less thing to clean
What is this cleaning thing
What is this cleaning thing to talk about? Isn’t that what riding in the rain is for?
Seriously, for me that is the
Seriously, for me that is the key selling point of 1x. I like upgrades, but components have got too expensive, so I will keep trying to cleaning these nasty front rings.
I have sometimes wondered
I have sometimes wondered whether moving to a single speed on the back with a double chain ring and front mech could work. My thinking is thus:
Front mech lighter, simpler, cheaper, easier to clean than rear mech
Weight difference between cassette and single sprocket greater than between single/ double chainrings. Also easier to keep clean.
Many rides in the fens I use only one or two rear sprockets, and most gear changes are on the front (small ring for getting up to speed, on the big ring the rest of the time)
You’d need a chain tensioner
You’d need a chain tensioner in that setup (single rear sprocket with double chainset).
Interesting idea. I would
Interesting idea. I would guess the chain tensioner (as Miller points out you’d need) would be a little lighter than the rear derailleur. Lighter rear casette, but also the hub would be narrower and therefore lighter.
I wonder if there is a way to build a chain tensioner into the front derailleur…
Wot about the massive winds ?
Wot about the massive winds ?
I have solved that by
I have solved that by reducing the reliance on raw sprouts as my in ride snacks!
Edit: You were referring to the weather weren’t you?
Last week, fully loaded, riding into a 20mph headwind for the full 25 mile ride home 50/26 allowed me to average 13.5mph. These days I find the wind will blow me into a ditch before it get strong enough to make we drop onto the small ring.
I commute on a hybrid with
I commute on a hybrid with 3×8. Except I only ever use the middle chainring, so I’m effectively riding a 1×8!
(mind you, I did have to use the little chainring this one time, when I’d gone shopping and my panniers were particularly heavy…).
brooksby wrote:
My MTB/shopping bike has 3×9 gears, but I’ve only been using the outer chainring for so long that the front derailleur is almost seized. I can try changing to the middle chainring, but it needs a few kicks to get it to actually move. I’ve only just decided to replace the front derailleur and am waiting for it to arrive in the post.
Same! The middle chainring
Same! The middle chainring gets all the use!
Though I have used the small one on a few hills around the area, and it’s been particularly useful since I’ve started carrying my kid in the child seat on the back. So actually, that one does have a purpose.
I shifted into the big chainring once, just to see what it did. Turns out it makes everything harder, so I shifted straight back!
momove wrote:
When I had the chainrings changed recently, at my LBS recommendation I had rings fitted that can be put in individually (?) so that the whole front set of chainrings doesn’t have to be binned if it’s only the middle ring which has worn out.
For flat commutes, get a
For flat commutes, get a fixed gear. Lot less to go wrong. Thicker, stronger, harder wearing chain. More reliable and robust. Perfect chainline, always, and no jockey-wheel drag – more efficient. Plus your legs will get stronger.
Why have a chain, sprockets
Why have a chain, sprockets and pedals? All potential points of failure.
chrisonatrike wrote:
Good point. Let me know how you get on. 😉
Paul J wrote:
Why have a chain, sprockets and pedals? All potential points of failure.
— Paul J Good point. Let me know how you get on. 😉— chrisonatrike
Going downhill fast.
I have recently been enjoying a Sturmey Archer 3-speed and while I had it my Shimano 8-speed hub with belt drive was my go to for most of my trips.
chrisonatrike wrote:
When I bought this bike, I didn’t think it would be come the bike I rode the most, but it has! Trek District 4 Equipped, belt drive and 8 speed Shimano Alfine. Has pedals, though.
Might have been “shiny new
Might have been “shiny new bike” syndrome but I had an almost identically spec’ed Cube which was definitely my most ridden bike – prior to its holiday with a thief. I should get a chance for further testing as it has recently turned up again (long story).
I’m more lazy than even I thought and convenience wins almost every time. So not fiddling with drivetrain, cleaning just involves a bit of water over the bike and a quick brush and not needing to manage two shifters. (More upright also of course – turns out I prefer either sitting upright or lying down!)
Didn’t one team try 3T bikes
Didn’t one team try 3T bikes with a single ring in the pro-peleton and didn’t exactly shine as a result?
Yes it is covered in the 1x
Yes it is covered in the 1x video piece, with costly and inconvenient chain drops. I notice that Vingegaard has a chain catcher attached to the front mech mount, which wasn’t an option with the 3T frames, because no mount. Did I see that K-Edge have now produced a mahoosive chain catcher for 1x set ups that attaches to the bottle cage mounts on the seat tube?
Probably being less aero and
Probably being less aero and heavier than an actual regular setup
Hmmm I thought the article
Hmmm I thought the article said a 1x (said 1 times ?) setup was less likely to drop the chain… they just need to keep selling us stuff
“The must get in front is
“The must get in front is just irresistible”
I think that happens to me pretty much every journey home. Driver overtakes with a queue of traffic visible a handful of car lengths ahead. <shakes head sadly>
I think the MGIF thing is as
I think the MGIF thing is as much as anything about the inability of some drivers to observe more than one thing at once. I had one last week riding to work, I was doing about 16mph in a 30, and the chap in the Golf decided he must over take me inspite of the fact that about 300m in front an ambulance on blues and twos was heading towards us straddling the white line with cars stopped on either side. He got past to immediately jump on the brakes to move in, forcing me to slow down too, when if he had stayed behind we could have both carried on as we were until the ambulance had passed.
There have been a few
There have been a few instances when I’ve been in my car, Ive seen a cyclist ahead and a queue of traffic further ahead and I’ve slowed right down, knowing that overtaking the cyclist is pointless. I’ve then had a fusillade of angry horn tooting from the driver behind. On one occasion the driver overtook me aggressively (despite an oncoming vehicle), only to grind to a halt a few metres further ahead. The sum total of the less than safe overtake was to get one car further ahead.
Some drivers don’t think ahead.
I see this when cycling, riding my motorbike or driving my car.
I do think cycling should be a compulsory portion of the driving test. And anyone renewing their driving licence should have to undergo compulsory cycle training.
This is it – lack of
This is it – lack of observation and forward planning. I was taught to be looking 3-4+ cars in front of me to plan based not on the car directly in front but much further up the road and give myself time to react.
OldRidgeback wrote:
in front of the cyclist at all costs.
I pulled over in the car once
I pulled over in the car once to be tooted. Just as I was about to get out and ask him if he could see the massive ambulance with flashing lights and sirens, he sheepishly put up his hands in apology.
Wish I had asked the passenger if they wanted a lift with me instead!
The one that gets me is when
The one that gets me is when you’re moving at pretty much the same speed as the line of traffic, and a car overtakes and then brakes straightaway, with the net result that you just swap places, until either the line slows and you overtake them all, or vice versa. It happened twice yesterday. It’s worse when they realise that there is no space at all into which they can go, and so they then squeeze you out. The trouble is, the the car behind them will have moved up too, so there’s no space behined you either. First up against the wall when the revlution comes, I tell you.
nniff wrote:
I had a glorious moment on Sunday. Heading for home on a fairly busy narrow road, a few vehicles had passed me. I saw a grey Mondeo out of the corner of my eye creeping up, about to pass too, but close. He backed off, and further ahead an AA van pulled out, towing with a rigid bar an older chavved up BMW 3 series with a young-ish fella steering it. This combination held a steady 20-25 mph so I took primary and enjoyed a draft for a couple of miles, so Mondeo man had to sit and wait.
I might have shared this one
I might have shared this one before but I had a SUV driver overtake, in a no overtaking zone, the car behind me, that was holding back because they knew there was a line of stationary traffic, and me just to come to a stop seconds later. I of course gave a cheery wave and a “seeya” as I cycled past.
One a couple of weeks ago, which I will share once Northants Police have finished with it, a van driver started an overtake where they couldn’t actually finish the manuever, then drove straight at me to get out of the opposite carriageway whilst shouting and shaking his fist like I was the f$*kwit.
I’ve had a similar one with a
I’ve had a similar one with a van.
A bit further up the road he was waiting, all pumped up.
I put him on his arse, took his van keys and drop them in at my local nick thus ensuring he couldn’t follow me and knock me off and also, it wouldn’t be theft by me.
I suspect MGIF is just
I suspect MGIF is just another example of brain in neutral.
I’m afraid it is the opposite
I’m afraid it is the opposite. They are invariably deliberate decisions. However, they are based on only looking as far as the cyclist – there is no other requirement.
Something I noticed in
Something I noticed in Belgium last month was the opposite of MGIF.
In towns with narrow streets and no dedicated cycling paths there were banners instructing drivers that overtaking cyclists was forbidden.
‘Must Stop Behind’ perhaps?
IIRC the Dutch “cycle street”
IIRC the Dutch “cycle street” (“fietsstraat”) doesn’t automatically require “no overtaking of cyclists” but I think that’s also signed in many places (article, translated Wikipedia entry).
There are actually “do not overtake cyclists” signs in at least one place in Edinburgh (e.g. “do not pass cyclists on bridge” sign on Dean Bridge). This has minimal effect as it’s just another part of a busy road.
It’s a combination of measures (infra, motor traffic reduction, enforcement, training, time for social norms to change) that we need to tame the car.
The MGIF overtake at the last
The MGIF overtake at the last moment is a standard procedure from the Tw*t Driver’s Manual.
Get into primary well before the end of the queue. It probably won’t make much difference, but may give a bit more road space if the driver cuts in.
Henceforth I suggest that this is known as “The Knobhead’s Manoeuvre”
Reminds me of that really stupid character in the Simpsons who is so dumb he doesn’t know he’s dumb.
Is the driver sitting there on the end of the queue as the cyclist rides past, thinking “I showed that cyclist” or is he thinking “I’m a proper Knobhead, I am”?
The bad news is not the actual Knobhead’s Manoeuvre, but the fact that you will probably meet the driver again further along the road and you know you will be dealing with an aggressive person with low intelligence who is probably angry. Not a good combination!
Forewarned is forearmed.
“the shake of a head” – gotta
“the shake of a head” – gotta watch those.
Had a 5 minute barney with a motorist who got upset at our group’s riding along a narrow two lane road littered with potholes. He passed us (without raising any reaction or apparently doing anything) but then one of our riders had gone off ahead signalling left just before a junction and I noticed a severe swerve out and around him. All of a sudden I see the driver stopped, indicator on, about 2 foot front the kerb. Matey in front hops on the kerb pops out in front and tries to continue. The driver set off and promptly collided with the rider.
A long argument ensued (JLR driver – either garage employee or direct employee) of which the main points were a cycling bingo of all over the road (but strangely able to pass).
I asked why the shake of the head (the reason he gave as to why he had stopped) gave him the right to use his car as a weapon. He replied we were supposed to stay together, tried to use the highway code to support this (of course it is silent on group riding protocol). We were in fact riding single file due to the width of the road and potholes. He specifically objected to my riding where I rode from the back of the group to the front to make sure they made a turn. I did this noting that there was a car far behind, I completed the manoeuvre and was ahead for 30 seconds or more before the car interacted with the group. I listed the number of offences he was committing including assault and threatening behaviour and that he was on camera, but he continued with his critique of our riding.
When he finally drove off I muttered “Idiot!” which he heard and stopped, got out of the car, door wide open, blocking the road and started on “So you are allowed to verbally assault me are you?” I think the arrival of an elderly couple stopped him from lamping me as I silently rode off with a mere withering look.
Why is it that motorists feel they are entitled to discipline cyclists for their perception of our riding standards?
The ride was topped off by a MGIF in a 20 when I was doing 20, and a near head on with a driver doing a bit of cleaning and shaking out a duster drifting onto the wrong side of the road a 100 yards from home.
A normal day out then?
A normal day out then?
Haven’t had a stand up row
Haven’t had a stand up row with someone for a while – wrong side of the road lady was perfectly reasonable.
These events are more glaring when do many drivers are getting better at handling cyclists.
Oh, I forgot the Freelander
Oh, I forgot the Freelander driver who tried to overtake me coming up to a junction near Chipping Camden, failed to complete and I was looking down at his wing (not mirror) as it got closer and closer. I glared with one of those “Do you think I’m going to magic out of the way?” looks, did some 1.5m hand signalling and set off left from the junction – with him still parked alongside -, adding on a bit of pointing at my camera, he then deliberately close passed me into a blind bend. As Brooksby says, drivers don’t like being criticised, even when they know they are in the wrong.
I find the best way to wind
I find the best way to wind up a driver is simply quote the Highway Code at them.
Cycloid wrote:
The same works equally well for winding up cyclists. Specifically rule 59. Works a treat.
I don’t know any cyclist that
I don’t know any cyclist that has a problem with rule 59.
Cycloid wrote:
I can think of a few on here, particularly the bit where cyclists should wear helmets.
Is it rule 59 which says?
Is it rule 59 which says?
Evidence suggests that a correctly fitted helmet will reduce your risk of sustaining a head injury in certain circumstances.
Cycloid wrote:
That’s the one. Though it’s the bit that says “You should wear a cycle helmet” that seems to get people’s backs up round here.
The Dutch do not wear plastic
The Dutch do not wear plastic hats – they remove the risk – cars.
Pedantry for the pedants’
Pedantry for the pedants’ pedant:
The Dutch mostly do not wear plastic hats – they massively improve the convenience and feeling of safety when cycling – they remove the risk from interaction with other modes on roads above a certain speed limit or with a certain volume of vehicles and manage interactions between modes where necessary by engineering. They’ve been so successful that now falls and crashes by cyclists not involving anyone else are the main contributor to the injury stats despite what appears to be a recent growth in casualties from “SUVs” and much larger cars.
swldxer wrote:
The relevance of the Dutch being…?
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Why would anybody get wound up by Rule 59? It’s a “should” not a “must”, purely advisory. People might get annoyed by other people quoting it as if it is compulsory (as so many of our not-lamented now-banned trolls such as Nigel, Martin, Socrapi etc used to) in order deliberately to wind people up, but that’s not getting wound up by the rule, it’s getting wound up by people being deliberately and stupidly provocative and disingenuous.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Why would anybody get wound up by Rule 59? It’s a “should” not a “must”, purely advisory. People might get annoyed by other people quoting it as if it is compulsory (as so many of our not-lamented now-banned trolls such as Nigel, Martin, Socrapi etc used to) in order deliberately to wind people up, but that’s not getting wound up by the rule, it’s getting wound up by people being deliberately and stupidly provocative and disingenuous.— ShutTheFrontDawes
Purely advisory? Like giving 1.5m when overtaking you mean (also a ‘should’). I don’t think you understand what ‘should’ means in the context of the highway code.
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Well now, let’s take a look at the highway code for 2023. What’s this on page 4?
Rendel Harris wrote:
Well now, let’s take a look at the highway code for 2023. What’s this on page 4?
— ShutTheFrontDawes
What version is that? The highway code online says no such thing as far as I can find.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
And it’s me who doesn’t understand? Go to the link that you have provided, click on the second section “Wording of the Highway Code” and look at the bottom of the second paragraph.
Ah yes that bit after
Ah yes that bit after “Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. ”
I must admit Rendel I had no idea you were so in favour of car drivers treating rules about safely overtaking as ‘merely advisory’.
I do apologise though, as you are correct that the wording you quoted is present. It would be remiss of me to expect you to apologise for your blatant errors and mistruths if I didn’t do the same when I err.
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
I’m not in the least in favour of 1.5 m being advisory, it should be compulsory, but the fact is that it is only advisory and, as you have shown with your own link which you apparently couldn’t understand, it is advisory because it is a “should” not a “must”. In exactly the same way as wearing a helmet is advisory. You have literally proven this with your own link, even though you claimed that it did not include the words which I quoted.
ETA adding further material and insults to a comment after somebody has responded to it without making clear that you have added to it is a rather cheap trick, don’t you think?
Rendel Harris wrote:
I’m not in the least in favour of 1.5 m being advisory, it should be compulsory, but the fact is that it is only advisory and, as you have shown with your own link which you apparently couldn’t understand, it is advisory because it is a “should” not a “must”. In exactly the same way as wearing a helmet is advisory. You have literally proven this with your own link, even though you claimed that it did not include the words which I quoted.
ETA adding further material and insults to a comment after somebody has responded to it without making clear that you have added to it is a rather cheap trick, don’t you think?— ShutTheFrontDawes
I edited my comment to include my apology before you responded. If you typed quicker you might be able to keep up.
Typing with one hand and half a brain slows you down a bit I expect.
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Ah, the standard STFD methodology, state something that is blatantly wrong, when challenged continue to argue about it until categorically proved wrong by the material you provided yourself and so then resort to insults. Rather sad really. Have a lovely day xx
Rendel Harris wrote:
Ah, the standard STFD methodology, state something that is blatantly wrong, when challenged continue to argue about it until categorically proved wrong by the material you provided yourself and so then resort to insults. Rather sad really. Have a lovely day xx— ShutTheFrontDawes
I apologized for my error. I do make them. You do too – you just refuse to acknowledge them.
What was the point that you were trying to make by the way? That cyclists don’t get wound up when you mention rule 59? Bravo on that one.
Highway Code Rule 59 is
Highway Code Rule 59 is unusual
You should wear a cycle helmet that conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened. Evidence suggests that a correctly fitted helmet will reduce your risk of sustaining a head injury in certain circumstances.
It says Cyclists Should wear a helmet then immediately waters down this advice to the point of almost negating it. Well informed cyclists will be aware of some of the reasons for doing this.
Other rules in the HWC Rules for Cyclists which to my mind are less than forthright are:-
Rule 59 (again)
Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing can help other road users to see you in daylight and poor light, while reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) can increase your visibility in the dark.
Interestingly the equivalent rule for Pedestrians (Rule 3 Help Other Road Users to See you) is much more direct.
Rule 61 (Cycle Routes ..) While such facilities are provided for reasons of safety, cyclists may exercise their judgement and are not obliged to use them.
I have just spent a good hour re-reading the HWC and have found no watering down in the Rules for all Road users.
For example it does not say “You should give cyclists 1.5 metres space when overtkaing. But if the road is narrow or you are in a hurry you can get away with much less”.
The “conradictory rules” are confined to cyclists and seem to refer to situations where Victim Blaming could be used agianst cyclists (either in court or by insurance companies) to mitigate bad driving behaviour.
Cycloid wrote:
Cheshire Police obviously believe that it does, as I have it in writing that I could not have expected the driver to sit behind me on a narrow country lane until a safe place to overtake presented itself. It then goes on to state that I may have aggravated the driver by ‘swerving towards the rear of his vehicle’. This ‘swerving’ was necessary as the driver stopped in front of me, presumably not to apologise for for the poor display of overtaking, so I thought I’d be best to steer around him and carry on my journey. Strangely enough, when he overtook me the second time, it was textbook.
I also live in Cheshire and
I also live in Cheshire and amy dealings with Cheshire Police have been variable.
I have noticed the “Reality Check” that often comes with a dodgey overtake. A driver attempts an overtake approaching a blind bend on a country lane, meets an oncoming car and aborts the manoeuvre, giving me a bit of a scare. It seems that the driver then realises that there could be other vehicles coming around the bends and drops into ultra cautious mode.
Most don’t believe you. They
Most don’t believe you. They have the Drivists’ HWC in their head and anything you quote that doesn’t fit their idea of what the HWC should say is rejected.
For example, my drivist friend didn’t believe me when I pointed out that 3 abreast is not explicitly against the HWC as an example – he was arguing that the HWC said that the rider off the front was against the rules as we must stick together, and I wasn’t allowed to overtake other members of my ride to change positions according to his HWC.
The thing with the HWC is
The thing with the HWC is that you can check the “your version” vs the “Official Version” with a mobile phone which closes down the argument but makes the driver even angrier.
Moto-normativity; the idea
Moto-normativity; the idea that behaviours, in response to events, that wouldn’t be acceptable in any other walk of life are acceptable and even exceptional when the event involves motoring and/or motorists.
billymansell wrote:
I remember reading an op-ed where someone was comparing driving to pushing a shopping trolley… Trolley rage, close passing, tailgating, &c…
IanMSpencer wrote:
JLR take bad driving very seriously when their employees are driving JLR vehicles.. a lot of workers there use their subsidised lease scheme and as a whole they are very encouraging of cyclists. I believe they have a yellow card system for any employee seen to be acting like a tit in one of their cars. You can tell JLR employees as they have OV or OY at the start of their registration plates.. if it happens again report them.
Motorists do seem to be
Motorists do seem to be particularly thin skinned and sensitive to criticism or even to perceived criticism of their driving…
.
.
Nothing like cyclists then!!!
.
Bizarre experience on the way
Bizarre experience on the way home! Had a car behind me for just on one minute, country lane, national limit, he could’ve passed, but it wouldn’t have been possible to give me a 1.5m gap. That doesn’t stop a lot of drivers, but there you go. So, I signal and pull up into a side lane to let the car past. He stopped, wound the window down, and said ‘you didn’t stop for me, did you?’. I said I had. He said ‘You shouldn’t have, I’m quite happy doing 25 mph on these roads, even that seems a bit fast sometimes’. I told him that he must be one of the few drivers to think that! He said ‘Have a nice day’, and drove off. It made me smile.
Humblebrag?
Humblebrag?
It was the driver that quoted
It was the driver that quoted the speed, I think I average about 17-18mph along the stretch of road we were on. ?
.
.
Oh, FGS!!!
.
Guy can’t win!
.
If he’d said the opposite, you’d a criticised that!
.
That was an interesting use
That was an interesting use of muc off.
Went to put the bike rack on then saw all this bird crap on the roof. Easy 5 minutes job I thought.
About 40 minutes later I finish. Looked like baked on leaves and after trying a few things and cloths and scrapers thought about muc off and it worked !
Spray, wait, scrape, rinse. Spray, wait scrape, rinse.
Tedious!
That drum ‘n’ bass ride looks
That drum ‘n’ bass ride looks like proper fun.