Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Virgin London Marathon 2010: New Route?
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
Anyway, my view on the route is pretty much - I LOVE IT! But agree with lots of others that the bit round the Isle of Dogs is not the most thrilling and drags on and is a bit too winding and I wouldn't say no to an alternative for this section.
It IS good of Mr Branson to consult runners... he is bound to get backlash if he changes the route though so better be careful that enough runners support it and that none of the big landmarks are removed. And also that the course is still flat!!
Hello Tutu,Yes it is flat but a bit slow.
NGU Girl, they had probably gone off too fast or were not proper elites or were stuck in congestion so they gave up and decided to walk as they had no chance of getting a good time!
Smeagol - suspect you are right but it was a bit weird expecting mega fit runners but not the case.
I think that London is a great experience just not a PB one - I agree with Tutu its a great day and Mr B is right to consult us as we are the ones who do it!
The BBC ought to show more of the everyday runner and not just the elite, and dressed up slower runners, instead of showing the elite results millions of times and an ariel view of the course and the same bit of recording of certain charity cases.
The course is not as bad as it was a few years ago, the cobbles have gone, but if it makes it better, then why not change it.
Hmm. Somehow managed to miss this thread before. Must have been <gasp> working or something!
I'm of the view it ain't broke so don't fix it. I've done Blackpool (thankfully not the mismeasured fiasco year...), Cardiff (in its final year), Amsterdam and London. London is the best course in terms of crowd support and, for my money, a pretty fast course too. I'm really not that interested in the sights - it's not like I'm going to stop, whip out a camera and take a picture. I'd rather have a 3 deep crowd of enthusiastic supporters. Don't think the businesses in central London would wear having us run up Oxford Street or similar and I wouldn't be that excited about it either. Although it might be a bit quieter than the average Saturday afternoon...
Also fail to believe they could get changes sorted out in time for next April, bearing in mind the size of the field and the need to ensure that transport arrangements, etc., would work.
Finally, don't talk about glamour. It's a marathon. There's nowt glamorous about it (unless black toenails and limping are de rigeur and I've somehow missed that information!).
"London is the best course in terms of crowd support and, for my money, a pretty fast course too. I'm really not that interested in the sights - it's not like I'm going to stop, whip out a camera and take a picture"
I'll second that !
We need tradition and it should stay the same for this reason.
I agree with Andy Blackford's article in RW - why change a course simply for the sake of spectators/media. Lets face it - most runners after mile 16-20 couldn't care less where they were running as you're focussing on the road ahead, the spectators and dreaming of the finish line
Yay!
*Reserves table, roast beef, sticky toffee pudding and Leffe supplies at the Priness of Wales, Blackheath...*
Hurrah !
Bring back the cobbles. They were iconic.
Apart from that it's fine.
It's 26.2 miles, surely any route is going to have bits that feel like they drag a bit?
The bonus of the current route taking in some "dull" bits of London is that these bits tend to be pretty dead on a Sunday (it's no accident mileage is made up in Canary Wharf which is a ghost town at weekends). I'd be concerned if the route was moved in such a way to disrupt the rest of the city and/or risk runners hitting tourist congestion as they try to get to the start.
Wobbled - on a review of the route why not try to iron out the boring cr*ppy bits - tourist congestion would only be as much/probably less than spectator congestion. If its agreed with the borough/police/highways etc. its not going to be a problem..
Cougie/Rodski - cobbles - ummm...
Yogajoga - I dont think the change is needed for the spectators/media more for the runners. Yeah okay most of the time we are staring at that square of tarmac but this is an iconic race if you happen to glance up you would rather see something other than the boring docklands.. Its not a bad idea for slight tweaks to be made..
Personally I'd be happy to lose some of the loops around the Isle of Dogs (running through Canary Wharf once is good...) and the Salter Road loop, but if you lost just them I'm not sure where you could put the extra mileage. I don't think that gives enough for a loop up to the Olympic park (boring right now anyway), and I don't think you could really increase the amount of the route in Central London. As it is it's a nightmare for folks trying to move near the route. Imagine if large amounts of Central London became an 'island'... It might work for the 10K, but I don't think they get nearly the volume of specatators the marathon does.
I don't think there's really a lot you can change unless you go for a massive change. On the Richmond Park alternative: definitely not possible (for much the same reasons you also couldn't use it for the Olympic Equestrian events... which are going to be in Greenwhich/Blackheath). Richmond is not just another park, it's a delicate and rare heathland ecosystem. It's already stressed by the number of people visiting, it couldn't take large numbers. For one thing you'd have to round up and pen the deer. Besides being a nightmare to do, removing them would have a massive impact on the ecology. I also find myself thinking that anyone who suggests Richmond has never tried to walk through the town from the station to the park on a Saturday... http://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/richmond_park/wildlife.cfm
I don't think I'd like the route to change in a major way. I think it might be nice to hold it along the Olympic route for one year and then change it back. Not actually looked at what Olympic route is planned (if it's been published), but I'm thinking maybe you could do something starting Clapham Common, up into Central London (maybe via Vauxhall Bridge and up to Hyde Park), and then out along Mile End Road to the Olympic park and stadium? Not measured out a route, but could be possible I think...
I suppose you have to start by asking why do we have the current route? When the LM first started it wasn’t the national event that it is today so the organisers had to choose a route that caused the least disruption. So they chose the rather unfashionable areas of South East London and the then empty wastelands of the Isle of Dogs to “kill the kilometres” before heading into Central London for a token bit of scenery along the Embankment at the finish.
Its now a international institution that could do far better at show casing our capital and thus whole country too.
The current route does an amazing job of avoiding all the iconic buildings and areas of London, which is quite farsical. We should run through Trafalgar Square and Piccadilly Circus. What about St Pauls? Westminster Abbey? Bank of England? St Pancras Hotel? Natural History Museum? Marble Arch? I could go on and on.
The only reason not to try something new is the inherent flawed human trait of resistance to change. If we had a more scenic route, I can almost hear the TV commentary team now saying “but we should have done this years ago, its so much better”.
I can't say the route matters to me that much as I never really notice what is going on around me in a race and can't say I would ever find a run boring. However last year it was almost impossible for spectators to get near enough to see anything where the route comes back on itself....is it 13 and 20/21 miles? So maybe this could be altered. Any ideas when RB will unveil the 'new' route?!
How slow/busy is running London for someone in the pack for around 3:45 finish time? Is this the busiest block of runners? I did Paris last year and managed to get caught in a huge bottleneck at 6km where we all stood still for 2 minutes!!!!
Those aiming 4-5 hours might have problems as majority of runners will be running round this time.
Parts of the course like Cutty Sark and narrow roads could be congested and slow runners even to walking.
I agree, when running, you not going say, wow the London eye when you flipping knackered.
RB wants to make the route spectator friendly rather than making it better for us runners.
Can`t see the route changing at all.
The only bit you will really appreciate is turning round the corner at 12 miles to see Tower Bridge rising ahead of you.
Also shortly afterwards, when you might see the elites running back towards you, having covered 21 fast miles to your own rather pitiful 13 at that point. It's certainly sobering!
All runners want is:
- flat
- bottleneck free
- regular drinks / food
- smooth underfoot (see road humps in first couple of miles on the blue route)
- no sharp corners! (see Docklands)
- accurate distance markers
As for congestion, I have to say from experience that it's quite claustrophobic for the first 10k or so if you are a 3:30 runner, relatively clear if you are a 3:15 runner, and peachy if you are sub-3 (except for the first couple of miles as you weave past the elite ladies who start just in front of you)
I'd love to find out what it's like at the 2:45 pace...
EPS,
On behalf of semi-elite ladies everywhere, I apologise ;¬)
Although hopefully I won't hold up 2.59.xx-ers in 2010!