Rutland Water Marathon

441 to 460 of 463 messages
09/11/2010 at 22:26
I had quite a good time but I was pretty disappointed by the organisation.

No problem with the cattle grids and didn't mind the hills, although I think that they could have been better described, as both are part and parcel of a stunning location.

The start and finish position was just nuts, really mad. The unexpected length of walk to the start meant that loads of people had to hang around for an extra ten mins in the rain while others missed the start (including my wife and daughter). And then we ran almost the whole of the water circumference but missed out Normanton church - the most spectacular sight for miles around (and the sight pictured all over the adverts/T-shirts) - which we started half a mile after and finished a quarter of a mile before. What an open goal missed - looking at the map it would appear easy to lose a few hundred metres from the peninsula circuit and start/finish at that brilliant location.

The mile markers were worse than useless and I don't know why they bothered. They said they'd be intermittent, they should have said they'd be inaccurate.

I thought the marshals were pleasant but ill-informed and I didn't much appreciate the guy saying "something like a mile to go" when it turned out to be less than half a mile.

And finally I think that while £30 isn't huge it isn't trivial and cups of water (I didn't see the energy sweets that were reportedly around and I don't believe in the 'elete' drink), paying for parking and fruit-of-the-loom style top don't quite cut it. I hope they do take this on board because it could be brilliant but it isn't yet.
09/11/2010 at 22:33
This was my 1st ever marathon, I'd say

- cattle grids: it's the countryside, lighten up folks! Also there was often a gate at the side ("for townies" as I heard one chap say!)

- mile markers: agree they seemed inaccurate

- marshalls/drinks station: plentiful and cheerful

- course: very scenic and quite varied so made for an interesting run, which was why I chose this one rather than a town race. 'Undulating" terrain was very tough going in the last few miles and I lost a lot of time and heart (legs still a little wobbly - heart recovered!)

-weather: perfect - the organisers even managed to secure a rainbow for us all to run through near the start - thanks guys!

Would recommend it and would run it again
09/11/2010 at 23:37
First marathon, great to get out of London for a day. Big thanks to the marshals and especially the army cadets who gave up their Sunday morning to hand out water. Some great words of encouragement from spectators and other runners.

I was a bit concerned that this wouldn't be suitable as a first marathon however having completed it I would recommend it, tough but great fun.

A nice mixture of athletes, die hards and fun runners. I got chatting to another runner which helped 4 miles flyby.

Good event set in a great location.



J2R
10/11/2010 at 18:54
As mentioned above, I had to pull out after the second loop of the peninsula (about 17.5 miles in). What was the terrain like for the rest of the course, compared with what had gone before?
10/11/2010 at 21:40
Gutted for you!

After the peninsula section it moved back onto roads with some gravel footpaths.

One odd path appeared to run between two gardens, this was very muddy and only wide enough for one person. If it was not for the fact that someone was behind me, I would have felt safer walking.

Edited: 10/11/2010 at 21:41
J2R
10/11/2010 at 21:57

Thanks. I'm already thinking about next year and how to run it. This year my plan was to get some minutes in the bank on the (relatively) easy section through to the peninsula, knowing that the peninsula was going to add maybe 30-40 seconds per mile to the time, and then pick up the pace again afterwards. Not having actually done this last bit, though, I wasn't sure if this plan would have worked out.

 I did a 'course inspection' of the peninsula on the Saturday (a very pleasant little stroll) but for some reason on the Sunday the track was distinctly muddier than the previous day (did it rain in the night?) and my chosen footwear was not ideal, I was slithering all over the place.

debbo    pirate
11/11/2010 at 14:04
I'm a bit surprised at all the complaints tbh

I don't think the provisions were 'rubbish' - they clearly stated there would be water, and most folk are capable of deducing that they need to bring their own food or energy drink if they need it

They also said there would be cattle grids and that it was off road - it wasn't on closed roads, so there were always going to be sheep and cyclists - it was on a beautiful country cycle trail on a gorgeous day so it's hardly surprising there were folk out

I wonder if we should contact the organisers and ask them to pave the course and paint a blue racing line on it

The walk to the start was the only bit that got to me, but they'll know for next year. I really enjoyed it.
11/11/2010 at 14:13

me too, loved it!

and nice to meet you debbo

11/11/2010 at 15:38

What a brilliant race - it was perfect conditions for me, cold and clear and as someone else posted there was even a rainbow.! The picturesque view of the water made the miles fly by - I even got rather used to the cattle grids and saw them as part of the challenge - having said this I was quite worried about falling, I hope no one did.

 I will definitely do this next year and also really enjoyed exploring the local town of Stamford after - what a nice part of the world!

 Nice to meet John and Margaret on the peninsula, perhaps see you next time?

J2R
11/11/2010 at 15:56
Ralph, John here. Good to meet the two of you, too! Yes, very good chance I'll be back, felt disconsolate at having to pull out. Don't know whether you saw my message above - well done on the Boston qualifying time (I'm pretty sure they'll use your chip time, not official time). I also rather enjoyed the cattle grids, gates, etc., as it all made it rather more fun. Big thanks to Elizabeth again for helping me out, don't know how I'd have got back to the hotel without freezing otherwise.
11/11/2010 at 17:58

Hi All,

My 5th marathon this year and I am sorry but I have to say it was the worst organised marathon, I ran the Snowdon marathon the week before and if the organisers want advise on how to organise a marathon give them a ring as the Snowdon is by far the best organised on a much more difficult course. The Rutland Water marathon stated a 15 minute walk to the start (try 30mins), I could not understand why there where more water stations at the start then none between 14 and 19 mile markers. I am glad other people picked up on the mile markers as I thought my watch was playing up!! Other marathons I have ran all give out energy drinks/energy bars at water stations and some (not all) bottled water for you £30 entry fee. Was also disappointed they didn’t put some portaloos at the start, all the people had to wait a while at the public ones (30mins from start). I also don’t understand the 9am start, possible 10 maybe better and may attracted more spectators. A long walk to the start is never a good moral booster and that really needs looking at. The big thing for me now is where are the Results?? Why are they not on the website, again every marathon I have run have the results on the web site the next day or either the same night! Where can we obtain race photos from as there where cameras around the course?? Had no complaints about the t shirt and medal but I do now wonder if the course was more than 26.2miles with the conflicting mile markers???? The course does have a few hills which stated on an email I got but the terrain does make it a little more fun so hardly think its fair to blame the organisers on a few patches of mud!

 Result

Sorry fat feet but wont be running this one again!

 

Phil

runwithphil.co.uk

11/11/2010 at 18:03
Phil the results are on the blog page of the website. Kind of a weird place to put them and I wouldn't have found them if someone on here hadn't have told me, but they have been there since Monday. The photos are also accessed via the blog page too.
11/11/2010 at 18:43

For some reason my computer will not let me click on the blog part of the website, giving an error message, will keep trying, sure i will get the results some how-thanks anyway.

J2R
11/11/2010 at 18:49

Actually, on the information sheet sent out with the race number, it says about the race start: "It is a 10 minute walk from the car park". It was 1.2 miles. Now, if I could walk 1.2 miles in 10 minutes, I think I'd just have stuck with walking for the course itself - why bother with running? How difficult is this kind of thing for an organiser to get right? Try www.gmap-pedometer.com. Or maybe even walk it yourself, just to check? The issue here is not the long walk to the start itself (which isn't ideal but may be unavoidable), but the fact that people were so badly misinformed about it (I heard that many didn't make it to the start line in time, even with the delayed start).

Also on the info sheet: "For the first few miles gates will be kept open by marshals". Now, I may just have been unlucky but I was in the lead pack and I didn't see a single gate held open by a marshal. (Later on I went through some gates kindly held open by spectators). This is not a criticism of the marshals, as I have no doubt that they would have held open the gates willingly, had they been asked by the organisers to do so, which it seems they were not.

And does anyone else think that this description of the course was a trifle misleading: "The majority of the route is on tarmac but there are small sections of grass and hard trail/soft trail"? Together with the playing down of the hilly nature of the course, I get the impression the organisers were keen to get as many people coming as they could and didn't want to deter them with the idea that it might be a difficult course. Once again, the complaint here is not the nature of the course itself (which I loved, just my cup of tea), but the misleading information about it.

And how difficult is it to get the mile markers right? Cycle along with your GPS watch going (I assume Fat Feet have a GPS watch between them) and when it beeps for a mile, you stick a sign on one of the thousands of trees, and then carry on. How could they, practically, have got this so bizarrely wrong when it is just so easy to get right (and no more work)? That's a mystery to me. They did get the numbers in order, though, which was good.

For those of you for whom this was the first marathon you've done and you can't see what a few of us are complaining about, you're undoubtedly in for a treat when you come to do your next one. I've done 10 before, all vastly better organised than this (even Dublin, which I thought was poorly organised particularly considering the steep entry fee). But it doesn't take a big organisation to do properly, just some thought. I've run 2 marathons in East Anglia, at Bungay and Halstead, both organised by small running clubs but vastly better done than this one.

I'm sure Fat Feet will organise things better next time, though, and I'll probably be back. 

Edited: 11/11/2010 at 18:50
11/11/2010 at 19:17

Agree with J2R

 They need to give out better information and with a bit more organisation i may run it again i suppose, forgot to say i did not understand why they sent your number through the post but you had to register on the day and collect your chip on the day. Also no reg times where given out as i beleive, maybe some could have reg the day before so more people would have been at the start at 9.

Maybe i am being a bit hard on fat feet and its just i am used to excellent and well organised marathons?

Phil

M...eldy    pirate
11/11/2010 at 19:27
They probably have to hire out the chip system for the day hence why its not mailed out weeks previousy



11/11/2010 at 20:17

My only complaint, is the daft old bat who said, "It's all flat once you get out of the village"

I'd like to visit her and put a bat up her night dress!!

07/11/2011 at 16:28

Not sure what planet the people who complained are on - every marathon is different that is what makes marathon running so great. The organisers clearly stated the refreshment position and the time of walk to the start.

Thank you to the organisers and marshalls for puuting on such a great event. I will definately be back next year and will be recommending the Rutland Marathon to other people 

J2R
07/11/2011 at 17:56
David Lewis 50, you may want to look at the dates of the complaints you're complaining about. They're all from last year, not this year. I would imagine Fat Feet have got their act together rather better this year. Despite my complaints last year, I'd still happily have done it again this year but was unfortunately not able to.
08/11/2011 at 12:40

Finished in 3:42:00 - 83rd out of 390 finishers. I thought the Ashby 20 was tough but this was hard work.

 The mile markers were not in the right places I agree, but I used my Garmin anyway.

 Would I do it again - porbably

441 to 460 of 463 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW competitions

RW Forums