Headington 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (95 votes). | 1 to 10 of 15 ratings | Page: 1 2 |
| The big picture 2006 (15 votes) | | Overall score | | 64% | | How many would do it again? | | 70% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 55% | | PB potential | | 69% | | Atmosphere | | 59% | | Organisation | | 73% | | Value | | 55% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 63% |
|
|
2006 race reviewed by: Graham Chapman
 | | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: In a good cause In full: There are not many things that the organisers could do better but one is perhaps to give more publicity for the organisation to which profits are donated. This is OXSRAD, a long-standing Oxford based facility that exists to provide sporting and exercise facilities specifically for people with disabilities, catering for all sorts of disability and all levels of competitiveness. For 2007 this organisation is again faced with threats to the partial funding it gets from the local authority so income from the race remains vital. I'm sure some complaints about prizes, momentoes were made by people who weren't aware of the beneficiary of the funds raised. Some of course will prefer to put their charity monies elsewhere and good luck to them in the races they choose for 2007. Date of review: May 27, 2007
|
2006 race reviewed by: Mark Clay
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Nicely organised, well worth doing In full: The big story of today for me was the strong winds, which I really struggled to run through. The event itself was smoothly run, however, and the route was mostly flat with little traffic to worry about. Personally I wasn't worried by the lack of mementos and souvenirs. The generous supply of bananas, drinks etc. at the end was very welcome, however. Nice touch that. Maybe not an event to love, but well worth pitching for. Given the right weather conditions, the route has big PB potential - but not today! Date of review: September 17, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Mark Sleight
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Pricey In full: I picked this race as I missed it last year and it isn't to far from home.
I had read the RW entry details and 2005 reviews before I entered, so I wasn't expecting much in the way of mementos. I was curious though to see what my £9 was going to buy me. A PB would be nice, after all that's what it's all about isn't it?
For me the conditions weren't up to much - too warm, humid and windy. It was all going fine until I hit the headwind as we re-entered the airfield.
I had expected great scenery, what with it being out in the countryside, but to be honest I thought it was a bit disappointing.
On the plus side, the organisation was rather slick, and the choice of venue made the course almost completely traffic free. Could've done with more toilet facilities though.
Will I do it again? I wouldn't rule it out - it's close to home, flat, and if the weather's favorable then a PB should be within grasp. Date of review: September 12, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Michael Beard 2
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Did what it said on the tin. In full: Was concerned before I started the race as some sign posts to the Airfield would have been good. When we got there though my fears disappeared. Well organised and started on time. The race did exactly what it said on the tin. You do not enter a race around an airfield and expect scenery, you do it for a PB. I was on for a significant one until the last 2km when I ran into a 25mph wind gusting over 30mph which lets face it that was beyond anyones control. However again on an airfield race it is a gamble you take. I am more than happy with the early part of the race as the hedgrows shelter you. Yeah fair enough no momento to put in the loft never to be seen again but all the fruit and snack bars you could eat. I know which I enjoyed more. Date of review: September 7, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Ultra Shazza
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Worminghall - a unique setting! In full: I've given it a high score for scenery not because it was a pretty setting but because it was unusual and interesting (if you like that sort of thing!). Disused airfield with a disused plane in the middle of it (which plenty of people seemed to be checking out on their warm-up jogs!). Quiet roads once off the airfield. Yes, the wind made it tough in the more exposed areas, but that's down to the day; nothing the organisers can do to change that! I didn't think it was the flattest flat course I've done, but to be fair it was not far off. Bit disappointing not to get a souvenir but the cakes and teas ensured that plenty of runners and supporters didn't just leave straight after they'd finished, which made for an ongoing friendly atmosphere. Date of review: September 5, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: swansea imp
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 20% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: fruit etc made a nice change from t shirt etc Date of review: September 4, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Simon East
 | | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Dull race with No momento apart from a banana! Date of review: September 4, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: emzap
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Nice and flat but too exposed and windy In full: Was well organised and nice and flat, but the wind in your face for the last 2km was hard to run against. It was also expensive with no finishing prize. Date of review: September 4, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Gogster
 | | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: an avrage race In full: having run most 10k races within a 30mile radius of ox18 in the last 4 months, nothing about this race stands out. Nothing bad, and nothing special....apart from a PB, but this race could be so much more...a t-shirt, medal, mug....commemerative jam spoon.....anything would help!!! Date of review: September 3, 2006
|
2006 race reviewed by: Stevie G .
 | | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: worth doing once..but thats all! In full: OSD? has a great summary of this race. The disused airfield makes for a souless 6-7k of this race...the wind you get in flat places made the conditions tricky at times
no medal or memento , yet a £7 fee is a bit harsh, no real expenditure bearing in mind only a small bit of road was used.
Date of review: September 3, 2006
|

| |