P_1 wrote: » prinzeugen wrote: » From my own observations at the crossroads in Rathgar, when the green man for pedestrians comes on, it will be people with expensive bikes/lycra that will be more likely to break a red. Green man does not mean go for cyclists. Strava has not helped. You had some here bitching about drivers but on another thread boasting about how they did y to z segment in xx minu by jumping red lights. And also it's them who tend to draft you when you're not expecting it. Like don't get me wrong, drafting if fine, when you're on a club spin, in a sportive or racing but sucking the wheel of someone who is just tooting into work is not. Though I have been guilty of hopscotching my way across a junction when it's green for pedestrians on occasion. My view is that if you're matching the pace of the people crossing and not barelling through then there's no harm as essentially you're a pedestrian.
prinzeugen wrote: » From my own observations at the crossroads in Rathgar, when the green man for pedestrians comes on, it will be people with expensive bikes/lycra that will be more likely to break a red. Green man does not mean go for cyclists. Strava has not helped. You had some here bitching about drivers but on another thread boasting about how they did y to z segment in xx minu by jumping red lights.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Have you tried observing the number of cars that go through the crossroads in Rathgar when the red light comes on? Usually one or two, but on a bad day, three or four from my own observations. And usually the drivers in the Mercs and the Beamers (sometimes those wearing golf jumpers) that are most likely to break a red. Except that I never mentioned links at all. I did ask if you had any information to back up your victim-blaming, so it looks like you don't. As I suspected. So the various cycling campaigns need to be focused on training cyclists? Despite the complete absence of any evidence showing that this is a factor in road deaths? So that's another no then - no specific information about any cyclist deaths in Ireland caused by cyclists, beyond the handful of cases that I mentioned. As I suspected. They're not randam pictures. They're taken from the cycling Ireland website and a couple of cycling clubs, and a couple of other sources. I can post the same number again, and the same number again, and the same number again if that's what it takes to get you to see the substantial number of young females who are active club cyclists. About a quarter of Cycling Ireland youth members are female. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good rant on this thread.
shakeitoff wrote: » TBF it's not a bad thing, but a lot of them have the most smug annoying faces. The whole get up is quite cringeworthy it must be said, zero chance of them doing it in football shorts and a t-shirt, has to be the most expensive equipment, reminds me of every middle aged tennis club player ever, shows up in all white with the best equipment and loses in straight sets to the guy with the 20 year old racket.
paleoperson wrote: » The middle-aged idea of being fit, adventurous and daring I'd guess. As pointed out, it's highly dangerous. Getting a bit of exercise isn't much good if you get hit by a bus. Not to mention it's harsh on men's private parts. Particularly for old people, you'd have to wonder why they do it. I've heard of someone over 80 doing it, and when you think about how they could get a heart attack or even drop dead at that stage you have to wonder.
paleoperson wrote: » The middle-aged idea of being fit, adventurous and daring I'd guess. As pointed out, it's highly dangerous. Getting a bit of exercise isn't much good if you get hit by a bus. Not to mention it's harsh on men's private parts.Particularly for old people, you'd have to wonder why they do it. I've heard of someone over 80 doing it, and when you think about how they could get a heart attack or even drop dead at that stage you have to wonder.
pjohnson wrote: » No one would complain if we had young female cyclists like Puck Moonen!
Silent Running wrote: » On the point of motorists killing cyclists: you only have to see pictures of a bike stuffed under a slow vehicle like a road sweeper to wonder who was speeding beyond their ability to stop.
paleoperson wrote: » As pointed out, it's highly dangerous.
RacoonQueen wrote: » Highly dangerous? Cycling? Where did anyone say that?
dense wrote: » It's not about speed its about cyclists playing chicken. Trying to go where they shouldn't up the inside of vehicles which they presume are being driven properly. They presume wrongly, often. Their mistake. You can't presume anything about a driver. You can hope the driver sees you, and that's not much to bet your life on.
P_1 wrote: » And also it's them who tend to draft you when you're not expecting it. Like don't get me wrong, drafting if fine, when you're on a club spin, in a sportive or racing but sucking the wheel of someone who is just tooting into work is not. Though I have been guilty of hopscotching my way across a junction when it's green for pedestrians on occasion. My view is that if you're matching the pace of the people crossing and not barelling through then there's no harm as essentially you're a pedestrian.
RacoonQueen wrote: » Where they shouldn't? Filtering is legal and generally safe. If a cyclist legally goes up the side of a vehicle which is not been driven properly, the error is the drivers. By driven properly I also mean, indicating in good time rather than as you are turning so a cyclist knows to hang back and let you turn. Trucks/HGV's etc in the age of technology we have for vehicles now should be phasing in sensors/cameras etc to that the driver knows if something is alongside them or has come into the space in their blindspot.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I would have to respectfully disagree with part of that last point - the junction at Dame Street for example, it's rare to see a cyclist do anything but barrel through, as they come down from Parliament St etc at some speed.
Silent Running wrote: » On the point of motorists killing cyclists: you only have to see pictures of a bike stuffed under a slow vehicle like a road sweeper to wonder who was speeding beyond their ability to stop. A bit of realism and a lot less hysteria would go a long way towards a genuine conversation around how we could all do better.
whisky_galore wrote: » Yeah they 'should be' but they aren't. It's not a priority. Even if installed, who is to say they are even working or being monitored? I for one will not be tootling up the inside of a large vehicle whose driver in all probability can't see me. I don't care whether I'm entitled to or not, all I know is I could be squashed like a bug. Whether I'm a few mins late or not doesn't make any odds to me.
07Lapierre wrote: » Have to agree with you on that point. I don't cycle in the city centre too often, but the last time i did, i stopped at a red light. this guy came up behind me on a DB, said "excuse me"....squeezed past me and proceeded through the red light! Oh and I was in full Lycra Kit and on a road bike, which for some reason on AH seems to be the "Stereotype" for the worst kind of cyclist?
RacoonQueen wrote: » Neither would I, for anything bigger than a van. My point was if someone is not driving properly, it is not the fault of the cyclist if they get hit by someone who is not following the basics of driving (checking mirrors, indicating in good time etc).
P_1 wrote: » A fair point though I was referring to shuffling across on the bike basically walking but with the bike between your legs if that makes sense. Cant stand idiots who barrel through pedestrian crossings at full speed
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
