The one that stands out for you above all others
I'd say Loch Ness, although I've only done two, the other being London, which was fine but not mind blowing. Lochaber strikes me as being a complete nightmare from what I've seen of it and it's finishers.
So, if you could only run one more marathon before you die, which would it be and why?
Beachy Head - what a way to go
CD I have done both Loch Ness and Lochaber (and Dublin). I have also done Speyside Way Ultra and am a couple of weeks from my next marathon Cape Wrath in the highlands again.
Lochaber is a flat out and back. Loch Ness is much more interesting course wise but obviously hillier. I did enjoy Lochaber though and its a good PB course and its nice that its organised by a club, (ie not a bunch of corporate people) and is small and full of runners (not charity fundraisers). There is a time limit of 6hrs and 300 runners as its run on a main road to Skye and they cant close the road and only have permission to marshall (I think) the road for that amount of time. It is also far less supported obviously because its a straight road run along the road side (no pavement) while LN although small in the grand scheme of things with approx 4000 runners has a good bit of support although not along the whole route.
I enjoyed them both for different reasons. LN was my 1st marathon, Lochaber was my PB, last year, and the out and back aspect didn't bother me as much as I thought.
I'd do both again, but I like to try different things. After CW I'll be taking a break from marathons for a while though as they take up so much time.
Hmmmm in answer to your main question... Cape Wrath is the one I've always wanted to do. The furthest north point of Scotland.I have no desire to run London. Ever. Too busy, too noisy, too corporate, not great scenery. Too expensive, too hard to get a place.... the list goes on.
I'd love to do Cape Wrath but I don't think I'm nearly nails enough! Lochaber never appealed to me because I really hate flat races but I do agree that the whole atmosphere of the place and the fact its such a small race makes it a really lovely one to attend.
London was better than I was expecting tbh. I got in on a ballot place but used it as a means of raising money for the Cystic Fibrosis Trust (DiL has CF). I was expecting to properly hate but the atmosphere was fantastic, although I did struggle with the number of people around me all the damn time. I wouldn't say I'd never do it again but I'd be the first to say there are far better marathons to run in Britain, and tbh, expense and logistics wise, possibly abroad too.
Good luck with CW!
I've done two: London and Marathon du Medoc (twice).
There's no contest - London was just too crowded, noisy, people slowing (or stopping) in front of you.
Medoc is much more fun You get to have a view of beautiful chateaux,, vinyards, places you don't normally get to see up close, and you get to taste the wine
Lots of people wear costumes - there is a different theme each year - and it has a real party atmosphere.
Athens is a must before you hang up your trainers. Berlin is good as is Los Angeles.Nottingham used to be good as did The Potteries...just some feed back for you.
I have only done two Brighton and London, Brighton wins hands down. Like Wilkie, London way too busy and noisy, could not get into the zone and find my rythem... never again!!
Swiss Alpine or Boston
Of my completed 45 marathons, Berlin, without a doubt. Wonderful city, great support, good course - and free beer after the finish! I've run it 5 times.
Hastings tops them all In may book.
Rome for me
Chester got to be the best even number 1 in RW mag the support though all the villages
Medoc appeals to me too, for no other reason than I love France and the course looks brill, Paris strikes me that it may be a bit too much like London - or in fact any of the other major city marathons. San Francisco always quite appealed too, despite me having no real interest in visiting America. Rome and Vienna hold an interest for me and I currently have a 'thing' about Copenhagen but the relative costs (travel, food, drink, etc) put a bit of a dampener on it for me.
I've ran Liverpool, Chester, Gtr Manchester and London, and for me London was the best.
London. It was brill.
Chester for the UK, and Rome
Is London genuinely so bad? I have never run it so have no opinion but there is a lot of anti VLM posts on the forum. I just wonder if it really is dreadful or if it is just people being too cool for school (bit like saying you hate the Beatles).
I hope to find out one day by running both a London and a smaller one.
I didn't enjoy London massively but I'm not used to running in such large crowds, which is why I struggled a bit. That said, the atmosphere was fantastic and the supporters were brilliant. I'd do it again, I would just tackle it in a slightly different way. I don't think this forum is any more 'anti VLM' than others, but VLM is such a massive race that its bound to attract masses more attention than the others and those opinions are bound to be massively divided.
And they don't get any smaller than London, they're all 26.2
I thought London was amazing..it was my first time this year and I will be coming back for more. I think tgood to have a bit of diversity, and wouldn't mind trying some of the more exotic ones as mentioned above like Paris, Berlin, Rome or Medoc etc....just not so easy to sort out!
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 |