[Closed] Riding two abreast on a two-lane road: yay or nay? (video)

I CBA with the more technical arguments, but I just want to say...

**** the motorists, they're giving us asthma, air and noise pollution, obesity, out of town shopping centres and Jeremy Clarkson.

Cyclists give nothing but joy, love and firm toned legs, and thats a beautiful thing. If they can drive sat two abreast taking up the whole lane all the **** ing time, then so can we cyclists.

It's not self-righteousness, it's just righteousness, and we are the people of the future, those mother ****ers just need to get that into their motorised skulls.

😈

Is that cynic al whining? I ignore him for good reasons

My point still stands.

TandemJeremy - Member
Is that cynic al whining? I ignore him for good reasons.

Can someone quote the following to him?

TJ - I've made various valid points that no one else on here has made, in a civil fashion. Are your "good reasons" that you have no response, like on the hub thread?

Thanks

[img] [/img]

*whimpers*

[quote=Cynic-al]TJ - I've made various valid points that no one else on here has made, in a civil fashion. Are your "good reasons" that you have no response, like on the hub thread?
Thanks

Can all the pro 2 abreasters vouch that they have never got upset with caravans or tractors when they are impeded in their cars.

As a pro 2 abreaster, I'm quite happy to admit that I have got irritated with caravans and tractors (and more significantly traction engines). The difference being that I don't feel the need to cut them up to prove some sort of point, and they have all significantly held me up - in the case of the traction engine I was stuck in a massive queue behind it for ~15 minutes, passing numerous places he could have pulled over. If the cyclists in the original video made any difference at all to other drivers' journey times (which I doubt - even those who's driving was poor enough that they didn't manage to smoothly change lanes and overtake were only delayed a little in getting to the back of the next queue), it was only a handful of seconds.

It is [s]interesting[/s] scary who I find myself aligned with on this thread (I'm gutted that TJ didn't mention me as one with the same POV). Note to the haters who think TJ is just arguing again - in this case he's far from standing alone. Though as somebody who quite often agrees with TJ, I do find it rather frustrating the way in such threads get reduced to pro or anti TJ - if only he didn't "cry wolf" quite so much to give the haters ammo (I hope you're reading and digesting this point, TJ).

Geebus. Not rocket science is it really? As a road cyclist:

1. Priority is your safety.
2. If you can reduce inconvenience to other road users without compromising your safety, do so.

If you feel safe getting squeezed by an overtake because you're close to the kerb, that's absolutely fine. Likewise if you do not, you are perfectly within your rights to take the lane if you feel safer doing so. Cyclists generally get sideswiped or cut off, not rear ended which tells its own story but it's your life, your risk, and your decision.

Why can't we all just get along?

Ta aracer - I just pulled out a few randoms who agreed.

I get annoyed with all inconsiderate people on the roads.

I get annoyed with all inconsiderate people on the roads.

Now I really am getting concerned about who I share my POV with 😉

glitchy bump

Not read the whole thread but think I agree with TJ.Never ridden two abreast but if the outer bike is in the middle of the lane then what's the problem?
I ride alone and always occupy the middle of my lane. I am a unit of traffic so why shouldn't I?
I believe I am safer , more visible and twunts in cars wont try overtaking me unless the oncoming lane is completely clear and so they leave me more room and do so safely. Would the van driver have stopped and lectured any other slow moving vehicle ie a bus,tractor, police car etc Can't believe so many posts on a cycling forum arguing against this?

I need to steer clear of this thread. I am now picturing Muddydwarf keeping arms length from the kerb yet still managing to catch the pedals on it.

oldgit - you've not been killed yet? You are incredibly lucky.

Why?
That's not in the gutter. 50cm is far enough out to clear gutters etc. And I ride in a predictable manner i.e straight and smooth so cars can pass with ease.
I'd say riding in the middle of the lane, right or wrong simply winds up drivers and giving them too much to think about seems to make matters worse.

And I've put it into practice cycling from north of Hemel Hempstead into North London in all weathers for years.
I suppose I ride like I ride with a road club.

So, to sum ip the TJ's opinion on this thread: It's legal to be a dick, either on the roads or the Internet, therefore it's ok to be a dick. That pretty much sums it up?

No - not at all. it is safer to ride defensivly in accordance with cyclecraft and other advise on defensive riding so why not do so?

Ride in the gutter and increase your danger.

Why be in more danger than yo need to be by poor road positioning.

Its sad how many supposed cyclists on here think you should get out of the way of cars and cower in an unsafe road position in the gutter

Oldgit I was joking...a lost art on here it seems...

After 8 pages, no one has said it is ok to ride in the gutter. TJ, you need to see a psychiatrist as you seem to have these voices in your head making up arguments that don't exist. Other than that you seem like a nice enough fellow.

You have and have others. You want bike riders to get out of the way of cars by riding far to close to the kerb and you have said this several times

Ok then. I never realised. Thank you.

GlitterGary
"Bikes have to get out of the way of cars do they?"

Yes, of course they do, when they are holding up traffic by driving selfishly

And gutters are mentioned where?

Did anyone see Kevin's Grand Design where he nearly took the cyclist out?
Talking to camera.
Taffic island.
Overtake cyclist.
Surely a law must have been broken there, no?

I missed that, though I had a wry smile through the bit when he was so enamoured by that 'one day' marketing bollocks and read out the 'one day I will cycle to work', followed by yet another section when he's gabbling away to a TV camera whilst driving to work.

when he was so enamoured by that 'one day' marketing bollocks and read out the 'one day I will cycle to work'

sometimes when threads like this go backwards and forwards, relentlessly it's probably best to agree to disagree, you know?

One problem with threads like this is that TJ is so vociferous that other folk who support his position can't get a word in edgeways! As a result it can often seem like an [i]"everyone against TJ"[/i] thread.

To add some "science" I've done a brief audit of the thread and tried to categorise where people stand on riding two-abreast along that stretch of road (or in general):

[u][b]FOR[/b][/u]

GrahamS
TJ
The Southern Yeti
coffeeking
psling
PeterPoddy
Rockplough
warton
stumpy01
poly
aracer
KungFuPanda
bencooper
scu98rkr
Omar Little
richmtb
teamhurtmore
stevehine
2tyred
antigee
oldgit
AdamW
Junkyard
Surrounded By Zulus
imnotverygood
nick1962

[u][b]AGAINST[/b][/u]

theflatboy
GlitterGary
5thElefant
IanMunro
martinxyz
themountaingoat
geordiemick00
theprawn
camo16
mega
rewski
kaesae
molgrips
BoardinBob
MTB Rob
user-removed
FeeFoo
Dickyboy
cynic-al
zippykona
MrSalmon
edhornby
trailmonkey
v8ninety

[u][b]UNDECIDED[/b][/u]

Cougar
wrightyson
DezB
hora
rickmeister
mansonsoul
thomthumb
project
b r
mrmo
nealglover
AlexSimon
PJM1974
redthunder
singletrackmind
grantway
HoratioHufnagel
starrman82
grahamh
Woody
thegreatape

[u][b]Totals: 26 FOR, 24 AGAINST, 21 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

Seems to be a remarkably even split so far.
No wonder the thread has rolled on so long.

(Apologies if I have misread anyone's position. It wasn't always that clear, hence "undecided" includes anyone that I wasn't sure what their position was as well as those who expressly said they weren't sure.)

The interesting point is that (almost) everyone cites "safety" as the main concern, which is good. It seems the core disagreement is about which is the safer approach.

I doubt we'll see that in [s]our[/s] TJ's lifetime, warton 😛

and GrahamS what on earth do you think you are doing with your well researched and rational approach? 😀

😆 Excellent!

tree-unnert!!

(I think the main problem is we haven't had Elfin here to tell us the correct answer)

I'm not undecided.

I'm against, the two guys in the vid were riding like ****s.
I just couldn't be bothered with it really.

Fair enough neal.
[u][b]Totals: 26 FOR, 25 AGAINST, 20 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

GrahamS, sorry, I'm clearly not making myself clear, I have self-flaggelated in repentance.

I've decided cyclists two abreast is awesome, and those dudes seem to me to be perfectly in the right.

mansonsoul: that's okay. Say ten Hail TJs and go in peace.

[u][b]Totals: 27 FOR, 25 AGAINST, 19 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

Hallelujah! 🙂

An excellent way to conclude. Now we dont need to hit 400!

Say ten Hail TJs...

😆 just picturing TJ as Mary trying to [s]arg[/s]debate away [b]that[/b] pregnancy... 😆

So only 25 out of 71 are right then 😉

Shirley [i]everyone[/i] is right 8)

If he walked up to me like that, trying to strut his stuff, I would've knocked the ****er out, no hesitation.

... But I wouldn't be riding 2 a breast on a busy road, just cos it's legal, doesn't make it right.

just cos it's legal, doesn't make it right.

I don't think anyone has tried to claim that, but new vote noted Milkie:

[u][b]Totals: 27 FOR, 26 AGAINST, 19 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

@oldgit - you seem to have had almost the exact opposite experience as me - I used to ride as you suggest ~50 - 70cm away from the kerb - sadly for me; a bus decided to squeeze past as we were approaching a traffic island then moved across as the road narrowed; he was still only half way past having clearly misjudged my speed. 6 months of painful dental surgery later and I now sport a nice set of implants instead of my own front teeth.

I will now take up a more prominent (I guess primary; though I've not read that book / used the terminology before) whenever I feel that to allow cars to pass / squeeze by would put myself at risk - since adopting that approach; I've had the odd confrontation with people who seem to think I've no right to take up any space - but no one has driven into me or forced me off the road.

I'm sure others have similar experiences; and I'm sure others have had bad experiences by adopting a wider road position - but I thought I would at least explain my reasoning (do I get extra marks for showing my working out ? :D)

Can all the pro 2 abreasters vouch that they have never got upset with caravans or tractors when they are impeded in their cars.

what other road users dare to use the road when I am there the Bastards. TBH I save my rage for horses or is it hearses [spelling is not my strong point] do these people not know who I am and that I have somewhere to go... i m ean uses roads when i want to but going slower than i want to its just unfair and inconsiderate - they should obviously consider mine as it would be stupid to think i should consider their needs.

It's legal to be a dick, either on the roads or the Internet, therefore it's ok to be a dick. That pretty much sums it up?

you need to see a psychiatrist as you seem to have these voices in your head making up arguments that don't exist