In short: Half-decent course, shocking organisation In full: I think "very poor" is a kind way to describe what was a bloody shambles.
To Annette Duncan, who posted a rating earlier and commented that someone said the course was longer than 13.1 miles.
I wore my GPS watch and it agreed almost exactly with the mile markers until mile eight. After that, my watch was telling me that I was covering a mile but the mile marker was some way beyond that point.
The upshot was that when I hit the turn at the end of Ocean Terminal, my watch told me I had covered 13.14 miles - but I still had the loop which went away from the terminal and back to run.
Anyone with a Garmin Forerunner 201 will know that the user can't alter or recalibrate the watch so I can only go by what the satellites were telling it. So going by my watch, the actual course would have been in the region of 13.3 or 4 miles.
Whatever, I enjoyed the run itself apart from the start and finish.
The course was nice, although a bit contrived to make up the distance, but I may need a bit of persuading to go back next year after the chaos at the finish line.
The goody bags? I really thought I'd been given a duff bag from which the "real" contents had been left out.
I've emailed the organisers and suggested they post a response to the criticism, if only to confirm that they'll take on board the points that have been raised by runners.
In short: The people who ' organised' this event really need to think a bit harder. They need to address organisation from start to end and use the attractions of the city a little In full: Where to start ? The start - atrocious organisation. The only race where >4000 runners have to circle shopping centre on a single lane road and to be squuezed through two security barriers. The route - totally wasted the sights of Edinburgh in favour of a tour of industrial wastelands & building sites. Managed to include several demotivating loops , especially the 300m one to a dead end at about mile 12. The last trip into the docks and backadded the finishing touch. The finish - to have runners not able to cross the line because of finishers queueing to have their position written down says a lot. Toilets - what are they? Mind you, I did run the Marathonm there last year and they hadn't worked it out then either. Water/Drinks - my wife was given a row for handing out water at the finish , she was told 'that wasn't the system' So the system was that finishers should queue for ~ 30 minutes to get their time checked. let their legs stiffen up and then maybe have a drink Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Decent course and organisation, traffic dangerous at times In full: The route was well sign posted and there were a few marshals dotted around but not nearly enough considering the volume of traffic. One big uphill in the middle followed by an equally big downhill. A hotter day might have necessitated a water station. The guy on the PA system was good value! Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Well organised undulating run through the Surrey countryside In full: Enjoyed it as my first 20+ race - well organised, friendly atmosphere and good route. Toilet facilities at the start could have been better. Don't know whether it was me, but I only found out once I'd got home that tea and cakes were available after the race - I had to make do with a trip to Sainsburys Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: A bit expensive for a 10k - but would probably do it again simply because it is close to home In full: A few more marshalls were needed along the way as well as a water table. The kilometer markers were not very accurate at all. Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: could have been better, but im happy!! In full: ok everyone, it wasnt the best organisation or price wise, but i had a great time!! know things could have been better but i ran a pb and really enjoyed every part of the race, lessons will have to be learned, but we move on!! (full marathons only 11 weeks, yikes!!!!) Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Very hilly, not for the faint hearted, can be isolated as long gaps between runners, but good if you're a challenge seeker! In full: A very challenging & relentlessly hilly course. Definitely a Challenge & not a Race. If you can do this you can do London no problem! Good atmosphere with a nice hot meal afterwards.
Can be a bit isolated & maybe vulnerable if you're a lady runner but some ran in pairs which is better & helps in case you're unsure of the sometimes vague direction markings. Marshall sent up on an extra 1 mile detour through the woods(!!), but marshalls very friendly indeed.
Could have done with more water stops - if hot next year should be reconsidered to put more in towards the end. But couldn't knock the quantity and choice of refreshments! Water, squash, tea, coffee, sandwiches, sweets but to name a few.
Nice hot showers when finished & the choice of a cheap massage before limping off to the canteen for sausage, chips, beans & pie! Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: No water at back of pack after 3 miles, absolutely no sign of energy drinks whatsoever. Stood in line at finish for 20 mins to receive banana and almost empty goody bag. Still no water. In full: Shockingly bad organisiation. Plenty of evidence of runners keeling over along the course - lack of water? I'd sue. My first 1/2 marathon & I'd trained for months, thankfully I'd taken along my own attentive support crew, otherwise this organisation would have scuppered my chances of finishing. The only good thing was the beautifully flat course. Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Rubbish rubbish rubbish In full: I hope all the sponsors are reading this and demand some sort of refund from the organisers because their name is stained by the terrible organisation of yesterdays run. We paid good money for this and instead we should have gone for a nice sunday run with some mates. The race director should resign. He has damaged the reputation of mass participation races and more importantly of our great capital city. Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Overpriced and pooly organised In full: It's all been said before - pretty poor - I missed Alloa the week before to give this a try; I won't be doing that next year!
The race and the Edinburgh Forthside development have much in common - very much work in progress and might be nice when properly finished. Just not sure which decade this might be! Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Who stole the goodies from my goodie bag In full: This event was a joke. I dont want to go over ground that others have already covered but its not good enough to suggest we lay off the organisers because its the first one. Its only their first one and there are plenty of people they couldn have asked for help in organisation or even paid to consult. I didnt see any medical people except at the end and they were carting a poor guy away. elsewere on the course people were limping alone and 2 were even being treated by the police. Come on guys give it up and let somebody with a bit of experience organise it next year. I wont be back as long as Ethical Athletics are involved.
p.s what on earth did you do with our £20? As an earlier person suggested, did you buy yourselves a new car? Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Dismal organisation and in a city as beautiful as Edinburgh they chose worst possible route In full: A wretched slog through the ugliest parts of Edinburgh. Hopeless organisation, a late start, several loops in the course that followed the ugliest route conceivable in Edinburgh, no championchips. Apparently there were no T-shirts in the goody bag - I spent 20 quid plus for a medal and a banana. Edinburgh Council must have been secretly in charge. They are the only people with the levels of incompetence required to stage this event. Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: Choose your shoes carefully! In full: Made the mistake of running in old road shoes - like running on glass in socks, with all the mud! Weather grim so not much chance to admire the scenery as you couldn't really see it, but hey-ho! Good marshalling, decent coaches to the start, well organised generally. Would have been nice to have had some sort of memento at the end to mark your efforts, and even nicer not to have had to pay for your tea and cake! Date of review: March 27, 2006
In short: this is the capital city of our country and they hosted an embarrassment!!! In full: my oh my oh my..... It stared terribly and got worse from there. Who What Where and Why's are the questions on every person's participant's/payer's lips..... I mean seriously people... who thought that snaking the start line round a bend through queues of people needing the toilet WAS A GOOD IDEA? Who in their infinite wisdom thought that the beautiful town of EDINBURGH would be best respresented to visiting runners and families by taking them on a coned off tour of sh"tsville and the back end of a shopping centre!!!! WHY WAS IT ON THE DAY WHEN THE CLOCKS CHANGED?? WHERE WAS ALL THE PROMOTIONAL WORK IN EDINBURGH? I mean why did we spend 20 pounds of our hard earned taxed money to struggle for air in a rugby-scrum-like first few miles only to enjoy a mauling of a finish...... Thats if you finished??? SERIOUSLY....THIS IS OUR CAPITAL CITY !!!! To first time runners, the course was a shambles with demotivational loops and double backs that were not conducive to pacing oneself... The energy drink stop(S) included 1 isotonic stop that was easily missed by many. WHO'S SADISTIC MIND WAS BEHIND THE IDEA TO LET THE RUNNERS CATCH A GLIMPSE OF THE FINISH LINE ONLY TO TAKE THEM FOR A MERRY WEE DANCE DOWN AND ROUND THE ROUNDABOUT???? 'GOOD'ie bag? I could think of other four letter words to replace GOOD that would be more appropriate....
Come on Organisers... post an explanantion/apology and make sure there are plenty of reassurances to your budding running fraternity so that your huge margins are maintained for 2007!!!
In short: With no disrespect to the wonderful friendly marshalls and organisers it is very much an average event that will appeal to average weekend runners, but poor value for those at the sharp end. Date of review: March 27, 2006