Group Riding

Cycling in a group is one of the wonderful things about our pastime; like minded people socializing while exercising.

There are few sports where you can do this as well.

The picture on the left is a group doing just that; highly visible to other road users and riding two abreast as is legal in most places. 

The picture on the right is not a group ride in my opinion; it is a group of cyclists all riding as individuals on the same section of the highway.

A few strong riders are going “Balls out” at the front, tearing what could have been a group apart. There is no socializing going on.

If there is one complaint I hear all the time from the non-cycling public, it is that groups of cyclists ride three and four abreast blocking traffic. I am sorry to say this but in many cases it is true, I have witnessed it.

Here is a group of professional cyclists on a training ride. The important thing about this group is that they are taking less than half the lane and a car wishing to pass can easily see around them to determine whether it is safe to do so.

In this next picture, these riders are technically riding two abreast, but why are they taking the whole lane? What is with all that unnecessary wasted space in the middle?

Here is another large group of about twenty experienced riders; these guys have the luxury of a nice wide shoulder on this stretch of road, but even if the shoulder was not there they would only be taking half the lane and it would be easy for a passing driver to see around them.

Then there is this group. You could argue that this stretch of highway is three lanes wide on either side, so why shouldn’t a group of cyclists use the whole lane. Just because you can, does that make it right?

It is not that difficult to ride two by two in a pace line, it just takes a few like minded individuals to democratically decide that is what they want to do.

If you ride in a single pace line, the line is twice the length for a car to pass, and there is usually a rider dropping back from the front, so the line is still two abreast at some point.

A group like the one shown on the left can cover a lot of miles at a fairly good pace, and training wise is more beneficial to everyone.

I may leave myself open to criticism in saying this, but it seems to me that many want to look like professionals with the equipment and clothing but have no interest in trying to ride like a professional.

That is to take the time to learn to follow a wheel, and to ride in close proximity to others.

And socialize, even the pros do it in the middle of the peloton during the Tour de France.

Feel free to weigh in with your views on this subject

                         

3 Feet: Most would give a dog more room than that

I’m not sure of the exact count but so far some 16 states have passed 3 foot passing laws for motorists overtaking cyclists.

In some states these bills have passed quite easily, in others they have been vehemently opposed.

Quite honestly I fail to see what the problem is. I doubt most drivers would pass an eighteen wheeler at less than 3 feet clearance; most would come to a complete stop and give a stray dog more room than 3 feet.

So why the big deal in asking the same for a cyclist? In Virginia a bill was recently shot down,

An opponent of the bill, Republican Delegate John Cosgrove, argued that the measure would force motorists into the oncoming lane and make the roads less safe for drivers.

No dumb-ass, it means waiting behind the cyclist until traffic in the opposing lane has passed, then pass when it is safe to do so. At least behind the cyclist the driver is still moving; albeit temporarily at a slower pace.

During any trip by car; count how many times we have to wait behind a vehicle turning left. We don’t sit there a blow our horn impatiently; we wait as long as it takes for a break in opposing traffic so the vehicle ahead can turn and we go on our way. It is all part of our daily driving experience; we expect delays.

Texas recently passed a 3 foot law; however, the governor vetoed it, saying that motorists are already subject to “Reckless and Careless Driving Laws.”

However, this doesn’t seem to work too well in Texas. When a couple on a tandem were hit from behind and both killed last year, no charges were filed against the driver of a pickup truck that hit them.

Opponents of these laws argue that they are unenforceable and point out that police officers can’t get out there with tape measures. These laws are a guideline; when a motor vehicle hits a cyclist, obviously the driver didn’t give the cyclist 3 feet.

There was an exact case like this in Arizona recently (AZ has such a 3 feet law.) where the driver of a garbage truck, struck and killed a female cyclist.

What about other vulnerable people on the road, a pedestrian, or a motorist changing a tire. Common sense and common decency says a driver should slow down, stop if necessary, and then give them as much room as possible in passing.

But of course, if common sense and common decency prevailed, we wouldn’t need 3 foot passing laws.

                        

Los Angeles: A step in the right direction

Los Angeles has a new police chief named Charlie Beck. (Left.) 

Just into his third month as chief, he has already met with community leaders promising to make "good policing and civil rights" the foundation of his LAPD legacy.

It was at one of these meetings Chief Beck was presented with a Cyclists' Bill of Rights and a challenge to put his leadership team to work towards making Los Angeles a better place for cyclists to ride.

As a result a LAPD Cycling Task Force has been formed headed by Commander David Doan. They recently met for a marathon session with representatives from various LA area cycling advocate groups.

These included, the Bike Writers Collective, illuminate LA, Sustainable Streets, Bikeside, the Voice, (a Bike Working Group) and the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee.

Commander Doan (Right.) convened the meeting saying, "The LAPD is committed to making our roadways safer for all commuters with an emphasis on our most vulnerable commuters, cyclists. We are committed to working with the cycling community to improve police cyclist interactions and to find ways to make our streets safer for everyone." 

One of the first orders of business will be the education of LAPD officers who patrol the streets and the LA public as a whole on the rights of cyclists on streets of Los Angeles. Better investigation of accidents involving cyclists, and also “crimes” against cyclists was called for.

When a motorist "asserts" himself against a cyclist, it is not a simple traffic violation or traffic collision, it is a crime. Crimes against cyclists need to be treated as real crimes, not as simple infractions that are simply part of everyday traffic in Los Angeles.

A hit-and-run motorist that leaves a cyclist behind needs to be pursued and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

The recent Mandeville Canyon road rage incident that resulted in several felony convictions for Dr. Christopher Thompson wasn't the first reported incident for the doctor, it was the third, and it wasn't investigated as a crime until it got political. That must change.

On the civil rights issue - Cyclists riding alone and late at night sometimes find themselves in handcuffs while the LAPD check their information.

LAPD officers report that this is simply for the safety of the officers but critics call it "bias based policing" or "profiling" and that riding a bike should not be a cue for handcuffs.

Many of these cyclists ride for economic reasons; they are workers in low paying jobs simply riding to or from work. They may not have lights and may ride on the sidewalks late at night.

The opportunity here would be to have the LAPD pass out blinkie lights and a copy of the Cyclists' Rules of the Road rather than to assume that late-night cyclists are involved in crime.

This is a huge step in the right direction; when a major city like Los Angeles starts to take cycling seriously, then other municipalities are more likely to follow suit. You can read a complete and more detailed report here

Eugene

 

I returned this week from a brief trip to Eugene, Oregon. In 1994, a year after I left the bike business, I moved from Southern California to Eugene.

I lived there until 2001 when I relocated to Charleston, South Carolina. The reason for my trip, to visit my wife’s family.

Eugene is a city where a person could manage quite easily to live without a car; in fact I did just that for the first six months I lived there. They have an excellent public transport service, and they make it easy to ride a bike.

Like many US cities, Eugene has streets that are laid out in a grid. Numbered avenues run east to west, and named streets run North to South.

I always admired the traffic system in Eugene, simple but effective, and coming from Southern California I wondered why other cities, and especially Los Angeles did not adapt a similar system, when a grid street layout is already in place.

In Eugene, 6th Avenue has four traffic lanes one way going west. 7th Avenue has four lanes going east. If you are driving these are the routes that take you from one side of the city to the other, and also link with the freeways.

One block south is 8th Avenue a main bus route east and west, and the next street over which is Broadway, is a bike route.

Cars are not banned from using Broadway, but are simply discouraged from using it as a through route. This is done very effectively by blocking the street every so often in the manner shown in the picture at the top of this article. (Sign indicates right turn only, except bicycles.)

Cars are forced to make a detour over to the next street; however, a narrow opening allows bicycles to ride straight through.

This means residents on Broadway have access to their homes and can park on the street, but cyclists enjoy a route with very light traffic.

Similarly, bicycles are not banned from using other streets, but a person would be crazy to ride a bike on 6th or 7th Avenues, with the high volume of motor traffic, when they can ride in relative peace and safety just two or three blocks over on Broadway.

There are many traffic lights on the main one-way through routes on 6th and 7th Avenues. However, they are timed in such a fashion that if you drive at the speed limit you will hit a green light every time, from one side of the city to the other.

Locals soon learn this, and there is no point in driving over the speed limit to be stopped at the next light. It is an almost magical experience to drive keeping the needle on the speed limit, and watch every light, one by one, turn to green as you approach.

What a simple idea; bicycles, buses, and cars are separated from each other, and people drive the speed limit. All done by encouragement, incentives if you will, rather than by law enforcement.

I have only touched on a small part of Eugene's bike route system; there are many other streets with bike lanes as well as bike and pedestrian paths.

Other cities, including my adopted home town of Charleston could do well by considering a similar traffic system to Eugene, Oregon. It has been in place many years, and it works.

I’m sure residents would initially be opposed to having their street blocked to through traffic and designated a bike route.

However, they would soon realize that there are advantages too, like easy parking and the relative peace and quiet of living on a street without cars constantly driving past.

Bigotry

If you find the above cartoon funny, you might be a bigot.

Think about it, would you repeat the joke if the caption read, “I once saw a Black Man run into a Jew, and didn’t know who not to help.” Most decent people wouldn’t, it would be socially unacceptable.

Those old enough to remember back to the 1950s and before. Racial jokes were accepted and it made those at the brunt of these jokes somehow less than human. To some it even made it okay to go out and beat up, or murder members of these minorities.

This dehumanizing meant these minorities were not seen as people with families who loved them, somebody’s father, mother, or child. Often referred to as “They,” or “Them,” which put a less than human face on a person, than it would by saying “Him” or “Her.”

“They” as a group were always judged by the worst behavior in that group. "You can’t trust them; they will rob you blind, given half a chance."

So too are cyclist as a group judged by the worst standard of behavior. “They always run red lights;" or are even blamed for their very existence. "They shouldn't even be on the road."

And when a cyclist puts on Lycra, it becomes his different color skin, and it too becomes fair game for ridicule. "Those stupid skin tight clothes they wear, those ridiculous shoes, and helmets."

I will admit if a cyclist strays more than ten feet from his bike he does look a little strange, but then so too would a guy walking down Main Street in a wet suit and flippers.

It is now against the law to discriminate against a person on the grounds their race, or sexual preference, etc. Because of these laws, such discrimination becomes socially unacceptable. It is a shame when society has to enact a law to force people to do what common decency should tell them what is morally wrong.

Strangely the above cartoon takes a cheap shot at two groups of people whose only crime is that they delay a person for a moment. The person collecting money for a charity that makes you stop and dig in your pocket for change. And the cyclist who may delay you momentarily, preventing you from getting to the next red light a little quicker.

Back before the 1950s a person of different race or color, could be harassed just for being out in public. In some instances cyclists get the exact same treatment today. Has our society advanced at all?

Do we have to keep passing laws to stop people from discriminating against this group or that? It is sad when otherwise responsible and upright citizens behave in this way.

The people, who draw cartoons like this, and the newspapers and magazines that publish them, justify the discrimination and need to stop. Not because cyclists as a group are too sensitive to take it, (Actually our Lycra skin is pretty thick.) but because it dehumanizes people who for whatever reason, choose to ride a bicycle.

And when you dehumanize a group of people, it makes it okay to honk at and harass, to even buzz real close and put the cyclist’s life in danger. To a very small minority it makes it alright to deliberately injure or kill a cyclist.

Some may think "Bigotry" is too strong a term, but is there any difference in hurling abuse at a man because of his race, than doing the same because another is riding a bicycle?

Some may shoot down this argument by saying a man can't help being black, but cycling is a choice. Religion is also a choice, and like religion riding a bike is my right. I have been racing and riding bikes since I was a teen; it has been a life time passion for me, I am not about to quit.

I should not have to endure harrassment and abuse because I exercise my right to do something as simple as ride a bicycle

From this story here

And this one