Edinburgh MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race (1467 votes). 2005 race reviewed by: David Brown 23
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Cobbles and hills made it quite hard especially at the end. Otherwise a great experience for my first marathon.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: Mick Rice
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Bad value.....Better races elsewhere. Particularly for those travelling.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: daviec
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Last 3 miles were killer, but it was a good course.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Mark Orrell
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Where were the toliets?
In full: This is the third time I've ran this marathon and the fastest. However the organisation was poor. It looekd like 8 loos for how many runners?? I actually missed teh start as I was still queueing! I did quite enjoy the race itself, shame no Arthur's Seat but the roads are pretty narrow. The cycle pasths themselves were showing signs of overcrowding as well, my pace dropped noticeably at this point. The contra-flow idea is psychologivally dis-heartening and there were tow of these to handle! The weather would have dampened the specators enthusiasm, the least 2 years were much better. Had to agree about the changing facilities being poor, why were there females and non-runners in the male changing tent?? Ladies, this is not on! To sum up: good race despite the efforts of the organisers.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: T Buckley
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 20% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Terrible, Terrible
In full: Really badly organised from start to finish. I waited around for over ten minutes at the start and then couldn't get going for tripping over spectators!. Why were they with the runners?. The state of the roads for the first three miles were appaling, so many holes and un-even tarmac, accident waiting to happen. The atmosaphere amongst the runners was just terrible. You could have heard a pin drop. I even heard one girl tell a lady who was cheering to shut up and stop being patronising. As for support, it was sparce to say the least. A very lonely, depressing run. why were these relay runners there?. At 18 miles plus the last thing you wanted to see is a fresh sprinter! As for the goody bag, microwave Pasta and a bag of sugar?. Tell me where was the microwave?. How about a banana or sports bar?. I even had to go back and ask for my medal. Organisers need to get their act together and think again before charging so much for such a poorly organised event.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: John Viv
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Enjoyable yet gruelling run- happy I finished
In full: I've read through most of the fascinating comments, and agree with most. No real transport connections the early 1.5 mile walk for me in the rain was off putting- especially as the kit bag was just big enough to only hold trousers and shoes and that a towel or change of clothes was simply too much to hold (so left towel behind!)The Nike 10K run in London accepted small bags/holdels, why not here? They were not transported at all just sorted out. Had to flag a taxi going back. The greeting image of hundreds in a queue so close to race start daunting, I agree there seemed ludicrously too few toilet facilities. The mens changing rooms were packed, and the pungent smell of travasin etc., quite overwhelming- again no benches, so we were expected to change on wet grass in a tent, balancing on socks and shoes, its not really a great start is it? Changing facilities?(where were they) I counted 3 or 4 chairs.
The race start was good, not so crowded and, yes the scenic beginning was amazing, glancing up at the castle, etc., Princes street, Scotts memorial, Hume’s tomb on the horizon. Did not like running anxiously on the wet and slippery cobbled streets, am sure running on these resulted or caused my injuries. The cycle path I found enjoyable, but was eagerly awaiting the sight of the sea. The coastal run was magnificent- however, I did not like the doubling up aspect of seeing runners winding so far ahead to an invisible point and then seeing those already on the return part. Found this pyschologically irritating. Its true, as many suggested, some of the mile markers were missing. I too noticed that enthusiastic cycling official reappearing, lol. The watering points seemed to me to be plentiful, I did miss the first aid promise- and towards the last stretch was ideally anticipating some helpful massage and ice packs for severe calf pain- instead had to administer water and massage myself. I must have stopped 3 or 4 times in pain but no medical officials around. Feel sorry for the chap here who pulled out after 19 miles waiting for attention. Despite the invitation to fill out on the reverse side of your number emergency details where were they, I guess the Scottish equivalent of St. John's Ambulance men and women? few and far between.
Towards the end of the coastal section I got caught in the downpour with a bitter wind- it was sheer hell. No toilet facilities here at all for runners and had to pee up against a sea wall. I too noticed the shower set up in some chaps front garden, and noted with bemused irony the fact that I was still soaking wet as I passed it.....still on a hot day it would have been a wonderful gesture! The hilly streets towards the end were tortuous, especially with an injury and like many I was walking/running towards the end. Cannot the planners give us a downhill route for the last stretch? Still, the Edinburgh crowds were very encouraging – a nice man gave me a welcome banana- although at times it did feel as if I was in a zoo. Nobody has mentioned it but I positively hated the fool screaming loudly in a microphone at the beginning & end of the park for Elvis et al- what has this got to do with running? Why so loud? I'm afraid I loathe the charity mafia who appear to have parasitically attached themselves to our sport. It isn’t as pronounced in other sports- why long distance running? I read The Scotsman's coverage for Monday and the politically correct journalist has alighted on an Indian turban team and the participation of a refused asylum seeker with pics- no surprise there then. I too awaited a certificate without further payment.
But to end on a positive note, I would run again- hopefully next time without incurring any injury and, god willing, without those windy coastal downpours. Edinburgh is a magnificent city and the coastal landscape was breathtaking (for a Londoner!) But is it really possible to run a pleasant marathon? this was my first one, I somehow doubt that very much? We all experience our highs and lows, pros and cons, participating is everything, and it was a great shared experience.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Desert Ram
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Felt that the lack of water stations let this one down a bit, escpecially once the sun came out, but all said well worth going to.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Melanie Jewett
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: For my 6th marathon, this was the priciest and most challenging
In full: I agree with comments made so far about lack of toilets at the start and also how crowded the start was. The finish was a bit of a mess, not enough room and no flow to it, it would have been possible to have missed out on picking up the t-shirt or medal. For the amount we paid I was expecting a bit more for the money, but it was great to have the chance to run around Edinburgh and see the sights - loved the bit by the castle and also leading up to Portobello beach, not so keen on the number of times we went over cobblestones though or that last 2 mile incline to the finish, just not needed after 24 miles. With regards to the water stations, I thought the size of the water bottles were perfect, but could have been more frequent...and why did they have Luozade and water at the same stations?? It would have been better to have spread them out seperately over the course, I missed the first energy station, which wasn't a problem for me as I had gel, but for those depending on it, it must have been disappointing. In all, a good run but needs looking at more organisation and value for money wise.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Liz Burgess
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Great race and stunning scenery. The crowds were excellent. Only two negative points were a lack of toilets and poor organisation at the start. Otherwise, a very enjoyable run.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Andrew Gerrard
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 100% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Not bad, easy course
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
