Are you impressed?
On first viewing, a mixture of good and bad. A couple of interesting articles, but a very busy layout and extremely prominent advertising make the content harder to read fluently.
A letter is published, making a valid comment on the types of races reported. This is refuted by the editor.Turn to this month's race reports. (RACE) and what do we find? ONE race report, which isn't about a "proper" race at all but is a two page commercial for an "adventure" type race involving straw bales and put on by RW's sister publication. This is followed by a couple of pages advertising upcoming races - mildly interesting, but where are the real reports giving honest evaluation of real races?
No, Which? is always interesting and usually contains something new.
I think it is definately improved actually - prefer new format, starting with getting rid of the model on the front page, and I've found a lot of useful info in there. No article/interview about a great athlete from the past or present, but maybe they just haven't got that this month.
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 |