Brighton Half MarathonHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (219 votes). 2012 race reviewed by: stephen massey
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: 13.5 who's having a laugh!
In full: Could ba and has been a great race, however the extra distance will put a lot of people off this now and poor goody bags.
I hope we get to see some official comment ....soon!
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
|
2012 race reviewed by: Pete The Plod
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 100% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Nice scenery and atmosphere, but 13.5 miles!!!
In full: Quite a good race, the scenery was nice, the course would have been fast.
But I as well as so many others all recorded a distance of about 13.5 miles even though according to my garmin I ran mile splits all within 10 seconds of each other!
As others have said this was probably caused by an incorrectly placed U-turn cone.
Again as others have said the goody bad wasn't very good, the medal on the other hand was pretty good, also no free t-shirt but we knew that anyway.
I managed a pb of three and a half minutes, it would have been closer to seven and a half minutes if we ran 13.1 miles so on the whole the distance inaccuracy really spoilt an otherwise good event in my opinion as 0.4 of a mile is just way too much!
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Richard Kemble
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 100% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Distance wrong, start far overcrowded, baggage long way from start / finish
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: kysira
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Too long, and where's the goody bag?
In full: Everyone's GPS put the course at around 13.5 miles, yet the organisers insist it was correct. Also, after proudly advertising "we don't have leaflet filled goody bags" all I got was a sweatshop bag with 2 leaflets in. The start was very confusing too, there didn't seem to be any guidance where to start depending on time..
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Aileen Sellers
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Distance was wrong which meant i missed my sub 2hr PB
In full: They got the most inportant thing very wrong. other than that race was quite well organised but goody bag rubbish.
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Peter Collins
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Good race, but, yes, the distance was way off
In full: I know a lot of people put in a lot of time to get all the basics right, and the distance can sound churlish, but if the distance was long - and a hell of a lot of people agree on this - then I was denied a first time under 1.35, and a run that was a long way under that, rather then getting a marginal PB. I pushed myself hard on this one, like a lot of others, only to be undone by an error no self-respecting race should make. I feel frustrated and quite bitter about it. Nice marshals, pretty poor goody bag.
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Jonathan Moscrop
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Great event but spoilt this year by innaccurate course measurement
In full: My third Brighton Half and I've always enjoyed the race, the atmosphere and the city, but totally disappointed this year as the race was about 0.4 of a mile too long thereby denying me a PB time by a good 2 minutes! A great fun run, and the course has good PB potential so I hope the organisers learn from this mistake for future years.
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Si J
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Missed out on pb because it was further than 13.1 miles
In full: I really enjoyed this race last year and got a pb. Can't say the same for this year- toilet q's were so long that I was late starting and had spent most of the race trying to overtake people. Did they have starting pens anyway?
My garmin finish time was 13.8 miles. I know that some of this was weaving in and out of poeple but I was consistently 0.5 miles over on my garmin after mile 5. It is so annoying as I did 13.1 miles on my garmin in a pb time and yet was officially slower than last year.
Not sure I will do it again next year, such a shame as it used to be a good pb race
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: rob laughton
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: good venue, spoiled by unforgivable distance error.
In full: Shame on you Brighton organisation team for messing up the distance. It should be one of the absolute basics to get right, instead it was a source of massive frustration for a lot of people. Capping off this frustration at the line, was an "Austerity Measures" finishing bag. I wonder how many people will come back next year for your 13.6 mile "not really" half marathon? Good luck with that, i will read with interest from afar.
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
2012 race reviewed by: Shen-Lung
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: I must have missed the memo that said half mara's are now over 13.5 miles!
In full: Worked hard to train to get a PB for this race and did get one - however would have been more impressive if the course had been measured properly. This cost me 4 minutes on my time - which is a big difference for me. It measured on my garmin at over 13.5 miles, as everyone has said the problem being between mile 4 and 5 by the time I got to mile 7 I was over half a mile out - alot when your chasing a certain time.
The finish after was shambolic with no real organisation or knowing where to go - out of 6 other runners only one ended up with a goodie bag (which was just full of advertising stuff), 2 managed to get a wrist band, not everyone got a 'cup' of water, we all did manage to get a medal. For the cost this is now just a money making exercise with no thought put in to what runners at all levels actually want from a race - I will not be back which is a shame as I've run this race about 5 times - each year there just seems to be more problems.
If you can't be bothered to measure it properly then why not just advertise it as an expensive fun run for those not going for times.
Date of review: February 19, 2012
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
