In short: The perfect definition of "undulating" In full: Well organised, enthusiastic marshalls but the run round the field at the end was very sapping on already tired legs. Two kilometer markers in the wrong place ( 11 & 21 ) Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Despite (or inspite!) of the weather, hills & mud - the scenary is worth it, different terrain and a good run for part of a spring marathon build up In full: I enjoyed the run & mud! Suggest the start is moved back nearer the Sustainabilty centre, as there was far too long a wait at the first style (up the hill). Also the distance & time seemed far longer than 19 1/2 miles. Some mile markers would have been welcomed. Marshalls & well marked route (plus points). Sort out the niggles and this will be a really good event Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Fast, flat course ideal for a debut half marathon In full: The main problem was congestion at the start. It took several minutes to get past the start line and there was a bottleneck right after that too. But overall a very well run event. Good water stations and distance markers, and the cheerfulnessa and encouragement from race marshalls, police and ambulance drew were simply magnificent! Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Great marshalls v. friendly even enjoyed the rain In full: Thanks to the marshalls who had to hang around for us plodders at the back. Changing/refreshment facilities were pretty good. Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: quick race but mind the dogs! In full: This race has PB potential as long as you concentrate to avoid dogs, skaters and the slow runners on the last lap. I got a PB so would definetely do it again! Make sure you go to the toilet beforehand or be prepared to queue. There were only 4-5 loos for 700 plus runners in addition to the park's facilities. Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Fast, big, well organised, scenic - your only worry is early Feb weather In full: My second time doing this one. Well organised big race (2,500 or so) through traffic-free flat country roads.
Only caveats are: 1. It's a fair walk from the town centre, so don't leave it too late 2. The start in past years has been congested, and it isn't helped by the fact that a lot of latecomers enter the start area from the front so have to just stand in the sub-1:25 area.
These are minor points though, and all in all an excellent race.
In short: Terrible weather which was made tolerable by the friendly marshalls In full: Nice race but not as flat as advertised (put it this way I wouldn't park my car on the course without the hand brake on!) Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Tough early KMs over an unusual distance make the last 20 minutes a challenge. In full: Well organised race at a good venue. Ample well manned water stations. Very few flat sections in the first 14KMs take a lot out of you for the later stages. Unusual distance and marking in KMs makes it interesting to pace. On the negative side, start and finish through an uninspiring housing estate and a couple of the distance markers were in the wrong place this year. Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Overall a very good race for a worthy cause In full: Even though this is a very good race, I do feel the organisation could have been a little bit better, i. e. on the water stations, I just felt there needed to be a third person there so to ensure everybody had the chance to get a drink. Also I think some people may be put off by the price as it is a little expensive for a 10K event, but it is for a worthy charity though.
On the plus side the race is in great surroundings, the marshalls were very helpful and you get a very nice T-Shirt too. Hopefully, I will be doing this one again next year. Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Fab day and fab run! In full: Very impressed by marshalling and friendliness of runners on this challenging run! Drink stations were good but its really difficult to drink out of cups going uphill! Bottles would have been alot better! Thankyou for a lovely day! Date of review: February 12, 2006
In short: Good for a PB, but a good job I timed myself as I can't find myself on the scores In full: Maybe the chip didn't work? I will contact them. It's a bit annoying. Date of review: February 12, 2006