General: PREMIUM RUSH

that should provide some insight.

Posted By: quixoticleWho is lickedwicked?

I feel like you've been here forever, but forgot you weren't here when lickedwicked was making us tear things apart over his trolling

Yeah, was hoping that question would instigate something or other. What this site needs is a good influx of new blood! Let's cut a deal with MTV or something. Would that work?

Posted By: END00291I guess that means I'm old

wut

I threw an OR in there because I was joking, but I have noticed that I can't do the same things that I could a few years ago, like long distance running. I watch anything that has to do with cycling when it pops up on the tube mountain bike tv sounds kool.

This thread has everything. I'm so happy to be back.

Posted By: SkidMarkThis is what it really looks like

@ 1:15

wait... WUT!?!

As entertaining as this movie seems, I have a hard time watching this kind of crap. it makes cyclists in general look bad, especially since most of the people in that preview had no regard for the safety of others. If I was driving a car and saw one of these clowns I would get extremely pissed off. Imagine its wet out, and in like one of the scenes, a car slams its brakes as a reaction to some idiot cutting in front of them, and loses control, running into pedestrians or other cars, and potentially killing or injuring people. Way to make urban cycling look bad.

If you actually rode this aggressively you would know that their "line" is BEHIND the car you think they are "cutting in front of". Nobody is playing chicken with cars or trying to cause them to stop. The idea is to cross the intersection without impeding traffic at all. In other words the idea is to not end up under a car. If these idiots overreacting and slamming on their brakes would just continue forward at the same speed the bike would go behind them like the rider was planning.

Think about the fact that in most of these circumstances the bikes are going as fast or even faster than the cars. Car drivers whine about bikes impeding traffic. What about when these idiots in their tin boxes stack up at a light? I'm supposed to sit there sucking in exhaust fumes while there is a green light in front of me? Fuck that, I am going to filter my way through, changing lanes because mirrors stick out and car drivers cannot seem to find the center of the lane and hug the line either to the right or left. Some of them see you coming up and try to block you, great way to lose a mirror or get spit on.

Also people in cars and on motorcycles illegally street race all the time. Burnouts, wheelies, drifting, all kinds of "irresponsible behavior". And this is on top of the zillions of moving violations that "regular" people commit.

Can we talk about hit-and-runs?

How many times have you been told "I didn't see you"?

Posted By: SkidMarkThink about the fact that in most of these circumstances the bikes are going as fast or even faster than the cars. Car drivers whine about bikes impeding traffic. What about when these idiots in their tin boxes stack up at a light? I'm supposed to sit there sucking in exhaust fumes while there is a green light in front of me? Fuck that, I am going to filter my way through, changing lanes because mirrors stick out and car drivers cannot seem to find the center of the lane and hug the line either to the right or left. Some of them see you coming up and try to block you, great way to lose a mirror or get spit on.

I appreciate your comments, and I think I was both being a little harsh and somewhat restricted in my argument, because I am not trying to defend cars or drivers at all. I understand the logic that the line is variable to whatever is going on, adjusting for whatever traffic does. And if someone is good enough (eg the brunelle types), it is very unlikely that anything bad happen to anyone with that kind of riding (as he says in the film). I also understand that no one is playing chicken or saying "I dont give a shit about what happens to the cars, I just want to get past them." I was not trying to make an argument as much about following laws as I was about certain decisions made that could (potentially) put other people at risk. I was thinking of minute 1:32 in the preview video you posted earlier. Even if you say bikes will adjust to what the car does, and make decisions based on what is feasible without changing the actions of the drivers, that does not translate into cars reacting the way cyclists would like them to. People have a false sense of security when they drive: not only do they not pay as much attention as they should, but they dont treat their vehicle like the piece of machinery that it actually is. That is how driving culture is and always has been. If someone (a good driver or bad) sees a bike in the middle of the street when they have a green light, and are going 40 miles an hour some 50 meters away, their reaction might be to slam on the brakes, EVEN IF the cyclist does not pose a direct threat because he/she is making a decision based on what the car is doing or will do. Imagine it is wet, the car looses control, and the path of the car is no longer something anyone could have predicted.

I used to ride "like that". Since I work from home now I have been away from this kind of riding of late. But I am fully aware that this kind of riding is safer than most because you will get run over if you ride what most non cyclist would call "a respectable way." I know DC is no NYC, but when I first started riding my bike in that city, I did most of what you may think I am arguing against (with the exception of riding through perpendicular traffic). Mexico City is honeslty a whole other story, because cars do not adjust to cyclists or pedestrians here (every day in the newspaper their is a picture of a dead pedestrian or cyclist on the front cover of the yellow journalism papers). I rode for a year and a half with the mentality that I need to create my own lines to not get killed, and it worked for the most part (I was only run over once, and it was probably because I was not paying as much attention as I should...despite the fact that anyone -cyclist or non -would agree the cab was 100% to blame). The point I am trying to make is that I am not against that kind of urban riding. I recognize it is necessary to both remain on your bike and keep yourself from getting hurt, and maybe more importantly get to where you need to get in a reasonable amount of time. I for one only ride "behind" cars in traffic when I am with my wife, otherwise my instict tells me to keep moving and following that invisible line. I can come up with plenty of other scenarios: the girl jogging when she has the right of way (the bike may think he timed her correctly, but maybe she is not aware, and not only does she not stop as she did abruptly in the film, but maybe she speeds up?) I know it is very uncommon, but there have been people killed after being hit by bikes (an old lady is not going to be able to react quick enough or even predictably)

All this aside, the point I am trying to make is that there is what I believe to be a smart way to do it and a stupid way. maybe the clips are bad examples because they are alley cat races where peoples' motivation to keep moving despite the possibility of an accident is directed by something less ordinary. I in no way wanted to bring up the illegality of car and motorcycle behavior (which I believe to be 10000000x more apparent than cycling behavior), and I for one hate most cars even when I am walking. In mexico city there is no such thing as the right of way, and the combination of stupid drivers and "i dont give a shit" drivers have put me at risk so my times that I myself hate driving anywhere. So believe me, this is not an argument taking sides with drivers in any way, shape, or form. And I have been told a thousand times that I was not seen...