Surrey Spitfire 20Here's how RW members rated this race in the past (82 votes). | 41 to 50 of 82 ratings | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
2010 race reviewed by: carmen Somerset
 | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: fantastic race, beautifully organised,very enjoyable, will be doing it agian in 2011!
Date of review: March 18, 2010
|
|
2010 race reviewed by: Mr Missionator
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Very good addition to calender
Date of review: March 18, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Mandy Kennett
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Great support, lovely setting - really enjoyed
Date of review: March 17, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Mr. K.
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: A good, stern event with excellent course.
In full: First time event. Excellent location with a surprising challenging course. Plenty of on-site parking. A good goodie bag. Well done `Run To Live` for putting on this one. Thanks to all concerned.
Date of review: March 17, 2010
|
0 race reviewed by: Thong Man
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In full: I've already posted my thoughts on the race but feel that some of the runners are being extremely too critical with their unjustified comments. The toilets both inside the registration building & outside were more than adequate for the number of people.Queues are always to be expected at races but if people drank earlier in the morning rather than leave it until the last moment then I'm sure less "loo visits" would be required.People should take more responsibility for themselves rather than expect to be "molly coddled". I never rely on the drinks stations & prefer to carry my own small hand held water bottle. In fact, I inadvertantly left mine in my car & ran the 20 miles with taking one drink. So please stop making negative comments & be more relaxed....it's not easy organising races these days!
Date of review: March 16, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: micheal thomas 2
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: organisation needs looking at
In full: parking was too far from start/finish line after running 20 miles you don't want to walk 500 yards to get your baggage then walk all the way back passed were you've just come from and walk for another 5 mins to get to your car.not enough toilets meaning a 25 min wait before start of race.plenty of water stations if a half filled cup is all you need and no sign of jelly babies as promised inrace pack.the energy drink was the same small amount at 5 miles and on the second lap at 15 miles they had run out.some runners need extra fluids and when told how often they would be on hand don't take too much of their own could struggle on such a long distance.goody bag was a waste of spacewould have been better off with a party bag as the only thing worth having was the mars bar.on the good side it was a GOOD medal
Date of review: March 16, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: m..eface
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Well organised, good pre-london (or autumn) marathon build up
In full: Excellent race, baggage queues were a surprise given that 99% of the runners drove and were less than 400 yards from their car! Plenty of parking meant a quick arrival and quick departure. The race started 10 minutes late but this was warned about readily so no-one seemed too confused.
The route was scenic nice country lanes and the rather austere airfield. Which gave a nice contrast. Airfield was flat and windy, the country lanes were undulating. Both of these are likely to be found in most marathon courses at some point so a good training run. These runs should be on tougher than race day material IMHO
Top gear points of interest included parts of the test track, a few cars, one bashed up truck and lots of rubber marks.
The water station girls were excellent at cheering runners on. The medal is the best in my collection - beating New York for quality.
Enjouyed it, sign me up for next year!
Date of review: March 15, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Simon Stevens 7
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Nice scenic course. About half of it on the aerodrome so traffic. Needs work to make it a better marathon training event.
In full: The first running of this event, it was decently organised with plenty of parking. They delayed the start as the sorted the baggage room delays, but sort it they did and quickly. Half the course was on mostly more minor Surrey roads which are narrow and have some less considerate drivers. The other half on the aerodrome so plenty of space and traffic free, if a bit exposed to the wind. Well marshalled with friendly water stops.
Two complaints: mile markers were all over the place, especially miles 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the loop (done twice, so at least you could compare the speed on each circuit). Irritating if like me you were mixing marathon and steady pace miles as a training session for London. I could be as much as 50 seconds too fast on one mile and a similar amount too slow on the next, though I am confident my pace was barely changing despite the wind and the odd short hill. I was never quite sure what my real pace was and do not have a Garmin.
Second complaint that water and fuel stops could have been improved with bottles rather than cups. Fuel especially was promised but given in small mouthfuls at the bottom of a plastic cup, and only at miles 5 and 15. It did not quite add up to one gel. I wished I had taken my own. Plenty of jelly babies if that is what you prefer.
Date of review: March 15, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Captain Hook
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: A welcome addition to the usual marathon warm-up races
In full: A nice mixture of airfield and country lanes to look at. Flat on the airfield and (very) undulating on the lanes. A very enjoyable race with no problems (plenty of marshalls and water stations)
Date of review: March 15, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Thong Man
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Great inaugural event.
In full: First class event & well organised....with all that tarmac in an ideal world it would have been nice to have either the car parking closer to the start & finish or vice versa. Weather conditions were excellent but if it had rained......... This is just an observation & not a complaint.
Date of review: March 15, 2010
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
