Everybody hates everybody.

fat bloke

Yeah yeah yeah, everybody holding a steering wheel is incandescent with hatred of anyone holding a set of handlebars, and vice versa. We all know that. And anyone holding a set of reins and a whip hates us even more, and of course we reciprocate. But now the walkers are in on the deal too! I'm sure they already hate cars and car drivers, forehead veins pulsating with every passing 60mph beeping and buffeting. And you bet your a$$ every one of those car drivers mutters the (Get off the fcuking road) mantra at each one.

But now I'm starting to see that fury aimed at cyclists too, both times at club races actually. It probably is an intimidating thing for a housewife to have a bunch of 80 or 90 whirring and shouting exo-skeletals clickety-click past pointing at you and bellowing "HOLE" and "ON THE LEFT" at you on your evening power-walk in fairness. We encountered a few at last thursday's race around the lake with cars simultaneously down against us. If the walkers fair play to them hadn't paused and stepped in and onto the verge, there could have been some... excitement. At another race up around the Greensheds a trio of housewives started swinging their arms more aggressively, striding more purposefully towards the bunch and asserting their space on the road, and shouting at the bunch at the same time.
I'm not for a minute saying they were in the wrong. They're fcukin dead right, and they're only doing what we've been doing ourselves for years in response to 4 wheeled bullying.

With bunches getting bigger and the evenings getting longer, and the roads not getting any wider, there should be more attention paid to recreational walkers I think. Can't just should LEFT at the last second and swerve around them like.


(Course if we all manned up, lined out, and worked in, it wouldn't be such an issue....and we might catch limit:rolleyes:)

oflahero

fat bloke wrote: »

With bunches getting bigger and the evenings getting longer, and the roads not getting any wider, there should be more attention paid to recreational walkers I think. Can't just should LEFT at the last second and swerve around them like.

We're not shouting at them. We're shouting at each other to avoid the upcoming 'obstacle' on the left. It's just unfortunate that it *sounds* like we're shouting at them.

fat bloke

oflahero wrote: »

We're not shouting at them. .

Well I know that...

Thing is, if one of them, and lets say he/she is walking a dog on a leash as well, says "feck that, I'm standing my ground" with a car coming down against us, on a narrow and fast section of the small lake. All that sudden funnelling is only going to lead to one thing.

I'm not overcome with love for walkers here either, I'm thinking of myself in the middle of that bunch as lads either side of me bunching in to avoid the walker on the left and the car/truck barrelling down on the right:pac:

Anyway, 'twas just a thought.

dave_o_brien

fat bloke wrote: »

Anyway, 'twas just a thought.

But it's only Monday... Is this going to be one of those weeks?

el tel

I think shouting "On the left" etc for walkers or runners is a bit curt.

We should use the encounter as a way to encourage our fellow human powered road users by shouting either "Fittie on the left" or "Fattie on the left".

dave_o_brien

el tel wrote: »

We should use the encounter as a way to encourage our fellow human powered road users by shouting either "Fittie on the left" or "Fattie on the left".

But why are they even using the road? This country has tonnes of footpaths, and frankly, they don't even use half of these nuisance-removing pieces of infrastructure. Frankly, if they are dumb enough to walk on the road, they should be fined. I think if people want to walk (weirdo's), then they should sit some kind of exam reinforcing how they are at the bottom of the road-food chain. That way, at least when we noble warriors condescend to them, they know their place.

Just in case, my tongue has worked it's way through at least two layers of cheek skin now.

Inquitus

dave_o_brien wrote: »

But why are they even using the road? This country has tonnes of footpaths, and frankly, they don't even use half of these nuisance-removing pieces of infrastructure. Frankly, if they are dumb enough to walk on the road, they should be fined. I think if people want to walk (weirdo's), then they should sit some kind of exam reinforcing how they are at the bottom of the road-food chain. That way, at least when we noble warriors condescend to them, they know their place.

Just in case, my tongue has worked it's way through at least two layers of cheek skin now.

If they want to walk on the road they should pay road tax........and some sort of insurance and licensing might make them cop on.......

Beasty

Is this rant aimed solely at housewives, or are spinsters equally culpable?

moggs1972

i would suggest that given the latest craze for racers to throw their bottles away during a race that instead the bottle be thrown at the offending walkers while the group shout obscenities. this could be briefed before the race start to avoid confusion.....that will learn them:D

Inquitus

moggs1972 wrote: »

i would suggest that given the latest craze for racers to throw their bottles away during a race that instead the bottle be thrown at the offending walkers while the group shout obscenities. this could be briefed before the race start to avoid confusion.....that will learn them:D

Killing 2 (auld) birds with one bottle so to speak?

Lumen

Beasty wrote: »

Is this rant aimed solely at housewives, or are spinsters equally culpable?

I dunno, but when the widows start giving us grief it's bound to end in tears.

moggs1972

Inquitus wrote: »

Killing 2 (auld) birds with one bottle so to speak?

indeed......more effective if the bottle is full tho. just a thought

fat bloke

Beasty wrote: »

Is this rant aimed solely at housewives, or are spinsters equally culpable?

I have a special resentment of housewives i must say. All those years of house-husbandry and being passed over for coffee and Victoria Secret catalogue mornings.

I must practice my off the bike urinating for the next fly-by. That'd teach 'em.:pac:

doozerie

fat bloke wrote: »

At another race up around the Greensheds a trio of housewives started swinging their arms more aggressively, striding more purposefully towards the bunch and asserting their space on the road, and shouting at the bunch at the same time.

There was something similar at the first league race back in February. Two young fellas, very early teens I'd guess, were walking towards the bunch with what I presume was The Mammy (capital letters are warranted here!). The Mammy made sure she was outside them, keeping herself into the road and made the same determined arm swinging walk you mention above while shouting at us "KEEP OUT! KEEP OUT!". The impression I was left with was that should any cyclist get within strangling distance of her they'd be ripped a new one, formidable bad-ass Irish Mammy style. I suspect that the Mammy fearing gene was triggered in every rider in the sizable bunch because she was given plenty of room and given a choice between facing her or an oncoming truck, the truck would have been the unanimous choice of the bunch I reckon.

I thought it a bit odd at the time. I can fully understand a parent wanting to keep their kids safe, but in this case she took the aggressive option when it seemed unnecessary. In reality it really did nothing to increase her safety or that of the kids, in fact she arguably created more danger for everyone when it would have been safest for all of us if they'd just stopped for a few seconds until we'd passed. And it may have been my imagination but one of the kids looked embarrassed which is hardly a surprise when yer ma steps up to your defence when you don't need it - no gold star for The Mammy when they got back home I'd imagine.

I can only assume she wouldn't have been so "in your face" if it was a truck or car coming against her, but she had no qualms about virtually squaring off against a bunch of sweaty cyclists. People are weird.

Lusk Doyle

Inquitus wrote: »

Killing 2 (auld) birds with one bottle so to speak?

In this instance it's permitted to use the term "bidon" as one is being "Euro" in behaviour. Unlike here where it is not acceptable as explained here.

galwaycyclist

Hmm as it happens at the moment various politicians are being actively lobbied for a traffic regulation imposing a mandatory minimum passing distance for motorists passing cyclists. The thought occurs that the walkers might merit similar consideration.

You have to feel sorry for the poor walkers as well though. My girlfriend was watching the 'barrs league race one night at the side of the road and she saw some poor fella walking along the footpath minding his own business get hit square in the face with a snot rocket.

Etc

As a driver, runner, fred and walker I can see all sides of this argument and realise I should stay at home............and I'm really, really sorry. Please check my adverts on multiple forums as I won't be needing much any more.

dave_o_brien

doozerie wrote: »

There was something similar at the first league race back in February. Two young fellas, very early teens I'd guess, were walking towards the bunch with what I presume was The Mammy (capital letters are warranted here!). The Mammy made sure she was outside them, keeping herself into the road and made the same determined arm swinging walk you mention above while shouting at us "KEEP OUT! KEEP OUT!". The impression I was left with was that should any cyclist get within strangling distance of her they'd be ripped a new one, formidable bad-ass Irish Mammy style. I suspect that the Mammy fearing gene was triggered in every rider in the sizable bunch because she was given plenty of room and given a choice between facing her or an oncoming truck, the truck would have been the unanimous choice of the bunch I reckon.

I thought it a bit odd at the time. I can fully understand a parent wanting to keep their kids safe, but in this case she took the aggressive option when it seemed unnecessary. In reality it really did nothing to increase her safety or that of the kids, in fact she arguably created more danger for everyone when it would have been safest for all of us if they'd just stopped for a few seconds until we'd passed. And it may have been my imagination but one of the kids looked embarrassed which is hardly a surprise when yer ma steps up to your defence when you don't need it - no gold star for The Mammy when they got back home I'd imagine.

I can only assume she wouldn't have been so "in your face" if it was a truck or car coming against her, but she had no qualms about virtually squaring off against a bunch of sweaty cyclists. People are weird.

You see, the thing is, we as a bunch of people who use bicycles frequently will see no issue with a cyclist aggressively asserting their right to the road in certain circumstances to make themselves more visible or apparent to motorists, thus making themselves safer. Is that not what this mad bat of a woman was doing?! Personally, I see no issue with it, and have never found it to be problematic on a club spin or any group spin other than a race.

So then is this annoying because of the race scenario? Would we as cyclists be prepared to stop and pull over for a speeding car if the car was in a race? Or does the race not actually change anything at all other than the care that we as cyclists need to take because we're all moving faster?

I have a sneaking suspicion that if nobody in the bunch rode on the right hand side of the road, and the call of "walker left" went up early enough, we'd probably be fine. The problem as far as I can see it is that the bunch is already wider than the road, someone shouts at the last minute to leave a gap left, then half of us are on the other side of the road and headlights! panic! "car down!! about a minute and a half late.

So the moral of the story is that we are racing on open roads. There are no traffic restriction, nor a barricade against our legions of fans, nor a major garda presence to ensure that the proletariat behave appropriately around such sporting demi-gods as our fine selves. So stop using the full width of the road, and indicate that you are overtaking with plenty of time to the road users behind you please.

On the other hand, we could all stump up a few euro's (I mean, who really needs those ultra light titanium skewers, right? My frame still weighs 1250g's) and get a cordon all around every circuit, and pay for private security, and team buses, and that guy who's volunteered to clean everyone's bikes, and, oh oh, a helicopter, with videos of our hair raising 60kph descents being uploaded live onto youtube!

manwithaplan

I hate everybody but I'm glad everybody is coming around to my way of thinking.

Lumen

This is really not a complicated issue.

Cycling Ireland and the commissars are quite clear that the rules of the road must be respected during races on open public roads.

Riders who do not observe this are risking the safety of themselves and others, and risk bringing the sport into disrepute and making road racing illegal (I believe it happened in the UK in the past, and I'm not sure the sport has yet fully recovered).

Raam

Has anyone ever been DQ'd for riding on the wrong side of the road?

doozerie

dave_o_brien wrote:

You see, the thing is, we as a bunch of people who use bicycles frequently will see no issue with a cyclist aggressively asserting their right to the road in certain circumstances to make themselves more visible or apparent to motorists, thus making themselves safer. Is that not what this mad bat of a woman was doing?! Personally, I see no issue with it, and have never found it to be problematic on a club spin or any group spin other than a race.

On the contrary, I do see an issue with cyclists aggressively asserting their right to the road. I also see an issue with motorists or pedestrians aggressively asserting their rights. I see no issue with people asserting their rights, but aggression has no place in doing that. When one or both parties resort to aggression it has ceased to become a case of asserting rights and has instead become something else entirely and it certainly doesn't make for a good outcome.

In the particular case of the woman that I referred to, she needlessly put herself and those around her at risk by walking so far out into the road. She chose a line that required the bunch to move out further towards the middle of the road, despite the bunch already leaving what seemed to me to be plenty of room for her and her kids. She wasn't asserting her rights to adequate space on the road, which I believe she already had, she seemed to be aggressively insisting that she had a right to position herself on the road where she saw fit regardless of whether this resulted in a fair and, more importantly, safe sharing of the space. I suspect that she wouldn't have been so aggressive if it were a car coming the other way because I suspect that she, as many people seem to do, considered a bunch of cyclists (regardless of their speed, and in this case it was a race so the bunch was moving fast) to pose less danger to them than a car, which to me is very misguided (personally I'd go out of my way to avoid a collision with either).

As for the space that a racing (or training, for that matter) bunch of cyclists take up on an open road, I have little patience with, or sympathy for, those cyclists that choose to position themselves where they clearly shouldn't be. I see it often enough that a rider goes round blind bends on the wrong side of the road, or squeezes up on the inside when there is really no space available. It is stupid, obnoxious, and plain dangerous. It certainly happens that people inadvertently end up positioned where they don't want to be, but in cases like that the rider usually removes themselves from that position quickly, the danger comes from those that casually and willingly put themselves in a position which puts those around them at risk, and that habit is certainly not unique to cyclists.

Lumen

doozerie wrote: »

In the particular case of the woman that I referred to, she needlessly put herself and those around her at risk by walking so far out into the road. She chose a line that required the bunch to move out further towards the middle of the road, despite the bunch already leaving what seemed to me to be plenty of room for her and her kids. She wasn't asserting her rights to adequate space on the road, which I believe she already had, she seemed to be aggressively insisting that she had a right to position herself on the road where she saw fit regardless of whether this resulted in a fair and, more importantly, safe sharing of the space

Perhaps she was attempting to force the cyclists further away from her kids, at risk to herself.

It can sometimes be difficult to judge whether someone is acting out of fear or being a cantankerous bollocks.

I once had a ped on the Phoenix Park cycle path/footpath deliberately stand in my way in the middle of the path and shout something like "I have right of way" when he could have just crossed safely and let me past. In that case I had no doubt he was asking to be run over.

lennymc

Lumen wrote: »

I once had a ped on the Phoenix Park cycle path/footpath deliberately stand in my way in the middle of the path and shout something like "I have right of way"

you should have replied "I have no brakes!" to see would he move.

i dont get the whole people hating people because of their chosen mode of transport. people should hate people for important things, like do they support celtic or rangers, or something.

doozerie

Lumen wrote:

Perhaps she was attempting to force the cyclists further away from her kids, at risk to herself.

It can sometimes be difficult to judge whether someone is acting out of fear or being a cantankerous bollocks.

There was no doubt in my mind that she believed that she was offering her kids greater protection by doing what she did. I also believe though that there was a significant element of "get out of my way just 'cos" but regardless of whether that assessment is correct or not she actually needlessly created more danger by her actions. There was enough space for herself and her kids in my view, and I'm not talking about just-enough-to-scrape-past space either - if people in the bunch had been that inconsiderate then I'd have been yelling at them myself 'cos there is no justification for being so obnoxious as to force a pedestrian(s) into the ditch. She made a conscious decision to position herself further into the road, which required that the bunch move over even further, and she took a real risk in doing so - if even a single rider had been either stubborn/stupid enough, or not observant enough, that they hadn't moved out further then a collision was likely.

So by her actions she created even more danger, and not just for herself or for the riders but also for her kids 'cos if a collision had happened at the 40kph that we were doing then it could easily have embroiled her kids too. This was one case where the bunch did the right thing, by leaving space.

Kav0777

lennymc wrote: »

you should have replied "I have no brakes!" to see would he move.

That made me laugh out loud..:D... in the office...:rolleyes:...when i should be working :eek:

Lumen

lennymc wrote: »

you should have replied "I have no brakes!" to see would he move.

It's difficult to communicate this sort of information clearly at speed, as Mr Stiller recounts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsHMnjIk-o8

dave_o_brien

doozerie wrote: »

On the contrary, I do see an issue with cyclists aggressively asserting their right to the road. I also see an issue with motorists or pedestrians aggressively asserting their rights.

In the particular case of the woman that I referred to, she needlessly put herself and those around her at risk by walking so far out into the road. She chose a line that required the bunch to move out further towards the middle of the road, despite the bunch already leaving what seemed to me to be plenty of room for her and her kids. She wasn't asserting her rights to adequate space on the road, which I believe she already had, she seemed to be aggressively insisting that she had a right to position herself on the road where she saw fit regardless of whether this resulted in a fair and, more importantly, safe sharing of the space

You're right, I shouldn't have said aggressive, I should have said POSITIVELY asserting their right. I didn't mean it in the belligerent selfish manner, more in the affirmative and definite action of doing things like taking a lane.

Then the bit in bold. How many times has a cyclist given out about a car passing them too closely and the driver being oblivious because he thought he had given the cyclist adequate space. I'm only playing the devils advocate here, but she perhaps had been passed by the semi-scratch/scratch bunch a bit too close for her personal comfort, saw the next bunch and said to herself "I'm taking my space, I'm looking after my kids" and did what she thought was necessary.

I didn't mean to suggest that you thought it was ok for people to ride on the wrong side of the road, or that anyone here has suggested that, just that people in races seem to resort to behaviour that would generally be considered as idiotic, illegal and dangerous once someone says that there are points available. I mean, we didn't even catch limit...

fat bloke

Lumen wrote: »

It's difficult to communicate this sort of information clearly at speed, as Mr Stiller recounts.

Indeed

doozerie

dave_o_brien wrote:

Then the bit in bold. How many times has a cyclist given out about a car passing them too closely and the driver being oblivious because he thought he had given the cyclist adequate space. I'm only playing the devils advocate here, but she perhaps had been passed by the semi-scratch/scratch bunch a bit too close for her personal comfort, saw the next bunch and said to herself "I'm taking my space, I'm looking after my kids" and did what she thought was necessary.

It's certainly possible that she had been passed closely by the (Limit) group ahead of us, and if so she'd have been well justified in being annoyed and subsequently being very wary of the next group up. However by her own actions I believe she increased the danger rather than reduced it, so she herself became the aggressor. It's human nature to shove back when shoved but she chose the wrong target to shove and I believe her actions were a poor choice and counter-productive even given the extra danger she created.

dave_o_brien wrote:

I didn't mean to suggest that you thought it was ok for people to ride on the wrong side of the road, or that anyone here has suggested that, just that people in races seem to resort to behaviour that would generally be considered as idiotic, illegal and dangerous once someone says that there are points available. I mean, we didn't even catch limit...

I agree that in races some of the behaviour is ridiculous, and I'm amazed that no harm has come to anyone, that I'm aware of, in the races I've been in (I've only done 2 races this year, both club league ones, but in both I saw near misses with oncoming cars where the riders were completely at fault). Some people clearly lose the head in a race and put their placing way ahead of any other concerns, even basic safety concerns. Hopefully they'll realise the stupidity of that approach before they cause and accident which impacts on others.