Old Deer Park Richmond 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (131 votes). 2009 race reviewed by: Al M
 | | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Bad bad organisation. get there super early. be prepared for the bottle neck finish line. would not do this one again.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
|
2009 race reviewed by: MissJosieW
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Victims of their own success and the postal strike
In full: I think because of the location (Kew) this is a very popular race and I think the organisers allow too many people to take part. I think there were over a thousand, and the marshalls just couldn't cope with those numbers and processing everyone.
As a result of the postal strike many competitors had to collect their numbers and chips were to be collected on the day. There were long queues for the toilets and the bag check.
The race was started late but even so people were still queuing for toilets / bag check including me. And I had arrived early. But what with waiting around, and it being a damp and cold November day you don't like to give your bag in until you absolutely have to and will you need the loo again...
The route was lovely as it is always gorgeous to run by Kew Gardens and along the Thames. I saw all the KM markers and did thoroughly enjoy the race.
When I crossed the finish line there was a queue to get on the chip mat. I would in future move the finishing funnel away from the end of the race. Or have less people taking part as even with the staggered start there were just too many people there. I would also have more marshalls but I think the people there did a fantastic job in difficult conditions.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Mike Davies 18
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In full: Actual race was nice, bar the first 4km being on roads and having to dodge cars! Last 6km was beautiful, all the way along the thames. Not quite sure why it was called the "old deer park" 10k, given that we were in the old deer park for maybe 300m... They'll need to sort the organisation out for next year tho- got there half an hour early, massive queues for race no/chip/bag storage and had to queue seperately for each. No changing facilities so had to bare skin in November cold (sorry everyone!). Race started whilst I was still queing, and didn't get through the gate until 12 min had passed, meaning I spent the entire race dodging and overtaking- good for the ego but not the time... Would do again if organisation improved.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Damian Bamber
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Erika Andre
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: I really liked the race itself, althought the organisation of it was terrible... can see potentional though, it was such a shame.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Carl Barker
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Nice scenary and a good course let down by poor organisation.
In full: The organisation was poor all the way through, the start was delayed because thy couldn't get people registered fast enough and it started while a lot of people (me included) where still waiting to give in their bags or get a timing chip. The route was very flat so it was a pretty fast course, although narrow in places so there was a few places where things bunged up a bit. The scenery was gorgeous though and considering how cheap it was you can forgive some poor planning.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Nicholas Turk
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: nice route, very poor organisation
In full: Confusion at the start for everyone. A marshall had just walked past us saying the race would be starting late. 5 mins later we here a shout and people are running off. NO offical start, route next to road was very poor (I was able to get my chip and number easiy but i could see many others waiting for up to 20 mins). The organisation said no music players were allowed yet upto 20% had them.
The finish was chaotic. As people were queing just after the finish line. It would have been very easy to have put the chip collection area back another 20m.
I doubt I would run this again which is a shame as the route was very nice and potentially a PB.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: La petite rosbif
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: An absolute disgrace, they should be refunding
In full: Very disappointed that after queueing 30 mins for my chip, I didn't get a time because I had to QUEUE TO GET OVER THE FINISH LINE! Did the organisers think there was going to be 14 entries not 1400?
The organisers should be doubling their contribution to Children's Need to compensate for the people who won't do it next year.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Sh@zza
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Would be a lovely course with PB potential... if it wasn't for the poor organisation
In full: Nuff said about organisation - took 1 hour to collect number and go to the loo and I still missed the start - which happened without warning. How about an announcement 5 mins before?
Marshalls.. What Marshalls?! None where they were needed on the road section where it was mayhem, or to remind people to keep right on the bit where you turn back. Missed a few km markers but they may have been there.
Frustrating as it would have been a lovely race, I just scraped a PB but would have been much quicker if I hadn't had to work my way from the back on fairly narrow paths.
Might be cheap but plenty of other races that at a similar price are much better value.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 race reviewed by: Paul Cownley
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: nice route but could do with more marshalls
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
