In 30 years of commuting I've never actually had to rely on hard braking to avoid a collision. On many occasions I have swerved to avoid a collision.
The one time a collision was unavoidable through swerving or braking, I jumped straight up, and deflected off windsheild rather than getting walloped straight-on.
Your lucky, my disk breaks have certainly saved my life in SF more than once. The one that really sticks with me is watching the cyclist in front of me fly into the air from getting hit by a speeding car ignoring the no right turn sign. If I had not braked hard I would have hit the side of that car.
I spoke with the police after offering to testify and they did not want to take a report even saying it was an insurance matter. I twisted their arm but later after getting in touch with the hit cyclist who was nearly killed again offering to testify found out they threw my report away. The injured cyclist was so traumatized he just wanted to put it behind him.
I got lots of stories and have been hit multiple times, had a friend killed on her cycle. I hate that the narative is all about defensive cycling and not that cars kill and no one cares especially SF cops.
I try not to rely on luck. The accident I mentioned above; it happened because I was stupid, not because I was unlucky.
I had ample opportunity to avert catashtropy but failed to recognize them because I wasn't directing my attention to the right things in the moment prior to the collision.
I'm a big believer in situational awareness, experience and skill.
I hear stories of cyclists getting into accidents and I'm aghast at all the hazards they didn't consider, and all the skills they didn't cultivate.
It's not like I'm risk averse. Quite the contrary, I make a practice of engaging with it. I was a bicycle messenger for 2 years in heavy downtown traffic. I raced mountain bikes and BMX. I've had hundreds of wipeouts in non-traffic situations.
There are skills I rely on daily while in traffic to stay in one piece, and I have a hard time convincing a certain subset of cyclists that these skills even exist. They think it's luck!
There are so many opportunities to anticipate and escape bad situations that go unrecognized by less experienced cyclists.
You can try to predict or anticipate people's actions and smugly think that you won't end up under the wheels of a truck because you're Mr. Pro Rider unlike those "certain subset of cyclists."
At the end of the day, drivers are exceptionally unpredictable, their vehicles can accelerate, stop, and turn far faster than a bicycle can, and there are plenty of actions of others that are impossible to avoid.
The problem is not that "certain subset" of cyclists aren't careful enough, it's that society has wildly different expectations from vulnerable road users compared to the people driving the dangerous machinery. Society expects someone on a bicycle headed to work to perfectly and expertly analyze everything in front of them and faultlessly predict the actions of others...while having no problem with a driver of a 4,000lb vehicle yakking on the phone while drinking a coffee and listening to the radio.
Doesn't have to be victim blaming if you read closely, but I got that vibe as well.
FWIW a car can not turn, accelerate and stop faster than a bicycle. I am sure our difference in opinion here is more about situation than facts. I do agree that they are more dangerous than bicycles and far less logical because of what you say.
You can not be on your A game all the time, so yes it's about luck. If everyone just made one mistake every week you would still have a high chance of seeing them all the time.
For me being experienced in traffic means I try to act as a buffer for others mistakes. If you know all of those situations that lead to bad out comes position yourself so less experienced people are herded to the safe ones.
"All those situations that lead to bad outcomes" are situations where I blame the victim for relying on the fatalism of luck. If you come away from a crash and think "oh man, I was just really unlucky" then you're denying yourself the opportunity to learn from it.
> In 30 years of commuting I've never actually had to rely on hard braking to avoid a collision. On many occasions I have swerved to avoid a collision.
I agree with what you said, but I think the issue is one of experience, or maybe even skill. I can remember one crash I had when better breaks would have saved me. But I do recognize now that I could have just as easily swerved. I was around 7 at the time, so still had a lot to learn. But I think many casual cyclists will try (panic-)breaking when something unexpected comes up.
But then again, if they're not used to strong breaks, they may crash on their own. Had this happen to me once while visiting Britain, and not being used yet to the brake levers being inverted.
Swerving and threshold braking are the two maneuvers in our arsenals to avoid crashes when things have gone badly. Every season I start off with some quality time in a parking lot practicing both swerving and braking (EDIT: on my motorcycle—I get enough in-situ practice on my bicycle regularly). I'm not sure I'd be brave enough to ride a motorcycle or bicycle not having both of those skills polished.
The one time a collision was unavoidable through swerving or braking, I jumped straight up, and deflected off windsheild rather than getting walloped straight-on.