Hampshire Chronicle Winchester 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (196 votes). 2011 race reviewed by: Zoe Windsor
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In full: This was my first winchester run, I enjoyed the challenge of the hills. There seemed to be a mixed field of runners which is what I like.
Personally I did not mind running around the field at the start, the end was ok and I am not used to running on shingle.
Although this run seems to get negative reviews I think we should appreciate the time and effort that is put in, and the people giving up their sunday morning so we can all run.
I will be back next year!
Date of review: February 20, 2011
|
|
2011 race reviewed by: neil_jam
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Fun, challenging course, but with a few organisational tweaks could be great!
In full: I enjoyed this morning's run -- good atmosphere, friendly competitiveness, and a tough, hilly course.
But if only a few things were changed, this could become a really good race. For example, the start was atrocious -- cramped, muddy, dangerous, and it took me over a minute to cross the start line. That's all well and good, but to improve things I'd suggest start-->finish chip-timing. This would allow for the start to be more spread out, and offer also the potential for graded starts based on estimated race times. With these two changes alone the start would become more relaxed, safer, and faster for all. Given the entry cost, I don't think this is unreasonable.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed it, and as it's one of my local races, I'll be back for more!!
Date of review: February 20, 2011
|
2010 race reviewed by: Pete 27
| | 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: I enjoyed the race apart from the last 100 to 200 metres. I didnt like finishing the race on pebbles
Date of review: April 26, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Peter Atkinson 8
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: This was my very first race and although I enjoyed the course and the challenge I expected more.The organisation was really poor start and finish were dreadful and whats the point of a chip timer that doesn't work at the start?
In full: This has the potential to be a really great 10k if only the organisation was better,because let's face it guys it was dreadful from before the start to after the finish.If you're going to charge that much for it then at least give some value for money.I'm looking forward to other races to see how it should be done i'll be back next year to hopefully see some improvements.
Date of review: February 27, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: peter naughton 2
| | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: |
In full: this was my first time running this race,i did enjoy the run itself although very hilly.I would also agree with some of the other ratings about the start and finish not being very good.think i may try again next yr but i would like to know why the chip times were not used in the results,anybody know???????????
Date of review: February 24, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: matt stevens 5
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: What a Shame
In full: What a mess , the start was poor ,"NO BAG DROP" the course it's self was okay, the finish was a joke . I tried to run on the path just to the right of shingle at the finish and was directed back onto the shingle.
I dont mind paying for races and understand that the organisers work long and hard to make it happen and for this we thank you.
This race however had the feeling of total lack of care for runners .Will I be back next year maybe but maybe not !!
Date of review: February 24, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Thong Man
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: Not a very well organised event.
In full: Start & finish awful...prize giving too late....could have gone home, showered, had Sunday Lunch & dug the garden & still wouldn't have been late! For a supposedly professionally, privately run race this was a disaster.
Date of review: February 24, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Toni Dolbear
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: OH MY GOD!!!!!!
In full: I would say I am late starter at running, and thought I would step out of the comfort zone, of which I did BIG time with this race.
The begining was hard, very slippery and boggy, I can safely say that was hard work in itself. I found the 1st 5K hard work and at times I wanted to give up but I got through it. I did find the lady at about the 8K mark who shouted to me that "it was all downhill from here on" a little bit of a liar, I think about 3 hills worth of lying. The end of the race could of ended just before the beech, my legs were like jelly before I ran across that.
But all said and done being at the back was nice as I felt there was a bit more camaraderie!
Date of review: February 23, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Jon Dolbear
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: A great race but some the start, finish and water stations need to be reviewed
In full: This was only my third 10k and my first over this course and it was the most challegning so far, but I loved the hilly course - hence a PB. I will definitely do this one again next year.
The leisure centre was very good and there was plenty of parking in or around the venue.
A few elements need to be reviewed:
1. The Start - this was absolutely awful and dangerous - to start a road race on a field (or should I say mud bath) in February was crazy - it was such a shame. Maybe for next year the Start should be moved to the far end of the Leisure Centre car park (on tarmac/concrete).
2. The finish - the pebbles were like running on a beach and it wasn't the nicest finish to a tough race.
3. The water station - under-manned and I had to stop to wait for water, which made me struggle over the next 2k.
Also, I did not know what my real race time was - it was not clear where the start line was so I didn't know when to start my watch and it was disappointing that the chip didn't register the start - what was the point of the chip?
All in all an enjoyable race.
Date of review: February 23, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Ian Watts 9
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: Very hilly and demanding
In full: Excellent race - now hurting in places ive never hurt before - very hilly - 7KM was long and hard- excellent training..
Date of review: February 23, 2010
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
