I-Like-To-Bike

As another poster has already stated, you and other self appointed experts are free to repeat Serious Cyclist™ Gospel about WRONG or NOT PROPER bicycling technique (or what seat height is TOO LOW) based on whatever criteria you and your comrades have determined are the ONLY PROPER criteria (presumably seeking the holy grail of "maximizing efficiency") to evaluate PROPER bicycle equipment or bicycling technique.

retswerb

Good lord. The woman in the video may not have been wRoNg or NoT pRoPeR either, but I'll bet she doesn't want to do it that way again. It's ok to say that some ways of doing things are good, and others not. This is particularly true when one way of doing things ends with you rolling down into a ravine, and another way of doing things wouldn't.

Jeff Neese

I'm not going to get hung up on terms like "right and wrong" or "proper and improper". How about "safely and unsafely"? You can Google any variation of "How to stop and start on a bicycle", and the basic technique is the same in all of them. In this aspect of cycling, there actually is a right way and a wrong way. Hell, the OP even posted a video of someone doing it the wrong way, and the results are exactly why this skill needs to be learned. I suspect some of the people offering resistance (because they've been doing it differently) are seeing some of these videos for the first time, and saying "Oh."

Some of the responses here are either hilarious, or unsettling, given that this subforum is called Advocacy and Safety. I think we all should advocate for greater safety, and proper start and stop techniques are an important part of that. The woman in the ravine can attest to that. Nobody taught her.

Maybe every new rider should read Sheldon's treatise on the topic, and watch the accompanying video, here: Starting and Stopping. Worth noting that he uses the term "correct".

Of course the video shows the same technique as all the others. The right way, the safe way. Other nuggets include (bold is the author's) -

cyccommute 

Again, it is very clear in the video that the woman did not try to lean to the left. She put her foot down from the saddle to the right and the drop was too far down. Had she dismounted the saddle by moving forward off the saddle as she stopped, she would have been far more likely to stop with the right foot down without toppling over the edge of a cliff. She wouldn’t have had to lean the bike at all and would have been more stable over all. Trying to put a toe or foot down from the saddle necessitates a lean and makes putting your foot on the ground in the wrong place much more likely and, thus, more prone to toppling over…and falling down cliffs.

I-Like-To-Bike

Then why choose to use those loaded judgemental terms to define the "ONLY" correct technique for all situations and all riders except for recumbent and other outlier bicycles until challenged?

Jeff Neese

I'm perfectly happy to cede the debate over semantics, and just adopt Sheldon Brown's verbiage. He refers to the preferred technique as "Correct", and I'm fine with that. No judgement, and there's no shame in not knowing. But now you do.

rumrunn6

whoa, poor kid

fwiw - after seeing someone else do the following, that's what I do now. as I roll up to a planned stop, I unclip & let that foot dangle. I'm off & have a reminder which foot is going down

that young lady was following a bit too closely. plan for the unplanned, eh?

FBinNY 

As you pointed out earlier, we watched different videos.

I saw a humorous vignette of compost happening and had the same reaction as the victim and her friend.

You saw an object lesson, and are highly invested in using it to support your warnings about dismounting while seated.

Given my lack of investment, I don't see the point in arguing, though, of course you're free to continue.

Jeff Neese

Except that this subforum is about Advocacy and Safety, not FailArmy or America's Funniest Videos.

We all saw an object lesson - it's just that not everyone understands what that lesson is. Just because she walked away relatively unharmed doesn't negate the lesson. She was lucky - the end result could have gone in a completely different direction and become a tragedy. Plenty of people aren't so lucky and end up injured, because they make the same mistake.

cyccommute 

For some one who is so disinvested you keep coming back to tell everyone…and others who, indeed, see this as an object lesson… that I, and they, are wrong. Curious.

FBinNY 

Except that I'm not the one telling experienced cyclists the ONE AND ONLY CORRECT way to do something that's already second nature by now.

Were it not for the insistence that there's ONLY one correct way, I would have moved on long ago.

You and Jeff are invested because you see yourself as on a mission, I'm less so because I'm happy to let people ride and dismount whatever way works for them.

I-Like-To-Bike

Here is an object lesson. Semantics matter.

A well known self appointed bicycling safety expert on a mission spent over 40 years browbeating anyone who would listen to his advocacy and safety message with judgemental terms about wrong vs. right, correct vs improper, scientific vs. superstitious bicycling techniques and bicycling safety in an unsuccessful attempt to promote his education program on the ONLY PROPER WAY to ride a bicycle. He also believed in "educating" the non-believers that there is only one way to be CORRECT, his way.

A refusal to consider semantics important or ignoring the counter productive effect of insulting and negative judgemental language in descriptions of cyclists who don't comply with an alleged ONLY PROPER WAY to ride a bicycle "education" program will drown out whatever merit such an advocacy program might have for the general bicycling public.

downtube42

I always teach the technique of sliding off the saddle to stop, sliding on the saddle after rolling. It's safe, stable, controlled.

Risk averse students may never do anything else. Nothing wrong with that.

I expect adventurous students will eventually test boundaries when I'm not around. Step off the side while rolling, throwing the leg over the saddle or perhaps over the top tube. Hop off to the side all at once. Stand upright with one foot on the seat and the other on the stem, arms spread like an airplane. Jump off the back (to see the bike roll away). Lean against a tree. Put a foot down on a log. Put their hand on a buddy's shoulder. Track stand. Wheelie then hop in place. And yes, even put down a toe and balance that way precariously. Many of these experiments will result in falls and scrapes. Maybe the occasional broken arm. These students will learn much about balance, control, recovering, risk and rewards. They will understand why I taught the method I taught, and they will also understand what they can (and cannot) do. I would never teach this; it is to be experienced.

When it's all said and done, the student who has become master may choose to roll to a stop seated and put down a toe. They will do it safely. Safer, even, than the student who never took a risk could ever hope to stop a bicycle. They have transcended the rules, and do what they know they can do.

CliffordK

I must say that the whole thing is just too funny!!!!

I don't see any sign of foot retention.

It is in Italian, and the man calls her "amore".... or his love. Yet, he is slow to follow her down the hill. However, she does repeat "sto bene" several times, or that she is saying she is fine.

The one addition that I'd make was that she was following too close to the car in front of her. While she was able to stop, if she had been 30 feet back, she could have slowed enough that there would have been no need to stop. Plus, it gives one more time to assess the situation.

cyccommute 

Just as with the video, you are misinterpreting what I said. I’m not telling you how to stop but was only noting that with my saddle at the height recommended by most experienced people…leg slightly bent at the bottom of the stroke…my foot doesn’t even come close to being able to touch the ground. I tested it yesterday. With size 11 feet on a touring bike with a very low bottom bracket, I had to stretch a long way to get the very end of my shoe to touch the ground while rolling. I would have had to lean the bike over at close to a 45° to get more than the very end of the shoe on the ground while still seated on the saddle…and that is on the bike with the lowest bottom bracket (11”) I own. On mountain bikes with around 13” bottom brackets the reach to the ground is even further.

You can dismount anyway you like. I don’t care. For newbies, I will still suggest that they don’t try to put a toe down because they are far more likely to topple over than if they plant a foot firmly on the ground. All I need as evidence is the linked video above. I’ll also suggest that they ride with more extension on their leg so that they can’t put a foot on the ground while seated because it’s easier on the knees and they get more power out of their pedal stroke.

I’m on a mission to help people find the bicycling experience more enjoyable. Falling over when you come out a stop usually isn’t viewed as an enjoyable experience. Having sore knees because you saddle is too low usually isn’t an enjoyable experience.

cyccommute 

He Who Must Not Be Named’s message wasn’t bad. It was the delivery and the person delivering it. Riding a bicycle like you belong on the road is far better than riding a bicycle like you don’t. I hate the whole “protected lane” movement going on everywhere now because it tells drivers that we cyclist belong “over there” and they have no problem telling us that any time we happen to venture into their territory. Never mind that those protected lanes end up as being the garbage heaps of the road or are shoehorned into the road where half of the lane is a gutter pan with a large linear crack running down the middle of it. “You belong over there because the road is for cars!”, is their response when a cyclist doesn’t want to do a (stupid) pedestrian left turn.

He Who Must Not Be Named was a turd and a jerk and an all around unlikable fellow. But he wasn’t wrong.

I-Like-To-Bike

Which just reinforces what I posted, Semantics Matter and even if the Message is good, it will be ignored (at best) by most people except true believers when it is loaded with unnecessary absolutist and emotional semantics by the messenger.

CliffordK

Looking at the video, the woman doesn't seem to straighten the legs out when pedaling, as is frequently the case with city bikes.

I think it is quite likely that she could have at least gotten a toe on the ground while still on the saddle if the road was flat.

However, in this case, her bike was likely on the pavement, and the foot off the pavement, and down perhaps 2" lower than usual.

So, on flat pavement, it may be safe to remain on the seat. But, overall, safer on mixed terrain to hop off the seat when putting a foot down.

Jeff Neese

What's safest is to develop the habit and muscle memory of sliding forward off the seat, straddling the top bar, and planting your foot firmly on the ground when coming to a stop. To quote Sheldon Brown (and is something most of us already know) "Do not try to sit on the saddle while the bike is stopped. " The video is why.

It seems as though she came up too quickly on that car, and had to stop suddenly, almost like a panic stop. In those situations your body will do what you've trained it to do by practicing. You don't "decide" how to stop, when you're in that situation. Stopping the correct way should be the default and drilled until it becomes second nature, so that it will be what you automatically do without thinking. Good habits and muscle memory come into play all the time in cycling, not just stopping. It's one of the foundations of good safety.

The title of this thread should really be "This doesn't have to happen to anyone, ever .... foot plant fail".

jon c. 

I'm more of the opinion that it can indeed happen to anyone. We might like to think we have great expertise and have created in ourselves a finely tuned machine that will always react appropriately. But I think humans are always going to be prone to potential error. Of course we should learn how to attempt to avoid pratfalls and always be mindful of the potential for problems, but we'll never completely avoid them and accidents will happen. I would never tempt fate by boldly asserting that it can't happen to me.