Virgin Media Night Run 2016

uvox

Nice little run tonight. Congrats to the organisers and well done all: 6,000 participants we are told. The weather was reasonable and the rain cleared in time.

My only niggle was that the course was way too narrow in parts and running actually stopped as participants came to large puddles of water from the downpour and looked for ways around it. Fair enough!

I'd do it again next year. The red shirt looks great and is a great design too with sleeves with thumb slots.

Well done.

JMSE

Samuel Beckett bridge

davedanon

uvox wrote: »

as participants came to large puddles of water from the downpour and looked for ways around it.

bless.

davedanon

I wonder how much they'll be giving to charity. Oodles, I expect.

long_b

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

I'm guessing that's due to all of the "sideways" weaving in the first 2 km.

I'd MUCH rather take my watch 10km time if it's all the same to yourselves

MonkstownHoop

Wave starts should be implemented in this race, probably an issue with the cut off time though

MonkstownHoop

long_b wrote: »

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

I'm guessing that's due to all of the "sideways" weaving in the first 2 km.

I'd MUCH rather take my watch 10km time of its all the same to yourselves

Absolutely, I'm taking my 44.30 Garmin rather than 45.03 chip ;-)

davedanon

GPS watches are inaccurate, particularly where there's tree-cover or in an urban environment with tall buildings. But hey, that's the price you pay with an edgy, disruptive run like the Virgin 10.2k!!

uvox

long_b wrote: »

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

Interesting. I had 10.4 (and no, not because I was going around the puddles the long way).

uvox

MonkstownHoop wrote: »

Wave starts should be implemented in this race, probably an issue with the cut off time though

I thought there was waves. I was at the back, and heard the announcer call out when the first wave and second wave were about to set off. I guess they need to be more granular.

Phoole

Its a fun event but not a good race. The course is way too cramped and narrow for PBs but still I always enjoy it. T-shirt is great!

Some serious steeplechase-like puddles around the course which took some real effort to avoid!

jimjamkk06

I thought the course was brilliant!!!! Ok there was abit of traffic at the start but don't think it was because of the narrow road . If people running an hour or more would stop going to the front It would stop all this congestion. I had to laugh when people were running around the big puddles and losing about 3 \ 4 seconds on each bend 😄😄 the best way I found it was go straight through them . And kept cool too. I did find the course long Garmin had 6.3mile . But I got a pb so I'm happy nevertheless.great run one of the best this year. If not the best

long_b

Good post on watch vs chip time

Tl:Dr You run the course, not the distance. Official time is the only time.

https://m.reddit.com/r/running/comments/4b343k/3_minute_difference_between_chip_time_and_watch/

RayCun

long_b wrote: »

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

I'm guessing that's due to all of the "sideways" weaving in the first 2 km.

I'd MUCH rather take my watch 10km time if it's all the same to yourselves

well, you know, you do you, but your race time is the time it takes to get from the start to the finish line (or the time between the gun going and you reaching the finish line)
'where your watch goes beep' is not really important

RayCun

MonkstownHoop wrote: »

Wave starts should be implemented in this race, probably an issue with the cut off time though

there were 3 waves

ThisRegard

What sort of ranges were people who ran donating to the charity?

average_runner

MonkstownHoop wrote: »

Absolutely, I'm taking my 44.30 Garmin rather than 45.03 chip ;-)

You have to take your official time not the garmin.

davedanon

ThisRegard wrote: »

What sort of ranges were people who ran donating to the charity?

Looks like people were more concerned about getting their shoes wet, or achieving a garmin pb, than the charity aspect. Apposite, really, considering Virgin didn't give a damn about it either.

Chivito550

long_b wrote: »

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

I'm guessing that's due to all of the "sideways" weaving in the first 2 km.

I'd MUCH rather take my watch 10km time if it's all the same to yourselves

MonkstownHoop wrote: »

Absolutely, I'm taking my 44.30 Garmin rather than 45.03 chip ;-)

Doesn't work like that I'm afraid. Sorry. You'll just have to train harder to run that time.

Stablemaster

Excellent race for me. Set a new record for 10k on my Strava. Course felt mainly downhill and I just bashed through the water hazards.

Got to wear my skins with the red shirt which is very user friendly. No bloody nipples from it anyway! Well done to Virgin

davedanon

Stablemaster wrote: »

Got to wear my skins with the red shirt which is very user friendly. No bloody nipples from it anyway! Well done to Virgin

Red shirt. how can you tell??!!

Sacksian

Whatever about the organisation, motives, etc - the winning time was pretty phenomenal: 29.23!

adrian522

Sacksian wrote: »

Whatever about the organisation, motives, etc - the winning time was pretty phenomenal: 29.23!

Same guy who won Terenure. Met him before hand and asked what he was going to run. Said he'd run around 29 mins. Ran 29.24.

RayCun

Sacksian wrote: »

Whatever about the organisation, motives, etc - the winning time was pretty phenomenal: 29.23!

Yeah, it was insanely fast given the course. There was two of them in it so at least it was a race.

(It was almost too fast for the course, which uses the same roads two or three times)

dublin runner

Not the same. Somba, who came 2nd last night, took the win in Terenure.

Several pages announced 'first Irish man home type posts', which I found a bit odd considering it was a commericial race with no national title up for grabs.

Stablemaster

RayCun wrote: »

Yeah, it was insanely fast given the course. There was two of them in it so at least it was a race.

(It was almost too fast for the course, which uses the same roads two or three times)

'Them'?

RayCun

Stablemaster wrote: »

'Them'?

Runners. A lead two. As opposed to one guy out on his own.

Sacksian

It's a ****ty course so when I saw the time, I just thought "short"! But he ran 63:12 in the Cardiff Half-Marathon last year. He's part of the Project Africa group.

davedanon

Somba been strolling to victory in a lot of races lately, not even bothering to get fully stripped for most of them. Maybe he wasn't mentally up to a genuine challenge.

average_runner

davedanon wrote: »

Somba been strolling to victory in a lot of races lately, not even bothering to get fully stripped for most of them. Maybe he wasn't mentally up to a genuine challenge.

Think Somba won Enfield 5k also?

adrian522

dublin runner wrote: »

Not the same. Somba, who came 2nd last night, took the win in Terenure.

Several pages announced 'first Irish man home type posts', which I found a bit odd considering it was a commericial race with no national title up for grabs.

I stand corrected, he was still spot on with his time though.

Run and Jump

long_b wrote: »

Anyone else have it come up longer than 10km on their GPS? I had 10.17, a mate had longer again.

I'm guessing that's due to all of the "sideways" weaving in the first 2 km.

I'd MUCH rather take my watch 10km time if it's all the same to yourselves

Moderators, would it be worthwhile posting a 'sticky' advising people to think carefully before they speculate that a race route was too long or short just because their GPS says so?

As well as informing people (GPS watches are simply not accurate enough to be that reliable, no matter how expensive or state-of-the-art) it would save clubs and race directors from getting unjustified negative comments for a race that has been properly wheel-measured and AAI approved.

We've all seen and heard of races that were genuinely long or short because of error or poor organisation (e.g. the Manchester marathons where the Jones counter wasn't calibrated properly) but I've seen comments here for various races that can most likely be attributed to the usual things like weaving, GPS signal dropout, running wide, or simply the unreliability of depending on an accurate measurement from a watch connecting to a satellite.

(DOI: I'm not a race director or organiser. My club has an annual race but I haven't seen any comments about it being long or short. It's just an issue I hear a lot and which I think is unfair.)

Daithi 1

I used a galaxy s6 for gps and it showed exactly 10km at the finish. :rolleyes:

Run and Jump

Daithi 1 wrote: »

I used a galaxy s6 for gps and it showed exactly 10km at the finish. :rolleyes:

I should have said: all GPS devices except yours, of course. Yours is always right.

Utdfan20titles

Fantastic event and such a bargain too. Only complaint is the puddles on the course. Can these be removed before we start running next time?

Degs1967

In relation to times, I understand that GPS distances will vary, but did anyone else have a difference between their chip time and their own watch time ? Mine was 44 seconds worse on the chip time, maybe I stood too close to the start mat at the top of the second wave ?1

fletch

RayCun wrote: »

(It was almost too fast for the course, which uses the same roads two or three times)

I presume you are referring to the confusion with the barriers as the tail runners still hadn't cleared the road before the lead two were due to cross on to the same piece of road in the opposite direction?
I guess it didn't impact the winning times and the guys got over to the other side without too much hassle?

RayCun

fletch wrote: »

I presume you are referring to the confusion with the barriers as the tail runners still hadn't cleared the road before the lead two were due to cross on to the same piece of road in the opposite direction?
I guess it didn't impact the winning times and the guys got over to the other side without too much hassle?

Yes, that's it.
The barricades were moved in time so they weren't slowed down, but it was fairly close. The race start was a minute or two later than planned, looked like a fire engine had to go across the course, and then I think the gap to the start of the last wave was longer than it should have been.

Degs1967

MonkstownHoop wrote: »

Absolutely, I'm taking my 44.30 Garmin rather than 45.03 chip ;-)

yeah, I experienced something similar, 44 seconds difference between my start/finish time and the official chip time.....nothing to do with GPS difference, just timings, any (logical) reason why this would happe ?

Run and Jump

Degs1967 wrote: »

yeah, I experienced something similar, 44 seconds difference between my start/finish time and the official chip time.....nothing to do with GPS difference, just timings, any (logical) reason why this would happe ?

If you started in the first wave then perhaps it's your 'gun' time (i.e. the race started and you crossed the start line 44 seconds later) that was posted instead of your chip time. You could contact the organisers or the timing providers to ask about it.

JMSE

So fletch what was the plan if the leaders ran out of road? - send them in the front door of jury's and out the back door?? ðŸ˜

Degs1967

Run and Jump wrote: »

If you started in the first wave then perhaps it's your 'gun' time (i.e. the race started and you crossed the start line 44 seconds later) that was posted instead of your chip time. You could contact the organisers or the timing providers to ask about it.

I actually started at the start of the second wave, the marshalls marched us up to the start line behind tape in a very organised manner, I was in the second row so got away ok. I suppose it doesn't make any difference in the scheme of things, I think I won the whole thing anyway cos they gave me a medal at the end :-)
I just thought it was an unusual one

RayCun

JMSE wrote: »

So fletch what was the plan if the leaders ran out of road? - send them in the front door of jury's and out the back door?? ðŸ˜

The north quays were divided in two, a river side and a land side.

The plan was that the tail runners would make it about 800m down the road before the lead runners were more than halfway through the race, because both were supposed to be on the river side of the road. But the lead runners got back before the road had cleared, so they had to run on the land side, which meant the barriers further along had to be opened up to let them back on the river side.

JMSE

Only havin the craic raycun , I was on fletchs crew, only I was a bit further up at Samuel beckett

Degs1967

Ok, I'm banging on about the Official times again....
The winners Official time is given as 29:23 on the results website, but he can quite clearly be seen in photos coming through the finish line in 29:14.
As I said, my Official time was 44 seconds slower than what I recorded it as myself.
My guess is that the equipment at the start line picked up the RFID tags of the runners up the front of each wave ( I was near the front of the second wave) and started the clocks early. Not a huge deal, but if it was a national championship, or a marathon where people are looking for PBs, it could be more of an issue.
While I am having a moan, I thought there should have been more Kilometre markers visible. I know most people wear GPS watches these days, but my eyes aren't great in the dark / twilight and markers would have been very useful.
Rant over !

28064212

Degs1967 wrote: »

The winners Official time is given as 29:23 on the results website, but he can quite clearly be seen in photos coming through the finish line in 29:14.

Winner clearly seen coming through in 29:23: https://www.facebook.com/AthleticsIreland/videos/1133867799977387/

Jay D

Degs1967 wrote: »

While I am having a moan, I thought there should have been more Kilometre markers visible.

I take the opposite view. Constant reminders of distances actually annoy me. I prefer to just plod along, take my mind off the distance because, well for me seeing distance measurements constantly is just torture.

davedanon

Degs1967 wrote: »

While I am having a moan, I thought there should have been more Kilometre markers visible. I know most people wear GPS watches these days, but my eyes aren't great in the dark / twilight and markers would have been very useful.
Rant over !

Do you mean there were no markers at some points, or that you wanted more than one marker at each km? Accepted practice is for one marker, I'm afraid. As for the visual problems, well, it goes with running at night. That's the cool thing about the race. It's edgy and disruptive, a crew of thousands, all individuals in matching red tops reclaiming the urban space. They should have had some runners with boombox speakers to pump out a few beats, come to think of it.

footing

Reclaiming the urban space?? For a faceless corporation that bleeds us of every cent it can get?

BeepBeep67

Degs1967

Good point well made !
I was thrown by a post.....; on dublinlive.ie
Still a bit of a headscratcher on my time, not to worry !

We have a WINNER!

We have a winner Dan Tanui!!!! What an incredible time!!! #VMNightrun pic.twitter.com/6tFAwmAclF

— Athletics Ireland (@irishathletics) 22 May 2016
That didn’t take long.

Dan Tanui has stormed past the finishing line with a whopper time of 29:14.
Congrats Dan

And the winner Dan Tanui has crossed the finishing line with a whopper time of 29:14. #VMNightRun

— Virgin Media Ireland (@VirginMediaIE) 22 May 2016