[Closed] Why don't roadies pull over to let you past?

[b]Can you explain why they had to let you pass?[/b] There's no legal requirement for cyclists to do so..

Personally, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

For their own safety 😀

Karma has everyone’s address

Good to see this is all going as well as expected.

The 1st answer should have been "because they're all weirdo's" then there would have been no need for however many pages this ends up at.

I thought that was the standard answer to any questions about roadies 😆

wilburt - Member
Good to see this is all going as well as expected.

actually feel a bit let down - with bad eyesight and not fixed photo zooming on my android I was really quite excited to see a hummer with a loft extension - back at my desk its all just the usual

How thoughtless of them, having a leisure pursuit that involves leaving their cars at home and enjoying getting out that doesn't involve sitting in a metal box!

I'm glad I've only got three jobs on today this should be interesting.

My bets are the OP reads the daily Mail pays road tax and has used the term should be riding in 'single file'

I'd be interested to see what OP you actually read, cos the one I read was pretty reasonable - 0/10 for ranting 😀

I wouldn't say they were definitely being d*cks by not letting him pass given the reasons others have provided (might have just pulled over to let others pass, etc), but in their situation (either on a bike or in a car) I'd have pulled over to let him pass. The stopping in the middle of the road because they missed a junction is pretty d*ckish though.

I wonder how many drivers here will regularly pull over to let a following car get past?

Because most cyclists are t*****s same as most car drivers, some motorcyclists and a few lorry drivers.
It's? a part of life now the F you attitude.

An attitude of entitlement on two wheels or four is ugly. Consideration of others is important in nearly all things.

I wonder how many drivers here will regularly pull over to let a following car get past?

Back when I drove a car (over 12 years ago, now) - plenty, when the situation demanded - the same way I let cars past now cycling the narrow rural lanes where I live. It's not a big deal - coast slightly at a wider spot and wave them through. I choose not to drive but, while there are some assholes in cars, I'm generally struck by the fact most drivers I encounter seem pretty considerate. Maybe it's a two-way thing; maybe it's coloured by living abroad where driving standards were much worse.

By contrast, I wince at the attitude and behaviour of many big groups of cyclists I see.

It's that kind of selfish behaviour that gives cyclists a bad name.

But I wouldn't say it was typical.

Yes, there are dickhead bike riders as there are in all walks of life - but being a dickhead on a bike is only risking their welfare, not anyone elses'.

Yes, there are dickhead bike riders as there are in all walks of life - but being a dickhead on a bike is only risking their welfare, not anyone elses'

Except it doesn't, riding erratically on a road risks everyone around you's welfare as well. Ok your most likely to come off worst but no one comes out well. Consideration is a two way thing.

An attitude of entitlement on two wheels or four is ugly. Consideration of others is important in nearly all things.

This. A million times this.

I usually pull in to let cars past, or at least slow down where the road is wide enough. I don't want them behind me tbh. I mostly ride on my own though.

ransos - Member

I wonder how many drivers here will regularly pull over to let a following car get past?

Me.

[quote=Richie_B ]Except it doesn't, riding erratically on a road risks everyone around you's welfare as well. Ok your most likely to come off worst but no one comes out well. Consideration is a two way thing.

How exactly does it put all the people surrounded by metal boxes at risk? Assuming that is that all the people in metal boxes (the ones who are actually introducing the danger to the roads) are driving safely.

[quote=deanfbm ]You're generally in a car because you need to get somewhere, not for fun, getting someone's rubbish time done quicker in a car is a higher priority to me than people's leisure.
There are infinite leisure activities, driving is often a means to an end you'd much rather not be doing.

Seriously? So somebody driving to a leisure activity has a higher priority than somebody doing their leisure activity? 🙄

Mrs_OAB, one Mini_OAB and Matt_OAB out for a ride last week.
Twisty local A-road, with blind corners, about 1km in length.
We rode two abreast at front, me at rear keeping an eye out behind.
A couple of cars held back, until I waved them past. Smiles and happiness all-round.
One pensioner decided that waiting around a blind bend for all of 30seconds was too much, so went for a punishment pass close to mrs_OAB and a tap of the brakes as he pulled in.
Even if the roadies were nice, there are idiots on the road.

Context and self-awareness is everything IMO.

I wonder how many drivers here will regularly pull over to let a following car get past?

I will if they're in an obvious hurry i.e. tailgating. Probably rather dangerously I've also taken to opening the window, sticking out my arm and waving them to overtake but without decelerating, especially if doing 30 in a 30. It's stunning the amount of drivers that will go to do so even though traffic is streaming the other way.

Caveat: haven't read page 2, can't be arsed 😉

Stopping to let traffic pass is relatively (but not totally) strightforward when you're on your own. With even two people it just isn't simple to safely co-ordinate pulling over, and with seven it's just about impossible: if one of the guys at the front were to pull over a bit quickly then they'd risk some sort of pile up and if the guy at the back were to do it they'd just end up with one or more cars stuck in the middle of the group because of the previous point. (FWIW the main reason I hate riding in groups of more than about four mainly is that it becomes very hard not to irritate other people, but that's just me; almost all the aggression I've ever encountered on the road has been on group rides and frankly it makes for a miserable day out).

As for stopping in the road to faff about, that's just being dicks. People who do that are a little annoying.

slowster - Member

Road riding safely and well in a group is [s]a skill[/s]

...an oxymoron.
You're trading safety for speed, simple as that.

ransos - Member

I wonder how many drivers here will regularly pull over to let a following car get past?

Me.

I must say I can't remember the last time I saw a car pull over to let another car past

Because car speeds are generally more equally comparable, even between a slow car and a fast car... the gap is FAR closer.

[img] [/img]

Riding in a group makes it easier for cars to pass...if the car can't pass it's not safe to do so, it's simple really.

Still don't know why people will happily sit behind a tractor for miles but get pissy about cyclists...probably the same reason they wouldn't pick a fight with the bigger boys in class.

Because car speeds are generally more equally comparable, even between a slow car and a fast car... the gap is FAR closer.

The speed differential means there are more opportunities to overtake a cyclist, so you spend less time behind one. In which case, assuming your hair's not on fire, why not show some patience and live with the extraordinary inconvenience of a minute or two on your journey time?

It looks like there is a split on this thread between posters who have never experienced riding in a disciplined group on the road (and who consequently are less familiar with what to expect when encountering such a group while driving, hence the OP) and those of us who have.

The OP was unsure about whether the group he drove behind should have behaved differently, and if so how they should have ridden. In other words, their riding created confusion and uncertainty in the mind of other road users, increasing the risk of drivers making a mistake, such as a decision to overtake when they shouldn't.

A major part of road safety for drivers and riders is behaving predictably, so that other road users can anticipate each other's actions. A group of badly disciplined cyclists is a major hazard to themselves and to others.

Riding in a disciplined group is safer than riding solo, because of the increased road presence which forces drivers to take more account of them, as opposed to just driving past a solo rider without altering speed or leaving an adequate gap.

However, it's also safer and better for the drivers such groups encounter. If in a car you encounter a disciplined group, you will know it. The group will behave predictably, confidently and even assertively (which is sometimes essential for safety, as opposed to hesitancy). So the group will give clear hand signals for turns, it will have an awareness of other road users, if turning right it will make a judgement about when to pull out into the middle of the road (if necessary, preventing cars behind from overtaking them as a result).

Where the group considers it would be unsafe for cars behind to attempt to overtake, it may deliberately maintain a doubled up formation to discourage an attempt. A driver may not like this, and it might not always be in compliance with the Highway Code, but ultimately we all have to make our own decisions about taking risks on the road - that may mean briefly irritating another road user is the price paid to prevent an unsafe overtake. I think drivers are more likely to accept such actions from a disciplined group which is behaving in a safe predictable manner.

For those of you who have not experienced riding on the road in a good group, I would urge you to try it. It is a great experience, which can really add to the pleasure of a ride, and it will improve your road riding skills. If you do get the opportunity, be prepared to swallow your pride a bit: on my first group ride I made a mistake which caused the group to have to stop, and it was made very clear to me what I had done wrong (to prevent me repeating the mistake). I quickly got over that, fitted in the group, and acquired the necessary skills - it probably helped that I was young, whereas it's often harder if you're older to listen to (constructive) criticism and change, as indicated by theotherjonv's experiences above.

This should be interesting. Kettle also on here....

A major part of road safety for drivers and riders is behaving predictably.

There's truth in this but let's also take an alternative viewpoint: Believing something to be predictable is essentially assumption. It's a bit like indicators on cars: they make things predictable. Apart from the times when the prediction turns out to be wrong and you pull out in front of someone.

When I'm driving and I approach a group from behind it may or may not be clear whether it's a chaotic or disciplined group, but I pass on the basis that it's not disciplined. If the pack is tight I don't assume it will stay tight for the time it takes me to pass; if someone waves me through I always ignore them and pass only when I'm certain it's safe (just as a car's flashing indicator just means the indicators are working, a rider waving just means their arm's working). Whatever the group does, in theory I should have it covered as best I reasonably can.

Yes, it's better to be a disciplined group than a messy one. But it's up to the people behind to pass in a safe manner regardless. If you can't pass safely, as if everyone ahead was a well-meaning idiot, then don't, and if you can't wait for a safe pass without blowing a fuse, chill the fup out. You're still getting from A to B with no more effort than flexing your right ankle, so the sky hasn't fallen in yet.

It's that kind of selfish behaviour that gives cyclists a bad name.

I'm curious, why do we never hear this about motorists? Surely they behave more selfishly, more of the time, but no one ever worries about tarnishing the good name of the motorist, even when he is tearing up grass verges.

Also curious as to why, unable to pass me, a motorist will follow as closely as possible when I'm riding 30 in a 30 limit, trying to intimidate me into somehow going faster, but will happily sit behind another motorist (even me in my car) at the same speed on the same road.

Personally think it's high time we stopped trying to appease these adult babies.

Personally think it's high time we stopped trying to appease these adult babies.

I've long since come to the conclusion that there is no standard of riding that will appease a significant proportion of motorists. They simply think we should not be on the road so will use any excuse to justify it, whilst overlooking their own far more dangerous and selfish behaviour.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

Stand back, I'm going to present evidence and do maths ....

the road is too wibbly to overtake a 10m chain of cyclists. So let's assume the reasonable *average* speed including bends when this road is empty to be 30-40mph.

If you follow the riders for 2.4 miles, it would've taken you 3m36s to 4m48s to drive at 30-40mph. Another car in front would most likely slow you down.

Groups of club cyclists tend to ride easy/blue (16mph), red (18mph) and hard/black (20mph+) averages. My club's blue rides tend to ride at red pace but slacken the pace to regroup, rest after hills, etc - so 18mph on the flat then 14mph when recovering.

I doubt this was a "Breeze network" or other casual ride group riding slower, as I'm guessing they're less militant. 🙂

The OP didn't mention hills etc, so let's say 18mph, or 3m20 per mile, = 6m48s for the 2.4 miles. Subtracting the 40mph average you've been delayed by 3 mins 12 secs. If its a 30mph day or you would've caught the caravan / grandad / learner in front, you've been delayed by about a minute.

Feels like more, of course - 2 minutes of being good natured, then building frustration for 4mins. Same reason I'll drive the long country route home to avoid the through town traffic snarl, even though the two are the same.

Slowster

An interesting point of view. Personally I will NEVER ride in a chaingang under any circumstances because it puts my safety in the hands of others. I want proper gaps between vehicles so I can stop safely without folk going into the back of me. I find it odd that you can accept a bike a foot off your wheel and another a foot off your elbow but a car must be 2 seconds behand and 1.5 m off your elbow

differnt strokes for differnt folks

I think most of your argument stand up tho until you get to the larger groups like in the situation I described above where due to the length of the line of riders overtaking was very difficult as yo had to overtake the whole line at once and it must have been the best part of 75m long Keep the groups of riders under 6 then overtaking is not too hard. Overtaking a group of 20+ at once is not easy. Add in a lot of traffic and twisty roads and it becomes very frustrating. 40 cars stuck behind a 70m line of bikes at 15 mph means a lot of frustrated riders nd it certainly seemed to me a the 40th car in the line it was about 10 miles before I got past ( can't have been really I am sure)

Now I am very pro bikes but this lot were selfish in not making it easier for the cars to get past - all they had to do was break up into smaller groups with gaps between. I am not asking them to stop.

^^ I wonder how many motorist s would see a group such as B in the diagram above and say, "they were riding three abreast you know!"

If a cyclist needs to get by a walker, they ring their bell. By the same logic you should honk your horn.

There's no legal requirement for you to breath either

No legal requirement for you to be a dick...but you're doing it extremely well!

I wonder how many motorist s would see a group such as B in the diagram above and say, "they were riding three abreast you know!"

I find that diagram on page3 well dodgy, option B has ~5 bike lengths between the group and that left bend apex, I would never contemplate passing that group there while driving. I would want to pass the group with plenty of space and return to the left side of the road well before the blind turn, which given the bikes will be moving, isn't likely to happen unless we are all travelling up Mont Ventoux or similar! 😆

If a cyclist needs to get by a walker, they ring their bell. By the same logic you should honk your horn.

Not really. A bell or a horn is used to warn others of your presence. I usually warn a walker if I'm cycling past on a path as a courtesy, because bicycles are quiet and I don't want to startle them. If a motorist gives a quick pip on the horn that seems ok, but it's usually a rebuke as they pass aggressively, for the heinous crime of delaying them by 10 seconds.

Rule 112
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn
while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am
except when another road user poses a danger

[quote=tjagain ]I find it odd that you can accept a bike a foot off your wheel and another a foot off your elbow but a car must be 2 seconds behand and 1.5 m off your elbow

I'm sure you can actually understand the difference between something travelling the same speed as you in coordination with you, controlled by somebody you know (at least to a minimal extent) which is also the same size and weight as you and a car. You also like your stats, so you could always check when a cyclist was last killed when in collision with another cyclist...

I find it odd that you can accept a bike a foot off your wheel and another a foot off your elbow but a car must be 2 seconds behand and 1.5 m off your elbow

When i've ridden in a chaingang, existing members wanted to get to know my riding before they'd let me join in. That's key, it's very disciplined and not just "riding close", there's a lot of trust and back and forth communication between people who know each other well. It's part of riding in a road club in my experience.

In answer to your question, it's pretty obvious why they'd want a 1-2 ton car driven by a stranger hanging back!! Even so, when such cars are driven by fellow riders, it's perfectly acceptable to have them close in certain circumstances, as that's what happens in road racing with the commissaire. Look at those cars in the TDF as well.

I went on my first fast paced road ride for a long time a week or so ago. A group of 11 others plus me. Despite it being dark when we went out on roads I didn't know etc I was much happier having them on 3 sides of me within a metre than a car not far behind me. Another rider will make a big effort to avoid you and they tangling as it's rare either party (let alone the group) come off well. A car gets a scratch in the same situation.

[quote=tjagain ]I think most of your argument stand up tho until you get to the larger groups like in the situation I described above where due to the length of the line of riders overtaking was very difficult as yo had to overtake the whole line at once and it must have been the best part of 75m long Keep the groups of riders under 6 then overtaking is not too hard. Overtaking a group of 20+ at once is not easy.

Your example illustrates why riding 2 abreast is actually preferable as it halves the length - 20 riders in a good group should only take up ~20m of road which isn't a lot longer than an HGV and given the typical speed really shouldn't be that hard to overtake (though 20 riders single file still shouldn't be anywhere near 75m).

I find that diagram on page3 well dodgy

I completely agree.

I wonder how many motorist s would see a group such as B in the diagram above and say, "they were riding three abreast you know!"

Whether you say they are riding 3 abreast, 2.5 abreast, staggered, or whatever, they are certainly not riding two abreast. In fact they look like just the sort of rag bag, ill-disciplined muppets who give cyclists a bad name. If you look at the image, you will realise that they would struggle to single up quickly in the event of an oncoming road hazard, and they only would do so haphazardly, since they would waste precious time as they worked out betweeen themselves who should slow down and who should maintain speed/accelerate to create the necessary gaps for the outside riders to move in. In contrast a disciplined group that is riding two abreast will quickly create gaps between the inside riders for the outside riders to slot in alternately.

Personally I will NEVER ride in a chaingang under any circumstances because it puts my safety in the hands of others. I want proper gaps between vehicles so I can stop safely without folk going into the back of me. I find it odd that you can accept a bike a foot off your wheel and another a foot off your elbow but a car must be 2 seconds behand and 1.5 m off your elbow

Riding in a group does entail a lot of trust, and requires a significant level of skill and everyone to behave similarly and predictably (is that not a bit like tandem riding though, where the stoker's safety is in the hands of the captain?). I found the concentration required to keep a foot behind the wheel of the rider ahead to be very tiring initially, but it quickly became automatic (a bit like driving a car). That said, I now ride solo and like you I would not now be comfortable riding in a group, since I would have to re-learn those skills. I particularly dislike mass participation events because the other riders are unknown quantities with wildly varying riding standards, and I have had a couple of close calls where other riders have behaved carelessly and unpredictably.

I think most of your argument stand up tho until you get to the larger groups like in the situation I described above where due to the length of the line of riders overtaking was very difficult as yo had to overtake the whole line at once and it must have been the best part of 75m long Keep the groups of riders under 6 then overtaking is not too hard.

I think you are hoping/asking for too much to keep numbers under 6, but certainly in my club days once the numbers started exceeding 20/approaching 30, they would be split into two separate groups, although this often happens naturally in clubs with splitting into groups of different fitness levels/speed.

I'm curious, why do we never hear this about motorists?

Motorists get complained about ALL the time on here.

On the subject of the thread - I always make it as easy as possible for people to pass me when riding, and so do the people I ride with. Even the grumpy old club rider I sometimes ride with never hesistates to break the conversation and move to single file to assist other motorists.

On my regular fairly busy country lane I do pull over to let cars past, but then it's a climb and there's nowhere to pass for 15 mins of cyling. And I want to be a nice bloke.

Also, I'm on my MTB and all my target Strava segments are in the woods 🙂

You also like your stats, so you could always check when a cyclist was last killed when in collision with another cyclist...

There have been five in the past couple of years, if you want to know. Although, a few points on that for context:
- Most if not all of those incidents have limited relevance to this thread.
- They constitute about 2% of fatalities (depending how you count fatalities) which, given the number of miles cycled vs driven, is not small, but…
- …fatalities aren't frequent enough to allow much useful statistical analysis, and I've not checked KSIs.
- Certain other fatalities and SIs might be to a greater or lesser extent a result of close riding, eg riders hitting potholes, which are inevitably harder to see in a group.

All in all I wouldn't say that having a careless rider close to you is of little concern, or that a well-drilled group is able to nullify all risks that are inherent to group riding.

I fully accept the chaingang thing is about me not about chaingangs. I used to ride motorcycles a lot with some very good riders indeed. We discussed about riding like police riders do - formation flying where you ride alongside each other in the same lane. Physically I could do it but mentally I just wouldn't / couldn't. Its nothing like the tandem - then you are on the same vehicle. I just psychologically cannot ride that close to other riders. I won't draft them and wont allow anyone to draft me. I want my 2 seconds clear front and rear

I cannot understand tho why anyone would do it and think it very unsafe - and its breaking the highway code.

[quote=Bez ]There have been five in the past couple of years

I'm surprised - can I just go on a slight derail and ask the circumstances?

[quote=tjagain ]I cannot understand tho why anyone would do it and think it very unsafe - and its breaking the highway code.

Really? Which rule?

tjagain - Member
I fully accept the chaingang thing is about me not about chaingangs. I used to ride motorcycles a lot with some very good riders indeed. We discussed about riding like police riders do - formation flying where you ride alongside each other in the same lane. Physically I could do it but mentally I just wouldn't / couldn't. Its nothing like the tandem - then you are on the same vehicle. I just psychologically cannot ride that close to other riders. I won't draft them and wont allow anyone to draft me. I want my 2 seconds clear front and rear

I cannot understand tho why anyone would do it and think it very unsafe - and its breaking the highway code.

[quote=molgrips ]

It's that kind of selfish behaviour that gives cyclists a bad name.

I'm curious, why do we never hear this about motorists?

Yes - but it would have helped if you'd kept the context (I've added it back in). When did you last hear it suggested that a motorist was giving other motorists "a bad name" even on here? That does appear to be something exclusive to cyclists.

aracer - is there not a rule stating you shuld leave a 2 second gap?

In a chaingang what happens if someone gets a blowout or hits a pothole -how do you avoid taking down the riders around you?

tjagain » I cannot understand tho why anyone would do it and think it very unsafe - and its breaking the highway code.

Really? Which rule?

Its the general one involving not being a dick! 😀

I'm surprised - can I just go on a slight derail and ask the circumstances?

One during a race, one failure to stop on a cycle path, one on an evening social ride, one on a country lane where two companions collided, and one in London in circumstances I forget but I think it was on a cycle path of some description. Memory is hazy.

All on here with purple markers next to them, anyway: https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/casebook/

Bez » There have been five in the past couple of years

I'm surprised - can I just go on a slight derail and ask the circumstances?

Really? Which rule?

126.

Thats the chappie Bez

Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should

leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall stopping distance (see Typical Stopping Distances diagram, shown above)
allow at least a two-second gap between you and the vehicle in front on roads carrying faster-moving traffic and in tunnels where visibility is reduced. The gap should be at least doubled on wet roads and increased still further on icy roads

I notice it says 'drive'
Honestly TJ. I get it that you don't like riding in a group. There are clearly additional risk factors involved. But don't be an arse and make out that it is somehow illegal.

There are clearly risks involved in group riding. You can mitigate them in various ways by making sure that everyone knows what they are doing, but the risk is still there. It is up to you if you want to accept them

I suppose they are not putting anyone else at risk tho so morally acceptable a bit like drunk cycling

Edit - I didn't say it was illegal - I said it was aginst the highway code

Good point imnotverygood - it does say "drivers and riders ( meaning motorcycle riders)" not "all road users"

so like drink drive limits or speeding is this part of our road rules that does not apply to cyclists?

Edit - it also says at the top of the section "This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, [b]cyclists[/b] and horse riders."

It's a bit tricky, because much of that section of the HC does only apply to motor vehicles, or have different requirements for pedal cycles, despite this not being explicit in the HC itself.

That said, (and I'm pontificating a little here so corrections are welcome) I would expect insurers or civil courts to treat riding into the back of someone to be treated similarly to driving into the back of someone.

I suppose they are not putting anyone else at risk tho so morally acceptable a bit like drunk cycling

Don't mention STW? ❓

I know that recognising the non-absolute nature of morals and their myriad relationships to other abstract social constructs is important, but I wasn't aware it was top of the list here.

When did you last hear it suggested that a motorist was giving other motorists "a bad name" even on here?

Ah I see. Yes. Well that's prejudice, all part of being a minority group isn't it? See racism/homophibia etc etc.

so like drink drive limits or speeding is this part of our road rules that does not apply to cyclists?

Indeed, hence my challenge. Just because it should be read by all users doesn't mean it applies equally to them. Elsewhere the HC acknowledges cycling two abreast and immediately behind another cyclist as being acceptable (unless you think that when it advises to single out it means you should drop way behind the other rider - which it makes no mention of).

But then the HC is a mess regarding cycling anyway, and in need of serious revision in some sections.

Interesting stuff.

I guess chaingangs are something I will never understand. Its one of the things people who don't cycle complain about a lot like RLJ and pavement riding. But unlike RLJ where I have been told off forcefully on here for doing it even when it inconvenienced no one and reduces the danger to me because it winds up car drivers chaingangs are ot critised by anyone.

I can see ( after this discussion) its probably not against the highway code and certainly not illegal but it seems to be treated differently by cyclists to RLJing and pavement riding despite irritating motyerists as much

I guess with chaingangs it's all about working together in perfect harmony, or something, probably feels pretty good knocking out the miles as efficiently as possible, having a bit of a craic with your mates, trying not to be the one suffering the most and stopping for a nice cup of tea and a bun.

I can see ( after this discussion) its probably not against the highway code and certainly not illegal but it seems to be treated differently by cyclists to RLJing and pavement riding despite irritating motyerists as much

In a chaingang what happens if someone gets a blowout or hits a pothole -how do you avoid taking down the riders around you?

The answer to this is that no one hits a pothole in the first place. OK that's overstating it, but such accidents will be rare and probably comparable with the accident rates for solo riders. The riders at the front of the group will be looking out for road hazards and will communicate them well in advance verbally and/or with hand signals to the riders behind, so that they will easily avoid the hazard. In a group, the riders at the front will be concentrating much more than when riding solo. You could think of it as being akin to the difference in concentration you give to riding on a red run at a trail centre compared with an empty gravel track.

I guess it's like any other potentially hazardous activity where people are taking part either as a team working together or as individuals who may be affected by the actions of other participants, e.g. Formula 1: they don't just behave as a collection of individuals, and instead they act and function as a group (think of it as being assimilated by the Borg).

Of course the other Rule that chaingangs regularly break is that of stopping at traffic lights. Usually if the first goes through, they all do. I guess there's an argument that someone mid-pack braking might end up causing a collision as those following pile into them but that just illustrates the fact that they are riding too close together.

Of course the other Rule that chaingangs regularly break is that of stopping at traffic lights. Usually if the first goes through, they all do. I guess there's an argument that someone mid-pack braking might end up causing a collision as those following pile into them but that just illustrates the fact that they are riding too close together.

* looks like that will be me then.

Checks outside.

Not Spain. 😥

Whether you say they are riding 3 abreast, 2.5 abreast, staggered, or whatever, they are certainly not riding two abreast. In fact they look like just the sort of rag bag, ill-disciplined muppets who give cyclists a bad name. If you look at the image, you will realise that they would struggle to single up quickly in the event of an oncoming road hazard, and they only would do so haphazardly, since they would waste precious time as they worked out betweeen themselves who should slow down and who should maintain speed/accelerate to create the necessary gaps for the outside riders to move in. In contrast a disciplined group that is riding two abreast will quickly create gaps between the inside riders for the outside riders to slot in alternately.

LOL, Bloody hell, It wasn't meant to be taken literally! It's just an example of how a group of riders riding together is safer and makes passing significantly easier than singling out.

I am moved to anecdote (may have told this before).
Group of 15 approaching a pedestrian crossing. Light goes changes just as first pair arrives, neither they nor the second pair could've stopped. 3rd & 4th probably could, but it would have been entertaining. 5th, ,6th & 7th pairs definitely could have stopped but group momentum kept them going. Your truly as tail end charlie stopped, because I am that kinda guy. Taxi driver pulls up alongside me, but in order to yell through his window at me goes right through the white line onto the crossing. He says " Well done for stopping! All those others didn't yadda yadda yadda" Clearly not actually congratulating me at all. I was about to point out that he had just broken the same law that he was complaining about my club-mates breaking when the elderly lady crossing the road banged on his bonnet and shrieked. " You should stop behind the white line. Typical Taxis!"
His face was a picture.

Guys - i am not just trying to be argumentative here - its something I am interested in and want to understand a bit more and this thread has helped that so thanks for that chaps
But

EDIT Just because drivers get upset by it doesn't mean that it is wrong. Lots of drivers get upset by people not cycling on cyclepaths for example, or dare I say it: cyclists not wearing helmets. Feel free to adjust your behaviour according to the misconceptions of the ignorant.

I have been berated on here for admitting I RLJ on occasion inconveniencing no one and improving my safety. OK thats breaking the law but the main reason I was berated was for irritating car drivers.

LOL @imnotverygood

Guys - I am not just trying to be argumentative here - its something I am interested in and want to understand a bit more and this thread has helped that so thanks for that chaps

[url=

is why#. We do it properly, train riders and obey the HC. That includes stopping at red lights.

#Can't embed videos, so it's a FB link.

[quote=tjagain ]I have been berated on here for admitting I RLJ on occasion inconveniencing no one and improving my safety. OK thats breaking the law but the main reason I was berated was for irritating car drivers.

You're making the mistake of thinking we're homogeneous on here. The people berating you for that are also likely to criticise people riding 2 abreast in groups (and not singling out on the occasions the HC nonsensically suggests*)

I have to admit I possibly have in the past criticised people (maybe even you) for RLJ, but I've realised such a position is hypocritical. I don't tend to do it myself, but then I don't go through that many traffic lights and it doesn't tend to be an issue (and I don't count going through lights which don't trip for cyclists - they're faulty, so it doesn't count). I daresay if I lived in London I would - I'm not so sure about Edinburgh, but I've mainly cycled there on a Sunday and not since 2008 I think so things may have changed. Certainly "it annoys motorists" is a totally invalid reason for not doing something, and legally the law breaking is exactly the same as a car crossing the ASL which I see almost every day.

*my sister is probably more [s]argumentative[/s][s]stubborn[/s] determined than me - was out riding with her once, riding two abreast when we were stopped by a policeman. She proceeded to explain to him why the HC was wrong and he genuinely went away better educated and agreeing with us.

I'm with you OP, just plain old bad manners innit.