Chances are you went for a ride over the weekend; when you got home, did you upload it to Strava? If the answer is yes, did you know you were breaking a picket line?

Following a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian in New York's Central Park that left the pedestrian with brain damage, influential US cycling blogger Bike Snob NYC called on readers to turn Strava off over the weekend as a "gesture of respect to the victim's family."

While it's natural to have every sympathy for the injured party in this case - and I'm a long-time fan of Bike Snob - the call for a Strava boycott struck me as bizarre, and unjustified.

Bike Snob, real name Eben Weiss, identified the cyclist involved in the collision as an active user of Strava. This may be true, but it is difficult to see how one could deduce, let alone conclusively prove, that Strava played an instrumental, or indeed any, role in the accident. So why the call for a Strava boycott?

Like thousands of other cyclists I am a devoted user of Strava, the free social app that allows cyclists and runners to track their routes and compare their efforts with friends, strangers and even the pros. When I first moved down from London to the south coast, Strava proved an invaluable tool for discovering new cycle routes, while the ability to compare your rides and stats over time was a welcome - if undeniably geeky - source of motivation to get out and ride.

I am also aware that alongside its many fans Strava has attracted its fair share of critics. Some people accuse Strava of encouraging irresponsible or reckless riding, as users "race" to beat their best times or top the segment leaderboard on public roads.

This appears to be the rationale behind Bike Snob's call for a weekend-long boycott, which comes at the end of an otherwise rational and pertinent post discussing the tragic accident. Weiss is open about his dislike, bordering on "a moral objection" to Strava, which he claims he has never used. But as he himself points out in his blog post, to blame Strava for this incident is to absolve the individual cyclist of responsibility for their actions.

This is not a case of applying the "Guns don't kill people...people do" argument employed by the pro gun lobby; Strava is not by any stretch of the imagination designed to inflict or facilitate harm. At worst, it may encourage the competitive tendencies of some cyclists. Even so, it is quite a leap to single out Strava as the critical factor in a tragic accident in which the facts are still disputed.

Was the cyclist riding on the road or on the cycle path? Did he jump the light; did the pedestrian? Did she fail to hear his shouted warning? These strike me as among the more relevant factors in seeking to establish the cause of the accident; whether or not the cyclist is a Strava user seems of negligible import. Why not pick another random factor; it appears the cyclist is an accomplished jazz saxophonist. Should we have a weekend-long boycott of jazz?

Strava is just a tool, like a mobile phone or even, for that matter, a bicycle; it can be used responsibly, or irresponsibly, and the consequences lie with the individual.

We don't need a Strava boycott; the best mark of respect we can show to the unfortunate woman in this accident is to cycle with due care and consideration for everyone on the road - whether we use Strava or not.

1 Comments