A little misleading commentary in the 'debate' about bike facilities, from a rider that really should know  better, a cycling instructor! In this fear-laden, misleading article, Cycling Savvy instructor Karen Karabell projects her personal bias that runs counter with the evidence into the bikelane debate."


"in this fear-laden, misleading article, Cycling Savvy instructor projects her personal bias into the bike facilities "debate"

more of the same, tired anti-facilities screed previously associated with the group that called themselves 'vehicular cyclists' -these riders are characterized as willing to ignore the preponderance of the evidence, and make wild claims about bicyclists safety being ensured by first being directly in line with traffic.

It's a ludicrous tautology that even the proponents of cycling savvy don't seem to agree with when discussing this article. many make a lot of asides of course, riding to the side is also safe, as is using bike lanes when safe, and that higher speed roads just aren't suitable for some riders.

 it's a very transparent tautology. suprising it gets so much traction by self-ascribed 'savvy' riders, who all claim to know that controlling lanes is not always required.

 if it isn't - why does cycling savvy's proponents drone on endlessly about controlling lanes to be noticed? It doesn't match up with the control lanes only when reasonably necessary riding styles of some of the ardent defenders of 'savvy' cycling.