Today January 2023

[kiwisimon]

I have been in the exact same situation dozens of times. That should not have been a close call even. Just a mild irritation that I have to hit my brakes.
That was object fixation, panic, etc... I think.

Fixed on watching his twitch screen, explains the deep tuck and not looking at a car 30M in front of him. Whats funny：obviously Aussie swears like a stockman and then sits down and goes into high pitch 痛い痛い
If you can walk and talk you ain't that hurt.

 

[OreoCookie]

I have been in the exact same situation dozens of times. That should not have been a close call even. Just a mild irritation that I have to hit my brakes.
That was object fixation, panic, etc... I think.

Yup. This is a standard situation, and using indicator lights at the last second is a “normal thing” in Japan. Although here, this wasn't particularly bad for Japan. I wonder whether this guy was new to Japan?

He could have slowed down and/or overtaken the car on the right — after brushing off some speed and checking for oncoming cars, obviously. Object fixation could definitely be a contributing factor.

However, I don't think it is binary: the driver also should have been aware of the cyclist. I assume he overtook him before turning left, and he should have considered just waiting behind him for a few seconds and then turn. A lot of drivers severely underestimate the speed of cyclists, especially that of road bikes.

I have had it happen that some douche in a kei car overtook me (sometimes me and riding buddies), just to immediately initiate a left turn. One guy got really lucky, because we were able to avoid crashing into him. If we had, that would have been very expensive for the driver (or his insurance).

 

[OreoCookie]

If you can walk and talk you ain't that hurt.

I don't think that's accurate. When you get into an accident, you are full of adrenaline and you might not realize how badly you are hurt. I have had that happen to me on at least two occasions.

Is that what is happening here? Probably not. But if you see a buddy or a stranger getting up after a crash, don't assume they are ok.

 

[kiwisimon]

My first aid training tells me when doing triage, the screamers and walkers ain't that critical.
Maybe I have experienced and seen too many sportsmen and others break bones and tear tissue and do nothing except swear.
YMMV.

 

[kiwisimon]

However, I don't think it is binary: the driver also should have been aware of the cyclist. I assume he overtook him before turning left, and he should have considered just waiting behind him for a few seconds and then turn. A lot of drivers severely underestimate the speed of cyclists, especially that of road bikes.

don't think that was the case here. How much room does a cyclist need after passing?

Hope the cops get to see this video. I'm 100% sympathetic to the driver.

 

[OreoCookie]

don't think that was the case here. How much room does a cyclist need after passing?

I think you view this situation from the perspective of blame rather than accident avoidance, the way airplane crashes are investigated these days. This situation is a very common accident pattern, and even if you are not legally responsible (as a driver or cyclist), I think working on ways to make it less likely is still the right way to go.

In this case, the driver knew when he wanted to turn left and that there was a cyclist. The cyclist did not know what the driver intended to do. I cannot tell whether the driver left enough space, it is a bit hard to judge distances with cameras. But look at it this way: the driver could have avoided that this accident could have occurred in the first place by waiting what looks like an extra 10–15 seconds. And if the driver misjudged the speeds, distances or acceleration of his vehicle, it could be much worse. Plus, it really would enhance safety if Japanese drivers started using their indicators much earlier than the vast majority do (one of my few gripes with Japanese drivers who on average are much better behaved than those in the other countries I have lived in).

In this case the rider was watching his smartphone, and that shifts a lot of responsibility on his shoulders. But I think that’s the exception rather than the rule, and the driver couldn’t know that. The startle effect that @bloaker mentioned is also known contributor to accidents. It happened to me once in an accident that wasn’t my fault.

Hope the cops get to see this video. I'm 100% sympathetic to the driver.

That sounds vindictive. Yes, the cyclist was stupid and irresponsible. But I don’t know, I don’t think it was worth getting hurt over.

 

[OreoCookie]

My first aid training tells me when doing triage, the screamers and walkers ain't that critical.

Critical injury isn’t the same as serious injury.

After a serious accident (not my fault), under shock, I refused the information by the driver, the offer by the driver to drive me to uni. In retrospect, that was completely stupid and I was under shock. (The driver was super nice, and even though he was at fault, it was an honest mistake. He just came home from a night shift.)

Instead, I took my bike, rushed to uni, because I had to administer oral exams the entire day and didn’t want to let others down. I felt very little pain, although I was drooped over the table. After an entire day of administering oral exams, I went to hospital. I was diagnosed with a broken rib, distended/torn shoulder ligaments and a sprained/suspected broken wrist/hand. (Fun fact, my mom worked at the hospital and took the X-rays herself.) I had to live 3 weeks at my parents home as I had to wear a shoulder strap contraption and a cast on my opposite hand (i. e. both hands were disabled). I had to take strong painkillers just to sleep and get up (broken ribs really suck).

At least in my broader sphere this wasn’t the only case, I know of a lot of cases where someone had an accident during the day, didn’t think too much of it and had to go to hospital in the evening, because it was more serious than they thought.

 

[jdd]

... the driver also should have been aware of the cyclist. I assume he overtook him before turning left, and he should have considered just waiting behind him for a few seconds and then turn. A lot of drivers severely underestimate the speed of cyclists, especially that of road bikes.

No way. The car was way out front, and it wasn't a last minute signal, not at all. The cyclist wasn't paying attention--especially for his speed.

That road bikes go fast means the rider needs to be aware, not that drivers do. If the cyclist had been in a car, then should the driver in front somehow have been careful so they didn't get rear-ended? Cars are faster than road bikes, so maybe if the driver got rear-ended by a car there, then hey, they should have known someone fast was behind them.

This cyclist is even dull enough to post this publicly. As I said above, the insurance company for the driver of that car would be interested in this video.

edit: there's the briefest glimpse of the cyclist's head in the car window at the :09-:10 point, and even when going thru it frame by frame I'm still not sure if the guy had a helmet on, or just a cap. (I think just a cap)

 

[jdd]

 

[OreoCookie]

No way. The car was way out front, and it wasn't a last minute signal, not at all. The cyclist wasn't paying attention--especially for his speed.

Compared to the laws in other countries, the signal is very late. In Germany the recommendation I am aware of is 30 m, and a quick search revealed a case where a driver who claimed to have started his turn signal 3 m before making the turn was found to be responsible for another car rear ending it.

Japan ≠ Germany, but I do think that drivers in Japan often use the turn signals extremely late. In Germany that would definitely count as late. I realize this is quite common here in Sendai that drivers only start blinking once they start the turn. This is not what the driver did here, but IMHO drivers should indicate early enough to give other people (including idiots who watch TikTok or TV) more time to realize what is going on. Again, it is not about who is right and who is wrong, but about how we can avoid accidents, even if some of us behave stupidly or make a mistake.

That road bikes go fast means the rider needs to be aware, not that drivers do.

IMHO this is a very bad take. Any traffic participant must be aware of their environment and of the locations and speeds at which others travel. Underestimating speeds can endanger yourself and others. Of course, if one of the parties is on a bike and the other is in a car, then the person in the car is safe from physical injury. But that doesn’t mean the onus is just on us cyclists, it is on everyone.

I had a driver almost crash into a lamp post, because she underestimated my speed (on a mountain bike) — I was going 35 km/h in street where the speed limit was 30 and she wanted to overtake me to make a left turn. This was a rare case when I was never in danger, but the driver was. My closest call in Japan was on a road where I kept up with the traffic, about 37ish km/h. I was perceived as an obstacle even though I wasn’t one — this also is a common ingredient in close calls and accidents between bikes and cars.

If the cyclist had been in a car, then should the driver in front somehow have been careful so they didn't get rear-ended?

If the cyclist had been a car, then the other car wouldn’t have overtaken in the first place. Even if the other person hadn’t paid attention, I think it is still fair to point out that had the driver used his turn signals earlier, he would have given the other car longer to realized what he wanted to do. You want to increase the margin of error.

Again, it isn’t about being right, but about avoiding accidents. I am sometimes inattentive or plain stupid when I am cycling, just like anyone else. Having a larger buffer is good for everyone. Even if the drivers are physically safe, I think pretty much no driver is ok with injuring someone else.

Cars are faster than road bikes, so maybe if the driver got rear-ended by a car there, then hey, they should have known someone fast was behind them.

Do you want to be right or do you want to avoid accidents?

This cyclist is even dull enough to post this publicly. As I said above, the insurance company for the driver of that car would be interested in this video.

That this guy posted the video is stupid yes.

 

[kiwisimon]

I think you view this situation from the perspective of blame rather than accident avoidance, the way airplane crashes are investigated these days. This situation is a very common accident pattern, and even if you are not legally responsible (as a driver or cyclist), I think working on ways to make it less likely is still the right way to go.

In this case, the driver knew when he wanted to turn left and that there was a cyclist. The cyclist did not know what the driver intended to do.

This was a 100% avoidable collision and so blame should be apportioned. The onus is naturally on the faster party to exercise the greater care. Your logic while very considered and caring does not work where laws are designed to protect the weaker or slower vehicles.
If this was an air accident would you blame the ground for being there? (facetious green)
The car can not disappear.
I am not talking about any other case but this specific incident. You can't apply generalizations to this driver. Are you presuming the driver overtook the cyclist? We don't know that.

In this case, the driver knew when he wanted to turn left and that there was a cyclist.

In other words committing a traffic offense. I think your argument in this specific case starts and ends there.

The cyclist did not know what the driver intended to do.

He wasn't looking at the car. He had no idea what was happening.

That sounds vindictive. Yes, the cyclist was stupid and irresponsible. But I don’t know, I don’t think it was worth getting hurt over.

Not vindictive but the cyclist has smashed into an innocent driver's car and no doubt the driver has to explain to the police and insurance company what happened. If he had a drive recorder he should be fine and the cyclist liable for damages. Otherwise the driver will be out of pocket for no fault of his own.

I have been knocked off my bike a number of times by careless drivers and even ended up in hospital with broken bones, this wasn't a such a case.

 

[kiwisimon]

In other news
Unseasonably warm 10 degrees up here so I squeezed in a slow 40kms and washed my friend. If this weather continues I'll be getting my road bike out.

 

[OreoCookie]

This was a 100% avoidable collision and so blame should be apportioned. The onus is naturally on the faster party to exercise the greater care. Your logic while very considered and caring does not work where laws are designed to protect the weaker or slower vehicles.

I don’t want to drag this out any longer, but I think this is where we differ: you write that the onus is on the faster party. I don’t think this is correct. In my mind the “stronger” party should have more responsibility, i. e. in collisions between a car and a cyclist or a pedestrian, the driver has more responsibility to try and avoid the accident, because he is safer than the others. Ditto for collisions between trucks and cars or cyclists and pedestrians.

Faster is also tricky because if I am on a bike and I do the speed limit of, say, 30 km/h. Why do I have any more responsibility than a car going 25 km/h? Or if cars go 40 km/h when the speed limit is 30, who has more responsibility?

I also think my logic/approach works perfectly well in this situation: we cannot avoid risk, but we should aim to increase the safety margins for everyone around us. Using turn signals earlier (e. g. in line with other countries) increases one’s safety margin, not just in accidents that weren’t the driver’s fault, but also in cases where the driver might be on the receiving end. Understanding common accident/near miss patterns is crucial, as is learning to anticipate the behavior of other traffic participants. Waiting an extra 10 seconds or a few minutes.

By far, most of my mistakes in traffic had to do with me wanting to make a traffic light or do something in the last second. Or when I am tired or exhausted. Or a combination of all. We make mistakes. We sometimes all act stupidly. But I don’t wish for anyone to get hurt. Even if you are as blatantly stupid as the guy in the Twitter video.

In other words committing a traffic offense. I think your argument in this specific case starts and ends there.

I don’t quite follow.

The driver most likely was aware of the cyclist, in which case, he could have avoided the accident by waiting behind the cyclist. (If he wasn’t, I’d argue this would be worse and an error of the driver.) This has nothing to do whether the driver is to blame or should be held legally responsible. I have tried to learn from my accidents, including those where I was definitely not in the wrong, and I think it made me a safer driver and on-road cyclist, protecting not just myself, but also others.

 

[kiwisimon]

I don’t want to drag this out any longer, but I think this is where we differ: you write that the onus is on the faster party. I don’t think this is correct. In my mind the “stronger” party should have more responsibility, i. e. in collisions between a car and a cyclist or a pedestrian, the driver has more responsibility to try and avoid the accident, because he is safer than the others. Ditto for collisions between trucks and cars or cyclists and pedestrians.

when skiing who is the onus on, the faster or slower skier?
When a fast car rear-ends a slower truck, who is responsible? but we are dragging on.

 

[OreoCookie]

when skiing who is the onus on, the faster or slower skier?

Depends. If a slow skier is behaving erratically and slowly crosses the slope without due care, I definitely wouldn’t say the faster skier who is smoothly carving down the piste is automatically to blame.

When a fast car rear-ends a slower truck, who is responsible? but we are dragging on.

That depends, too. I don’t think speed is the correct criterion, though. With a truck you have to be aware of the fact that your vehicle is way heavier and can do a lot more damage.

 

[jdd]

he could have avoided the accident by waiting behind the cyclist.

That's your presumption/assumption--you're creating/imagining what you think happened well before the video starts.

The video initially shows the car way out in front of the bike. If the car did indeed pass the bike, it was far enough back that there is no such issue. The biker lacked situational awareness.

 

[OreoCookie]

That's your presumption/assumption--you're creating/imagining what you think happened well before the video starts.

I think you are focussing on a weird point here. Yes, strictly speaking, we don’t know what happened before. We also don’t know what happened inside the car. We don’t have any distances. Still, at least in my experience this is by far a very likely scenario, although the car could have made a turn onto the road instead and not overtaken the cyclist. That’s a possibility, too, I guess.

I still think the driver could have done more to give a larger margin of error such as using turn signals earlier. It is easy to lay blame on a douche who watches TikTok or whatnot while riding a bike, and feel good about it. I have seen e. g. women with two children on their huge van mamachari crossing a red light while they were typing away on their smartphone with one hand and clutching an umbrella in the other. You can easily say “If something happens, it’s 100 % their fault.” Yeah, but if I were the driver colliding with them, I’d feel super terrible. And likely, she’d get more sympathy from many even though IMHO she’d be more irresponsible (as she is endangering not just herself, but also her kids). I don’t think it is good if (lack of) sympathy clouds our judgements.

Honest question: have you ever ridden a bike in the Netherlands? There are situations when cars and bikes share a road, and then almost always Dutch drivers will wait for you until you leave the road or you reach an intersection. Dutch use turn signals much earlier, too. And since virtually all drivers (of cars and trucks) are also cyclists, they have a much better understanding of the dynamics of cyclists, typical speeds, etc. As far as I understand, that was a huge factor in reducing the number of (serious) accidents between cars and bikes. When I ride in the Netherlands, I am much more relaxed.

The video initially shows the car way out in front of the bike. If the car did indeed pass the bike, it was far enough back that there is no such issue. The biker lacked situational awareness.

If you are applying your strict standard here, you cannot draw the conclusion that the car overtook far enough back. Plus, judging distances from footage of cycling cameras is hard by itself.

Air crash accident investigations use the Swiss cheese model where the holes in the different layers have to line up. Some holes (e. g. the cyclist being irresponsible) are certainly bigger than others, but other participants can still do their share to make other holes smaller. That’s all I am arguing for. Doing that makes everyone safer (including the driver), and reduces suffering. As I wrote above, I’m holding myself to the same standard, and I tried to learn from any accident I have had, regardless whether or not I was (legally or morally) more at fault.

 

[kiwisimon]

. With a truck you have to be aware of the fact that your vehicle is way heavier and can do a lot more damage.

Hard to be more safe than stopping

And I’m a heavy truck and bus driver in a previous life. What happens behind you is an uncontrollable but we are dragging on.
I see on twitter the cyclist had a bone tumor in his arm which accounts for his screaming.
Went to hospital got scanned and there was nothing majorly wrong
Good news

 

[jdd]

Rain coming soon, and tomorrow will be wet, but 184km for the week (five rides).

This could have passed for a nice week in March.

 

[gillty]

In other news, Strava doing Strava things.

They are increasing subscription rates significantly depending on location, but won’t communicate what the new prices are and won’t notify anyone until February or 30 days before your renewal (which ever comes first).

Wouldn’t even disclose pricing to well known industry media like DCRainmaker.

This doesn’t affect Japan for now, however, fyi it may affect some of us. In Ray Maker’s case even though he has lived in Holland for years he’s being affected by the US shadow pricing increase because his account has origins in the US.



Response to Ray:

"At Strava, we are consistently investing in the value of our subscription experience to deliver a best-in-class digital experience. A price change was recently enacted to reflect the growing subscription features, as well as local market changes. We remain committed to delivering value to our active community on a daily basis.

The last pricing release for annual subscriptions took place about a decade ago while monthly subscriptions have seldom fluctuated.
Price adjustments will vary depending on region and preferred platform."

To which Ray asked for clarification on pricing, and recieved this response…

"That's our full press statement." – Michael Joseph, Strava PR Lead