Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

What's the obsession middle aged lads have with cycling?

1…2223252728…38

Comments

  • #722
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    In most cases, it means they get to the back of the next queue of cars 10 seconds earlier. Then they sit in the queue, just as they would have done if they hadn't passed the cyclist.

    Then the cyclist filters past them on the left as they wait in the queue.

    But yeah, bloodycyclists.


    Like motorists who overtake at speed just to get to next red lights and then the car that was overtaken rolls up behind you all of 5 seconds later....not that I have ever done that ever...:o


  • #723
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Do you worry about antagonising cyclists when you're driving in heavy urban traffic? Do you pull over and let them through? Or do you perhaps avoid driving a single-occupancy vehicle, wasting vast amounts of road space in the first place?

    Your personal subservience approach is your own personal choice, but I've no idea why you'd expect others to show the same lack of confidence.

    So if you're a single disabled person with a Motability car, you're a nuisance and should exit it and give up "valuable" road space ?


  • #724
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Like motorists who overtake at speed just to get to next red lights and then the car that was overtaken rolls up behind you all of 5 seconds later....not that I have ever done that ever...:o

    Or the cyclist by College Green that shoots through a red only to be caught up because they can't physically get through a LUAS ?

    (4.47pm last night fact fans).

    His other option was to use the cycle lane but sure where is the fun in that!


  • #725
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    So if you're a single disabled person with a Motability car, you're a nuisance and should exit it and give up "valuable" road space ?

    Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the disabled?

    Obviously nobody is going to mind the above. I wonder do disabled folk get fed up at being used as emotive examples?


  • #726
    Balanadan
    Site Banned Posts: 725 ✭✭✭Balanadan


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    In most cases, it means they get to the back of the next queue of cars 10 seconds earlier. Then they sit in the queue, just as they would have done if they hadn't passed the cyclist.

    Then the cyclist filters past them on the left as they wait in the queue.

    But yeah, bloodycyclists.


    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?


    Very easy for motorists to go close to the kerb to stop a cyclist from undertaking too.


  • Advertisement
  • #727
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Balanadan wrote: »
    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?

    Eh, plenty of cyclists do queue.


  • #728
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    Weepsie wrote: »
    As above said. Many do.

    Motorcycles tend to skip ahead of cars, any issue with that?

    The only reason cars do, is it's very hard to not do it as your limited by the space.

    I actually saw a car do it the other day too. Decided it wanted to be first at the lights so went around everyone (about 5 cars) and plonked itself ahead of them.

    Some people are d!cks. Some of them are in cars, some are on bikes, a lot of them are on roller blades

    Skateboarder on the Abbey St LUAS platform!!

    Lad in at least his 30s. I've literally never wanted someone to fall more.


  • #729
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,535 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Balanadan wrote: »
    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?


    Very easy for motorists to go close to the kerb to stop a cyclist from undertaking too.


    The only reason cars queue is because in most cases it's physically impossible not to!


  • #730
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    The only reason cars queue is because in most cases it's physically impossible not to!

    I did once see one of those diddy smart cars try to go between two lines of traffic by Christchurch - that was funny!


  • #731
    Stab*City
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,413 ✭✭✭Stab*City


    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    Skateboarder on the Abbey St LUAS platform!!

    Lad in at least his 30s. I've literally never wanted someone to fall more.

    Whats his age got to do with it?


  • Advertisement
  • #732
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    Balanadan wrote: »
    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?


    Very easy for motorists to go close to the kerb to stop a cyclist from undertaking too.

    Eh what nonsense is this.

    Filtering is a perfectly logical way to get through traffic.

    Unless you get an asshole who decides to hug the kerb. Usually its picks in SUVs who do this.

    See isn't generalising fun


  • #733
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    Stab*City wrote: »
    Whats his age got to do with it?

    Riding a skateboard on a city centre street at his age makes him look even more of a berk!

    The mere riding of it would be bad enough.


  • #734
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,445 ✭✭✭mloc123


    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    (4.47pm last night fact fans).

    4.47pm is not night time fact fans...


  • #735
    PlaneSpeeking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭PlaneSpeeking


    mloc123 wrote: »
    4.47pm is not night time fact fans...

    4.47pm yesterday evening, pendantry lovers.

    (Btw - when you've been up since 4.30am and starting the commute at 5.20am - yeah near 5 with 2 hours still to go to home feels like night k ?)


  • #736
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 56,340 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Balanadan wrote: »
    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?
    isn't that one of the benefits of cycling? you don't get stuck behind stationary cars in traffic jams, looking at a tailpipe.


  • #737
    Duckjob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,857 ✭✭✭Duckjob


    Just to try to clear one one depressingly common misconception of drivers: That cyclists enjoy holding up traffic.

    I know lots of cyclists and NONE of them, NONE of them, enjoy having traffic going slowly behind them. It simply isn't something that goes with why people enjoy cycling.

    Personally, if I'm on a rural road and I get a car behind me, I want them to overtake me quickly (providing they can do a safe overtake). If they have the chance to do that, and they don't, I get stressed, because I know irritation is going to build, if not with them, then with the cars behind them, who will then be more likely to blast past me on a narrow stretch and put me in danger.

    Having a car waiting behind you is generally as stressful and unpleasant for the cyclist as it is for the motorist. Apart from a few dicks (which we all know exist), no right minded person on a bike derives any pleasure from this scenario.

    Having said all that, the need and desire to let motorists safely pass always has to be balanced with the need to maintain a safe and assertive position on the road in the interests of ones own safety. If we ride in to the side too much, there will be a few dicks in cars (which we also know exist) that will not reciprocate with the respect of giving a safe pass and will instead put our lives in danger. If a car buzzes past me at 80kph+ and I'm already hugging the verge of the road, then I have to no escape route, which is a very dangerous and scary situation.


  • #738
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 33,400 ✭ [Deleted User]


    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    Riding a skateboard on a city centre street at his age makes him look even more of a berk!

    The mere riding of it would be bad enough.

    I guess that the penny hasn't dropped with some people that, for many other adults, worry about what other people think of their appearance is a non-issue. As Steve Earle said at his gig at Vicar St last night: "Your personal opinion of me is none of my fcukin business".

    Why would he, or anyone else, give a toss about whether you think he looks like 'a berk'? We're not 15 years old in the schoolyard now. Time to grow up.
    Balanadan wrote: »
    Why can't the cyclists queue like all the other road users? Why do they put themselves at greater risk by trying to go up the inside of other vehicles?


    Very easy for motorists to go close to the kerb to stop a cyclist from undertaking too.
    What greater risk arises from legally and safely filtering past slow moving or stopped queues of cars? If there is room to filter, then why shouldn't cyclists filter?

    It is interesting to see that some people seem to be so threatened by the possibility of another road user passing them. Perhaps this is where road rage comes from?
    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    Or the cyclist by College Green that shoots through a red only to be caught up because they can't physically get through a LUAS ?

    (4.47pm last night fact fans).

    His other option was to use the cycle lane but sure where is the fun in that!
    Did you see where he went on Westmorland St?

    PlaneSpeeking wrote: »
    So if you're a single disabled person with a Motability car, you're a nuisance and should exit it and give up "valuable" road space ?
    'Motability' is a UK scheme, so I'm not quite sure what it means in this context. But just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that anyone needs to give up legal road space to others. I'm just trying to explore, for those people who do seem to expect that cyclists on the open road are in some way subservient to motorists, if the same logic applies in urban traffic, where cyclists are generally faster?


  • #739
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 56,340 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    roads were built before cars existed.

    6c6.jpg


  • #740
    Internet Friend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 885 ✭✭✭Internet Friend


    The roads are built for everyone


  • #741
    Balanadan
    Site Banned Posts: 725 ✭✭✭Balanadan


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    What greater risk arises from legally and safely filtering past slow moving or stopped queues of cars? If there is room to filter, then why shouldn't cyclists filter?


    Putting themselves in the blind spot of motorists. Vehicles turning left. Doors opening. Just a few of the risks.


  • Advertisement
  • #742
    Missus Doubtfire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 ✭Missus Doubtfire


    I can't wait for AJR to get his teeth into this one from Beachswim!


  • #743
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 33,400 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Balanadan wrote: »
    Putting themselves in the blind spot of motorists. Vehicles turning left. Doors opening. Just a few of the risks.

    The usual 'blind spots' that I encounter while cycling are the motorists who drive while looking at, and/or typing on their phones. Those blind spots tend to be all round the vehicle, rather than at any one location.

    Any competent driver knows how to manage their blind spots, by double or treble checking before committing to a manouvre to make sure they don't kill people. I know there are large numbers of incompetent drivers out there, but it is a very manageable risk, in slow moving or stopped traffic.

    Dooring is indeed a risk, though it can be minimised by (once again) competent driving and (by the cyclist) good observation.

    Somehow, I'm not really convinced that the safety of the cyclist is your priority here. Do you have some other concern about being passed out by a cyclist when you're stuck at lights?


  • #744
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    If there is room to filter, then why shouldn't cyclists filter?

    There's a lot of cyclists who do it needlessly, i.e. overtake when there's no need to do so. That means once the lights change, motorists are waiting to overtake them again and the flow of traffic slows down.

    Ideally, you should only overtake if you're going to make progress, i.e. if it's likely you're going to be staying ahead of the vehicle you're overtaking.


  • #745
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,608 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    roads were built before cars existed.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ


  • #746
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    That depends on what the vehicle is doing. Ferrying some guy's fat ass down to the chinese for his dinner on a friday night is not "providing utility".

    Perhaps we should have special lanes based on how much you earn? People who earn more provide more utility to society and therefore should be allowed get around quicker?


  • #747
    joey100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,477 ✭✭✭joey100


    And they are given priority, by having thousands of km of motorways built for them.


  • #748
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 56,340 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    it's not only utility they provide.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/cars-air-pollution-cost-nhs-vans-vehicles-health-bills-lung-disease-a8384806.html


  • #749
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,611 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • #750
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,535 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    The Irish Government agree with you. That's why they spend billions on Motorways and feck all on cycling infrastructure.

    I've no problem with cars "Sharing" the road either...but Motorways were built so it should be mandatory to use them and tolls should be put on all side roads! Indulging people's desire to avoid using the very roads that were built specifically for motorised traffic is madness! :D


  • Advertisement
  • #751
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 33,400 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Baron de Charlus wrote: »
    There's a lot of cyclists who do it needlessly, i.e. overtake when there's no need to do so. That means once the lights change, motorists are waiting to overtake them again and the flow of traffic slows down.

    Ideally, you should only overtake if you're going to make progress, i.e. if it's likely you're going to be staying ahead of the vehicle you're overtaking.

    So why do the motorists overtake the cyclists in the first place, knowing that they're not going to be staying ahead of them?

    You seem to be moving the goalposts a bit now. You said that roads were built for cars, as if that were a matter of fact or of public policy. Is it your position that this is a matter of fact, and if so, could you please explain where you got this fact from?

    In terms of 'utility', I'd wonder about how you define this 'utility'?

    Do you include the more than half of travellers who use cars for journeys of under 2km as 'utility', given that these journeys are very easily walked or cycled? Do you include the 1600 odd premature deaths each year in Ireland due to poor air quality in this 'utility'? Do you include the huge healthcare costs of obesity, diabetes, stroke, hypertension, cancer and more that are significantly impacted by the sedentary lifestyle arising from our over-dependence on car travel? Do you include our total failure to come anywhere near to meeting our climate emission reduction targets within this 'utility'? I'd love to see your calculation of utility.

    Maybe some day, motorists will actually start to pay for all the damage done to society by motoring.


Advertisement
Advertisement