Barnsley 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (185 votes). | 1 to 10 of 19 ratings | Page: 1 2 |
| The big picture 2005 (19 votes) | | Overall score | | 71% | | How many would do it again? | | 89% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 66% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 59% | | Organisation | | 61% | | Value | | 77% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 69% |
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: FLASHAHA
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: not as testing as the old Barnsley 6, but a decent run out nevertheless,also for me,local.
Date of review: November 18, 2006
|
2005 race reviewed by: Kelvin Bierton
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Very good delightful run, undulating so not a PB course. Let down a little by a poorly organised start.
Date of review: December 1, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Barnsley Runner
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: |
In short: Thanks for the constructive feedback, folks
In full: We feel it went better than last year but still need to iron out providing a clear starting noise (easily sorted) and a better finish area (less easy but we have some ideas).
Re. the comments of Wayne Heppenstall which were rather negative, we can't find his name on the race results anywhere. If he has been missed off we're sorry and would like him to get in touch so we can amend the situation.
Otherwise should we assume he did not run the race at all, or ran it under a different name?
Date of review: November 26, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: mellifera
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Good testing course with excellent marshalling
Date of review: November 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Trevor Watson
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Great marshalling made this a good race
In full: I got there an hour early, as advised and parked in the Co-Op (like many other runners, which the shop were probably not too happy about). However, there were plenty of nearby streets to park on if you wanted to be more public spirited.
The race start and finish were a bit odd. The start was about 50yds down the street from the school entrance where the start banner actually was, and there didn't seem to be a clear finishing "line". Having said that, those were only very minor issues, and the race itself went through some nice bits of Yorkshire countryside (although I could probably have done without the coking plant in the first mile). Having read the forums on RW, I was aware that there was going to be a hill between 4 and 5 miles, but not ready for it lasting almost a mile! (well, maybe a slight exageration there). The gentler hill up to mile 6 was probably worse though - coming as close to the finish as it did, and it nearly did finish me!
The race itself was notable for very good marshalling (without the normal Police help, it should be noted), and their support - particularly in the last mile or so was encouraging when I was flagging. Top marks to the marshals!
Date of review: November 14, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: hareandtortoise
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Ver
Date of review: November 13, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Not a townie
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: A well orgainsed 10k catering for experienced and newer runners alike
In full: I found no problem parking as I read the detailed advice sent out by the organisers before the race. Got there in good time and was shown where to go by the car park marshalls. Also toilets in 3 different buildings, so no problem there. Start was better than last year and all points were well marshalled.
Good humoured helpers at the end handing out t-shirts and drinks despite heavy weight of runners. It's not the London Marathon but if you go in the right spirit expecting a race with all the basics done professionally - accurate well-marshalled course, mile markers, finishing times, t-shirt, water and free online results then you won't be disappointed.
A nice local 10k which caters for a decent size field whilst maintaining a friendly atmosphere.
Well done Barnsley AC.
Date of review: November 13, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Holly Metcalfe
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Toilets??!
In full: Enjoyed the actual race itself - the scenery was nice and the route was good. Hills made it a bit of a challenge for a beginner! But don't expect spectators to enjoy the 1-lap course.
However, travelling from Liverpool and arriving with plenty of time to spare I would have expected to not have had a problem getting to a toilet! As it was I very nearly missed the start of the race and ended up starting right at the back. This was maybe made worse by the limited parking facilities - it took us ages to find a space!
One last thing - the water station just past 3 miles seemed unprepared for the number of runners passing through.
Overall, however, will definately do the race next year because the course is great!
Date of review: November 13, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: SlowC
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Not quite sure what happened
Date of review: November 13, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Gary Bacon
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Instructions on getting to the venue were poor.
In full: I like this event and will do it next year.
BUT, directions for getting to the start were awful (if you are doing the event get a map to locate it).
Actual start a bit messy, I think there was some confusion over the 2 minutes silence and I never heard a gun/whistle whatever.
Good route with a start through the houses before a climb up passed the coking plant!
The out in the countryside proving that it isn't grim up north.
T shirt at the end was a welcome surprise as I didn't think one was on offer.
Date of review: November 13, 2005
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
