Cirencester 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (85 votes). | 71 to 80 of 85 ratings | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
2005 race reviewed by: geraint blackwood
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: beautiful scenery! and a nice big hill!!
In full: Cracking race.well done!
(bit of a trek from race HQ to the start though!)
Date of review: September 26, 2005
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: Percey
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Enjoyed the race, even the hill..start could have been better
In full: Not a bad race, organisation could have been better. Could have done with someone pushing people towards the start as it was a fair trek from the changing area. Race started with no warning, just someone firing the gun, could have done with some count down as most of us were chatting when the gun went off. No water on the course, it got warm as well, so would have been nice to have a water station. Diary at the end was a bit naff. I did Aldbourne previous week and got a quality t-shirt and mars bar...for same money!!
Date of review: September 26, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Roslyn Kemp
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: beautiful scenery and friendly runners
In full: Fabulous place to run, and the hill was fun. Nice gentle downhill 1km to the end. Agree with others about lack of water and bathroom facilities though. Definitely recommend it just to run through the lovely park. Very friendly runners to chat to in the race, and they all tracked me down at the end to see how I went - really nice. Even found a fellow Kiwi.
Date of review: September 26, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Tombliboo T
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Scenic and traffic free race with a few hills. Spolit by cheap organisation.
In full: Undulating route in the lovely Cirencester Park, with one significant hill that you do twice. Facilities at Cirencester College poor, only 3 ladies loos (one with no seat!)and very disappointing memento - a tiny diary and the event not even mentioned on it. Marshalls excellent and course well marked.
Date of review: September 25, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: martin9
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: good race
Date of review: September 25, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: digi dave
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: beautiful setting and nice run, although organisers miss the odd trick
In full: was weary about this one, as many people spoke of "the hill" and lack of water, problems getting to start etc. To be honest, all of this is pretty much par for the course, if you know about it beforehand.
Firstly, toilets are a bit of a problem, queue of about 10 just to the door (and that was just the gents) - but loads of trees/undergrowth at the start ;-) . Car Park is about 15 minutes walk from the start, so get there a little earlier than you normally would. Yep, no water apart from at the end, but much of the course is shaded, so if you need fluids for 10k, run with your own. The hill is nothing terrible, but yes it does take it out of you, but I would hate to see all 10k's flat runs. Go again, yep - it's not too far away (Cirecester is about 20 mins from Glos/Cheltenham, and 20 mins from M4), Scenery is lovely. Hill a git, but lets you know you've had a run...
Date of review: September 25, 2005
|
2004 race reviewed by: LoopyLor
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: Awful Race would never do this again.
In full: I ran this in 65 minutes by which time they had run out of water and goody bags etc at the finish, was punishing to us beginners. Would definitely not do this race again.
Date of review: April 17, 2005
|
2004 race reviewed by: P Nadolski
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: As a first race for me, it was great. Great course - found the hills 'challenging' - and nice friendly atmosphere. Water station would have helped.
Date of review: October 1, 2004
|
2004 race reviewed by: B1rchy
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Quite fast course, the hills are not as big as expected!!
Date of review: October 1, 2004
|
2004 race reviewed by: The_Dodger
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Not bad...the hill that you do twice is a bit overrated.
In full: The scenary was nice, the course wasn't too tough and there were plenty of runners of all types. The drwabacks were...1) no water stops which appeared to be tough on a number of newer runners 2) the distance from parking to the course and 3) the number of toilet facilities.
Date of review: September 29, 2004
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
