To get wound up at cycle races on public roads

[Ilovemyself]

It is so annoying to me when I am on a journey and come across a gaggle of cyclists on an organised race. Quite often they are 3 or 4 abreast and all over the road.

Racing on the public highway foe motorists is a serious offence. Why are cyclists allowed to race.

"Lazyjaney I really don't see how a comparison of road traffic death rates in different countries can tell us anything at all about whose fault the accidents were when they occurred"

What this tells you about is relative safety of all road users, by country. If British motorists were the wankers the cyclistas here claim, it would be higher than other countries, not lower and even better than Holland's.

yes Le Tour is king. Seeing Wiggo as yellow jersey leading out the entire field in the final kilometre in Paris (which is just never known) was a sight to behold, and feeding Cav to the sprint.

Well Lazy, drivers are often wankerish to each other. Which as a cyclist is a bit amusing.

"Its a completely different culture, and one which doesn't really share the mass road rage/intolerance of other members of society thing which seems so prevalent in the UK"

It is, and my view is that a lot of it has to do with the consideration and road competence of Dutch cyclists, as opposed to too many UK cyclists who are too often incompetent and inconsiderate.

And I really cba to work out the hidden meaning in Dutch slang idioms.

Well, I've ridden in UK, Spain, France and Italy, Lazy. And comparatively, UK drivers are def. the most angry, absorbed, bitter and entitled of them all.

As you have so eloquently testified.

But lazyjaney how can you possibly know, if you have never trained properly in road cycling at a competitive level? Or at least been an enthusiastic spectator? How on earth can you presume to tell people who are fitter, more talented and higher achieving than you what they should think and what they should do? You simply do not have enough knowledge or understanding of the topic you are attempting to preach on (and I have to say that is a feature of most topics you have discussed on this thread so far).

If you had any appreciation of Dutch culture, you would know that cyclists are considered far more important than car drivers. And that road race cyclists are at the top of the pile.

Most road cyclists are both drivers and cyclists, and generally have better motor skills than those who are only drivers.

Its like someone without a law degree telling a lawyer what the law is (as you did on the previous cycle-hating thread).

On a happier note, Gilbert has just started the time trial in the Tour of Belgium, and the Eurosport presenter, who is British, has really excellent pronunciation of Flemish placenames and rider names. Albeit with a Flemish, not Dutch accent, but you can't have everything.

"I think drivers need to see driving up to the speed limit as the exception rather than the rule, and accept they are sharing the road with everyone else"

Cyclists need to see that knowing the rules of the road, the Highway code, and obeying them is not an optional choice, but the minimum requirement to share the road.

Lazy - do please get out on a bike for a while and then report back what the experience is like?? You're becoming a bit of a caricature of the entitled, angry, entitled..etc UK driver.

"Well, I've ridden in UK, Spain, France and Italy, Lazy. And comparatively, UK drivers are def. the most angry, absorbed, bitter and entitled of them all."

But the hard data is conclusively against you, so the likelihood is that it's the cyclist behaviour that is the root cause.....

Lazyjaney you really should consider competitive cycling. Your tenacity would hold you in good stead.

I have however encountered your type of arguer before. The type who go on and on and on, regardless of whether they have the facts wrong. I have to say generally they alienate me and I regard them with fond amusement at best.

Lazy don't be more absurd. Your likelihood conclusion is groundless. You just seem to be tiresomely bitter about cyclists and nothing more.

Lazy as Pan has said you can not possibly draw that conclusion when there are so many factors at play. For example, ROSPA's 2012 factsheet on cycling accidents states that HGVs present a particular danger for cyclists, particularly in London where around 20% of cyclist fatalities involve an HGV. So a country by country comparison could for a start be affected by number of HGVs on the roads, what rules apply to HGVs, how well junctions are designed to meet the needs of cyclists and HGVs etc. That's just one factor which could affect accident rates. There are so many variables!

Anyway, I repeat my plea for anyone reading this who would like to see Britain's roads made safer for cyclists to sign the "Get Britain Cycling" petition on the Government petitions website!

Lazyjaney

I thought after the last cyclist thread that English wasn't your strong point and now it seems that Maths isn't either. I'm guessing you're artistic?

You may well choose to accept just one solitary figure to draw your conclusions but any person with any comprehension of statistics will see the foolishness of not considering ANY other factors.

It really is pointless to discuss with you as you've now shown on two separate occasions that your logic is highly dubious.

With regards to HGV's, many road users put themselves in very dangerous situations. Turning left in London (or anywhere for that matter) in an HGV without other road users putting themselves in a anger ours position is nearly impossible.

I think one of the problems is you don't hear on the news about the number of car drivers hit by left turning HGV's because they are in at in box and don't get hurt.

It is about education. For anyone to drive/cycle/walk down the left hand side of a left turning HGV they either are not aware of how dangerous it is, or don't care and think they automatically have right of way

Lazy, I really think your analysis is completely unsupported by the data, and I don't get how you can't see that.

Your analysis is like suggesting the NL is the safest place to go mountaineering

"It really is pointless to discuss with you as you've now shown on two separate occasions that your logic is highly dubious"

What nonsense, it stands up very well for itself, and I'd love you lot to show where the maths or logic is wrong, because you can't.

By turning to denial, anecdote and calling me names you merely show an inability to dispute the facts anymore.