In short: Big freeze didn't help this one In full: I wouldn't argue with some of the earlier feedback but there were some positives to take from this race (honestly!). The results were posted on www.southlondonfives.co.uk within 3 hours of the finish. I made the distance 10k spot on. I spoke to the organiser and he said there was no option but to change the course at the last minute due to hazardous conditions at the far side of the railway track near the car park. I double-checked before going home and it was dangerous to walk on, let alone run. Finally, the race could and perhaps should have been cancelled but the organiser had alreading postponed once because of a mix-up at the council (and they still wouldn't open the gate for us!) and didn't want to let people down for a second time. Perhaps this was the wrong decision in hindsight? Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: Park run with definite school sports feel to it In full: Felt like a change of scenery for a training run but not like a proper race - that gate! -insecure bag storage, absence of kilometre markings - see forum for further comments. Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: waste of a sunday In full: did anyone have a garmin tracking the distance?
as this was my 1st 10k i thouhgt about it hard looking for course details but got none, but it says it was flat so i thought id go for it...
well i wish i hadnt, i dont think this was very good especially for someone just starting out running to see a race organised so bad and having to give way to people!! again more toilets needed as 1 is not enough.
i would only run this again if it was organised by a different person/company Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: Organised hmmmmm In full: A course that even the organiser could not explain. A nasty leaf style gate that was a disater. And as most people will comment on 'TEE SHIRT what tee shirt'. And a note for MATT CLARE it may have been me that the lead runner colided with in the gate area, but he did say sorry. With 95per cent of the run on muddy grass or snowy areas I dont think I will rush to enter again. Marshals did a great job and thanks to them for coming out for what started as a very cold day. MORE WC's are a must as if you wanted to go it must have been a wicked delay or use of the trees. And a final note for the orgainser (And I have organised events myself so I feel I can comment). MORE info is needed for runners in advance of the start line so we ALL know what we have entered for, and this would help you to have less to do on the day. Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: shambolic In full: Sorry but there's not much good to say about this one. From a distinct lack of advance info to no advance registration, one (mixed) loo, a shambolic and late start, no t shirt or goody bag and a very 'interesting' course. It reminded me of a half-baked school cross country from my eighties comprehensive with more twists and turns than the Labour governement and lots of giving way to oncoming runners on the 4 1/2 lap course. If anone got a PB (other than first-timers) I would be very suprised. The organisers website bills it as a fun run and I guess if that's your thing then it hits the spot. Serious runners beware!
In short: Running up and down a football pitch is not my idea of fun In full: Ist off, its not flat. No where near. 2ndly, more than half the race is on a playing field - not Swanley Park. Dull dull dull. 3rd, who in their right mind designs a course where you have to cross a kissing gate in both directions against oncoming runners? Insane. And finally, where's my t shirt? Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: Definitely not flat! In full: Really a run over the same hill (undulation?)in Swanley Paek 4 times. Wouldn't have come if I'd realised that - haven't got the mental strength for laps and hills together! Having said that, it was a thump around in the fresh air and a medal for a tenner which I think is pretty good value. Apparently there were last minute changes to the course due to the weather, so maybe it was flat to start with. Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: a little more organisation and it would have been just about ok In full: only one toilet, poor signposting, distance was short, finish was poorly indicated, really needs sorting out. Marshalls were nice though. Date of review: January 11, 2009
In short: Cancellation in December unfortunate. Marshalls superb though. In full: Very good race let down by cancellation in December and bad weather. Hats off to the Marshalls for turning out in such awful weather.
A lead runner showed complete arrogance pushing through the man in front of me on the loop back. Date of review: January 11, 2009