Protecting Our Rights from GroupThink
E-mails are flying and cycling forums are full of the story of the Town of Jupiter (FL) considering passage of a local code limiting the size of cycling groups. As often happens when reactionary minds get together, the proposed law goes too far, requiring nonsense such as bells and “safety” flags on bikes, and it seems to limit the ability for solo cyclists to drive as defensively as State law allows.
Responses from local cycling groups has also been disappointing. The more vocal folks seem to believe the solution is for everyone to ride single file and hug the edge of the road. For years now I have been arguing that the problem with groups rides in Florida is primarily group size. But few if any of the clubs and groups seem willing to try reducing group size.
Keeping the same size groups and going single file along the edge will not solve the problem, and it may make things worse.
Cyclists ride two abreast because humans are naturally social animals. The desire to ride side-by-side and talk to somebody will create constant tension between those attempting to keep everyone single-file and those who just want to enjoy the ride.
Long, single-file pacelines are inherently squirrelly at the end, and dropping back after a pull takes quite a while with a big group, so there will often be at least one rider outside the line.
Hugging the edge invites motorists to pass when it’s not safe to do so. They will squeeze by within the lane (many rural roads have lanes of 10 or 11 feet wide), and in many cases pass closer than three feet.
The problem isn’t cyclists “riding in the middle of the lane;” it’s cyclists making it difficult for motorists to pass by choosing to travel in large packs. Larger groups leads to other problems, too.
Groupthink is dangerous stuff. With larger groups…
- Personal responsibility decreases.
- Competition and “testosterone poisoning” increase.
- Communication between cyclists decreases.
- The influence of more experienced and level-headed riders is diminished.
- Complying with traffic control devices becomes more problematic.
Take a look at the scenarios below and think about which strategy will result in less motorist delay and frustration and greater safety.
Please folks. Let’s not shoot ourselves in the feet over this issue. Those of us who’ve been riding safely and successfully for years in small, two-abreast groups that motorists can pass easily don’t want to be seen as the scofflaws.
26. August 2009 at 10:04 pm :
Might, great analysis.
I used to lead a lot of paceline rides, with 10-15 people in the group. That’s enough to make you pay attention to your interactions with overtaking motorists.
What I observed was that motorists perceived it as a polite gesture to “single up” EVEN THOUGH we were on a narrow road (18 feet wide, as in two 9-foot lanes, no shoulder) and the motorist had to cross the center line to pass us anyway. The fact that the group he had to pass was twice as long didn’t seem to matter.
We caved in to the appearance of politeness (as opposed to the reality) and singled up routinely.
If there’s an answer to this, I don’t know what it is. Roadside education has very low limits.
John Schubert
Limeport.org
27. August 2009 at 8:49 am :
Thanks John. In Florida (especially down on A1A in South Florida and on the fringes of many large urban areas) the problem is often that the motorist has to deal with quite a bit of on-coming traffic. Going single-file at the edge will invite the squeeze pass. Going single-file in the right wheel track (or farther out) will mean a much longer gap is required from on-coming traffic.
27. August 2009 at 12:54 pm :
20 riders 4 abreast is the same as 10 riders 2 abreast.
If motorists need to change lanes to pass anyway, then 4 abreast is no different than 2.
The same discrimination and faulty logic that creates far-to-the-right laws also imposes no-more-than-2 abreast laws.
Wayne
27. August 2009 at 1:21 pm :
Of course you’re right Wayne. But we’re in no position to challenge the existing law. The major offenders are often running stop signs and signals, too (not to mention stuff like public urination…). It’s hard enough to play defense when you have fools on your team; forget about offense!
28. August 2009 at 8:08 am :
Over the course of many years of bike touring, I’ve cycled throughout the US and I’ve come to believe that the problem isn’t cyclists but rather the attitude of drivers when approaching cyclists, whether one or many. In bike-friendly states, cars are patient as they understand that their actions, when passing cyclists, can kill. One misstep, and the cyclists life could be wiped out. In other states, I’ve had cars follow me for many minutes, patiently waiting for safe passing time with nary a burst of angry impatience. Several years ago in Iowa, a truck followed me for a full fifteen minutes on a very rainy day, on a narrow road, while I struggled up a long hill. On the top of the hill, I had the chance to move over and the truck driver waved and cautiously passed by. I’ve just returned from cycling in Wyoming–you can’t even imagine how far to the left those four-wheelers veer when they see a cyclists on the road. These drivers do not have anger in their hearts–rather they understand the danger to us if we collide. In Florida, the attitude is that cyclists do not belong on the roadways and drivers act accordingly. In Florida, shackles rise when drivers approach cyclists; not so in other states. In some states I’ve ridden in, cyclists have told me that they would never ride in Florida as Florida has the reputation of being a death trap for cyclists. Since a car can kill a cyclist, and not the other way around, it is the driver of a vehicle that has the weapon of mass destruction in his hands, thus, it is a driver that is in control and the driver MUST use his weapon with EXTREME care because it is, truly, a matter of life and death. The secret is– patience and consideration and a deep understanding that misuse of the DMV, can result in loss of life.
The question is: How do we cyclists get Florida to become a truly bike-friendly place such as Calif., OR, WA or CO??? If they can do it in these states, we can do it in ours!!
dianne franz/Palm Harbor, FL
28. August 2009 at 2:29 pm :
Dianne,
I’ve noticed different behavior in various places as well. Florida drivers do have a reputation for intolerance which stands apart from group behavior. Stupid passing behavior exists pretty much everywhere I’ve ridden, except Amish Country.
But even within Florida, there is remarkably increased intolerance in places where large packs of riders operate regularly. One of the problems with a flat state is that people of limited skill and fitness can suck wheel and hang onto a pack of riders for 40 miles. Add the year-round weather and the year-round social aspect to the flat terrain, and I’d be willing to bet our groups are larger and more obnoxious than in most northern, hilly states.
We need to be careful about tossing around the “death-trap” figures. There are many factors that contribute to our annual FAR. Not the least of which is year-round cycling. And, like it or not, incompetent and illegal cyclist behavior plays a significant role in those numbers. Complaining about how dangerous it is to ride on Florida roads will only backfire — it doesn’t make anyone want to change motorist behavior, it just makes them want to get us off the road all-the-more.
28. August 2009 at 3:58 pm :
Florida’s nasty motorists and high cyclist fatalities are a correlation, but I don’t think they are necessarily causally related. A number of years ago Dwight Kingsbury analyzed a years worth of cycling fatals. Only 5% involved an adult roadway cyclist traveling in the daytime and obeying the rules of the road. Cycling professionals from out of state have noted how terrible _bicyclist_ behavior is here compared to other states.
There is however a pretty clear correlation of climate and bicyclist fatalities. The states with the highest rates are mostly sunbelt; the lowest mostly icebox.
There may be something however to aggressive motorists resulting in bad cycling behavior. Novice cyclists try to “hide” from motorists to keep from incurring their wrath, and hiding leads to crashes.
29. August 2009 at 1:16 pm :
I have an interesting question. What comprises a “group”? If I’m operating my vehicle legally upon the roadway, and come upon 5 others operating legally upon the roadway, am I (are we) breaking the law? I’m not operating ~with~ them, but behind or in front of them. My destination may be the same by coincidence, or it may not. Who is to decide this? Every day when I’m operating my vehicle legally upon the road I come upon others doing the same. Am I therefor in violation of the law?
You’ll notice that I said “vehicle” and not “bicycle”. The state law is very plain in this regard. Bicycles ~are~ vehicles under the state law, and have all the priveleges and responsibilities of any other vehicle. So, if I’m in my car and come upon 5 other “vehicles”, am I in a “group”? If so, we must all be in violation of the law!
In a nutshell, we don’t need new laws. The exising ones, if enforced, are more than adequate.
Jack
29. August 2009 at 1:50 pm :
Jack:
You’ll get no argument from me that we don’t need a new law on this matter. But just because something is legal doesn’t mean doing it is in our best interest. I’m of course not talking about you coming up on a group of five riders, but of a group of 20, 30, 40 etc riders deciding to not split up, even though they know staying in one group annoys and delays some other folks.
To me it’s about being Mindful and respectful of others, not what should or should not be illegal. Balancing one’s own desires against those of others.
29. August 2009 at 3:32 pm :
Certainly! And timing is important, too. What may not be a problem on a lazy Sunday afternoon may be a serious impediment on a Friday at 5:30 p.m.! Courtesy goes a long way, for all users of the road. I think that’s the more important issue. Educate/remind all users of the road of their basic legal responsibilities, as well as their “golden rule” responsibilities.
4. October 2009 at 2:07 pm :
I can’t agree with you more. I’ve been in groups as large as 50, and somewhere past 15 the group goes from functional and pleasant to ride in to clearly being too large for its own good.
Convincing everyone to break up early is difficult though. Many riders aren’t sure yet if they want to jump on with the fast group, or hang back with their usual pace. The first big hill (which is a long way into the ride in the land of flat Nebraska) often separates the group out.