
I Learned to Cycle Like a Dutchman - jseliger
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/personal-history/how-i-learned-to-cycle-like-a-dutchman
======
jeffk_teh_haxor
It's fascinating that Netherlands made a deliberate, pragmatic step to take
their streets back from cars in the 60's and 70's. I had assumed that they had
simply never lost their love of the bike. But no, the positive situation they
have today was developed as the result of conscious political action against
the scourge of cars and traffic.

~~~
CydeWeys
There's plenty of us here in the US, especially in the large cities, that are
actively trying to make this a reality here too. Join us! Here's the largest
NYC group: [http://transalt.org/](http://transalt.org/)

------
bad_user
This year I fell off my bike twice.

One time my wheels skidded while trying to get on a sidewalk and I would have
hit my head if I didn't wear a helmet.

Another time a girl jumped in front of me on the bike lane and I must've had
30 km/h. I pressed the breaks hard and unfortunately the breaks on my front
wheel were stronger than those in the back, and my bike overturned with me
falling violently on the ground. My left arm still hurts after one month and I
had pain in my spleen area that kept me up at night. It's a good thing I also
wear protective gloves as a fall like this can really injure your hands.

I'm not a Dutchman and I'd love to live in a bike friendly city like
Amsterdam. But protective gear can really save you from serious injury even
with no cars around.

~~~
j0057
In an unclear situation (i.e. any busy city), doing 30 km/h is way too fast.
The sibling post talks about 25 mph = 40 km/h(!), that's racing speed, pretty
dangerous if there is other traffic around.

There's a difference between the cycling the Dutch do at 18-20 km/h -- maybe
25 km/h on a dedicated cycle path with no chance of interaction with other
traffic -- and race-cycling at 30+ km/h, which is in no way appropriate in a
city with pedestrians and cars. I saw it in London too: very busy streets, and
the cyclists are in full racing gear on racing bikes where they're hunched
over instead of upright (bad for overview of traffic situations), doing 25-30
km/h, that's asking for trouble and it also gives cyclists a bad name.

It also explains why people complain about getting to work sweaty -- they're
going way too fast! If you relax and do 18 km/h, it will take only a little
bit longer but you won't be soaked when you arrive.

~~~
u801e
> In an unclear situation (i.e. any busy city), doing 30 km/h is way too fast.

Yet drivers of motor vehicles can go that speed without too many issues
between intersections. If one rides a bike in the middle of the general
purpose traffic lane, then going 25 mph is safe.

> It also explains why people complain about getting to work sweaty -- they're
> going way too fast!

Depending on the distance one must cover during the commute, going "fast" is
necessary if you want to complete your trip in a reasonable period of time. If
I wanted to go at walking speed, then I would just walk.

~~~
j0057
Your definition of safe must be different than mine, because car drivers are
protected by wrinkle zones, roll cages, airbags and seatbelts, whereas a
cyclist is less visible, takes up less space and has ~nothing to protect their
body.

~~~
u801e
Yet, motorcyclists ride in the traffic lane at similar speeds on urban
streets. The definition of safety is to act in a predictable manner in terms
of following the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. Then you're far
less likely to be involved in a collision in the first place.

------
yellow_postit
The comment about slowing down even when you have the right of way in America
rings particularly true to me as I was given a ticket in Seattle for being hit
by a car while in a dedicated bike lane. Even in bike friendly cities in my
experience you need to go beyond defensive cycling to defensive and _always_
deferential cycling as cars (and cops) will always assume the car is in the
right.

~~~
Beldin
Funny. In the Netherlands, there is a law that makes cyclists a protected
class. In particular, while cyclist may cause an accident, the one with
airbags, cage construction, bumpers and crumple zones has the responsibility
to avoid accidents.

This is not "its always the fault of the car driver". But: it is always the
_responsibility_ of the car driver to avoid an accident.

~~~
CydeWeys
In theory that's how it's supposed to be with pedestrians here, though in
practice police often give a blank check to drivers no matter what, at least
here in NYC.

------
lizmat
Nice article. In the past years however, the number of e-bikes used by elderly
people has gone up so much, that fatality for that group has gone up quite
notably as well. Many elderly buy an e-bike while not having ridden a bike for
many years. Meanwhile, traffic _has_ become more difficult. And their reflexes
not really what they have been.

See e.g. [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/25/older-men-
usin...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/25/older-men-using-e-
bikes-behind-rising-death-toll-among-dutch-cyclists)

~~~
nkootstra
I haven't seen that many (elderly) people in The Netherlands on e-bikes that
used a helmet this year. The only people that wear helmets are the ones that
have a speed padelec/mountainbiker or racing bikes.

~~~
lizmat
I guess it really makes a difference if you're cycling in the Randstad, or one
of the other greater cities, or outside of them. I'd say about 50% of elderly
people _I_ see on e-bikes (and I cycle about 4000km / year, almost all outside
of bigger cities) are now wearing helmets.

------
tim58
Asking cyclist not to wear a helmet is like asking drivers not to wear a
seatbelt. Yes, they are not needed if everyone follows all the safety rules.
Yet accidents still happen.

~~~
Carpetsmoker
Except that the evidence is not clear that cycle helmets actually improve
safety for adults (it is clear that it improves it for children), and cyclists
will avoid cycling altogether if helmets are mandatory.

Perhaps more importantly, cars carry safety risks for _everyone_. If I walk or
cycle I am at risk of being run over by your car, my lungs get damaged due to
the exhaust, the climate suffers.

~~~
oh_sigh
How could helmets not improve safety for adults?

~~~
Carpetsmoker
Turns out things are a bit more complex than "survival rate after being hit by
a car at 40 km/h in the front":

\- Both cyclists and motorists tend to take slightly more risks when wearing
helmets (cars give less distance when overtaking).

\- Mandatory helmets means fewer people cycle, so cars are less used to
cyclists leading to more dangerous situations.

It's been discussed many times on HN, and there is no clear-cut answer. Some
research (I can't be bothered to find it all again, sorry) suggests it doesn't
make a difference, other that it makes things slightly safer, and others that
it makes it slightly less safe. On balance, it probably doesn't make much of a
difference.

~~~
tim58
> Mandatory helmets

Mandatory helmets is a separate thing. You're arguing against a policy none of
the parent comments or the root article talks about.

> Both cyclists and motorists tend to take slightly more risks when wearing
> helmets

This whole article is about being an assertive bicyclist while not wearing a
helmet. The author is encouraging people to not wear a helmet and bicycle less
defensively than they typically do. The primary argument for this behavior is
because it feels good.

~~~
Carpetsmoker
The original comment is comparing it to seatbelts, which are mandatory in many
countries.

------
Kaotique
In the Netherlands, it is also not allowed to bike next to highways or auto
ways. Separate bicycle lanes have been made to navigate in different routes.

------
discreteevent
Apparently cycling in a fully upright position makes a big difference in how
much sweat you produce. Also not wearing a helmet means you get to make better
use of one of your major heat sinks.

~~~
freehunter
This is actually pretty important. I did a 50 miles ride once and after about
30 miles the only way I could continue was by removing my helmet. My head was
overheating otherwise, and every mile I continued with the helmet on, I was
getting dizzier and dizzier. Only after I removed my helmet was I able to
continue the ride without any negative effects.

I still advocate for bicyclists wearing a helmet, but inside that
recommendation is the reality that the standard American helmet I was wearing
was causing me to overheat and suffer negative side effects. The only way I
made it to my destination was from removing the helmet and taking the risk of
crashing and suffering a major head injury.

In that way, helmets are very different from automobile seat belts.

~~~
brianwawok
To be fair, there is a wide range of helmets. I have a $20 helmet that feels
like you describe. I also have a $200 helmet that I can’t tell I have on. You
may just need a nicer helmet...

~~~
freehunter
Agreed, which is why I said "the standard American helmet". You'd probably be
hard pressed to walk into Walmart and buy a $200 helmet. Non-bikers like to
make fun of cyclists wearing spandex and weird shoes and etc, without knowing
that cycling can be dangerous in a way that a car or walking might not be.

It's something people should be aware of. Your $20 Walmart helmet may cause
your brain to overheat while you're riding. I certainly didn't know that was
possible until I experienced it.

------
rocqua
> As with so many aspects of their society, it seemed to depend on subsuming
> the needs of the individual to the needs of the community.

It gets kind of exasperating when you see this kind of writing about your own
country. Perhaps from an American perspective, it seems like some sort of
socialist heaven here, but it really isn't.

Our healthcare system is teetering, our elderly care system has already
fallen. We are still laying down more asphalt 'because it will solve traffic
jams'. Moreover, we've been eating away at some of our social safety net. Our
prisons stated goal went from rehabilitation to retribution, and the police
have more issues with 'confused people' which is a polite way to say people
with a mental illness.

One of the bigger issues is that of affordable housing. A recent report stated
that 25% of renters forgo normal expenses to make rent. Moreover in the bigger
cities we see foreign money guying real estate as investments just like in
London or Seattle. Which brings me to the hypotheekrenteaftrek (tax rebate on
mortgage interest). Which was pitched as helping the middle class afford
housing, but turned into a massive tax credit for the rich. Now, we know this
thing is pushing up a housing bubble, but we are afraid to do too much with
the rebate for fear of popping that bubble.

Not to mention the recent political push to abolish the dividend tax 'because
it would help all business', not to entice Unilever and Shell to fully
incorporate here. Only for the plan to be rescinded when it turned out
Unilever wasn't gonna move here after all.

And despite the large number of bicycles, we still have a shit-ton of cars.
Whilst it is not uncommon for people to cycle to work, taking the car is still
more common. And not having a car at all is a pretty rare thing. At the same
time, the increase in e-bikes is causing dangerous situations, and a marked
uptick in broken bones, especially among the elderly.

My point being, the Netherlands aren't some perfect place to emulate, even
though we have bike-lanes and drivers and cyclists here are used to seeing
other cyclists on the road. Thank you for reading my rant.

~~~
j0057
I agree that the hypotheekrenteaftrek should be (and is being) phased out, but
it seems to me that the monetary policy of the ECB is a big factor in the
current housing bubble as well -- for years they've been lowering the interest
rates in the name of stimulating inflation, which also drove up housing
prices.

------
isostatic
Do you wear a helmet while walking?

~~~
snazz
Do you walk at up to 20 miles per hour (32 km/h) in roadways right next to
cars going much faster?

~~~
pmontra
I recently saw a Dutchman explaining that they don't wear helmets because they
don't cross paths with cars. Bike lanes are designed to keep cars and bicycles
apart. From the article it seems that cars always give precedence to bicycles.

~~~
gambiting
The worst accident I ever had was when I collided with another bike, not a car
- I flew over my handlebars and hit my head directly on the edge of a concrete
slab. There was a loud crack, and in half split my....helmet. I was pretty
ok(apart from severe bruises all over).

My point is that whether you cross your path with cars or not is irrelevant -
you're still travelling anywhere between 15-30km/h and your head is 1.5-2m
above the road - it's enough of a speed and enough of a distance to kill you
just from a fall, vehicles notwithstanding.

~~~
Kim_Bruning
Regular dutch (commuter) cyclists tend to ride a bit slower than 30. Sports
cyclists DO wear a helmet!

