Wetherby - 10kHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (7 votes). | 1 to 7 of 7 ratings | Page: 1 |
| The big picture (7 votes) | | Overall score | | 63% | | How many would do it again? | | 86% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 66% | | PB potential | | 71% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 51% | | Value | | 63% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 57% |
|
|
2011 race reviewed by: tracy farrar
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Good PB potential but more of a club runners event.
In full: Good scenery, route, mostly flat and fast but defintley more of a club run, some jostling despite recognising my pace and starting at the rear - manners a bit poor!
Date of review: September 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Paul Dungan
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Friendly run but let down by poor organisation.
In full: A friendly gathering which was well marshalled by the good people of Wetherby. The start was a shambles: why charge for and send out chip timing loops and then not set up the start and finish to accommodate them? And as for the SIX toilets for 800 runners! What was that all about? The advertising blurb also promised a mug and a memento to each runner. Was the memento the free copy of Northern Running Guide? The only shining light from the gathering was the after race massage(for a very respectable £5 donation to charity) It would be good to see this service available at more runs.I love Wetherby and the surrounding area and will be back... but not to do the 10k.
Date of review: September 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Mark Hudson 5
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: 3rd time I've done this race but the problems at the start would make me less likely to come back again
In full: As with the previous comments, I've done this race for the last 2 years and have really enjoyed it, a good atmosphere, good route, friendly marshalls, etc. The changes to the start this year were a disaster. It would have been congested if there had been 200 runners as opposed to the 800+ there actually were. It took me 55 seconds to cross the line and then realised that it wasn't chip timing after all! Its a shame as this is a fairly decent race all in all.
Date of review: September 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Ben Jones 34
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Quick course, very friendly, improvements at starting gun needed
In full: Just to emphasise what has already been said about the start/chip situation. Clearly too congested at the start meaning it as a bit of a fight for the first km or so before you could settle into your own race pace (and make up for the lost time while shuffling up to the start line). Surely the point of a timing chip is to provide the runners and organised with a more accurate and efficient way of timing the results. If runners are losing 10-20 seconds before hitting the start line then the use of a timing chip loses it's main purpose. Mat-to-mat timing next year please!
Aside from that the race was very friendly and overall well organised. Those involved were very enthusiastic and dedicated. Special mention to the 'MC' who ?I believe was quite entertaining. Good route mostly along trails and countryish roads. Mainly flat with a couple of hills over motorway bridges to mix things up. Overall good race. I'll be back next year to beat my time (if it's published before then!!! :p)
Date of review: September 12, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Claims Monkey
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Too congested at the beginning!
In full: Agree with the other comments made on here. This is the first time I've done this race and from what I could tell they'd moved the start. Not sure where from but the 'new' position left a really congested first few km. There are some narrow paths up to the 3km mark which makes racing a little tricky. I too noticed the lack of start chip mat - why not at both ends? They clearly have the technology. If it was to save money, it's a bit cheap. It could have been a really good race but little niggles make it an average one. Oh and a mention to those running a 60+ minute race, start at the back and you won't find people pushing past you. If you start in the wrong place, you've only yourself to blame for being jostled.
Date of review: September 12, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Lee G
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Decent route, well organised, maybe slightly oversells itself
In full: Mainly positives to this race - generally well organised, pleasant flat route, mainly off road and down quiet country lanes. Good split of fast boys and girls and first timers, both equally welcome.
There a couple of problems though that have maybe come from the race growing quickly in popularity. The start was a little congested and from what I saw there was no chip mat at the start, only the beginning. I can see how it helps the organisers (and that helps the day go smoothly, so is a good thing), but not sure that chip timing in that sense is any benefit to the participant (they'll get the same time as if there was no chip). There may have been something registering crossing the start line, but as yet there are no results to check - I'd expect a professional company to be able to turn around a Sunday race results by Monday evening. Not necessarily the organisers fault, but something that detracts slightly from the event.
Hopefully these one or two issues can be sorted out next year and the race can go from strength to strength.
Date of review: September 12, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Fishy
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Flat, good mix of trail and road, nicely scenic - fantastic mug to boot
In full: Overall a very nice race, well-organised with friendly organisers and enthusiastic marshalls. Unfortunately wo things spoiled it for me. You could only hear the starting gun if you were right at the front (although the race organiser will add more speakers towards the back next year), so not the best motivation at the start of a race. The race is also chip timed, and this is publicised as being for the benefit of the runner, but it's only gun to mat, not mat to mat, and we're still waiting for the results nearly 24 hours later. I can't really see how this is for the benefit of the runner! I got a PB, however, and I'll probably be back next year for another go.
Date of review: September 12, 2011
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
