Originally Posted by
cthenn
Def don't want to start an argument, it's useless, but I guess I somewhat object to the "racer boy" stereotype which is seemingly just as prevalent as those labeled as "Freds". Just because someone is wearing a skin tight kit, and rides fast, I don't think that makes them Tour de France wannabes or that everything is a race. There are a lot of guys who are fit enough that riding 20+mph is easy breezy for them. A lot of them do ride in packs, and there are definitely a fair share of them who are like that, thinking everything is a race, and that passing is challenging their manhood (in my experience, most of those are the 50+ year old MAMILs
). In fact, I can't even recall a time where some young dude got "offended" by a pass, almost without fail it's the older guys. I wish I was fit enough to cruise around that fast, or to be able to ride hard for hours on end. We agree that on the bridge, or other kinds of similar situations, there are always those who are not situationally aware, but for me the gawking tourists weaving all over the place riding 2, 3 abreast is worse. At least the racer boys generally have bike skills whereas I have to hold my breath going around some of these tourists!
Well, the tourist stereotype is also not fair if we're applying it to all tourists, heck, I've been one of those tourists on a bike (not on the GGB, but other places).
I think that bikingshearer's comment is completely fair if you also read his earlier post in this thread into it. He said, "
Not every tourist on a rental bike is clueless, and not every hard-core racer is selfish. In fact, most are not. Unfortunately, a large enough minority of both groups are, and the space is confined enough, to detract from the experience."
So the question isn't who is worse, the hard-core racers in general or the tourists in general, this isn't about stereotyping. The question is who is worse, the problem hard-core racers (a minority of hard-core racers) or the problem tourists (a minority if tourists) -- bikingshearer acknowledges that reasonable minds can differ as to which is worse, and that it is close. He seems to use "should know better" as his tiebreaker. That seems like not so much a "what puts our safety at risk more" assessment so much as a "what do we judge to be the more despicable behavior" assessment, and his reasoning is fair.
For me, on the GGB, the hard-core racers put my safety at risk more than the tourists, in part because the problem tourists don't come up from behind me, I am generally prepared for the danger the tourists present. I don't trust any of them, I see all who are near me, and I ride accordingly. Similarly, I don't trust the hard-core racers, but they can come up fast from behind, and in spite of the rear-view mirror attached to on my glasses, they are sometimes upon me before I realize they are coming, and if in a pack, it gets pretty dangerous. If I'm lucky enough see a speedy pack coming from behind on the GGB and I have time, I usually get off my bike before they get to me, for self-preservation purposes.
Forget the GGB, however, simply out on the roads of the East Bay, most of my close calls have been on more rural roads with the hard-core racer types blasting by. While the behavior is perhaps even scarier on the GGB where there is less space, on the GGB at least there is a reason for coming close, the confined space. Out on rural roads, there is no reason for them to come close like they often do. As a generalization, the larger the pack, the more likely their behavior is to be dangerous; even with the largest packs, it is a minority that is a problem (and probably a minority within the larger packs that are a problem), but those minorities should know better.