Dave,

Try it, it's one of the most exhilerating and rewarding pastimes I know of. Sure, it has associated risks, but the sheer sense of personal achievement of, say, getting to the top of an alpine pass, or the joy of hitting 40+ mph on a downhill (like I did last night) compensates for all of them. And like I say, risks aside, people who cycle have on average a greater life expectancy, and a larger number of healthy years, than people who don't. The same is probably true of other forms of physical exercise, but the sums have been done for cycling,

John

John,

I only managed to max out at 39.35 last night however I did average at just over 20 mph on a 35 mile chain gang ride last night.

Are you going to do the Phil Liggett CTC Challenge sportive next weekend?

This is an extract taken from the House of commons Transport select commitee report session 6 2009

"Estimates show that motoring taxation amounts to around £46 billion—this includes
fuel duty, VED, VAT and business motoring taxes. The amount spent on the roads is
less than a quarter of this—just over 30 years ago there was much greater equity with
£11.4 billion of £12.8 billion motoring tax revenues being spent on the roads."

Motorists are the most taxed group in the country!!

Road tax doesn't go on just road related stuff and never has. So that gets rid of that argument.

Does it really matter if people don't understand why others like cycling? We all have different likes and dislikes.

IMO the Holland report can't be taken into account for this country (and I have read into both sides of that argument) as they have a different infrastructure etc.

This whole thing is very much a case of it being very easy to find fault in something you don't share an interest in. I have recently made such a comment on an off-road running forum where poeple were slating off-road 4x4'ers for being destructive to the environment when in fact you could level the same argument at all the walkers eroding the hills in greater numbers.

There is good and bad in all things and in all people and generalisations do not help. And it is very easy to just see the faults in something you do not share a passion for.

Although I think people should wear helmets I don't think it should be enforced. Too much like a nanny state and as yet we are all free to make individual choices about our own lives.

Where does it end?

Helmets for cyclists. What about knee and back protection for cyclists.

What about applying the same principle to horse riders and motorbikers and quad bike riders and then what about all kids wearing head protection...and where does it end?

In our personal lives we should be free to choose.

By the way the counter argument for helmets and other forms of personal protection is that it makes people take greater risks because they feel less vulnerable. It is the debate that is raging on the ski slopes of Europe. Many believe that those that wear helmets, ski/board more aggressively becuase of it (not saying i agree or disgaree just that that is the argument).

As for insurance I pay enough insurance of one form or another. No more!!

I have travelled by car and bike this week and have seen several near misses, all caused by car drivers failure to follow basic comment procedures i.e. mirror use, respect for other road users etc. to digress slightly perhaps car drivers as well as their cars need an annual competence check.


Cyclists are often slated because of a few poor cyclists - there are far more poor drivers who risk everyones lives, the far majority of us cycle safely and obey the rules of the road, and if we hold up other traffic temporarily so be it, we are entitled to use the road. - (so do milk floats, horses, mopeds etc.) If you think you are likely to be held up by cyclists on your regular route, then allow more time for the journey.

With regards to the comments on the cycle profficiency, I did mine many years ago, I've also (by reason of some voluntary work I do) done the more 'modern' competency based course. I personally thought my original 'traditional' course was far more practical based and more suited to learner need.

I choose to wear a cycle hat, as I believe it will protect my head in some accident circumstances. (also stops me arriving at work with too much of a bad hair day) But there are other things cyclists can do which will have more benefit, such as preventing accidents by riding safely and making sure they are visible particularly in poor light conditions.

There is nothing like a debate on cycling to create division. I cycle to commute and for pleasure around Manchester. I try to be very considerate to my fellow users. However, that same consideration is all to often not reciprocated. 1 in 5 cars that I passed on Thursday had drivers who were not paying full attention, several cars occupied the advanced stop line, intended to get cyclists in a position of safety AND out of the way quickly. One driver of a white van took exception to me going in front of him at such a junction. He genuinely did not understand that he was prohibited from entering it through the highway code. Equally I see many (frustratingly slow) cyclists who run red lights, hop on and off pavements and have total disregard. As for no lights...

I'd like to see both vehicle and cycle offenders dealt with but the UK PLC is not resourced to do so. Like with many things, if more took responsibility for their own actions then society would be in a better shape.

The comments about cyclists causing environmental damage are slightly off the mark - it is generally cars that cause congestion, if you want to avoid it then jump on a bike.

I accept the argument about competency of all road users and the Bike right scheme should be compulsory for children and those buying bikes on a bike to work scheme or other occupational scheme. Realistically that is the only point at which you could enforce.

So yes, there may be issues but as a profession do we want to define ourselves again as kill joys? We need people to exercise personal responsibility within a sensible framework that is enforced proportionately. Cycling is not a particularly risky activity and I for one would like to see more of us embracing controlled risk. How many of us climb, skydive, hang glide etc? I know of a few others - and their approach to doing exciting things is fantastic - the unwritten requirement that underpins these activities is that YOU make sure the right controls are in place (including equipment checks), you are competent and those you rely on are competent too.

I've lost 33% of my body weight in three years of cycling, am fitter than I was when I played national level basketball and have not had any time off sick. Hopefully I will see the day when the dutch approach is adopted here, all road users working together, respectfully, whether on foot or any form of wheel. I fear tho' that we are all to engrossed in our own rights to see it happen.

I am a pedestrian, cyclist and motorist but, in whichever role I happen to be, I try to act towards others as I would expect other people to act towards me; I am nearly always disappointed.
With regard to cycling on the pavement, I do not do it; if you are old enough to be cycling without stabilisers, you are old enough to cycle on the road (although you might want to ask your dad to go with you). Cycling on the pavement only confirms the view held by some motorists that they own the road and everybody should keep out of their way.
On a more general point, no one can be selective in the laws they choose to obey and then get upset when someone else is choosy, too.
For those who object to cyclists being exempt from vehicle excise duty, you could always campaign for a change in the law but, in the meantime, you will just have to take it on the chin.

LB

I'm a cyclist (since 2007) and I commute to work 5 days a week.
I have to say that when I first decided to cycle to work (using my employers cycle scheme) I hadn't ridden a bike in about 15 years or so. I started going to work on quiet roads and canal towpaths and then all on roads as it was quicker. Before I did this I had 2 hours of tuition from a Bikeability approved instructor as I wanted to do it properly. It covered junctions, busy roads, roundabouts etc and road positioning etc. Well worth the £3.00 it cost me!
I also joined the Cyclists Touring Club as this provides me with 3rd party insurance and expert legal cover.
I have tried to be as responsible as I can and see both bad drivers and so called cyclists (who are licky to be alive IMO).
I also wear a helmet as I am a bit accident prone!!
I live in the west midlands and we have high rates of obesity.They should get more people on their bikes. The more bikes on the roads mean the more safe they will become.

I live in a rural community with a large cycle centre locally. There are a lot of single track roads in which cyclists either ride in the centre of the road giving the motorist no opportunity to pass for miles potentially, or they ride two a breast. I see a cyclist most mornings who has already been knocked off his bike once (not the motorists fault apperntly according to witnesses) wobble and waver from one side of the road to the other. I was in London a couple of weeks ago and saw a cyclist hit a pedestrian up into the air and then completely blame the pedestrian. He was riding like he was at the olympics. And with reference to horses nothing frustrates me more than a rider on a busy, bendy A road when there is a 5 meter plus verge. Personally I like cycles and if it was suitable for my job I would use one. I love horses and my family rides but agrees that horses should not be on A roads other than crossing, or on the verges. My pet hate though has to be head sets MP3's etc. I,m sure if they were banned for cyclists pedestrians, horse riders etc less accidents and mistakes would occur. They are like mobile phones in cars. Has anyone considered a survey to find out how many accidents where cycle users are using head sets of some sort? I bet it would be quite substantial percentages wether it was considered the cyclists fault or not.

It's certainly the CTC view and they cite evidence. See http://www.ctc.org.uk/re...TC_Safety_in_Numbers.pdf

Here's my evidence courtesy of Yes Minister

Compulsory cycle training for everyone. Now why do I feel another DM story on the way about "elf and safety"?

My imput would be that Cyclists/Pedestrians and horses still have the right of way on the highway, so whatever our interpritation, car drivers have to give way and show common courtesy at all times!

Prsumably more perception not the considered assessment of a specialist ?

This thread really does show the profession in poor light.

Rather too long in the pub at lunchtime! I think I missed the 'more' and any comparison with mountain biking; sorry. The second point was (probably) a more general comment about some of the other nonsense posted; perhaps, they'd just come back from the pub, too.

As it is now Monday, this Friday topic is now locked.

Paul