Official Running Thread

[Charlies Shinpad]

How many of us on here doing the Brighton marathon are going to be wearing Albion related tops now CH is starting the race I wonder
I'm going to be in a blue training t shirt

 

[Mr Blobby]

Brighton half marathon confirmed as 146 meters short for the last THREE years.

Statement from Brighton Half Marathon

Dear runner,

Earlier this month we were contacted by UK Athletics following concerns about the length of this year’s course and the course in 2015 and 2016.

Over the past few weeks we have been conducting a formal investigation into this matter and we can now confirm that unfortunately the course has been short by 146 metres (0.09 miles) for these particular race years.

What happened?

The area of concern centred on the turning point just after mile 4 where the course passes Roedean School before turning and heading back towards Brighton.

UK Athletics' concerns were not observational regarding the course layout, but were based on an analysis of GPS data.

The accuracy of GPS devices is a hot topic within running at the moment, with some runners reporting variances for our race both under and over the correct half marathon distance. We must emphasise however that our investigation has looked not only at runner data, but also our own internal procedures for delivering how the course was set out for each event.

2015-2017 race years

Our conclusion is that the eastern turning point has not been positioned correctly over the last three half marathons, resulting in a shortfall in the overall half marathon distance.

We are a team of runners ourselves so we fully understand the impact of this news. We are devastated that this mistake has happened and we take full responsibility for this situation and apologise unreservedly to all runners who took part in the affected race years.

Furthermore, as a charity, we take this matter very seriously. Although mindful of the money the event raises for good causes, we also want to balance this against acknowledging that we got it wrong on these occasions.

With this in mind, we will be writing to you again shortly with details of a loyalty offer for our 2018 event. We have also answered some FAQs on our website which we hope you will find useful.

Once again, apologies from everyone on the race team and please be assured we are committed to making the 2018 race a great event.

Whatever your running goals are for the rest of the year, we wish you every success in achieving them.

Brighton Half Marathon

 

[dazzer6666]

Brighton half marathon confirmed as 146 meters short for the last THREE years.

Statement from Brighton Half Marathon

Dear runner,

Earlier this month we were contacted by UK Athletics following concerns about the length of this year’s course and the course in 2015 and 2016.

Over the past few weeks we have been conducting a formal investigation into this matter and we can now confirm that unfortunately the course has been short by 146 metres (0.09 miles) for these particular race years.

What happened?

The area of concern centred on the turning point just after mile 4 where the course passes Roedean School before turning and heading back towards Brighton.

UK Athletics' concerns were not observational regarding the course layout, but were based on an analysis of GPS data.

The accuracy of GPS devices is a hot topic within running at the moment, with some runners reporting variances for our race both under and over the correct half marathon distance. We must emphasise however that our investigation has looked not only at runner data, but also our own internal procedures for delivering how the course was set out for each event.

2015-2017 race years

Our conclusion is that the eastern turning point has not been positioned correctly over the last three half marathons, resulting in a shortfall in the overall half marathon distance.

We are a team of runners ourselves so we fully understand the impact of this news. We are devastated that this mistake has happened and we take full responsibility for this situation and apologise unreservedly to all runners who took part in the affected race years.

Furthermore, as a charity, we take this matter very seriously. Although mindful of the money the event raises for good causes, we also want to balance this against acknowledging that we got it wrong on these occasions.

With this in mind, we will be writing to you again shortly with details of a loyalty offer for our 2018 event. We have also answered some FAQs on our website which we hope you will find useful.

Once again, apologies from everyone on the race team and please be assured we are committed to making the 2018 race a great event.

Whatever your running goals are for the rest of the year, we wish you every success in achieving them.

Brighton Half Marathon

Very poor, unforgivable for a race of this size. PBs scrubbed from the records etc. Measuring the course should be Race Organisation 101 for one like this.

 

[Nathan]

Lazy planning and a big let down.

 

[soistes]

Very poor, unforgivable for a race of this size. PBs scrubbed from the records etc. Measuring the course should be Race Organisation 101 for one like this.

Even if you don't really care about "official" times, which I don't, this does take the edge off it a bit. I don't quite understand why or how it's taken three years to spot the error though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Simgull]

Obviously not good and there is no excuse.

But let's not completely crucify the organisers, I know of them, they are genuine, committed members of the local running community and will be feeling absolutely devastated at what has happened.

It's clearly a genuine mistake so let's keep it in perspective.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Obviously not good and there is no excuse.

But let's not completely crucify the organisers, I know of them, they are genuine, committed members of the local running community and will be feeling absolutely devastated at what has happened.

It's clearly a genuine mistake so let's keep it in perspective.

While I'm not particularly happy about it I am probably more determined to enter next year and beat my 2016 time by a long way so that I have an official PB of sub 1.45. The course is bound to be correct next year now! Hopefully they'll look at getting a few more loos in next year and a crossing point. However, it would be bad for the running community to turn their back on it as [MENTION=25508]soistes[/MENTION] points out it supports Sussex Beacon which does amazing work but is pretty much out on its feet.

As an aside I am slowly heading back to three runs a week myself - after 7 months of not being quite right - so it's time to enter some races as my calendar has been empty. Might do Worthing 10K at plod pace just for fun to give me something to train for.

 

[Nathan]

Obviously not good and there is no excuse.

But let's not completely crucify the organisers, I know of them, they are genuine, committed members of the local running community and will be feeling absolutely devastated at what has happened.

It's clearly a genuine mistake so let's keep it in perspective.

True. But I do think they should have double checked the distance!

I am sure next year they will get it right and hopefully have more loos as well.

 

[knocky1]

For the Brighton half all they needed was a bike with a mileometer on the wheel (old school accuracy, radius of wheel times number of turns). Mine has never under or over recorded a road race.

 

[soistes]

While I'm not particularly happy about it I am probably more determined to enter next year and beat my 2016 time by a long way so that I have an official PB of sub 1.45. The course is bound to be correct next year now! Hopefully they'll look at getting a few more loos in next year and a crossing point. However, it would be bad for the running community to turn their back on it as [MENTION=25508]soistes[/MENTION] points out it supports Sussex Beacon which does amazing work but is pretty much out on its feet.

As an aside I am slowly heading back to three runs a week myself - after 7 months of not being quite right - so it's time to enter some races as my calendar has been empty. Might do Worthing 10K at plod pace just for fun to give me something to train for.

Agree with all that. Instead of a discount on next year's entry, I'd like an official T-shirt with "I was 146m short" on it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[big nuts]

I might be wrong but didn't they under measure one year so everyone ran further and the changes were as a result of this.

That makes it even worse in my book and begs the question why isn't the course measured every year to ensure accuracy.

Very disappointing for an expensive race.

 

[dazzer6666]

For the Brighton half all they needed was a bike with a mileometer on the wheel (old school accuracy, radius of wheel times number of turns). Mine has never under or over recorded a road race.

This - hence not a lot of sympathy with them. Walking the course with a handwheel (usual UKA method I think) would've taken them a morning and guaranteed accuracy.

Agree it's a very worthy charity, and it'll still sell out, so shouldn't be any long term impact. For the vast majority of runners it won't actually be a big deal. It's just pisspoor, that's all - less excusable than insufficient loos (the case at every event, pretty much), aid stations or crap goody bags/lack of tee shirts.
[MENTION=18183]big nuts[/MENTION] - yep !

 

[Mr Banana]

Agree with all that. Instead of a discount on next year's entry, I'd like an official T-shirt with "I was 146m short" on it

If there'd been another 146 metres I'd have won it. Gutted.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Christ, just baselined myself with a 5k round the seafront. 27.27.

Late April last year I was 22.03 round the Hove Park hills.

 

[dazzer6666]

Christ, just baselined myself with a 5k round the seafront. 27.27.

Late April last year I was 22.03 round the Hove Park hills.

Don't worry about it, really.......once you're back on plan/regular training it'll rapidly come back. Be glad 'you're on your way'

 

[Mr Blobby]

Christ, just baselined myself with a 5k round the seafront. 27.27.

Late April last year I was 22.03 round the Hove Park hills.

Was it exactly 5k or a BHM 5k

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

While I'm not particularly happy about it I am probably more determined to enter next year and beat my 2016 time by a long way so that I have an official PB of sub 1.45. The course is bound to be correct next year now! Hopefully they'll look at getting a few more loos in next year and a crossing point. However, it would be bad for the running community to turn their back on it as [MENTION=25508]soistes[/MENTION] points out it supports Sussex Beacon which does amazing work but is pretty much out on its feet.

As an aside I am slowly heading back to three runs a week myself - after 7 months of not being quite right - so it's time to enter some races as my calendar has been empty. Might do Worthing 10K at plod pace just for fun to give me something to train for.

Ironically the recent West Worthing 10K was actually over 10K andthe listing in 'Power of Ten' had the dreaded NAD (Not Accurate Distance, I assume) next to performances in this race. Many years ago a mate of mine ran a 3K race - which were more popular back in the day - at (I think) the European Student Games. He won it and was told that he'd broken the World Record until such time as they realised that it was a short course. Now that's what I call a disappointment.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Ironically the recent West Worthing 10K was actually over 10K andthe listing in 'Power of Ten' had the dreaded NAD (Not Accurate Distance, I assume) next to performances in this race. Many years ago a mate of mine ran a 3K race - which were more popular back in the day - at (I think) the European Student Games. He won it and was told that he'd broken the World Record until such time as they realised that it was a short course. Now that's what I call a disappointment.

That would be devastating. Worse than, say, running 4.00.06 in your first ever marathon

I'm on a running Facebook group and a couple of people posted on there asking if the short measure really mattered. My response was "try telling Usain Bolt he has to give his medals back because the course was only 98 metres". I didn't think that was remotely actually possible but you've just made me realise it could be!

 

[dazzer6666]

That would be devastating. Worse than, say, running 4.00.06 in your first ever marathon

I'm on a running Facebook group and a couple of people posted on there asking if the short measure really mattered. My response was "try telling Usain Bolt he has to give his medals back because the course was only 98 metres". I didn't think that was remotely actually possible but you've just made me realise it could be!

Check your Garmin. I guarantee you ran at least 0.25 of a mile further than 26.2.

If you'd kept to the official line, you'd have gone under 4 hours [emoji106][emoji106](or if you hadn't been running too fast in the first 10 miles, obviously [emoji23][emoji23])

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Worthing parkrun today. A bit windy. Aimed to get under 21:30 and came in at 21:29 (AG 75.19%). Pleased with this as it's a season's best if a long way for a PB.