If you're going to quote figures, make sure they're accurate.

 

No, you get it right. I was being generous by only quoting the all year round daily cycling commuters.

 

But if you want to quote ALL deaths as a fraction of cyclists, you need to include ALL cyclists.

 

I've now given you that accurate figure, 1 in 59,000. You multiplied the death rate 35 times.

.

I've now given you that accurate figure, 1 in 59,000.

 

How can we know that's true, without a link to a reputable source?

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by I893469365902345609348566

How can we know that's true, without a link to a reputable source?

 

You do like me, you look up the available data and trustworthy estimates.

 

Your 1 in 1667 deaths that you posted meant that there are under 190,000 cyclists in the country !!

 

We have approaching twice that cycling daily in London alone, so it's clear which is right.

.

You do like me, you look up the available data and trustworthy estimates.

 

Your 1 in 1667 deaths that you posted meant that there are under 190,000 cyclists in the country !!

 

We have approaching twice that cycling daily in London alone, so it's clear which is right.

.

 

You started quoting figures, not saying where the hell you plucked them from. Justify them or shut up.

You started quoting figures, not saying where the hell you plucked them from. Justify them or shut up.

 

Forum Rules & Terms of Use:

 

2. Be nice to each other - no personal attacks on other users. While differences of opinion may lead to disagreements, we ask our members to agree to disagree politely.

 

3. Freedom of speech does not extend to trolling. Or using the forum to further your own agenda, whether that is personally or commercially driven.

.

Forum Rules & Terms of Use:

 

2. Be nice to each other - no personal attacks on other users. While differences of opinion may lead to disagreements, we ask our members to agree to disagree politely.

 

3. Freedom of speech does not extend to trolling. Or using the forum to further your own agenda, whether that is personally or commercially driven.

.

 

It says nothing about being accurate. And a good job too

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by I893469365902345609348566

I find this discussion quite interesting, and I note the guidelines above about disagreeing respectfully.

 

I expect drivers to give me all the available space, and to wait either for clear road or for me to pull over if there is not enough.

 

I don't agree with 'a miss is as good as a mile', and whilst I understand the objective measure of the small number of annual cyclist deaths, I do not from my own recent riding experiences accept the correlation between that and safe roads.

 

The lack of a collision is not the same thing as a cyclist feeling safe. My understanding of the recent highway code changes is that they are in part intended to achieve that feeling of safety in the minds of the more vulnerable road user in any encounter, and the less vulnerable is expected to facilitate that.

 

I have reported four drivers on my recent trip to Wales out of over 200 bad passes. I find it disturbing that even with maximum use of cycle paths, cycle routes and quiet roads, I am still seeing a bad pass every two miles or so on average.

 

Here are two that I did not report.

 

A bunch of cars, most fine, just one that can't quite manage to give the space that all the others managed.

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/NQAg9xB3kcJmi4kF6

 

Not so good. First the close passing white car, then the black Focus squeezing through against the opposing traffic.

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/spKtQAYLsfBxn6EE9

 

 

Here are two coaches passing me within minutes of each other on the same piece of road, which was empty in both cases. Both doing about 50mph, one giving me a whole lane, the other about 60cm.

 

They didn't hit me, but that is the kind of incident I do report.

 

 

And that is without considering how many of those annual 110 cyclists caused their own death. For many years here in London that was the majority of them.

 

Where are the statistics that show more that 50% of cyclists who have died in London were completly to blame for their own death ?

Where are the statistics that show more that 50% of cyclists who have died in London were completly to blame for their own death ?

 

You are very recent in this forum so won't have seen all my many posts in this subject, trying to prevent those needless deaths. All carried the details and links and I'm not going to repeat all that hard work.

 

We only have a small proportion of the national annual deaths, around dozen a year for some while now. That makes it easy to look at each accident's circumstances. The majority for many years were due to riding up the nearside of large vehicles into the blind spot where they could not be seen by the driver. Then a left turn by the large vehicle crushing the cyclist. In one year all 8 who died were killed that away.

 

The drivers were invariably not arrested since they had done nothing wrong, signalling well before the turn. Indeed I posted one video showing a rider ignoring a huge flashing indicator on the rear of a cement truck, riding rapidly straight past it to their immediate death. Further evidence is that there never any head injuries in those accidents, it was always crush injuries.

 

A strange statistic from the time was that the cyclists who died were almost invariably helmeted, though over the couple of decades in question only from 27% to 46% of cyclists year by year wore helmets.

 

Of course that lead to speculation that the helmeted have a greater sense of security so were more likely to take risks, such as nearside overtaking.

 

Another oddity was that around half or more of the deaths were female, even though they were barely over a fifth of the cyclists. The reason for that was quickly known and understood though.

 

Of course there were big campaigns to reduce this toll. Education to try to make cyclists more aware of how dangerous it is to overtake on the nearside. Sessions with trucks, drivers and cyclists taking each other's places to better appreciate the problems each face. Warning signs plastered over the rear of vehicles. More mirrors for drivers to try to cover all possibilities, the full complement now being 6 or 7, depending on the vehicle. Of course that makes a new problem, how many mirrors in multiple positions can a driver look at to turn left while still looking at where he is going?

 

All these measures reduced the problem over time, but it hasn't been eliminated and too many cyclists are still taking these unnecessary risks to save tiny fractions of seconds.

.

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by flecc

You are very recent in this forum so won't have seen all my many posts in this subject, trying to prevent those needless deaths.

 

I can understand that there may have been many posts, trying to persuade cyclists, that they could behave better to reduce the risks to thier own life. And that is good.

 

But where are the actual accident statistics, coronors reports etc (and not just opinions) that prove that the 'majority' of cyclists are 100% to blame for their own deaths in cycling accindents ?

I can understand that there may have been many posts, trying to persuade cyclists, that they could behave better to reduce the risks to thier own life. And that is good.

 

But where are the actual accident statistics, coronors reports etc (and not just opinions) that prove that the 'majority' of cyclists are 100% to blame for their own deaths in cycling accindents ?

 

So because I dont have access to all of that information, you ignore the available evidence that does exist?

 

For example the lack of arrests, believe me the Met Police were quick enough to arrest on the odd occasion where the driver was in the wrong.

 

I wouldn't place too much faith in Coroners reports anyway, I'd rather do as I always did and rely on the investigations by Transport for London and the GLC, both strongly pro-cycling bodies. They've been very successful in driving down the deaths, proof enough that they know the causes:

 

The number of cyclists killed on London's roads fell to its lowest on record in 2021, figures from Transport for London (TfL) show. The number of people killed while cycling in London in 2021 was down by 40% on the 2005-2009 average, from 17 to 10 people, according to the transport body's annual report.

 

That's despite cycling roughly trebling over that period.

.

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by flecc

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-e-scooter-factsheet-2021/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-e-scooter-factsheet-2021#:~:text=there%20were%2010%20killed%20in,and%20354%20respectively%20in%202020

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-63492215

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUEJUmevY8E

For example the lack of arrests, believe me the Met Police were quick enough to arrest on the odd occasion where the driver was in the wrong.

 

It seems unlikely that cyclists who have been killed, when it was 100% their fault, would be arrested.

It seems unlikely that cyclists who have been killed, when it was 100% their fault, would be arrested.

 

Now you are just being deliberately cussed. I'd already specified in post 35 that I was speaking of driver arrests, and I repeated the mention of driver in an arrest context in the post 37 you replied to.

 

I'll leave you and the other like minded members to your fantasy world where invariably drivers are at fault and cyclists can do little wrong.

 

The truth is very different as the cycling presenter of last night's Panorama program admitted at the outset. That the vast majority of drivers are decent and considerate in their driving. And as I've added earlier, that we have by far the lowest road deaths of any country in the world is proof of that fact.

 

One further comment from last night's program, not one cyclist I saw in it was riding responsibly. Do you even know in what way?

.

The lack of arrests of drivers, involved in accidents with cyclists, is in no way directly related to whether the cyclist is partially or even fully to blame for an accident.

 

Most likley a lot of drivers get away with it due to lack of evidence, but to then assume that because the motorist is not charged the cyclist is therefore at fault is perverse.

It's easy to see how someone who hasn't cycled for many years, could now have their boots firmly planted in the other camp; experiences and views out of date. The climate of the roads is very different now, vehicles more numerous and too wide.

Edited November 3, 20223 yr by I893469365902345609348566

Most likley a lot of drivers get away with it due to lack of evidence, but to then assume that because the motorist is not charged the cyclist is therefore at fault is perverse.

 

As my posts clearly show I have not assumed that, only mentioned it as supporting evidence to what the cyclists were doing wrong in such as nearside overtaking.

 

I'll leave you to your bigotry.

.

It's easy to see how someone who hasn't cycled for many years, could now have their boots firmly planted on the other camp; experiernces and views out of date. The climate of the roads is very different now, vehicles more numerous and too wide.

 

If this is a snide reference to me, you are very wrong. I cycled through an over 70 year span into my eighties and for most of the 16 years since this forum opened in October 2006. As experienced members know that included doing reviews and tests for manufacturers which were reported in here, plus appearances at the odd e-biking event. If it weren't for heart trouble I would still be cycling.

 

And since I've spent the last 55 years primarily cycling and driving in London and the home counties, I think I'm well aware of today's roads climate. Particularly since that driving included trucks, pickups and cars, a breadth of experience obviously lacking in so many posting.

.

From last nights program 25% of drivers deliberately close pass cyclists, an admission of dangerous driving as it is premeditated.

From last nights program 25% of drivers deliberately close pass cyclists, an admission of dangerous driving as it is premeditated.

 

This certainly explains my recent and relevant experience of actually cycling on today's roads, not merely recalling memories of cycling years ago, when roads were less congested, and when cars were slimmer. Some of the ever more popular SUVs, are as wide as vans.

Edited November 3, 20223 yr by I893469365902345609348566

This certainly explains my recent and relevant experience of actually cycling on today's roads, not merely recalling memories of cycling years ago, when roads were less congested, and when cars were slimmer. Some of the ever more popular SUVs, are as wide as vans.

 

Little wonder that we've lost so many of our most valuable members, leaving in disgust at the posts of the increasing number of wilfully offensive members.

 

And why this forum is dying on its feet with hardly any input. Given the immense increase in e-biking over the two years of the pandemic, we should be flooded with input traffic and new members and the forum should be thriving.

 

Perhaps not surprising though, given that the government believes 12% of all car drivers are also cyclists. Obviously those cyclists wouldn't be impressed with all the anti car driver ranting they would see if popping in here.

.

Edited November 3, 20223 yr by flecc

When's the last time you actually rode your pedelec on the road? It's quite a different experience now for cyclists. Drivers are much more hostile than they have ever been.

You are very recent in this forum so won't have seen all my many posts in this subject, trying to prevent those needless deaths. All carried the details and links and I'm not going to repeat all that hard work.

 

Have you heard of bookmarks?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bookmark

When's the last time you actually rode your pedelec on the road? It's quite a different experience now for cyclists. Drivers are much more hostile than they have ever been.

 

Two years ago, though my cycling had been declining for two years before that, confined to utility trips. But all in heavy London and Home Counties traffic

 

As I've posted a number of times recently, driver attitudes to cyclists have vastly improved so I very strongly disagree with your contention. Ten and more years ago when cycling I would often be verbally abused by drivers, but as cycling increased that became more and more rare.

 

The last two abuse occasions I suffered were both from cyclists. One because in refusing to ride up the nearside of a truck at lights I'd inadvertantly blocked him from doing so. I moved for him to be silly though, but he still swore just the same. The other because he was so sure he had the right to dictate what I wore when cycling he became very abusive.

 

Frankly I'm appalled at how unreasonable your attitude is. You recently posted a video showing a car driver behaving entirely correctly in using a centre of the road right turn lane and clearly having seen you, stopping until you passed from the opposite direction before turning.

 

Your utterly unreasonable spoken response was "I think he was drunk".

.

Edited November 3, 20223 yr by flecc