Virgin Media Night Run 2016

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

Degs1967

I only saw two Kilometre markers on the whole course, maybe they were there but I missed them....

Run and Jump

Degs1967 wrote: »

I only saw two Kilometre markers on the whole course, maybe they were there but I missed them....

I was stewarding at the corner just before the 7K marker and it was definitely there! As was said above, it's going to be harder to see them at night - even in races during the day I sometimes don't see a marker.

Degs1967

My last word on this (not very) important issue !
A lad I was talking to at the top of the second wave while we were waiting to get going has an official Start Time of 00:05:19 after the first gun, my official Start Time is 00:04:36 after the Gun. We both started at the exact same time, I can only think that my RFID chip was picked up by the reader at the start line too early....

Phoole

The only official time I'm concerned about is the one on my stop watch. That's good enough for me. As for distance, no run (training or official race) will be 100% bang on, whether that's by small discrepancies in the measuring or by running around obstacles on the course. You could drive yourself silly over-analysing it. That's just me though.

28064212

Degs1967 wrote: »

My last word on this (not very) important issue !
A lad I was talking to at the top of the second wave while we were waiting to get going has an official Start Time of 00:05:19 after the first gun, my official Start Time is 00:04:36 after the Gun. We both started at the exact same time, I can only think that my RFID chip was picked up by the reader at the start line too early....

Contact the timing chip people, detailing the stuff you've mentioned here. They may have backup information or video references that can be checked

davedanon

Phoole wrote: »

The only official time I'm concerned about is the one on my stop watch. That's good enough for me. As for distance, no run (training or official race) will be 100% bang on, whether that's by small discrepancies in the measuring or by running around obstacles on the course. You could drive yourself silly over-analysing it. That's just me though.

Actual stop watch, or gps device?

Phoole

davedanon wrote: »

Actual stop watch, or gps device?

Just a regular Casio stop watch. I have a garmin but I prefer the old fashioned way. I hit start as I go over the start line and stop as I finish and use the mile markers to judge my progress. Job done

jimjamkk06

Run and Jump wrote: »

I was stewarding at the corner just before the 7K marker and it was definitely there! As was said above, it's going to be harder to see them at night - even in races during the day I sometimes don't see a marker.

I went for a warm up and warm down run before and after and I seen 2km 3km 4km 5km 7km 8km 10km markers the rest I didn't go that way or perhaps they took the roads in😄😄😄ðŸ˜ðŸ˜

Daithi 1

Degs1967 wrote: »

my eyes aren't great in the dark / twilight and markers would have been very useful.
Rant over !

28064212 wrote: »

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

Eye's arent great in the daytime either :P

uvox

davedanon wrote: »

They should have had some runners with boombox speakers to pump out a few beats, come to think of it.

Big time. Next year perhaps.