In short: Great location, well organised but need to do something about the start i In full: 4 ran in the group I was with times ranging from 41 to 59 mins and the concencus was that this was a race we would do again. There are some steps that could be taken to improve for next time. For the size of the field, the start just didn't work as was narrow with many slower runners in front. The turn at 1.5km made meant the path was halved - that together with the wet and uneven footing made a PB difficult. Hopefully organisers can work on this for next time as this could be 'must do' race if they did Date of review: October 17, 2009
In short: Complete waste of time and money In full: The golden rule of setting a course is that the first couple of kilometres must be wide enough to enable the field to settle, with faster runners being able to pass slower ones safely. The ridiculously narrow course, compounded by the hairpin turn after 1.5k (which effectively reduced the available width by half) was totally unsuitable. My race was ruined by 2km, by which point I was already 2 mins off my target. The race information indicated that the start would be staggered to mitigate against this problem. It was not. Load of old rubbish. Date of review: October 17, 2009
In short: small run in a great setting In full: Greenwich Park is beautiful, but this run was only a small affair. Given the hills, it was quite challenging. Nice medal at the end, but that's about it. All in all good if you live nearby, wouldn't have travelled across town though.
In short: Very bad registration website In full: This is the most frustrating registration website I have ever had to use. Registering anyone other than yourself is very time consuming and the process is unclear. Additionally google web pages were continually popping up and halting the process. I almost didn't bother. Then we registered separately. So what's the point of having the fields to register with friends??? I expect better. Date of review: May 31, 2009