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.
me too, loved it!
and nice to meet you debbo
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?
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!
Sorry fat feet but wont be running this one again!
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.
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.
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?
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!!
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
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
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |