Hacker News Reader

Comment by ruddct | Hacker News Reader

Interesting read, up until this point.

“[As a cyclist], look at the head of the driver that is approaching or has stopped. The head of the driver will naturally stop and centre upon you if you have been seen.“

Please, please do not rely on this. Correlation is not causation, a driver’s head might face your direction for lots of reasons (focusing on something behind/in front of you, spacing out, looking at their phone, etc). Friends and family have been bitten by this ‘trick’ before, thankfully not with deadly consequences. When someone’s head is facing you, it does not mean they see you.

A little surprising to see this advice in an article that’s mostly about the eye being fallible.

View on HN

The author speaks in stepwise, risk management terms rather than "if green then go" rules. This is just another piece of information that can help you reduce risk and make better judgements as a cyclist on the road, but by no means a hard rule (don't think the author meant to imply that it is)

I understand your point, but I still think it is worthwhile advice. This trick saved me very recently when it was clear that a driver had not seen me (and my 4yo!) on my bike. I was able to start braking hard even before she pulled out and thus avoid the collision. So, while you are correct that just because someone looks at you, it doesn't mean they see you, it is also true that if someone doesn't look at you, it means they almost certainly didn't see you.

It's not just the face, I always aim for eye contact.

But also as they say in the article it's about judging risk. If the face is towards you you're very unlikely to be in the peripheral vision, so there is a good chance the driver saw you.

> It's not just the face, I always aim for eye contact.

I do the same. It failed me once though: a young woman in a SUV was looking me in the eye and drove forward; I managed to stop in the last moment.

I've added a friendly nod to this as well. If I get a nod back, odds are MUCH better that I've been seen. If I don't, lots of caution is used.

If I'm approaching a junction where a vehicle is waiting to pull into my path, I watch their front wheels. I find this often gives an earlier indication that the driver is about to move than their head or eye movements, as you can see the change in weight distribution when a driver prepares to move away.

As a motorcyclist this is exactly what I do too. Its impressive how often people will telegraph a turn before they ever really turn.

Managed to not get into many an accident by watching the heads and front wheels of cars. Also, look for signs of them being on a phone, if so remove yourself from their area asap.

Exactly. It's much more reliable since drivers are very unreliable when it comes to using their turn signals.

I look at drivers not because I want to verify that they see me, but because I know that the brain is better at picking up faces in the peripheral vision.

Still, my ultimate judgement is based on their vehicle’s position and movement.

Yes, "visibility" is as much about expectation and context as it is about being physically visible.

Example: Parking lots, of all places, are some of the most dangerous places a cyclist can ride into.

One would think a parking lot is relatively safe because of the slow speeds and lack of intersections, but actually, they're peppered with distracted people going backwards trying to avoid hitting other cars and slow-moving pedestrians. They're not expecting to dodge cyclists and aren't "looking" for them and thus cyclists aren't seen even when in plain view.

One of the campaigns here about truck drivers and the blind spot of trucks has focused on “if you see me, I see you” which, while not an absolute guarantee, still helps me as a cyclist to get some indication whether I would be visible in the first place. As sibling post mentions: lots of little things that can help you mitigate risks.

I like the reverse better: "If you can't see me, I can't see you".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com