Don't be a pussy, don't be a dick

A conference is planned later this month for London boroughs to hammer this out and to make recommendations for changes to the National Standard training syllabus.

Thinking about this.... I think Fausto is totally right. There is a limit to how many positions one can define so any change is going to represent telling riders to ride to the left/be less assertive etc. It's the engineering guidelines that need looking at not what we are doing.

I suspect that TFL have recieved an increasing number of complaints that cyclists are, "riding in the middle of the road" and this is their response. Skydancer?

If that is the case then it means we are doing our jobs :-)

I have a quote...it's from ol' Ben himself;

"to sacrifice liberty for safety is to get neither"

What, Uncle Ben?

Franklin wrote:
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

I have to cleave toward Londonneurs views.
there are examples of how engineers work well with cycling officers (helps when the cycling officers are qualified engineers) http://www.dft.gov.uk/cyclingengland/2010/10/scheme-of-the-month-links-to-schools-bournemouth/
what is interesting from a trainers perspective is simply that now 'taking the lane' is accepted speech.
5 years ago riding a metre out was often seen as 'too assertive'
the latest B.C Bikeability instructors manuals stress taking the lane on passing a junction, all junction turns as well as the usual places in the l2 syllabus.
somehow the frame is moving to the point where taking the lane when necessary is commonly known by all road users as the correct way to ride,
that hasnt helped S.D with his words, solved the majority shit riding syndrome (pavements, unlit, etc etc) but is has given me a chance to make a proper post for once so enjoy it while it lasts.

Bingo.

the shorter one is easier to convey.

Bingo.

the shorter one is easier to convey.

I can see shortening it, but to convey Franklin's intended meaning, it is necessary to make clear that they don't deserve either. Usually, they get neither, but Franklin was making a moral judgement, not just a practical one.

Transport for London have been debating what advice to give to cyclists around the default riding position and there is some discussion

Thinking about this some more....

TFL can go hang. They want to dictate where we should ride across all london but refuse to dictate any cycling policy to the local authorities who take their grants. Cycling conditions vary massively from bourough to bourough. There IS NO default position in the real world. We should ride where ever the hell we need to on our own roads. Until TFL are prepared to roll out a coherent and progressive cycling policy for London, they really need to "lip up" about where we should position ourselfs. We are doing what we HAVE to do to ride safely. I'v got 30 years riding in london and I know in my bones that what we teach is right! TFL are not really concerned with cyclists (in my view) except when they become a "problem". They are the last people who should be suggesting changes to the syllabus.

Sorry, always angry in the mornings, it's the coffee....

PS "lip up" - see what i'v done there? ;-)

The point about "default" is moot, cause the system defaults to the default only when all other factors affecting the position cease. So you assume the default position only when the positioning matters the least, at situations where the overriding edge-hazard, lane-width and junction-approach rules don't affect your positioning.

Having never been to the British Isles, I could safely say that "default"-positioning rule will have very little effect on my position in London.

the system defaults to the default only when all other factors affecting the position cease. So you assume the default position only when the positioning matters the least, at situations where the overriding edge-hazard, lane-width and junction-approach rules don't affect your positioning.

Concise, precise, nice.

Now do the same for the Pussy and Cock pithy phrase thingymabob.

Bingo.

the shorter one is easier to convey.

Are you a journalist for a poor quality newspaper? You must be to consider poor misquotes like that acceptable.

TfL, specifically the 'Better routes and places' department, support the national standards and are keen to ensure that there is standardisation in training across london. They are also keen that engineers and local authority scheme managers understand and buy into what instructors are teaching in London (BTW there is still a lot of ROSPA training out of london where road position taught differs -one foot on the kerb for left turns is still around out there). London ITOs (instructor training organisations) have been involved in discussions around the NS and there has been a lot of agreement and consensus.

For a variety of reason the NS has stood still for 5 years. It was meant to be a live document with revisions ongoing as appropriate. TfL's actions here are to be applauded in that they are not trying to impose anything but to get relevant bodies in London round a table to come up with recommendations to put to the Cycle Training Standards Board who are ultimately responsible for the NS. The CTSB will likely consult the ITO group where the training expertise lies before any tweaks to the standard are made.

There are clearly issues with some infrastructure in London, even the more recent superhighways (which in my opinion, contravened TfLs own guidelines in some instances). I would hope that an outcome of this debate will be that the infrastructure guys will be forced to listen and understand better how riders minimise risk by riding in more visible positions.

One issue, however, is problematic and that is speed, the 5mph pootler... Everything fits nicely into place if the speed differential between the driver and rider is minimal.

The point about "default" is moot, cause the system defaults to the default only when all other factors affecting the position cease. So you assume the default position only when the positioning matters the least, at situations where the overriding edge-hazard, lane-width and junction-approach rules don't affect your positioning.

Having never been to the British Isles, I could safely say that "default"-positioning rule will have very little effect on my position in London.

What you also need to remember is that when cycle lanes are *in situ, *for many, this perpetuates the view that the extremities of the road are the assumed default position for cyclists. If you choose to ride beyond the demaracated lane, (reclaiming road space) you are often treated as a transgressor. It is the issue of mariginalisation (both as a mode of transport and in terms of traffic engineering/land use) that is the problem and needs to be considered when discussing cycling/road positioning.

There's a short film there.

Or a top down view animation.

Are you a journalist for a poor quality newspaper? You must be to consider poor misquotes like that acceptable.

The implication is simply that trying to be as safe as possible under the illusion that by not doing this/that, you won't get injuries, (like staying at home and going out sparingly) actually put you in a greater risk of getting injuries than staying at home sparingly, it's misquoted to fit the specific training.

Skydancer - in your first post you mention TFL and London Boroughs working with you to make decisions about changes to the NationalStandard syllabus. I appreciate this is with regards to the content of TFL publications and that's probably a simple explanation on why these are the parties involved. Is there another "steering group" that'll get to comment and input into this for the rest of the Nation?

A same dick can be sometimes be inflated and appearing huge and powerfull and sometimes barely noticable and very vulnerable.

Wordz of wizdom, eh?

The implication is simply that trying to be as safe as possible under the illusion that by not doing this/that, you won't get injuries,

No the original is a statement of deserve not an implication of method. As pointed out by mdcc_tester the original quote is a moral judgement yours is one of consequence.

Applying the quote to a cycling on the road situation would be people who give up the right to ride in the road don't deserve safety or liberty.

Your version is people who give up the right to ride in the road don't get safety or liberty.

it's misquoted to fit the specific training.

I'll take that as a yes, misquoting for your own gain.

Create a saying of your own, say it is inspired by someone else's saying if you want but don't claim quote someone who has said something quite different.

Skydancer - in your first post you mention TFL and London Boroughs working with you to make decisions about changes to the NationalStandard syllabus. I appreciate this is with regards to the content of TFL publications and that's probably a simple explanation on why these are the parties involved. Is there another "steering group" that'll get to comment and input into this for the rest of the Nation?

Read my post #91 above re the role of the CTSB and the ITO group

Read my post #91 above re the role of the CTSB and the ITO group

Ah yes

The CTSB will likely consult the ITO group where the training expertise lies before any tweaks to the standard are made.
dunno how I managed to miss that! Nice one.

The Advanced Motorists get it already, the unadvanced ones are just a bit slow to learn.

One issue, however, is problematic and that is speed, the 5mph pootler... Everything fits nicely into place if the speed differential between the driver and rider is minimal.

I was thinking about this recently, or just how being actually able to actually ride a bike really helps. Saw someone turning right at a crossroads; did everything right positioning-wise waiting in the middle of the crossroads but once the lights changed so the oncoming traffic stopped (and the traffic coming from the left started) there ensued a rather painful-to-watch push/wobble/attempt to get foot on pedal/wobble/pedal forward at 1mph sequence, then when they noticed the bus coming from their left (which was accelerating slowly, in a kind of anticipating the cyclist to actually be able to make it round the turn kind of way) they came to a dead halt and almost fell over. So the bus had to stop and wave encouragingly at the cyclist, who again attempted the push/wobble/pedal at 1mph sequence.

I do always wonder about this when people are complaining about roads being dangerous or whatever, as a lot of the reasons why I don't feel intimidated by traffic are due to being able to accelerate and turn effectively and ride at a decent speed, which many people don't seem able or willing to do.

One thing really being slow and other thing forcing youself to go slow because squeezing yourself to the space left over from motorists. Most slow people will be able to go much faster if they learn to manage their space and spread their wings and fly, and get that bike maintained and configured properly. But many don't have even that level of commintment.

FUCK'EM!

If someone is interested only using a bike as a walking stick to save his ass a little energy by not walking sans wheels, he is not going to do the society any good with his bike use. Everybody has potential, but without some base level of commintment they are lost cause.

As for proper cycling slow speed, I've done it with 3-speeds etc and it works. You just have to think ahead and do ahead even more cause speed differential mostly hits negoation ability.

Infact being slow is more consistent with bad driver's view of cyclists as almost stationary obstructions and thus a slow cyclist encouters less short passes.

Rule 163: Learnz it.

I want stickers made

Insofar, 'take the lane' have been my chosen quote, would love to hear anything better.

To me that sounds a lot like:

"Don't be a pussy, just be a dick"

I regularly see cyclists in the "primary position" when they could either be closer to the edge, or in the centre (depending on upcoming turning direction) and are basically just being fucking selfish and inconsiderate. The common claim drivers make about cyclists "acting like they own the road" is often true. However, like I said I think this is more ignorance and lack of consideration for other road users, rather thank just being a bunch of cunts.

Be assertive but sensible, seems to cover it for me, use your common sense/instinct...

although saying that, it would seem the majority of road users have neither of these things, so maybe try something else

Agreed on both counts. But I like "be sensible, be assertive" or "Confident but Considerate", but the former has a bit more strength.

Confident but Considerate...

TBH most of my problems come from peds. On the whole I don't really have a problem with cars (famous last words) and recently I've had some very positive experiences of people being especially considerate. Equally I'm not a dick when I ride, so I'd like to think it's karma.

TfL's actions here are to be applauded in that they are not trying to impose anything but to get relevant bodies in London round a table to come up with recommendations

Ok fair enough... Like I said, the coffee was strong.

There are clearly some progressive voices somewhere within tfl. However they are not the only voices and as an organisation they have built some really bad stuff as you point out. I'm sure you have seen the proposal for Blackfriars? Shockingly poor for cycling and totally at odds with what we teach. Don't get me started on what they are doing to Henley's Corner..... Also, since Boris fried the LIP process, they no longer have any say in what the bouroughs build or don't build or what standard to use. TFL runs the TLRN(?) roads and er... that's it. There is no one that I am aware of, who could set a cycling policy for London even if there was the will to do it.

I can think of only two positions to show a cyclist in publications. Middle of the lane or to the left. There is only one choise as the left option is tantamount to encouraging dangerous riding. Interestingly, the road is absent from most (all?) of the "Catch up with the Bike" imagery. So they kind of dodged this issue.

The pithy phrase needs to be aplicable to all road users. No one should be behaving like a cock/pussy. Sometime it drives me nuts when a driver hangs off my tail and hasn't got the guts/skills to pass me cleanly when they can.

We ALL need to be considerate to each other. So how about, "Spread the love"?

YouTube - al hudson & the soul partners-SPREAD LOVE