Rutland Water MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (90 votes). | 61 to 70 of 90 ratings | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
2011 race reviewed by: andrew pask
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% |
In short: A great race but very expensive.
In full: This was my 2nd Marathon and my most enjoyable. The course is very scenic but tough in parts. I totally underestimated the peninsular section. You turn onto the peninsular at 6m and leave it at about 19 so it's a big chunk and thats where the bulk of the hills are. This race is not fast and I was 10mins beyond my target a foot injury didn't help with that though!
As for the £35 entry fee. Well I'm not sure where that went. The t-shirt is ok but cotton and the medal is a generic fat feet medal that only says Rutland Water on the ribbon. For that reason £35 is well to steep.
Would I do it again? Yes if the cost came down.
Date of review: November 6, 2011
|
|
2011 race reviewed by: pandamanda
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: great race on a challenging undulating course
In full: My first marathon. The course is undulating/hilly throughout with some short steeper hill sections. About half the course is rough stony tracks, other half on tarmac. So it's a fair challenge! Fantastic location and great scenery on the majority of it. Exposed around the lake so go prepared if weather is bad. Very well organised, excellent marshals, good local support and friendly fellow runners. I have no regrets at all, but will look for something flatter for by second marathon.
Date of review: November 6, 2011
|
2010 race reviewed by: helen owen 5
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Fab first marathon!
In full: Not the easiest first marathon but so well worth the trip.
the walk to the start was long but fellow runners were very chatty and actually help calm my nerves!
Fab course gorgeous scenery and challenging! Marshall's were friendly and very support all the way round no matter what time you were doing!
Would recommend this day to any one who likes to run away from the big city.
Thank you Fat Feet for a great day.
Date of review: November 14, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: big bad bri
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: i found this tough...
In full: Organisation - was 'ok'. Long walk to the start was not good, and delayed start. But they didn't really cause problems. While advised beforehand water in cups is a bit of a problem - bottles would be better and have an odd gel / energy drink would be good.
I found this course challenging with the hills and different surfaces. kicked a big stone and got a black toe nail for my efforts!
This race didnt work for me - my third marathon, was just a poor day for me on the day.
Good small field and thank go to the chatty fellow runners. Marshalls pleasant and chatty too - thanks.
FInish - was ok. Would have appreciated a bannana or something to eat and a space blanket. I was frozen when I finished, but it was in the car park and easy to get to the comfort of the car.
I had a poor performance which maybe tarnishes my view of this race. Its definite "maybe" whether i try it again.
Date of review: November 13, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: The Joggler
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: I loved it
In full: On road, off road, trails, grass and mud. Up hill, down hill, then back up again. Cattle grids, some cattle (mostly sheep). Brilliant! - this is what running is about. Forget the PB, admire the scenary and feel proud to finish a challenging marathon.
Yes - the mile markers were out, but as long as the finish line is 26.2 miles from the start line then I'm happy. I never trust markers anyway and since I never carry any with me when I'm training I'm used to relying on 1970's satellites.
The marshals and support staff were superb with lots of encouragement - as well as the pot banging locals!
If you want a challenging marathon then give this one a go.
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Traviss Willcox
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Very good trail/road mix marathon with lovely scenery, just needs a few tweaks.
In full: Pros
1) Lovely scenery around Rutland Water.
2) Excellent directional signage and even better marshalls manning the water stations and pointing people in the right direction. Very little chance of going astray.
3) Nice medal at the end.
4) Easy parking.
5) Challenging course, varied terrain, road, bike paths, tracks, grass, sandy trails, most of which was in very good condition and only a spot or two a bit muddy despite the rain. A road shoe race rather than trail shoes for sure.
Cons.
1) The start I'd guess was a mile further than I thought it would be. A "few hundred feet" past the church, was more like a couple of thousand yards, meant that we almost missed the start despite it being 15 minutes late. I imagine this was a late change due to the diversion later on but would have helped a great deal if this had been mentioned when we picked up the chips!
2) Was rather more hilly/undulating than we thought it would be, the first few miles seemed quite level but then the rest just seemed a constant up and down, nothing killer at all, but just very undulating. Perhaps reversing the course would help this perception?
3) The mile markers were hopelessly out or my garmin was. At mile 3, garmin said 3.5 miles, but by mile 9 garmin was at 8.6... anyone relying on them would have had problems.
4) No calories supplied on the course or at the end. Which to be fair was exactly as advertised so was prepared, but this is the first time (out of 27 goes) that a marathon I've done has been like this. Would happily have paid another £5 on the entry fee and been something to nibble on at the water stations, energy drinks etc and especially at the end, was just plain hungry by then! There was an electrolyte drink at mile 19 or so (which again was as advertised, not an energy drink) though on such a chilly day something full of calories would have been more appreciated!
5) Ran out of my size t-shirts at the end, so will just end up giving what I received away which is a shame.
Has the potential to be a top notch event with a few tweaks, nothing fundamentally wrong, and could easily be a Runners World Top ten event in a year or two.
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Caroline Gasper
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: tough but beautiful
In full: i think the walk to the start fooled everyone and made for a delayed start. It was bitterly cold waiting although the rainbow was lovely! The sun soon came out which showed rutland water off to its best and eased the pain of the course which i tend to agree was hilly rather than undulating. I really enjoyed the friendly atmosphere, the marshalls were great, i thought the water stops were adequate although i missed a sports drink around 18-20 miles. A well run event Thank you Fat feet
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Lee loo lyn
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: I'm inclined to say hilly!
In full: Agree with most of the forum comments around start line, mile markers and undulating vs hilly 'issues'. But most of the niggles can be overcome with tweaks and more detailed website/race pack information. They did warn us about cattle grids and trail paths so tough to complain there...although my feet took a battering on that diversion onto a new shingle path. Hopefully it stays on our race calendar and the finish line gains itself a banana table! Still, it was nice to get a medal and t-shirt. Great route for the field size and for the full range of speeds, which should be encouraged because of the narrow paths in parts. Nice to have support from the public and the marshalls but was a bit let down by one marshall who thought it would be a good idea to say "all downhill from here I promise" at mile 21. Heartbreaking lie.
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Remember The Goals
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Great potential - not quite there yet
In full: Pros:
Fantastic scenery
Beginner friendly
Something different instead of plodding on tarmac.
This race has the potential to be in RW's top 10 if a few organisational issues are addressed. As was mentioned before, the obvious point regarding tge mile markers was a pain. I personally did not feel there were adequate water stations, especially within the final 6 miles. I know the guidelines say every 2-3 miles but 2 inside the final 6 would have been better, given the profile of the final part of the course. Also - no energy drink as promised at 20 miles?
Start - yes, a more accurate description of where the start was would have been helped although I think people will be more aware of this for next year. Not much the organisers could have done to move this closer to the car park unless there were some alterations to the route here and there over the 1st few miles?
Route - I did find this a bit frustrating that the undulating description was given to entrants. I wouldn'd say this was a hilly course but the relentless undulations really took their toll, especially at the 21 mile marker.
Finish - some snacks would have been superb in a goody bag and not too sure how many people would wear the cotton t-shirt.
Overall, has great potential and without doubt the most beautiful scenery for a race yet. Well done fat feet and I hope this continues for next year.
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Jane Stedman
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: beautiful and peaceful!
In full: Lovely scenery - peaceful run - great marshalls - shame about mile markers being somewhat randomly placed - we miscalculated distance to walk from Chuch to start!Hillier than described - around that peninsula!!!! Would defo do it again. Thanks Fat Feet and well done!
Date of review: November 9, 2010
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
