Medmenham 10  Here's how RW members rated this race (49 votes). | 1 to 9 of 9 ratings | Page: 1 |
| The big picture 2010 (9 votes) | | Overall score | | 78% | | How many would do it again? | | 89% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 91% | | PB potential | | 44% | | Atmosphere | | 70% | | Organisation | | 67% | | Value | | 71% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
|
|
2010 race reviewed by: dalli
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: thanks to the organisers and marshalls
In full: first time at this one , not a big event but a great course with a couple of steep but not long hills. very enjoyable & will be back next year.
Date of review: September 18, 2011
|
2010 race reviewed by: Bear G
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Tough but enjoyable 10-miler
In full: Thanks to the organisers and marshals for making this such a special event. I ran with a friend and we were both really impressed by the smiling and encouraging marshals (we needed their support after some of those hills). We'll be back!
Date of review: September 26, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Anette Crick
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Beautful scenery.
In full: Yes, it was hard work and I did walk part of the hill at 4 miles but the scenery was beautiful and there was a nice friendly atmosphere. Would definitely do it again but will do some hill training before then !!!
Date of review: September 21, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: J Rogers
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: had a really enjoyable race
In full: the hill before the 4m point was very steep- I would have done more hill training if I had known! Another ladies toilet would have been useful at the start. It was for a good cause and worth getting up for
Date of review: September 20, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: ngwhitelock
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: Brilliant off road course and scenery - poor race organisation.
In full: My friend (a beginner runner who has never run 10 miles before but who had trained in earnest and was excited at the prospect) and I (an experienced runner) entered this race for the first time. On arriving at registration we collected our numbers and joined a very long queue for the toilet-only one for the entire field of runners. This resulted in us being late for the start of the race and we found ourselves about 5 minutes behind the last runner and the marshal following them. We approached the first marshal who did not hide her anxiety and worry about this fact-not very encouraging and very disheartening. Furthermore when we approached the marshal at the point the 3.5 mile route changes direction from the 10 mile route, we did not see the two signs nor did the marshal check which race we were running. We continued on the 3.5 mile route and ended up just before finish. When we explained to a nearby marshal what had happened and asked the way back to the 10 mile route he told us not to bother. This was not an option for us and we eventually found the way back ourselves. We passed most runners returning to the finish and the water stations were packed away. We ran most of the run feeling very disappointed, angry and anxious that we were very behind. This was utterly soul destroying and made the rest of the run mentally very difficult. My friend cried. When we arrived at the finish (we couldn’t believe the sign was still up) everything else had been packed away and we had to tell the finishers our times from our own watches and ask for a medal. We were badly let down.
*if the race organisers read this we are runners 99 and 130 and we would like our entry fees returned.
* this could have been prevented by:
1. providing more toilets.
2. not assuming the last runner in front of the 'last runner marshal' is actually the last runner.
3. providing marshals who are encouraging and helpful.
4. printing the distance on everyone's race bibs.
5. ensuring the marshal at the change in route is checking people are on the correct route.
Date of review: September 20, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Mike's Sister
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: An enjoyable challenge, good atmosphere, great scenery but the finish was a bit of a let down.
In full: I enjoyed the challenge of this hilly race, lots of different terrain and enough flat bits to give you a chance to get your breath!Everyone friendly, everything well marshalled. However, the finish left a bad impression with me and my friends. The prize giving ceremony started just before 11.45am, when many runners haven't yet finished. It's demoralising enough to have to run up Ferry Lane past all those finishers walking towards you wearing their medals, and having to dodge the cars of those on their way home; but to then have to run to a finish line in front of which is a crowd of finishers gathered around watching the 1st and 2nd placed winners receiving their prizes is quite soul destroying!
Date of review: September 20, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: AnnaMG
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Good local race
In full: Really enjoyable run, the deer running across the path was a nice distraction to the nasty hills.
Date of review: September 19, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Catcat
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: What a small club run should be
In full: very good course mixing up a flat run along the thames with some sharp hills and some picturesque undulating countryside.
Lots of course marking and friendly family marshalling.
organisation at the start was efficient, although probably needed another portaloo. The mens urinal (however rustic) was appreciated.
Date of review: September 19, 2010
|
2010 race reviewed by: Gary Clayton 4
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: good ten miler.
In full: flat first 3 miles along the river then up we go, then we go down again and then we go up again, for me what running is all about, totally enjoyed the run, thanks to all.
Date of review: September 19, 2010
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
