Road positioning, cyclist ahead

[ericonabike]

So...you're driving along a single carriageway road, let's say in a 30 limit. Approaching you is a cyclist, with a car behind that is palpably anxious to get past [reading their body language]. The road is too narrow for two cars and a cyclist to safely share the width. Do you:

a) continue in the centre of your carriageway, leaving the overtake decision solely to the other driver;
b) shift to the left slightly, in the hope that this will give the cyclist more room in the event of what seems an inevitable overtake;
c) shift nearer to the centre line, to dissuade the driver from overtaking [but being aware that so doing would endanger the cyclist if an overtake still occurs]
d) do none of the above [although I can't think of another option!].

Maybe it's because I ride a bike a lot, but I seem to encounter this situation more than I would prefer. Thoughts?

[Custom24]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

[jont]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

+1. Ideally you've positioned towards the centre before the oncomer has started to think about the overtake.

[superplum]

So...you're driving along a single carriageway road, let's say in a 30 limit. Approaching you is a cyclist, with a car behind that is palpably anxious to get past [reading their body language]. The road is too narrow for two cars and a cyclist to safely share the width. Do you:

a) continue in the centre of your carriageway, leaving the overtake decision solely to the other driver;
b) shift to the left slightly, in the hope that this will give the cyclist more room in the event of what seems an inevitable overtake;
c) shift nearer to the centre line, to dissuade the driver from overtaking [but being aware that so doing would endanger the cyclist if an overtake still occurs]
d) do none of the above [although I can't think of another option!].

Maybe it's because I ride a bike a lot, but I seem to encounter this situation more than I would prefer. Thoughts?

Out to the centre-line, assert your position whilst keeping a close eye on the other two, and plan your escape action.

[gannet]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

+1. Ideally you've positioned towards the centre before the oncomer has started to think about the overtake.

From another cyclist another +1 for this approach...

while also hoping the cyclist sticks up for themselves by taking a more primary position towards the centre of their lane and thus discouraging the overtake themselves...

[jcochrane]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

+1. Ideally you've positioned towards the centre before the oncomer has started to think about the overtake.

From another cyclist another +1 for this approach...

while also hoping the cyclist sticks up for themselves by taking a more primary position towards the centre of their lane and thus discouraging the overtake themselves...

+1 from another cyclist.

[MGF]

In the scenario described option a) for me. If the driver is already on the tail of the cyclist moving towards the centre line is only helpful if the driver cannot physically pass. If not I may have insufficient time to react to him moving.

If I approach an oncoming cyclist and there is oncoming traffic approaching the cyclist I will probably take a more central line to encourage the oncomer to reduce speed toward the hazard. I wont bother trying to convince myself I can do this imperceptibly but I will try to avoid it looking aggressive.

Option b) only in response to an actual pass.

[sussex2]

' palpably anxious to get past [reading their body language]'

I'd be hesitant to assume too much and in my experience body language can be easily misinterpreted.

Pressed though I'd avoid if possible making three abreast.

[TripleS]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

Yes, I think that would be my thinking.

BTW, in the OP, in item a) for 'carriageway', read 'lane.'

[TripleS]

I also cycle.

In the driver's seat in the situation you describe, if time permitted, I might steer almost imperceptibly towards the centre line, but be prepared to get out of the way very quickly if this did not work out. This can dissuade oncomers from doing something stupid without sacrificing too much of my position.

I probably would not steer left, as this makes the stupid overtake almost inevitable.

+1. Ideally you've positioned towards the centre before the oncomer has started to think about the overtake.

From another cyclist another +1 for this approach...

while also hoping the cyclist sticks up for themselves by taking a more primary position towards the centre of their lane and thus discouraging the overtake themselves...

Er, no, sorry; not the last bit. I accept that this 'primary position' business has some legitimacy, but it can get overdone or misused, so I'd rather it be used sparingly. Unfortunately some cyclists appear to use it to dominate the scene without good reason, and that can irritate and annoy others, which is detrimental to the attitude we ought to be promoting between the various road user groups. We don't want it to become a 'cyclists versus the rest' situation.

[Custom24]

while also hoping the cyclist sticks up for themselves by taking a more primary position towards the centre of their lane and thus discouraging the overtake themselves...

Er, no, sorry; not the last bit. I accept that this 'primary position' business has some legitimacy, but it can get overdone or misused, so I'd rather it be used sparingly. Unfortunately some cyclists appear to use it to dominate the scene without good reason, and that can irritate and annoy others, which is detrimental to the attitude we ought to be promoting between the various road user groups. We don't want it to become a 'cyclists versus the rest' situation.

But there is good reason. The scenario was defined saying there is not enough room for two cars and a cyclist. By taking the lane, or riding in primary, the cyclist is simply making that clear. He is in effect saying "overtake me, but be sure there is room".

Personally, I wish this was the norm, why shouldn't it be? I find only about 30% of passes give sufficient room when I cycle keeping to the left. The more room I take, the more space I am given.

[Flexibase]

The original post appears to use "carriageway" when meaning lane at a)!

[ericonabike]

My bad, I did indeed mean lane - I was thinking of a single carriageway road. Which is a pretty archaic descriptor anyway - carriages?

Interested to see that most would favour intervention, with caveats. I posted the question on a cycling forum [as has been shown here, the two modes of transport are not mutually exclusive] and got very different answers. The upshot was that doing nothing was preferable, leaving any decision up to the other driver. Which is impossible, as it happens. If you see the situation unfolding, then you cannot do nothing. Since by continuing in the centre of the lane you are making a decision, albeit a default one. And as a cyclist, if I was in that position, I would like to see 'affirmative action' from other road users.

[GJD]

My bad, I did indeed mean lane - I was thinking of a single carriageway road. Which is a pretty archaic descriptor anyway - carriages?

Interested to see that most would favour intervention, with caveats. I posted the question on a cycling forum [as has been shown here, the two modes of transport are not mutually exclusive] and got very different answers. The upshot was that doing nothing was preferable, leaving any decision up to the other driver.

That's interesting. I wonder why they felt that - perhaps because at the point you're describing, where the oncomer is already at the cyclist and about to lunge, it's probably too late for intervention. Or did they just seem not to like the idea of such intervention at all?

Were there any views on cycling in primary position?

[MGF]

...I find only about 30% of passes give sufficient room when I cycle keeping to the left...

How do you define sufficient?