Latest Ratings
| 1 to 8 of 8 ratings | Page: 1 |
2010 Run to the Beat Half-Marathon
 | | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: dreadful lack of organisation - and music was less than other half marathons
In full: yes there were transport issues, but most runners were there on time - it was a chipped race - so why delay the start and have everyone standing in the freezing cold for an hour? start was very slow, hardly knew it had occurred - most of us still stressed from the queue for loos and bag drop! - race was sparcly marshalled, and very slow at drinks on the stations - water out of buckets?? (no drinks ready for when runners arrived). through the finish, a mass of people unlacing their shoes to remove time chips (why dont you send out ties to people and have help at the end?) no goodie bag, huge queues again for bags, hard to even get a drink.
if you are going to run a race for this many people, you need to invest in good solid organisation, train marshalls and have good facilites - over priced, only two live bands on the run, the rest of the music was sparce and not very loud (or inspiring) terribly dissapointing - would not recommend sadly.
Date of review: September 26, 2010
|
2010 Maidenhead Easter 10
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Great Marshalls, well organised, but dislike the laps of the carpark - makes for a dull start.
Date of review: April 2, 2010
|
2010 Cranleigh 15/21
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: bit more undulating than I expected, excellent marshalls, nice atmosphere, a good way to get your long run done!
Date of review: March 28, 2010
|
2010 Reading Half Marathon
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 80% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 80% |
In short: well organised, great atmosphere, but a few bottle necks
Date of review: March 24, 2010
|
2010 Snow+Rock G3 March 10K
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 80% | | PB potential | | 40% | | Atmosphere | | 80% | | Organisation | | 100% | | Value | | 100% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: hills hills and more hills, but great fun!
Date of review: March 6, 2010
|
2009 Old Deer Park Richmond 10K
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: race organisers were not geared up for the number of people - a disaster sadly!
In full: Where do I start! paperwork was great, sent in good time and seemed promising, was expecting circa 800 people as last year.
over 1500 entrants - 10 toilets (you can imagine the que..) tiny tents for the organisors to give our time chips (right next to the start line) everything took too long, start didnt happen on time, when it did there was no announcement (in fact no announcements at any point). - some people started 15 minutes later than the main thrust of entrants!
running on the road, no signs, scared runners and drivers alike!
Water stop was non existent, one chap with a load of large bottles, none poured out, so anyone needing a drink had to get their own and lose time. - the loop was a bit of a disaster, not enough room and a slippery finish.
the lack of signage meant local people had no idea what was going on, so lots of people out walking/cycling got caught up in the runners.
At the finish, hardly any room, so people couldnt get on the time chip mat, and then had to que to get out (goodbags were not made up so people giving out various things).
A real shame, I think the organisers really tried their best, but were not able to cope with an event of the size it had become. if doing it again I recommend they keep it small (no more than 800), post out the time chips, put tents away from the start and have some way of making announcements.
still for a sunday morning run with other people it was a change.
Date of review: November 8, 2009
|
2009 G3 February 10K
| | Overall score | | 80% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 100% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 80% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: Hills that are vertical! not for the faint hearted but really good fun!
In full: mud, cold, hills, total madness! was a really interesting way to start the day, nothing could prepare you for how steep the hills were, walking was allowed in many places (and the only option in one) but all in great spirits, very well organised, great marshalls and a drink and banana - times and photos available in record time - recommend it to those that want a challenge!
Date of review: February 15, 2009
|
2007 BUPA Great South Run
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Yes | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 60% | | Organisation | | 80% | | Value | | 60% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: crowded start, and dreadful weather - if only the sun shone it would be nice
Date of review: November 3, 2007
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
