Norwich Union City v City 10K - LondonHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (24 votes). | 1 to 10 of 24 ratings | Page: 1 2 3 |
| The big picture (24 votes) | | Overall score | | 78% | | How many would do it again? | | 90% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 88% | | PB potential | | 46% | | Atmosphere | | 71% | | Organisation | | 83% | | Value | | 85% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 67% |
|
|
2007 race reviewed by: Neil Ambrose
 | | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: Well organized and a good venue
Date of review: June 10, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: valluga
| | 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: Great race, well organised but tough hills in places
In full: Really enjoyed this, very well organised and a nice atmosphere. Great value too. Was suprised to find London was 3rd out of the 3 cities - but a closer examination of the average times (I work with data, it's what I do) reveals the following: Liverpool's average time was quicker than London's, true. BUT London's men AND London's women had quicker averages than Liverpool's men and women respectively. What does this mean? Liverpool beat London because they had a much bigger gender divide, i.e. not that many women took part in Liverpool. So hats off to all the London women who got out there and ran faster than the Liverpudlian women on a warm, hilly course.
Date of review: June 6, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Sai Lee
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 100% |
In short: Great atmostphere!
In full: Great atmostphere, generally well organised, bottled water throughout, nice medal (a heavy golden looking thing). A bit hilly (3 major sets) so a PB wasn't so easy (I wonder how hilly the Glasgow and Liverpool courses were?!). My only criticism is at the finishing line, where things appeared a bit chaotic, and the use of black bins for the race-chips - bins were being filled with chips as well as rubbish!!! What do you expect... Would do it again next year though without a doubt!
Date of review: June 5, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Matthew Kerry
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Great 10k, despite the hills, with stunning views and a lovely atmosphere.
Date of review: June 5, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Gareth Davies 21
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Great location, brilliant bargain but with horrible hills really sorted the men from the boys!
Date of review: June 5, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Dick Dasterdly
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 60% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: You cant tell me the other cities did not have the same sort of steep course. Otherwise London would have done better surely
Date of review: June 5, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Jane McConkey
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: didn't think marshalls were encouraging and km markers round the wrong way twice!
Date of review: June 4, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: dvc
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: [LONDON] - Very hot. Very hilly. Very well organised.
In full: After some recent bad 10ks i thought this one was particularly well organised.
Only bad thing was the seeming lack of ordering people by speed at the start, which meant that the beginning was a nightmare for faster runners due to so many slow people at the front. Not so much of a problem in a marathon, but a real pain in a 10k. Soon thinned out though.
Hilly ups were hard, but plenty of downhills to sprint.
Apart from that, no real problems.
Date of review: June 4, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Janie H
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: bit hillier than i was expecting, i wouldn't describe it as undulating!
Date of review: June 4, 2007
|
2007 race reviewed by: Miguel Vicario
| | Overall score | | 100% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: A bit tough, but excellent views and organization
In full: Great scenery, extremelly well organizer, water stations, lucozade, bananas, a t-shirt and a medal for a teener... bargain!
About the run itself, challenging with a couple of steep uphills, not the best place to try to improve the PB, but great overall!
I did 46' and found loads of people running in my pace
Date of review: June 4, 2007
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
