Sidcup 10Here's how RW members rated this race in the past (102 votes). 2011 race reviewed by: Stephen Thackeray
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In full: Anyone thradld think that the people that give up their Sundays to put on these races on eat babies for breakfast, a bit OTT!
Just take the positives from it, which for me was that it was a good season starter, a high quality Tempo run that I wouldnt have done otherwise.
Just because you have a Garmin watch, that doesnt mean you are the oracle & the running worlds number 1 administrator, not what running is about IMO.
Having said all that, I would like to know EXACTLY what the distance we ran was from someone official ?
The Marshalls were excellent, every single one of them.
I think people should be grateful that they can go out there & have a good run like a lot of people did on Sunday.
I would do this race again, its a good early season tune up.
Date of review: February 14, 2011
|
|
2011 race reviewed by: Ginger N
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 20% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: It was short, FACT!
In full: This isn't a debate about Garmin accuracies. It was short, and times reflected this! The facts are the route was changed, I assume because it was deemed dangerous having a right turn on to Harcourt Ave, fair enough. But why was this only thought about on the day, why was this not relayed to the runners at the start? The marshals were excellent and did a brilliant job stopping traffic and offering encouragement. Shame the distance debate has taken the shine away from them.
Date of review: February 14, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Jim Addison 2
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Length matters
In full: As others said, the course we ran wasn't the the certified course as shown on the website - we turned into Harcourt Ave too early.
I guess that sort of thing happens occasionally. But as this race was short last year it smacks of carelessness rather than misfortune. Like others i would have done a great pb if it had been 10 miles.
Certainly won't be doing this again and i doubt it'll be in our club's grand prix again.
Date of review: February 14, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Steve Barnes 7
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 100% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Short - but don't really care! Jolly enough Sunday outing!
Date of review: February 14, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: georgina selway
| | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: |
In short: Gutted course was short
In full: The course that we ran was different to the course that was shown on the website map. In essence we cut off a section of road three times. What a shame as it's an excellent course for pbs. Also I finished in the top half of runners and there was no water at the end. Big shame. Marshalls were fantastic and atmosphere great too will have to look to Paddock Wood for a Pb next.
Date of review: February 14, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: xZL
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% |
In short: Wrong route ran. Turned too early into Harcourt Avenue.
Date of review: February 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: alan mercer
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: A good charge out, who cares if it was short.
In full: I get fed up with garmin wavers moaning about short this and short that. Enjoy the run. You were happy with distance measurement before garmins were around. They are not 100% accurate, get a life!!
Date of review: February 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Running5k
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Garmin v OS Map v A man with a wheel
In full: Just downloaded the route from a Garmin onto an OS map 1:50,000 - comes out at 9.93 miles - not including the start from Leisure centre to road.
Making a new route on the OS map with Memory Map measures out at 3.24 per lap - not including start to road and road to finish - so 9.82 plus the finish straight and start to road.
So the map is almost spot on, leading me to think that the route might have been measured on a map.
Very odd though that the reading on the Garmin itself was 9.7 yet gains .2 when transferred to OS
I took things very easy this year and did exactly the same time as last year.
A big thanks though to the marshals, great support and direction.
For £10 you cannot expect too much in way of medal and to be honest i nearly didn't bother to take one - just getting round the 10 miles was good enough for me.
Date of review: February 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Liz Wilkinson 3
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Enjoyable
In full: This is the second time that I've done Sidcup and is one that I enjoy. I like having the laps as it means you know what is coming up and the second lap is quite entertaining as the other runners come whizzing by with words of encouragement.
The marshals are great - happy and cheerful and very encouraging - whether you are a fast or slow runner.
Good to see that they kept the water station out for the duration of the race, as last year it disappeared after the first lap.
Date of review: February 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Chris Collinson 2
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: YOU ARE FU*KING JOKING
In full: I've run this a couple of times previously, so when I finished in 63 mins and a couple of seconds I was very pleased to have knocked over 5 mins off my previous 10m PB. Rather gutted to now read people saying the course was short....very, very poor effort if that's true. I've never beaten 40mins for a 10k and at the 5mile mark a marshall was calling out the times and when he said 31 mins I was surprised as it would mean a 10k time of well under 40 mins....still heres hoping the course wasn't short, and I will break 90mins in a half marathon at Tunbridge Wells in a couple of weeks !
Date of review: February 13, 2011
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
