Edinburgh MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race (1467 votes). 2005 race reviewed by: Heather Keeps Trying
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Poorly organised start, but enjoyable first marathon. Hated the doubling back - soul destroying.
In full: More toilets needed at the start and along the course. Showers would have been appreciated. The channel onto the start was far too small and there needs to be more than one. However, the atmospher at the start and finish was good and the course generally was well laid out, with well set out and organised water stations. I didn't get a T-Shirt as they had run out of my size!
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: rjsmall
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Average course which didn't use the potential of the city to the full was demostrative of the overall poor organisation
In full: I read in the newspaper that the organisers want to make this a major marathon with over 20000 competitors. If this is the case then they really need to get someone competent to organise it. Basic problems with this race were 1) terrible mile markers - missing or completely incorrect - that is basic and it makes me wonder about the rest of the organistation if they get it wrong 2) terrrible start organisation - lack of toilets, poor starting line procedures 3) bad finish area - not enough space 4) no safety pins for the numbers (or that was the case when I registered) - thanks heavens for sewing kits in hotels. 5) slow race results - why aren't they on the website yet?? They used champion chips so the results are sitting in a computer somewhere and cannot be that hard to dump a flat text file on to a website.
The race has potential but they need to look at the course. The stuff on the bike trails / footpath needs to go as does the looping back on yourself towards the end. The organisers may also think that having a hill near the is a great challenge but for most people it is just a final straw when already tired.
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: krusti
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: was expecting more for the price
In full: Still can't think of what they spent all that money on...and still no results!
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Lesley Powls
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: The start let it down
In full: The start really let the marathon down, standing around for 40 minutes in the line for the toilets in the cold is no fun. I ran this last year and thought the course and water stations were much improved, although the loop backs were soul destroying and the industrial section is grim!
Its much better to split the relay start- and it was a real boost knowing there would be crowds at the relay changeover as the were great long stretches without any support.
I would run Edinburgh again
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Harvey Scriven
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: really enjoyed it, just needs less of the industrial part and more of the city! and more toilets!
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: The Bevster
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: 39quid and you get a bag of sugar and some pasta ! AND THEN YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR A CERTIFICATE ? Wotz all that about ???? Surely they fleeced us enough !
In full: Firstly for £39 you would expect a better made t-shirt in a bag. You would also expect more than a bag of sugar,some minging pasta & sauce and salt in your goody bag. How about a key ring or something (like the first year!).
The medal is the same as previous year bar "BT Syntegra" on it !
As for the new course - the doubling back on yourself was soul destroying - there are enough streets in Edinburgh to have a route that doesnt go along the back of the gas works, down the road and back up in Portobello, and 2 loops in Crammond ! GREAT NOT. Granted it was flatter and faster but give me the hills back anyday !
There was a distinct lack of loos at Holyrood.
There were also night on 2000 people that didn't turn up - 2000 x £39 = £78,000 surplus and the website states "Individual finish certificates may be obtained from the race office on receipt of a payment to cover postage and production."
Why are they trying to extract more money from us ? Will it be a fancy certificate ? Doubt it !
The entry form said Medal, t-shirt and Certificate - why make us pay even more money for it ? Also the mugs & caps that were for sale should have been part of the goody bag.
I can't remember what last year cost but the goody bag and t-shirt were far better an I think it was less than 30quid too !
Oh but it was a good day out !
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: running26.2
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Decent enough course,could have done with out the industrial/housing estate sections.Support wasn't to bad particularly
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: stacyanne
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: A brilliant course, could have been more toilets but otherwise very well organised
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Margaret McCaig
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: This was my first marathon and I'm so glad I did it in my home city. I was familiar with a large part of the route and thought the Coastal part was the best part of the run. Only downside was queuing for the loos at the start!
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Philippa Edward
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Fun, good weekend but could have been better organised
In full: My first marathon so nothing to compare it with but overall I really enjoyed it and although not many people did turn out those that did were very supportive and friendly. The coastal section was the nicest with the last four miles grim not only due to the scenery and the hill but I wasn't really paying that much attention. And I agree with the comment "when are there ever enough loos".
Date of review: June 14, 2005
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
