Nike Milton Keynes Half MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (558 votes). 2006 race reviewed by: RedBaron
 | | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Well organised and marshalled.
In full: The MK half has the potential to become one of the better halfs in the country if they step up the logistics a gear eg add timing devices, offer water in a bottle (not cups) & keep cars out of the way totally.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
|
2006 race reviewed by: Palomino
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: No warning at the start and pens would have been good so that slow friends running together and chatting knew to start further back. Great race. Will be back.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: swansea imp
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: good race
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: d2
| | 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: good route, nice race, poor organisation at the finish
In full: directions and parking were good, toilets (ladies) good, although I WISH those that weren't running, (i.e. spectators) would wait until after the race had started to use the facilities - at least they have a choice. Route fine - not sure my definition of flat is the same as some peoples but there you go. It certainly wasn't hilly. The finish was a joke. Where was the finish line? And only one person recording numbers? If you came in at approx the 2hr mark it was chaos, and freezing. I waited about 10 mins (I timed it) to get through which was way too long in those conditions. Lucozade was a surprise, but its a shame they only provided the yukky orange one at the end and no water. It'd do it again though.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: r o b s t a
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Bring in Champion Chip timing!
In full: A great course, well signposted and with plenty of lucozade sport on offer.
It wasn't clear where the start line was, better sign posting and maybe a guy with a microphone would have helped. It may have been beneficial for a group warm up session too?
As i was running towards the end it wasn't very clear how close i was to the finish line, maybe a half mile and quarter mile to go sign would have helped me time my final sprint better.
Then of course the usual grumble about finishing and having to stand still in the cold for five mins. The inaccurate timings or positions don't bother me too much as i used the time form my stopwatch but being unable to cool down or stretch properly was very bad form.
Having said that i had a great run, got a nice medal and I'd come back next year but only if chip timings were used. I don't mind paying say £5 more to enter as long as the finish line moves well and we all get chance to stretch out when it matters.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Graham Miller 5
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Potential decent race ruined by a poor start and an even worse finish.
In full: A good race for either a potential PB or workout for London was spoilt first at the start, well we just started, I heard no hooter in fact there was no indication that we had actually crossed the startline. As for the finish I was in the middle of the field and therefore in the crush at the funnells. My muscles have been very stiff for the last two days which could have been avoided if I didn't spend 10 minutes in the funnel getting cold and frustated.
Will only consider doing this again if they introduce chip timing. Otherwise the race is good value particularly if you have a fondness for Lucozade Sport.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: kevin ferris
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Saw parts of MK I didn't know were there - very good
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Brian of Bozeat
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 100% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Nice fast route, But understaffed.
In full: This was my 4th half Marathon and to compare my experiences...
I wonder if it was a lack of voulenteers that let the organisation down? I saw less marshals on this one than any of the others... Some marshals seemed a little "flat" others were positively perky. Thanks to them all for their time and effort, especially the army cadets, some of them stood IN FRONT OF BOLLARDS to stop us crashing into them, NOT in the way as others have claimed.
The world is not flat, but this course is as flat as you are likely to get and was easily the flattest I have ran.
This was the only one without chip timing, and it has the second biggest number of entry's, I think they know that now, judging by the apology on the MKAC website!
Some motorists where a little impatient, not all the roads were closed, life's like that sometimes eh?
I wonder what would happen if everyone refused to help at races because of the attitude shown by competitors? people would have to be paid and then entry fee's would go up and the helpers would be unlikely to be fellow athletes, so you'd get that "if its not on the shelf we ain't got non" attitude. Think about it.
Well Done MKAC, thanks for a great mornings racing, please Iron out the start & Finish, We will be back next year.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Keith Borkett
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Farcical queue at the finish and poor start organisation spoiled an otherwise good event.
In full: Pros:Parking excellent, and close to the start. Very well marshalled and drinks stations good. Lucozade sport turning up was good.
Cons: I was in the middle of the pack at the start, and didn't hear the start gun (or hooter) going off, so was unaware that the race had started. The finish was a complete farce, as I had to queue for approximately 5 minutes, from about 2 yards in-front of the finish line, until the poor chap at the end of the funnel (there was only one) recording the numbers. The time keeping was poor (showing about 2 minutes slower than I actually ran). The last thing you want to do after finishing a race like this, on a cold day, is to stand around for 5 minutes before you can leave the finish area to put some warm clothes on.
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Nigel Clements
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Free drink and good parking do not outweigh the farcical finish.
In full: Pros.
Arrived 1hr early, parked the car easily about 20m from the start, left my kit in the boot at 10:29 and set off on time.
Plenty of free drinks hand outs, not restricted to one each.
Lots of toilets, though the later runners seemd to have some weird queing system!
Flatish course, going under roads with associated dips and climbs.
Well signed mileage points.
Well marshalled and plenty of water stops.
Cons:
Start not easily identified!
Baggage hold a joke.
Finish:- worst 'organisation'I've ever encountered.
Results not accurate after 700th place!
Date of review: March 14, 2006
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
