Trowbridge 10KHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (5 votes). | 1 to 5 of 5 ratings | Page: 1 |
| The big picture (5 votes) | | Overall score | | 64% | | How many would do it again? | | 90% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 72% | | PB potential | | 56% | | Atmosphere | | 64% | | Organisation | | 52% | | Value | | 64% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 72% |
|
|
2013 race reviewed by: Wrinty
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Very good low key race. Date of review: April 7, 2013
|
2011 race reviewed by: Robin Mark Schols
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Fun low key event In full: Two laps of Southwick park, then residential for the last 1k up to the finish. Positives, friendly crowd, pleasant weather and dry and firm underfoot through the park. Negatives, no souvenir at the finish other than a bag of paper, a creme egg and a bottle of water and they ran out of these very early leaving quite a few without even a creme egg. The finish was very small and easy to miss as you approached and then had to go onto the grass along the side of the road yet there was no marshalling to let you know this. Additionally, the finish was right by some traffic calming which could have caused problems for those a bit distracted by the race to watch for traffic. Most of the marshals were pleasant enough, but some of the others could have interacted a little more, rather than just sitting there reading a book. All that said, an enjoyable low key event helped on a personal level by a cracking turn out by my club members. Date of review: April 18, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Tim Woodman 2
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: A good race, but could be tweaked In full: As ever the organisers did an efficient job at the Trowbridge 10K. The move of the start into the park was a good idea as it eliminated the bottleneck of the bridge. I was somewhat surprised that there was no race briefing. I know we've heard it all before, but it is still important. I think the organisers were hoping that all the runners would walk down to the start together, but that's not how runners behave, unless they are specifically instructed too (such as at the Slaughterford 9). There could have been more marshalls on the run in to the finish too. All said, a pleasant run on a hot morning, and hopefully lots of money raised for the Bath Cancer Unit. Date of review: April 15, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: Bob Depledge
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In full: Preferred the different start position and glad ground was firm. Organisation was full of good intent for which I was grateful but to run out of goody bags and produce a number of inaccuracies in the listed results was disappointing. My absence from the results list would never convince my mates that I really did run!They did rectify it though. Date of review: April 13, 2011
|
2011 race reviewed by: DanBerryman
 | | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Good race but need more marshalls along the road at the end, no medal, some results straight after the race were wrong, let's hope the online results are correct. Good route but very hot. Date of review: April 10, 2011
|

| |