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

Junkyard obviously has anger issues. Shouting and everything.

To me one of the problems here is that the antis are taking a very car-centric viewpoint. I fully accept the point about not upsetting people, both from wishing to be courteous to others and from a safety perspective. But... all these guys are doing is riding down the road. They are barely, if at all, holding anyone up.

I was riding along today when a car overtook me (safely) went 50 yards up the road and then had to stop because there was a line of parked cars with traffic coming the other way. I had to pull up behind and stop (no way past). Without the car being there I could have continued the road past the parked cars as there was bags of space. As it was I WAS DELAYED BY AT LEAST 20 SECONDS !!!. If I took my cue from WVM I should've leapt off the bike and had a go at the driver for being so inconsiderate as to delay me. Even before he overtook me it was obvious he would have to stop.

The problem is:
Bike delays car/van = froth rant 'why don't you pay road tax' etc
car delays bike = situation normal.

I don't think it is terribly sensible to ride 2 abreast in this case, but there is no doubt that the perception that the car driver has more right to be there seems to play an awful lot in how this situation is viewed.

'kin 'ell - it made 400 with consomethinge ease!!

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

Clearly.
Still think there's nothing to it, I have a sweet relationship with drivers.
Like I said the irony was that the day I thought to stand my ground was the day I eventually got hit by a car. And it's seems the folk who bang on about the rights and wrongs seem to have the most trouble.

IME just riding out enough to clear drains ect so you can keep a constant predictable line is the safest. I would think a motorist would overtake just as close to you if you were 50 or 100 cm out? Then the problem is that if there's a car coming the other way you effectively squeeze the car into a tighter gap, and I'd imagine that a motorist would instinctivly hit the smaller object i.e you rather than have a head on. No?

I think that being 'car-centric' is quite a sensible position for a cyclist using the road network to take, purely because there are lots of them its best to assume that they are all driven by blond idiots and they kill cyclists. Not worshipping the car, just respecting their otential for harm.

hang on, how many in the "lost the will" category?

I'm feeling fresh, but then I can't get on during the day anymore.

Poor car driving made me ride defensively I did not start out this far out

Indeed - if I get overtaken too close my instinctive reaction is to move right - a reaction which has 100% success rate in getting the following drivers to give me [b]lots[/b] of room IME.

They are barely, if at all, holding anyone up.

A point I made earlier and nobody disputed. So I take it we all agree that the cyclists aren't being discourteous to other road users, it's just that some of the idiot drivers think they are. I do always love the irony of a motorist stopping his* vehicle to berate cyclists for holding him up.

* I feel no need to use a gender neutral term here.

OK oldgit, but what do you do when a car comes up behind you at a pinch point? not enough space to overtake safely but just enough for a driver to try it if they are unwilling to wait 2 seconds? Do you still stay in a position which encourages them to try?

'Own' them with Bombers, IMO

If drivers had to change lanes completely each time they came across a rider in the middle of the lane or a pair riding two abreast.. do you think,if the line of traffic behind them was 15-20 cars long,the cars at the back of the queue would still be calm and drive past safely without booting it or maybe get out and do what the white van man did in the video? If you drive into a city and all cyclists rode defensively like this.. you wouldnt believe what would get posted on the net. Not to mention the rise in accidents and assaults. Its not right i know.. but i really do believe this is the way things would turn out. Anyone agree?

Theres some right nutters out there and remember its not like its another cyclist. Some of these headers could easily aim for you on purpose if you peeve them off enough.They wont be nudging the rear wheel. You probably wont even remember the accident (if your lucky and live) You are on the road for a reason. It might be heading to work or heading home. Possibly a training ride or just getting around town. You dont go out on the bike to get closer to death or to stress out every ride.. you do it for other reasons so ride considerately. So why do these riders add to it?

I dont think risking it all by riding two abreast in the city is going to change the way drivers respect the cyclist.Quite the opposite.I wouldnt continue this riding style in hope of it changing. Its going to take a different approach.. without ending up in a wheelchair or losing your life.

Maybe with laws put in place like someone mentioned earlier on how the gap should be a certain distance would be the way to go. If the drivers dont follow the rules and get caught passing a cyclist too close then points or a fine might be the right way to go about it.

I know the folk on here that ride two abreast or down the middle of the road will disagree with this "giving in" attitude. Standing up for what you believe in and hoping that every cyclist will follow is just wishful thinking.If you climb inside the mind of the stressed out nutter thats sitting 20 cars behind you whose already 10 mins late for work or whatever.. just remember that he might crack some day and nail you.

If drivers had to change lanes completely each time they came across a rider in the middle of the lane or a pair riding two abreast.. do you think,if the line of traffic behind them was 15-20 cars long,the cars at the back of the queue would still be calm and drive past safely without booting it or maybe getting out and doing what the white van man did in the video?

So your solution to this is what? Riding in a position so that drivers don't have to move into the other lane to overtake the cyclists? I'm struggling to think of another one, but if you have something creative I'm sure we'd all love to know.

Its opening up another can of worms. Like i said.. the stresshead waiting to finally crack at the back of the pack might do something on purpose. If they rode more considerably they wouldnt be bringing this danger to themselves quite as much as a close passing car.

If you think that this scenario is impossible.. you are wrong. Drivers will pass close as possible to prove a point once they get pizzed off enough. Havent you noticed this happening?

As has been mentioned above, I've noticed lots of cyclist being killed due to inattention, none due to road rage.

You haven't answered the question - you seem to be implying that the cyclists should be far enough over to the left that a car can pass without changing lanes. Is this what you really think is the safest thing to do?

As has been mentioned above, I've noticed lots of cyclist being killed due to inattention, none due to road rage.

Hear, hear. I was taken out by a motorist pulling out of junction, broad daylight. He didn't even slow down as he approached the give way lines, he just went. After I'd picked myself up from the ground and was screaming "WATDA**** MAN, WATDA****!" he said "Smidsy."

By and large, I really don't think it's our fault as cyclists that we get run over. It's the impatient, aggressive, careless and reckless motorists. It is motorists that need to be lectured to, not cyclists. And it sickens me slightly that so many motor-apologists on here are so keen to be doing the anti-bike lecturing.

Then theres the drivers than have poor judgement/lack of confidence during overtaking manoeuvres. They stress a bit,judge things wrong and squeeze past cyclists as they nearly clip the car on the other side. They didnt mean to nearly kill the cyclist.. "i didnt mean to,it was an accident" Does that make it all O.K? I dont want to ride in a fashion all the time that could bring that on to be honest. From what ive seen in my life it seems that folk make more mistakes and drive closer to me if i`m more central.Whether it be on purpose or not.

I am not saying that gutter hogging or riding defensively is right or wrong. I just think we have to do what is best for the conditions. Sometimes one might be safer than the other. For the folk that think central position or two abreast is the way to go 100% of the time.. Good luck. The idea that its going to be safe all the time is fine if you believe that all drivers are looking ahead,full concentration,and accept that they really will have to make an effort towards a proper manoeuvre to get past but thats not the case.

Some are on a mission.They will squeeze past on purpose,some might squeeze past by mistake,some might be reasonably good drivers but decided to open up a text message and plough into the back of you,some might be speeding and have no option but to plough into you.. some might not be concentrating enough and only clip you. In some of those circumstances gutter hogging will see you live another day. Thats the way i see it. The folk that want to ride in the middle will have to accept that they might be struck full-on by one of these nuggets in the future. I would rather be clipped.

By and large, I really don't think it's our fault as cyclists that we get run over. It's the impatient, aggressive, careless and reckless motorists. It is motorists that need to be lectured to, not cyclists. And it sickens me slightly that so many motor-apologists on here are so keen to be doing the anti-bike lecturing.

But it's not that at all, is it. Of course, you are right, it's the motorists at fault 9 times out of 10, but can you change that? Or can you just stay out of the nutters and the blind eejits way? Of course a car [i]should[/i] overtake giving a whole lanes space, BUT THEY DON'T. You can't change that fact as a cyclist, and to ride taking up more space and in the path of dozy motorists is just asking for trouble and likely to make the dickheads pass you closer, not further away.

And it sickens me slightly that so many motor-apologists on here are so keen to be doing the anti-bike lecturing.

I'm not convinced that there is actually much anti-bike lecturing going on within this thread. Pretty much all the opinions I've seen proffered seem quite reasonable.
I do get the feeling that we all suffer from a natural tendency to sort of automatically project the antithesis of an argument on someone who doesn't agree 100% with our own thesis. So people who comment that riding two abreast may not always be appropriate become projected as rabidly anti-bike car lovers, and those who point out that it's perfectly reasonable to ride two-abreast are painted militant trouble makers.

For the folk that think central position or two abreast is the way to go 100% of the time.

Name me one...

The folk that want to ride in the middle will have to accept that they might be struck full-on by one of these nuggets in the future. I would rather be clipped.

Risk assessment. My judgement is that you're far, far more likely to be clipped by somebody trying to overtake without changing lanes than hit full on by somebody not paying any attention at all. The severity isn't all that much lower for being clipped. Risk = likelihood x severity

Yes, you're probably right Ian. I think it may well be only the odd person who is really a rabid motorist, but there is still a lot of car-centric thinking going on. Likewise, there isn't anyone here who thinks

central position or two abreast is the way to go 100% of the time.

is right either. I suppose as someone who rides everywhere all the time, I reject utterly the idea that it is cyclists that are to blame, and believe we need to challenge bad motorists at every opportunity, as long as that won't put us in danger. I don't think their behaviour in the video put them in danger. The only thing I criticise them for is meekly saying sorry, not, "**** off you stupid poor driver" or words to that effect 👿

"You haven't answered the question - you seem to be implying that the cyclists should be far enough over to the left that a car can pass without changing lanes. Is this what you really think is the safest thing to do?"

In certain conditions.Yes.Read above for examples.

Lets say you are riding on a country road half way around a tight left handed bend, a car approaches at 70mph behind you and another car meets you at the same point on the bend coming from the opposite direction. You would rather be central as opposed to gutter hogging in this instance,would you?

Ive gone through this scenario yesterday and also many months ago. Its only become apparent over the past few years having a car,bicycles and a motorbike that ive looked at it from behind the wheel of the car,bars of the motorbike. I never noticed this danger previous to passing my motorcycle test. I should have,being a driver, but i didnt. I think gutter hogging in this situation is a way of living another day. If you honestly cant put yourself in this scenario and see that gutter hogging would be the safest option.. then there really is no point in me explaining it again. With different situations, we need to ride accordingly. The example above proves that central or two abreast is not always the best option.

Well lets say a pair or riders out together two abreast.They might stay two abreast in real dodgy areas out in the country. They might enter a town in single file but out on the country road where they rode two abreast for the majority of their ride is just pushing it. O.K. Not 100% of the time but pretty close to it.

In certain conditions.Yes.

In the conditions in the OP's video? Because that's what I was discussing.

Lets say you are riding on a country road half way around a tight left handed bend, a car approaches at 70mph behind you and another car meets you at the same point on the bend coming from the opposite direction. You would rather be central as opposed to gutter hogging in this instance,would you?

If you're central, then the car will see you a lot sooner than if you're gutter hugging, and at least if you are central you have somewhere to go to when you notice the situation occuring. If you're hugging the gutter, the chances are the car won't have time to do anything once they see you, and given typical road positioning of somebody driving that fast on blind corners (cutting the inside of the bend) I don't reckon much for your chances.

It thought it might be worth posting what John Franklin (who came up with the primary position term) says on the subject.

So when do you use the primary position?
“The primary riding position should be your normal riding position when
you can keep up with traffic,
when you need to emphasize your presence to traffic ahead,
or when you need to prevent following drivers from passing you
unsafely.”

So when don’t you use the primary position?

“Because the primary riding position can result in some inconvenience to following drivers,it is reasonable to ride farther to the right when this could help others, so long as your own safety is not thereby impaired.
At these times you should adopt the secondary riding position, which is about 3 feet … to the right of the line of traffic if the road is wide,
but not closer than 1.5 feet to the edge of any road.”

So pretty much what I'd imagine most people would think is reasonable 🙂

Well lets say a pair or riders out together two abreast.They might stay two abreast in real dodgy areas out in the country. They might enter a town in single file but out on the country road where they rode two abreast for the majority of their ride is just pushing it. O.K. Not 100% of the time but pretty close to it.

So name me somebody who's advocating that. Go on then...

"and at least if you are central you have somewhere to go to when you notice the situation occuring."

Well thats unlikely to happen unless you have amazing reactions and eyes on the back of your head. Even with a wide angle mirror (like i use on the road bike to adjust my positions when i need to) a speeding car is still going to cause a problem when he arrives behind you on a tight bend.

Between central or 1M to the left of the road on a tight corner would barely give the speeding driver more braking/reaction time.At 70mph the difference could be something like 20-30ft.. but by the time he arrives at your back wheel the speed he is still carrying could still see him hit you or try and drive between you and the other car. This is where i choose the gutter hogging option (i love the word gutterhogging!)

The bikesafe course for motorcycles and advanced driving might point out the difference in the distance in relation to road positioning on a corner but on a slow moving bicycle, its nothing compared to the positives to be gained like those when riding the motorbike at similar speeds.

Infact,positioning of the motorbike approaching/half way around a left hander is all very well staying out near the white line if you want the oncoming drivers to see you sooner,also giving you more reaction time and somewhere to go if need be.. the distances between far to the left compared to close to the white line are incredible on some types of bends but approaching a bicycle going 12mph in a car going 70mph.. it doesnt really help that much with road position,does it?

Dont get me started on how the right approach to a left hander on a motorbike positioned near the white line is the correct way either. The number of people that cut the white line on their exit of the bend as you are approaching it makes this option even more dangerous if other drivers arent driving correctly. Another example of what many believe to be the safest option actually being more dangerous.. depending on how other road users drive. They dont point this out in the motorcycle test/bikesafe course.

Aracer, even 40% of the time. If they ride in that fashion then its going to cause a problem to certain types of motorist. We cant get away from that.
I got the idea that certain folk rode central as much as they could. I havent read the entire thread but thats what i thought.

Going back to the start of the thread it took me no time at all to find a certain poster talking about riding in the centre of the lane.

I dont want to continue going off in other directions,the thread is too long as it is. I just wanted to point out that i feel that we need to use a bit of gutter hogging as much as central riding depending on the conditions.

It thought it might be worth posting what John Franklin (who came up with the primary position term) says

Ian I'm thoroughly confused by that quote. He seems to be arguing that we should move further out? Or was he talking to an audience that drive on the right?

For the folk that think central position or two abreast is the way to go 100% of the time.. Good luck

As a pro-primary/breaster ( 😯 ) can I clarify that I absolutely [u]don't[/u] think riding in the primary or two-abreast 100% of the time is a good idea.

You definitely have to choose the position according to the situation.

On a windy NSL country road then yes I'd be tucked tight into the kerb as martin suggests, because the speed differential and poor sight lines means drivers might not have enough time to react to me in the middle of the lane.

But that's a very different situation to the one in the video.

What does this have to do with riding two abreast? Nothing.
Stick to the topic.

Junkyard obviously has anger issues. Shouting and everything

when you need to emphasize your presence to traffic ahead,
or when you need to prevent following drivers from passing you
unsafely.”
So when don’t you use the primary position?
“Because the primary riding position can result in some inconvenience to following drivers,it is reasonable to ride farther to the right when this could help others, so long as your own safety is not thereby impaired.

The issue is just what you think of your safety and that is where the debate lies here I don’t think there is room and neither does the previously posted Highway code pic of overtaking one cyclist in one lane.
One rider or two abreast the car still needs to get in the outside lane to overtake.
[img] [/img]

i feel that we need to use a bit of gutter hogging as much as central riding depending on the conditions.

I doubt ayine disadgrees we just disagree about hwere

wot e sayed (just in from the pub Junkyard?)

CBA replying to anybody any more, as it's all been said already, but I had a thought about what I do regarding positioning and when I move between primary and secondary (also to prove the point that I only ride primary a very small proportion of the time).

If I do ride primary, I usually make a point of swerving hard back to secondary when I no longer need to stop them squeezing me - this makes it clear to the driver that my positioning is a conscious choice and that I'm not deliberately holding them up for the sake of it. I don't think I've ever experienced aggression from a driver after doing this.

Haha. He rode home from the pub using the central position of the road. Only it was the wrong side of the road!

The thing i worried most about moving from primary to secondary was the flushing of the head down the toilet.

aracer - Member
If I do ride primary, I usually make a point of swerving hard back to secondary when I no longer need to stop them squeezing me - this makes it clear to the driver that my positioning is a conscious choice and that I'm not deliberately holding them up for the sake of it. I don't think I've ever experienced aggression from a driver after doing this.

Junkyard- would you please post that picture up again, I don't think I've ever seen it before? I wish you tried harder.

just in from the pub Junkyard?

note i did actually edit between your quote and still did not get it right 😳
EDIT: Apart from care gary there is nothing I wont do for you - did you read the bit about trying too hard can I add that you are not very good at goading.

If a car hits a cyclist the outcome is going to be the same if the cyclist is 1cm or 100cm from the kerb .]
unless you literally have eyes in the back of your head it is pretty much unavoidable.
just maybe by making the space bigger the chances of being hit reduce, by simple mathematics

martinxyz
Lets say you are riding on a country road half way around a tight left handed bend, a car approaches at 70mph behind you and another car meets you at the same point on the bend coming from the opposite direction. You would rather be central as opposed to gutter hogging in this instance,would you?

Yes - every time - I can see further, the cars can see me for further, I have an escape route always primary position on corners. The cruicial point is youare significantly more visible by being out in the road and can be seen from a lot further away - it makes a huge difference, Its not just a few feet further away they can see you its a long way.

Dont get me started on how the right approach to a left hander on a motorbike positioned near the white line is the correct way either. The number of people that cut the white line on their exit of the bend as you are approaching it makes this option even more dangerous if other drivers arent driving correctly. Another example of what many believe to be the safest option actually being more dangerous.. depending on how other road users drive. They dont point this out in the motorcycle test/bikesafe course.

100% wrong and showing your inexperience Riding out on the white line on a left hander allows you to see further - I would often go even further across the white line to see further often half way between the white line and the wrong side of the road. .

Because you can see further you are safer as yo can see idiots in cars coming earlier. Obviously you alter your line depending on what you can see but always go as wide as you can on entry to get the best visibility

singletrackmind - Member

If a car hits a cyclist the outcome is going to be the same if the cyclist is 1cm or 100cm from the kerb .]
unless you literally have eyes in the back of your head it is pretty much unavoidable.
just maybe by making the space bigger the chances of being hit reduce, by simple mathematics

apart from the further out you are the more likely yo are to be seen and the more yo can see - and yo have an escape route. Riding wide is safer everytime Its why all the teaching emphasises this.

I have never had a near miss when in the primary position - I have had loads when near tot eh kerb.

martinxyz - Member
Another example of what many believe to be the safest option actually being more dangerous.. depending on how other road users drive. They dont point this out in the motorcycle test/bikesafe course.

😆 Late night campaigning eh TJ? Get yourself to bed matey. Have you been on the beer?

How about another poll...

How many people feel the need to have this much space when being overtaken?

Hopefully you can guess my answer...

[img] [/img]<

How many people feel the need to have this much space when being overtaken?

Don't [i]need[/i], but definitely [i]like[/i]. And I do try to give cyclists this much room when I pass them in the car.

As mentioned earlier 3 feet / 1 metre is the legal minimum in many US states and the more cycle-friendly European countries. I'd love to see them bring that in here!

So.. what about when there are lots and lots of bikes? Like the A38 northwards out of Bristol at rush hour? If all the bikes stayed out form the kerb then no driver would ever be able to pass, and all the traffic would have to trundle along at the speed of a slow cycling winching up a hill.

I'm sure as motorists many of you would find that unacceptable.

GrahamS - Member
Don't need, but definitely like. And I do try to give cyclists this much room when I pass them in the car.

Yes but it's [i]need[/i] we're talking about is it not? I.e. what is reasonable to demand from other road users?

that point, cynic-al, was one i couldn't really be bothered to debate about two days ago. 😆

i'm with you, for the record. and yes, i do ride my bike. on the road. many thousands of miles in and around Central London.

problem is all we have all been passed and probably a few times every 10 miles on our commute by someone who almost clips you/passes too close.
I dont think anyone actually needs this much room as per the pic but on many/some roads it is not possible to pass safely without putting part/some/all/most of your car on the wrong side of the road. This does not stop motorists from trying to do this in their lane so sometimes you have to position your bike so they realise they will need to do this - this annoys them but it does not endanger them or me.
al it is reasonable for me to expect that other road users will not endanger me and be considerate of my needs and do as the highway code says about what they should do /how they should behave. Experience has taught me that this wont happen so I need to make it happen on certain stretches and look after myself.

i dont see any accord being reached here and I think most people sort of agree [ position depends on the road and sometimes we would hug the kerb to let folk past [ sometimes i even go on the pavement to allow this tbh if the pavement is clear].
If it is safe yes i get out of their way to let them past and wave to thank them for waiting.

Molgrips I dont think anyone is suggesting bikes should just pootle down the middle in some sort of solo mass action /road bocking manner but are you really suggesting every car driver gives every cyclist enough space ?

How many cyclists dont use roads because of how dangerous they are ? they are dangerous because of how car drivers drive rather than because the highway code or roads themselves are dangerous.

if all road users were safe and courteous then we would have no need for this debate and yes sometimes some cyclists are idiots too.

Its the f ecktards that 'buzz' you even when the oncoming lane is totally devoid of all traffic that really boil my piss.

beautiful sunny day down south , but do i risk a bimble on the RB when every man and his dog are rushing around trying to find the perfect last minute present for cousin johnny, who they secretly despise?

Try riding further out into the road to make them overtake properly? *ducks and hides*

Junkyard - couldn't agree more, although for voting purposes that could mean my vote is now split with 1/3 in each camp

TJ - here's a challenge, bet you can't stay hidden til Monday

they tell horse riders to ride side by side in the highway code

Dickyboy - Member

TJ - here's a challenge, bet you can't stay hidden til Monday

*peeks round corner*

99, 100 - Ready or not here I come

if all road users were safe and courteous then we would have no need for this debate and yes sometimes some cyclists are idiots too.

And to go waaaaay back to the OP, that's what those cyclists riding two abreast are, they're discourteous idiots.

99, 100 - Ready or not here I come

savouring mental image of TJ poised ready to post

stalking TJ - hadn't really thought this through had I 🙁

And to go waaaaay back to the OP, that's what those cyclists riding two abreast are, they're discourteous idiots.

If the drivers were safe and courteous, they'd be thanking them for taking up less of the road, meaning they have to spend less time in the right hand lane. The only possible argument for the cyclists being discourteous comes from drivers who are discourteous and unsafe.

Junkyard - Member
al it is reasonable for me to expect that other road users will not endanger me and be considerate of my needs and do as the highway code says about what they should do /how they should behave. Experience has taught me that this wont happen so I need to make it happen on certain stretches and look after myself.

of course - but it's like it always has to be as per the pic.

only read the OP and skipped the 12 pages of angst, is this an official 'TJ-thread' yet?

*checks thread*
Yep TeeJ is still talking and Junky managed to get his misplet drivel in before the 12pm cut off yesterday.
*Happily gets on with own day*

Wanna join in the game of hide and seek TSY? - dickyboy is "it"

Its the f ecktards that 'buzz' you even when the oncoming lane is totally devoid of all traffic that really boil my piss.

Maybe they are the ones that would have taken you straight out if you'd been in the middle of the lane 🙂

Nice work there molgrips 😀

Junky managed to get his misplet drivel in before the 12pm cut off

al it just depends i can generally live with 1 metre but if it is windy, crap road and a 60 mph limit and an artic truck overtaking i would like a lot more tbh and much more like the picture

I did it accidentally and thought it somehow added to it 🙂

Wanna join in the game of hide and seek TSY? - dickyboy is "it"

Its the f ecktards that 'buzz' you even when the oncoming lane is totally devoid of all traffic that really boil my piss.

100% agree I just dont get why they do it ! The other lane is totally free there is no traffic why pass so close !

The other lane is totally free there is no traffic why pass so close !

scu98rkr - Member

"Its the f ecktards that 'buzz' you even when the oncoming lane is totally devoid of all traffic that really boil my piss."

100% agree I just dont get why they do it ! The other lane is totally free there is no traffic why pass so close !

Because you are sitting in at the edge of the road and they see you but don't notice you / don't see yo as a hazard therefore don't avoid you - the answer is to ride further out in the road - it happens far far less then

xyz wrote "Dont get me started on how the right approach to a left hander on a motorbike positioned near the white line is the correct way either. The number of people that cut the white line on their exit of the bend as you are approaching it makes this option even more dangerous if other drivers arent driving correctly. Another example of what many believe to be the safest option actually being more dangerous.. depending on how other road users drive. They dont point this out in the motorcycle test/bikesafe course."

TJ wrote: "100% wrong and showing your inexperience Riding out on the white line on a left hander allows you to see further - I would often go even further across the white line to see further often half way between the white line and the wrong side of the road.

Because you can see further you are safer as yo can see idiots in cars coming earlier. Obviously you alter your line depending on what you can see but always go as wide as you can on entry to get the best visibility"

Wrong Jeremy! Riding down Loch Ness and many other highland twisties proves this when you are approaching a tight left hander.Lets say you are going 50mph,eyes on the vanishing point,and the driver cutting the line coming out of the corner on the other side is going 60mph (maybe more) with a possible impact of 110mph+ waiting within less than 0.25 of a second reaction time? You have reaction times to cope with this unforseeable mistake to steer a motorbike out of danger? Not a chance in hell. Theres many moments where you have positioned yourself as well as possible.. but you soon realize that with the speed they were going along with the tightness of the corner.. the time it takes to shift position when they people are already a foot over OUR side makes it a very close call.To the point of me now not taking that option at all on some roads.

I will give you a good example that you and many others will know. Riding out of Strathpeffer towards Contin you will be going through a 40zone before it gets up to 60mph on the way to Contin. If you remember, theres a tight left hander just before you get out of the 40 zone. If you position close to the line approaching this corner you would soon see how fast cars appear from the Contin direction.If i approach this corner positioned correctly around 20-25mph, i have on more than one occasion had to suddenly move due to cars crossing the line. Its the correct position and even at half the speed limit its a danger if the other driver isnt playing ball. I find slightly to the right of central the best option in this case. Not close in to the gutter as i might hit a walker or cyclist. I ride the way i want to on coners like these through experience. My experiences show that such corners are a greater threat when driving "to the book" when using the head to look at the dangers and possibilities from all angles makes more sense.Yes, the majority of the time we should all ride left handers the way we are taught but this is an example of why we shouldnt.

I agree with the positioning and being able to see further (also letting the other driver see you sooner) and being able to get back in sooner.. but like ive just said, its not always going to be like that because when people break the law by cutting corners on exits on crazy tight bends.. you soon find out how close things can get. Theres no reaction time. Put the two speeds of each vehicle together, the severity of the corner,your reaction time,the mistake of the other driver and put it into practice Jeremy and get back to me before you try proving me wrong.

For the motorbike arguement: If oncoming drivers stayed on their side of the road,yes.. i would be 100%wrong.(see,this is where you jumped to conclusions before reading what i wrote carefully)

" I would often go even further across the white line to see further often half way between the white line and the wrong side of the road"

Yes, fine on some roads but try it on the approach to the corner im talking about. You would be mad to. Even staying on your own side next to the central line is a threat. Many rides out of the town it will feel the right thing to do but its when you have another vehicle on the line that you realize its not worth it. Its a great example of a corner and im glad that you know it.

Still wrong martin.

I put this into practice all the time - its the police way, its the advanced rider way.

You always go wide on the entrance to a corner to get better visibility. always. No exceptions. You are not positioning yourself early enough or going wide enough if you are getting into this situation. Go wide early you can see further.

according to you the police are wrong, the IAM are wrong

For the motorbike arguement: If oncoming drivers stayed on their side of the road,yes.. i would be 100%wrong.(see,this is where you jumped to conclusions before reading what i wrote carefully)

Nope - you do not understand the correct road positing.

If you position yourself properly you can see the car that is going to come over the centre line earlier so you have plenty of time to avoid it

and put it into practice Jeremy and get back to me before you try proving me wrong.

I have done for hundreds of thousands of miles over 35 years.

I once followed a plod at speed down a twisty road. It was very interesting to see that he actually pulled out onto the wrong side of the road approaching some corners to improve his sight lines.

Its not wrong in certain circumstances. You know the example of road i mentioned yet you would disagree about keeping in a little more from the centre line on that left hander after me explaining my reasons for doing so.. regardless of early positioning (that i always do anyway to avoid making a pigs ear of the job ahead)

If i drive that road and have far more room between the vehicles i`m passing by staying in a little bit more from the normal police/IAM recommended position.. i will always choose to ride it this way as its the safest. On this length,width and radius of left hander i have proved to myself that i am safest when closer to central position. Again, this is due to cars arriving on the bend about 35-40mph but ocasionally cutting the white line. Its such a tight corner that its safer to not have to try and move position as quickly as possible.. but to be central in the first place. Yes, it sounds wrong but putting it into practice proves its the safest.This also proves yet again there is no right or wrong as the reason for better road positioning is to ultimately avoid collisions. To be seen,yes. But the whole idea is to drop the number of accidents.This is what it all boils down to. The main aim of road positioning is not to be seen. Its to cut down accidents. To be seen earlier is high up the list but No1 is to cut down accidents and deaths on the roads regardless of being seen a fraction of a second earlier.Agree on this at least lol.

So the question is in this arguement:

Is it more important to be seen a fraction of a second earlier?

Or is it more important to avoid the contact by NOT having to make frantic position changes in the first place?

At 20-25mph Jeremy.. it is honestly a better option on this type or bend.Try it.Or at least think about the situations i have been in if a car cuts the line. You will probably be there for the Puffer so worth a thought on the passing.

Thats me finished with this. Its totally Off topic. Sorry folks!

No - the main aim is to be able to see further - thats why the wide line. See further yo are safer.

I can't think exactly of the bend in question but I would always go to the white line and often beyond it - simply so I can see further. I cannot think of any shape of corner where a narrow entry would be better - I have never seen one.

"I once followed a plod at speed down a twisty road. It was very interesting to see that he actually pulled out onto the wrong side of the road approaching some corners to improve his sight lines"

If the line is broken then he is using the other side to his advantage. It was an unbroken line then its obviously not allowed but not against the law to cross broken lines. The same as broken lines with the orange painted sections you often see around the approach to junctions.Some people believe you cannot drive on the orange sections with hatching.. you can,if its safe to do so.

The police,IAM etc dont spend millions on helping drivers to ultimately see each other sooner. They want to,first and foremost,cut down deaths and accidents and to help them achieve this, riding in the positions we have been taught helps us all out a great deal in most situations but not all. So if i believe that not having to make sudden movements on the bars when there no need to on sharp corners.. i will do so. If its going to help me stay safer on that type of corner i`m sure they would rather i was safe and felt safer than doing what they say and having to deal with other problems in the process. Its crazy i know but we have to do whats best when other drivers arent following the rules. On tight corners when drivers are cutting them.. there are good reasons to not ride the way we have been taught. It might sound bonkers but once it happens repeatedly on certain corners you soon get the jist of why riding the way you were taught isnt always the safest option.

Martin - Its not just what I have been taught - Its how I have ridden for hundreds of thousands of miles. I suspect you are missing something - either not getting into position early enough, not looking far enough ahead or not being able to turn quickly enough. Countersteering perhaps?

IIRC you have a mate who is a advanced / police trained rider or something - have a chat with him perhaps

Of course you need to adapt your riding position to what you see - but I simply do not recognise the situation you describe - I have never seen it as far as I can tell. You need to be flexible and adapt to the situation.

Google streetview the corner so I can see it?

Well this is it. "not being able to turn quickly enough"

If a car cuts the line and i have to countersteer aggressively as soon as i make eye contact with it then why dont i just position myself a little closer to the centre of my side of the road on the tighter corners?

Right, i`m off to get some nosh!