Edinburgh MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race (1467 votes). 2005 race reviewed by: Dec
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: My 9th marathon. Course compared favourably but obviously not as well as London. Although organisedation at start could hav been better and event was sporadically supported, there was a friendly atmosphere and I would recommend to friends.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: Scoota
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: A very good race, could have been better organised at the end
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Dmac138
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Great people involved but some sloppy planning
In full: This is my second time at this run and frankly it was better organised the first time. The enhancements to the course (i.e. taking out the climb up Arthur's Seat) were good but contraflow running is very demoralising. Using the cycle path is fine but it needs to be later in the run when the runners have thinned out (i.e. not after 5 miles or so). The support was excellent and the people were very friendly but PLEASE more loos next time. I'm maybe feeling a little generous as I knocked 19 minutes off my time this year but still only 3.48...
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: FC
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Loved the people, not enough loos
In full: Everybody' s talked about the loos so I'll not bother, except to say I agree. Expo was ok, better than the last for me at Blackpool. It should have been explained to competitors that because timing chips were being used people didn' t have to start exactly on time, this would have prevented the bit of panic at the start. Loved the spectators, enjoyed the contra-flows (it's nice to see other runner's faces rather than just their backsides). Water and sport's drink stations were faultless and well provided for. Yes the hill at the end was tough and I felt for the people who had to walk it, but living in Cumbria I' ve had plenty of hills to train on and so it gave me an edge over others. I was surprised to see women in the men's changerooms but I didn' t really care at that point and I just got on with what I had to do.
Don' t anyone be put off by the negative reviews I' ve seen here. The people alone are enough incentive for anyone to come
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Stuart Mason
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Not a good advertisement for the City of Edinburgh
In full: This race had its good points, namely
- a nice fe miles by the sea
- plenty of water and lucozade
- the support at the end was good
Unfortunately this race suffers from
- terrible organisation - no toilets at the start
- poor mile markings - I used GPS and they were over 2/3 of a mile out by the time marker 25 came around
- the horrible layout by the beach, it was depressing doubling back and almost too tempting to cut across the cones to save a mile.
- The cycle path through the woods - too narrow and congested for the volume of runners, plus it stank!
- The hills at the end. In fact the last few miles in general.
The run suffers from a lazy approach to planning, but then again what can you expect from a city that gave us the slogan "Edinburgh: The City of Edinburgh Council". Must have been up all night on that one.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: stephen price 2
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: could be more toilets, overall happy be back next year thank you .
In full: thanks to all the race organisers and helps all around the race for there support.be back next year thank you steve p
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Smart
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: To be fair, there were some bad points (lack of toilets), but the course was well laid out/marked/marshalled (and it was a nice medal!).
In full: The Good:- I liked the course. It wasn't flat, but wouldn't that be a bit dull? At the same time it wasn't mountainous either so respectable times were certainly possible. Unlike some other people I liked the 'contra-flows' (you got to see some runners head on!), and the long bit by the sea. The cycle path bit I found a bit narrow though. I think the atmosphere was great and there was some nice encouragement from the locals towards the end. Water in squirty bottles and Lucozade was great.
The Bad:- As mentioned already, there was a woeful lack of toilets at the start. There were only eight situated prominently, where I queued for maybe 50 minutes, changing in the queue and giving my bag to a friend to 'bag-drop', before starting 10 minutes after the gun. If we hadn't had timing chips it would have been a disaster. The loos were paperless (that doesn't mean they clean your bum by computer) and they wouldn't flush. Portaloos are never luxurious but these were filthy, probably through overuse.
The 'Expo' was a bit of a waste of time. Why not just send out numbers and chips? Was this just a way to try to flog a few pairs of running shoes to a captive audience?
As for those mile markers; I saw most of them ok, and I'll admit, it looked like 300m to go until you got a bit closer (it was 800!).
So, half the price, five times the loos and I'll be back; otherwise....
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: S Harrison
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Very good friendly marathon. It is clearly still growing and will no doubt improve year on year. I thought the organisation was fine and thanks to all the volunteers.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Bob !
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: got my 2nd marathon under my belt, but at £39 plus hotels flights, mealsetc. I won't be doing it again. Very friendly city though
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Paul Gray 2
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Steep prices, weak organisation, not traveller friendly
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
