Risk assessment of assertive cycling

Core to riding well is the ability to assess risk dynamically while riding. To tweak road positioning and enhance communication in anticipation of, and response to the changing situation on the road.

People hone this ability pretty quickly while undergoing cycle training and do so in a controlled manner while the instructor hands over risk management responsibility to the trainee a bit at a time.

One principle is simple and clear: **Ride where you can see and be seen. **And the place of optimum visibility is the middle of the lane in the driver's line of sight. So the least risky place is in the middle of traffic stream when you can match its speed or need to ride there to reduce the risk of dangerous overtaking. All well and good and (eventually) learnt and practised by people getting training.

One risk element is rarely discussed or even analysed in detail as far as i know. That is the risk of being 'punished' by drivers for riding in this manner. Unfortunately too many people I know have recently experienced drivers swerving into them or recieved serious abuse for 'taking the lane' (including myself who was assaulted by a car passenger for this on petherton road N1). There are numerous posts about such incidents on the forum (the 101 W***kers and c*nt of the day threads for example).

While I believe that this is transitional and a reaction to a change in road hierachy by drivers who are losing their dominance (As discussed by Dave Horton from lancaster university who wrote in his 5th Fear of Cycling essay:
*'The cultural acceptability of cycling's spatial marginality, particularly when combined with the cyclist's stigmatised identity, is highly consequential. It means that those cyclists who do not stick to the margins, but either consciously or unconsciously attempt to 'centre' themselves, are experienced as threatening and unsettling, and are demonised - ...')

*There is a need for local govornment, Tfl, DfTand driving organisations to start encouraging this acceptance with images of cyclists riding assertively and words legitimising this. Cycling advocacy groups should show images of assertive cycling at every opportunity. legitimising this riding position will have a much greater effect on a riders safety than another mirror on a lorry or another bit of dayglo on that rider.

As a cycle trainer I believe we now owe it to people we train to discuss the risk of being punished in some way when riding assertively. But in a way that that won't discourage them from doing so.

Insrtuctors do you discuss this with trainees and if so how do you broach it?

Interesting question. It* is* something I discuss with trainees; not specifically being 'punished' by being swerved at or assaulted but drivers' possible reactions to riding in an assertive position. One of the reasons I discuss it is because I felt, during instructor training and observation of sessions, that it was rather brushed over or a slightly rosy view was given; one that did not accord with my own experience.
Having had trainees see the risk of riding in the car door zone and having them see that avoiding it often means literally riding 'in the middle of the road' I will ask them "What implications does this have for other road users" (unless it is a trainee who's English I have judged not to be fluent enough to use a word like 'implication). They will then discuss those implications; that the driver will not always be able to over take. What will they do then? is my next question. 'They will beep you' is often the answer and it's at that point we can have a discussion about possible repercussions.
It's not always quite as scripted as that. I had a chat with Festus recently about the phrase 'middle of the road'. I like to use it because it shocks trainees, it challenges their notions of what is allowed, it is counter to everything they might previously thought about a cyclist's place on the road.
But I do very explicitly tell trainees that if they ride assertively they will get beeped at more often and that they might get shouted at too. Then we can discuss that, I will talk to them about how they might react to that, how I react. Exactly how I phrase it depends on the trainee, on how confident or assertive they seem to be, I try and find a way which will not discourage them, to get them, essentially, to see that it is enough to be in the right, to ride safely, even if they get beeped or shouted at. They probably won't have the chance to explain to a driver why they are riding the way they are and they don't need to.
I think it is very important to be honest with trainees about this and, in a way, to prepare them for the worst. Because if we give them the impression there is no possible down side to riding assertively then the first time they encounter it they will be more shocked and more dispirited by it. My aim is that when it happens they will have a strong belief in what they are doing, will understand why they are doing it and will have experienced the advantages so that they can stay calm, accept that there are impatient and rude people out there and then carry on riding in a way that they know is safe.
I also encourage them not to be bullied in to taking a submissive position on the road but with the major caveat that if they encounter a very,very aggressive driver and genuinely feel they might be run in to or assaulted then they should pull over and let that driver go by. Then regain their composure and carry on. I stress that this will be a rare event but it can happen; you can't win every battle.
Again depending on the trainee these things will be discussed in different ways, with different emphases and, for example, different levels of humour. One of the things I love about being a trainer is trying, quickly, to figure out what the trainee is like and the most effective way of talking to them. But with all trainees I think we need to be straight and open about reactions they might provoke in other road users.

...
I think it is very important to be honest with trainees about this and, in a way, to prepare them for the worst. Because if we give them the impression there is no possible down side to riding assertively then the first time they encounter it they will be more shocked and more dispirited by it.
...

Good point well made Will.
Managing a novice rider's expectations at this point may what keeps them riding when they get their first angry driver as well as giving them strategies to manage that situation. (Like suggesting they seek a positive interaction with another road user to dispell any bad vibe from a negative interaction may help a lot)

Oh, I meant more that they should go mental with a d-lock but your approach could work too I suppose.

Glad you started this thread because it is going to cover many things that arent mentioned explicity elsewhere.
It might be worth mentioning that on this thread we are talking about conversations with adults or very capable children, likely to be doing level 3 National Standards training, and certainly those who have demonstrated they know the rules of the road and are prepared to keep learning.

I try and train people that the way they ride invites behaviour from those immediately around them, and that every time we change position on the road we need to check whats going on around us with looks.
From this stems what might be called attitudinal projection, (but that sounds so twatty I cant think of other words yet)
it is how a rider lets other road users know they know exactly what is going on,
and I have seen competant senior citizens do this equally as much as fast boys and girls-
and absolutely agree that all representative road users groups should be accepting of cyclists demonstrating skilled riding.

an example:-
One thing that seems to have been eroded in the last few years is rule 146 Highway Code "Junctions- you should -not cross or join a road until there is gap large enough for you to do safely"
I deal with people trying to pull out dangerously all the time! (I call these 'divers' because they dive out into small gaps), now if I am cycling along, aware that someone could pull out from an opposite or same side junction, towards my line of travel, where is the safest place for me to be? you guessed it, in the middle of the lane, clearly visible, this way lets them know that I am part of the traffic, and there is no way that they are allowed to pull out on me.

@SD "So the least risky place is in the middle of traffic stream when you can match its speed or need to ride there to reduce the risk of dangerous overtaking."

So this behaviour is referred to in CTUK training as 'perspicuity'- letting the movements you make be so obvious to others they cannot be ignored, as opposed to 'conspicuity' which could be wearing another later of flouro but riding in the gutter inviting drivers to squeeze past unsafely. This is definately part of what I try to demonstrate to trainees. When people understand their safe zones, and the movements of all vehicles, they can work on this positioning.

To answer the question about being threatened, it comes quite early in training level 2, starting and stopping a journey which we always do on a road with traffic either side, thus enabling us to use of the centre of a lane for demonstration. Generally the time that a driver will have to wait to pass is short enough for this to be issue free, however if there is no room in which to yield to an aggressive driver like in Wills worse case scenario (no gaps in parked cars) appealing to that drivers awareness of you as another human being (looks behind and acknowledgment) should diffuse their insistance. Even when they are proper mentals, if you keep on there consider what will they actually do?
no-one actually when asked wants to kill another human being, so sometimes you experience a reluctant back off (then when they get away into the next space become boot it and brake drivers again.

Without becoming all political (but sometimes bike riding has become politicised because the transport of this country is so fucked) you can also speak to trainees about the bigger part of their journeys, where is it that this aggressive driver is going so fast? likely the next queue of motor vehicles, again if you can see the next line of traffic ahead, and some boot it and braker is pressuring you from behind, you might have to yield if there is sufficent space, only to pass them shortly after. Everything depends on individual interaction, but I think that the more riders are taking part in this comedy, assertively with perspicuity, the more drivers just accept it and even start to wonder perhaps there is a better way of getting about locally.
be the rider drivers wish they could be.

This is partly why I started this topic in order to find out a better way to diffused a situation (of which will quite rightly suggested that simply acknowledging them and carry on riding is the best solution, and one that'll work).

edit - this whole topic went into a tl:dr discussion, will need to print it out to read properly.

There is a need for local govornment, Tfl, DfTand driving organisations to start encouraging this acceptance with images of cyclists riding assertively and words legitimising this. Cycling advocacy groups should show images of assertive cycling at every opportunity. legitimising this riding position will have a much greater effect on a riders safety than another mirror on a lorry or another bit of dayglo on that rider.

Damn right mr Skydancer! That's what I want to see happening in your country. You have the national standard of good cycling. That standard should penetrate the whole society. Currently -- based on what I read on papers and webz -- there is some messages and policies conflicting with the standard. There's gotta be a realization that it's a revolution type of a situation, two paradigms clash, only one leaving the scene alive. Your country has taken side on this war of paradigms by accepting the standard of good cycling. Now it's time for it to show that it is committed to the standard and the cultural change it stands for. Your governments and organizations should flaunt the fact that you have best standards for cycling.

Train. Training leads to speed. Speed leads to passing cars. Passing cars leads to revenge. Revenge leads to cupcakes with icing and butterflies.

however if there is no room in which to yield to an aggressive driver like in Wills worse case scenario (no gaps in parked cars) appealing to that drivers awareness of you as another human being (looks behind and acknowledgment) should diffuse their insistance. Even when they are proper mentals, if you keep on there consider what will they actually do?
no-one actually when asked wants to kill another human being, so sometimes you experience a reluctant back off (then when they get away into the next space become boot it and brake drivers again.

.

Yes; when talking to trainees about this many of them do know cyclists who have been car-doored but none know cyclists who have been deliberately rammed from behind by a driver who has seen them. So I stress that only in the most extreme circumstances should they give way and that they should keep looking behind if they feel a driver is too close or is beeping in order to remind that driver that there is a person on the bike.
In way there seems to be no point in telling them, for example, about SkyDancer's experience of being assaulted because it is so rare and so unfathomable; that kind of violent assault could take place almost anywhere, it is not unique to cycling and would probably only put them off.

i only read hippys post and in my opinion he got it right. the rest have far toooo much time on their hands.

there is also a distinct lack of cat photos on this page

Something that came out of that conversation with Will is the distinction between 'riding in the middle of the lane' and 'riding out of the door zone'.
It has struck me that a number of 'enlightened' cyclists that now understand and accept that once on the road they are a legitimate part of the traffic flow seem to do the riding in the middle of the lane but in a belligerent manner or are truly unaware of what is going on around them*. I ALWAYS discuss with trainees what do you expect to happen i.e. aggressive/dangerous overtaking maneuvers, intimidatory tailgating, or foul and abusive language. As Will also mentioned, I try to prepare them for the worst of it, so that, if it does happen hopefully their confidence isn't too shattered or shaken.

*it's one of the reasons I'm less likely to do big group/forum rides.

What I try to impress on them is that unless you need to for issues of safety then why take up the whole lane and bring unnecessary antagonisation your way?
If there is a bus with 50 people on it why should everyone have to wait behind you?
If a motor vehicle is faster than you and has the right to use the lane you are in why should everybody have to wait?
If you do find yourself having to 'take the lane' occasional look backs can help diffuse drivers vexation as you 'humanise yourself' instead just being an object in the way.
As long as you give yourself enough space away from the curb/parked cars at all times.

I had an interesting session with a guy recently who was bloody quick and was clearly an experienced cyclist. I wondered why he felt he needed training. He explained there was a section of single lane road (in Dulwich, I think) where he found it impossible to ride in a strong position without getting aggression from drivers- despite the fact he'd ride at the speed limit, motorist's egos couldn't handle him being in front so they'd break the speed limit to pass him.
What do I do?
I suggested riding in the middle of the lane as normal but you have to know what is going on behind you at all times. If/as and when you get a vehicle behind you, look back at the driver (the acknowledgment) and when/if it is safe move to the left let them pass but then move back out. So he was acting as the filter to traffic flow around him, thus giving him back the feeling of being in control. So there is a lot of assessment, looking and movements but roads are very dynamic, there is no one totally safe road position.

@ Greasy Slag. This was the question the OP asked: Instructors do you discuss this with trainees and if so how do you broach it?

You are of course welcome to add your thoughts on the matter; if you have any. If not there is a whole forum out there you can contribute to.

And yes speed is your friend. I also mention this to trainees. It seems to me the most dangerous place to be is in a situation where there are massive speed differentials between you and other vehicles on the road. The faster you go the further out into the road you can ride. (especially on roundabouts as they're short in length, with entries and exits everywhere with things accelerating and decelerating all the time)

Absolutely Festus; we have to stress courtesy towards other road users. But for inexperienced cyclists the line between being courteous and being craven is a blurred one. All of these things are linked though which is why Cycle Training is something you have to do rather than read about to understand how flexible and ad-hoc it is.
Also true about the speed; how a fast and how a slow cyclist adapt to dynamic road conditions can be quite different.

Exactly Multigrooves. It IS dynamic and letting driver past when it is safe is a good way to share the road space, manipulating the drivers with looks back and subtle acknowledgements of their presence. It takes time to learn and training gives people a leg up. Your point also highlight the unhelpfulness of teaching fixed rules such as 'ride a metre from the kerb' or 'hold a signal for 3 seconds'. Unfortunately i still hear that a lot from instructors.

(BTW festus any chance of a special 'braking technique' training session with you? ;-)

You're gonna need special insurance mate!

YOU'll need the insurance festus...
(I'll Check if zurich will cover you for that)

Exactly Multigrooves. It IS dynamic and letting driver past when it is safe is a good way to share the road space, manipulating the drivers with looks back and subtle acknowledgements of their presence. It takes time to learn and training gives people a leg up.

I think I've mentioned this before but if I'm riding in a bus lane I've taken to giving way to faster moving buses now. YOU have to assess how far the next bus stop is and whether it is worth doing it or just holding your position in the middle of the lane but (anecdotally) <65% of drivers acknowledge this with a wave and tend to look out for you further down the road. This is for the very skilled and quick riders. For the slower ones but equally confident ones I advise they move to the left ONLY in locations that do not place them in trouble.

Your point also highlight the unhelpfulness of teaching fixed rules such as 'ride a metre from the kerb' or 'hold a signal for 3 seconds'. Unfortunately i still hear that a lot from instructors.

Uh-oh the 3 second thing. I'm guilty of this: mainly because I see cyclists do the hand signaling thing but only for 1-2secs- not enough if a driver is on the phone or having a play around with the climate control in their motor or if a cyclist behind just doesn't see it. If they are doing junctions 2 i.e. right hand turns into minor roads they will probably (i.e MUST) signal for a lot longer than 3 secs.
I think it's good to have a minimal time of 3 secs though.

Threads getting good.

@MG "I think I've mentioned this before but if I'm riding in a bus lane I've taken to giving way to faster moving buses now. YOU have to assess how far the next bus stop is and whether it is worth doing it or just holding your position in the middle of the lane but (anecdotally) <65% of drivers acknowledge this with a wave and tend to look out for you further down the road. This is for the very skilled and quick riders. For the slower ones but equally confident ones I advise they move to the left ONLY in locations that do not place them in trouble."

This example highlights an interaction principle, and Im quoting it because it is such a frequent scenario, if a bus driver sees you doing pretty much the same speed, along the course of a couple of miles of road, it can actually be quite rewarding when they just ease back because they are about to stop again- you can then let them off first at lights or wherever and it really becomes sharing the road. So much easier than being a cat6 workplacetimetriallist and busting a gut all the time.

I agree that speed without doubt makes it easier to ride confidently and assertively enabling the rider to travel more harmoniously with other road users.

That said, as any fule nose, more cyclists on the roads is the ultimate solution to increasing saftey and not all cyclists are capable of or want to travel at speed and neither should they have to.

if they encounter a very,very aggressive driver and genuinely feel they might be run in to or assaulted then they should pull over and let that driver go by... you can't win every battle.

In an aggressive situation it's easy to get fuelled by adrenalin and the temptation is to return the abuse. It's taken me a while to learn to take a few deep breaths, move to a safe position and let the tosser past - he's obviously having a bad day. It's easy to take it too personally - the kind of driver hurling abuse at you is also abusing other drivers for getting in his way - he's just pissed off, and is therefore more likely to make bad decisions - get out of his way. I used to "battle" cars, but after a couple of prangs, soon learned you're going to lose against a ton of metal every time. If you let them past at one point, you're almost certain to pass them again further down the road = that's satisfaction enough for me...

5 * thread

It seems to me the most dangerous place to be is in a situation where there are massive speed differentials between you and other vehicles on the road.

No, actually the most deangerous place to be is a situation where there is massive direction differential aka intersecting paths.

Per my experience riding round Helsinki (and I don't buy that 'but drivers are different round there' -schaisse), riding confidently and assertively dramaticly lessens the trouble you have. Riding assertively, using as much of the roadway you need (and even more if it doesn't negatively affect overtaking convenience) the only trouble you have is from a very small minority of motorists enforcing the motorist superiority (too bad that they are right, cause I'm very often illegally on the roadway).

The trouble caused by motorists enforcing motorists superiority over the uppity cyclist takes form of honking and intentional close/short passes.

The trouble caused by being a meek curb hugger include (in addition to a plenthora of other trouble) close/short passes as a standard and per my experience more honking.

In addition to that the meek cyclist often interprets the close/short passes as harassement resulting in a stronger feeling of being harassed (cycling is all about feeling ya know) .

The uppity assertive cyclist also has the space reserve to counter the effects of close/shorts passes that are much more rare for him than for the meek cyclist anyway. Thus being assertive is superior strategy also when considering harrassement. Q.E.D.

I did have a trainee who got beeped at while we were riding; we were practicing taking the lane at road narrowings and a taxi driver didn't like it. She was surprised when I told her I was glad it had happened: because it showed her that being beeped at doesn't hurt and looking back at the part of road where it had happened she could see that, had she been by the curb, the impatient driver would have squeezed by her in a much more frightening way. So taking the lane worked for her and being beeped, while unpleasant and annoying, is harmless.
It also helped that it was a situation where the driver clearly had nothing to gain so the trainee could see that the fault was all his, he was the one being a jerk and from that she could, in a paradoxical way, take confidence.
I've also had a couple of trainees assume that a driver using his horn was beeping at them when they weren't; which is also useful too as you can talk to them about the assumptions they are making about drivers' attitudes.