How to ride the canals
London cyclists often eulogise Regent’s Canal – which runs from Paddington to Limehouse – as the best way to cross town. On the surface, it’s a good idea: the thought of arriving at your destination refreshed by bucolic birdsong certainly appeals. Yet beyond the illusion the canal holds some hidden tribulations. Canals are all about travelling at a leisurely pace, so why do some cyclists ride so fast? These idiotic nuts make passing through the numerous arches – where the towpath narrows to a knife-edge – more like a white-knuckle ride.
Heading west from Victoria Park, where the canal flanks the De Beauvoir estate in north London the territory becomes more feral, with silhouettes of burnt-out scooters – stolen, ridden and discarded – visible beneath the water’s surface. Still, it makes a change from round the back of King’s Cross where the canal ducks near Caledonian Road and street drinkers and drug dealers join the occasional fisherman by the water’s edge. Antisocial as these elements are, they can’t touch the biggest bête noir to cyclists, especially evident as you head towards Primrose Hill. It’s the self-righteous dog walker who refuses to believe, in spite of notices stationed along the canal stating it, that the path is for everyone – cyclists included. Ineed, the Regent’s Canal is one of the GLA’s designated cycle corridors. Perhaps by giving and receiving consideration in equal measure to other users, cyclists can all make it worthy of its name.
Route rating
Distance Six miles (Victoria Park to Primrose Hill).
Average cycle time 50 minutes.
Calories burned 350.
Dog leads entangled Three.
Feature continues
|
|
The best of London in your inbox
Up to the minute picks of the best things to do in London, delivered to your desktop.
|
|
6 comments
'Why adhere to a law that endangers me?' (re illegal pavement cycling) The same stupid selfish comment could possibly be made about knife-carrying. Get off the pavement, you selfish git - even if people say nothing to you don't take it as tacit acceptance, it's probably because they're frightened. Read letters in the local press and reports of local community and police meetings - it's you and others like you who are making the pavements in London a no-go area for old, disabled and vulnerable people. What a stupid and irresponsible article for Time Out to endorse - I will not be purchasing it again.
I was with a cyclist who was catapulted off her bike in an accident last week. She landed on her head and shoulder. Result: Helmet severely dented, concussion, face had a nasty case of road rash, broken collar bone. Without a helmet I think it could have been much worse.
Re: amazing statistics - the trouble with accident statistics is it is impossible to measure all the accidents that don't happen...
Did the writer really mean;
'Anarchic behaviour under the guise of protest is selfish and self-defeating.'
Or perhaps;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of protest is self-defeating.
Or maybe;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of anarchy is self-defeating.
Clean up on the stereotypes mate.
I ride through that road system most days and, as I've found generally with cycling in London at all times of day and night, if you ride with your wits about you, it isn't a problem. A cycle lane past Central St. Martin's would be safer and there's loads of pavement but in the mean time the author should grow a pair and use the road.
LB 's Southwark and Lewisham provide free Adult Cycle Training for all those who live, work or study in the borough. Available via www.cyclinginstructor.com. Online Booking!
Statistics show that amazingly cyclists who wear helmets have more accidents than cyclists who don't. This is because, the study says, drivers of cars and other vehicles tend to take it "slightly easy" when they see a cyclist wearing a helmet as opposed to when a cyclist is unprotected. A model Catch-22 situation innit?