80 replies to this topic

[ratdog]

Sydney Marathon Clinic Road Race Series has been using the current course for years due to the quiet roads and facilities available on Sunday mornings.  

As many would have noticed whilst running, there has been a new road constructed at the corner of Widemere Rd and Davis Rd, which will connect Prospect Hwy to Wetherill Park. The traffic is expected to be significantly increased (especially with trucks) compared to the current volumes.  The safety of runners and marshals is paramount, therefore we have to move the course..

Proposed New course features:

• Walkway Cycleway.
  
• Park scenery with vast views to the South.
  
• Canteen at Start and Finish.
  
• Registrations at Start and Finish.
  
• Toilets at Start and Finish, also the 10 and 20km points.
  
• Carpark at Start Finish.
  
• Flatter course than the current course.
  
• Less Volunteers needed.
  
• One Busway crossing, same as the current course, but with better vision approaching.
  
• No other road crossings, No Traffic.
  
• 5 km event is a 2.5km out and back x 1.
  
• 10 km is a 5 km out and back x 1.
  
• 21.1km is a 5 km out and back x 2 plus another 550m out and back.
  
• 30km is a 5 km out and back x 3.
  
• Aid stations located at 2.4km and 4.8km. Accessible on both out and back legs each lap.
  
• Lots of grassed area each side of the path, except in small sections.

Here is a garmin activity showing the 5 km out section.  The back section is the reverse.

A photo Gallery is located here with many pictures from around the course.

Once again this is the proposed new course and is awaiting council approval.  The course will NOT be used for the February 2012 Race.  Notice will be given prior to changing course.

Keep discussions about the the current SMC Road Race Series here.

All comments are welcome.


If anyone would like to have a run along the course on the same day as 6ft Track then we will be starting at 7:15.  Saturday 10th March 2012.

Edited by ratdog, 11 February 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[Colin]

Thanks Ratdog,

Great work in the mapping.

Just a note,

30km could also be 7.5km out and back X 2
Proposal for a regular marathon in the May date

We could have effectively 9.8km of track before crossing a road - a minor one at that, Fowler Rd- so 10.55 out and back X 2 is possible.

The idea behind using only 5km of track is the ease of setup-take down and two drink stations only. Total of only 14 signs inc km signs

Brick will enjoy the sleep in.

As ratdog said, comments are welcome.

Edited by Colin, 11 February 2012 - 12:54 PM.

[ratdog]

Youtube Linky

[Eagle]

Great work Ratgog. The course while being a shared pathway and so not as wide as a road is not a real issue. It is traffic free and so safe in that regard.

With the opening of the new roadway it it definite a new traffic free course is required. It seems like a now brainer. The new course when approved should be used. The ease of setting up is an absolute bonus.

[backofthepack]

Viewed the video link, three areas of concern.

1/ The path appears to be all concrete, definitely restricts me to 5/10 km due to injury and recovery risks.

2/ A small part of the course appears to be on dirt, how will this stand up to the likes of the heavy rain conditions we have been experiencing of late?

3/ The 5 km turn around on the aquaduct looks narrow, any possibliity of altering the start of course slightly to have it just prior or after?

That said and done, I do understand the wish to leave the roads of Wetherill Park and SMC can only use what is available. The efforts to find a better course are appreciated.

Edited by backofthepack, 11 February 2012 - 05:40 PM.

[thomo]

Eagle, on 11 February 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

Great work Ratgog. The course while being a shared pathway and so not as wide as a road is not a real issue. It is traffic free and so safe in that regard.

With the opening of the new roadway it it definite a new traffic free course is required. It seems like a now brainer. The new course when approved should be used. The ease of setting up is an absolute bonus.

Just to clarify, the course is not traffic free. It is open to the general public.

Bicycle riders, other runners not entered in SMC events, walkers, walkers with dogs & these people could be using headphones which makes any warnings about appoaching will possibly / likely unable to be heard.

I had a friend who came off second best to a cyclist who was travelling in a group on a shared pathway. This was in a race sanctioned by ANSW.

Is there an alternate course when flooding occurs in the start area?

[ratdog]

backofthepack, on 11 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

Viewed the video link, three areas of concern.

1/ The path appears to be all concrete, definitely restricts me to 5/10 km due to injury and recovery risks.

Yes the course is on concrete.  

backofthepack, on 11 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

2/ A small part of the course appears to be on dirt, how will this stand up to the likes of the heavy rain conditions we have been experiencing of late?

The current view on the satellite images is not up to date with the actual roadways.  Or are you talking about the area nearby the start area?  That is wash from the heavy rain and that is the only place where it happens.  The photos we took of the course was on a very heavy raining day.  It shouldnt get any worse than what is pictured.  Dare I say it is a heap better than the current start and finish area when wet.  i.e Jan Race.

backofthepack, on 11 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

3/ The 5 km turn around on the aquaduct looks narrow, any possibliity of altering the start of course slightly to have it just prior or after?

Yes your right the turn around is only 8 ft wide, and will be very difficult to do a 3 point turn when your driving a b-double on the course, Ive observed hundreds of people making U turns on courses and very little of them need any more than 6ft.

thomo, on 11 February 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

Just to clarify, the course is not traffic free. It is open to the general public.

Bicycle riders, other runners not entered in SMC events, walkers, walkers with dogs & these people could be using headphones which makes any warnings about appoaching will possibly / likely unable to be heard.

I had a friend who came off second best to a cyclist who was travelling in a group on a shared pathway. This was in a race sanctioned by ANSW.

Is there an alternate course when flooding occurs in the start area?

Traffic free meaning free from Cars, trucks, and motor bikes.  

The rest of the traffic your referring to has the possibility to be on the current course.  This is a safer course.  Signage will be on the course notifying other users of the race.

Where abouts does the course flood?  I went down on a heavy raining day and there was no flooding on the course.  At the most there was 1/2 inch of water at the carpark which im sure can be pushed away prior to the start.

All local knowledge is appreciated!!!!

[thomo]

ratdog, on 11 February 2012 - 09:41 PM, said:

thomo, on 11 February 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

Is there an alternate course when flooding occurs in the start area?

Where abouts does the course flood?  I went down on a heavy raining day and there was no flooding on the course.  At the most there was 1/2 inch of water at the carpark which im sure can be pushed away prior to the start.

All local knowledge is appreciated!!!!

Flooding occurred last year between the Rosford Reserve and Gipps Road.  As the pathway, if I remember correctly would be down stream of the situation. Then that is what I am referencing.

[ratdog]

Ahhh under the roadway floods yes, not sure how high up the water gets. The course doesnt go under that bridge. Does it go up onto the pathway?   It runs alongside the river but about 1 or 2 metres higher.  

The proposed New course is higher than the start area of the current course.

[Colin]

thomo, on 11 February 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

Flooding occurred last year between the Rosford Reserve and Gipps Road.  As the pathway, if I remember correctly would be down stream of the situation. Then that is what I am referencing.

Thomo, it is not the same pathway. The course starts and finishes is at the Gipps Rd Sports Field and doesn't go downstream of that underpass. It goes back towards Widemere Rd and then follows the northern shared path to Guildford. It is not the same path as that used by Sri Chinmoi which does go under that bridge and certainly would be subject to flooding.

backofthepack, on 11 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

1/ The path appears to be all concrete, definitely restricts me to 5/10 km due to injury and recovery risks.

I know this is not the thread to debate this, but that is an old furphy. Just think about it, most of us are running on shoes with soft rubber underneath. The softest material is the one that 'gives'. The impact from this flat rubber is an unmeasurable poofteenth different (if one acknowledges that there may be a difference) on asphat as compared to concrete. There simply is no difference that will make your legs feel it more. There are other things that may make your legs feel it, but not the surface.
Yes, if we were to run on shoes with metal spikes underneath then it may sink into the asphalt more than the concrete, but then you'd also have to pull them out again each step.
Sorry if that sounds like a lecture , but the surface is actually conducive to good running conditions, so I hope you do run the distance you are training for.

backofthepack, on 11 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

2/ A small part of the course appears to be on dirt, how will this stand up to the likes of the heavy rain conditions we have been experiencing of late?

3/ The 5 km turn around on the aquaduct looks narrow, any possibliity of altering the start of course slightly to have it just prior or after?

As ratdog mentioned, there is no 'dirt area' such as we have at the start now, and the turnaround is wider than that currently being done by runners at SMC.
I did actually check whether we could move the turn a bit, but it was more to do with whether the pumphouse at 4.9km would be more 'obvious'.

In summary, the road could be opened any time in the next two months or so. We have trialled options since July last year and this I believe is our only option.

Edited by Colin, 11 February 2012 - 11:41 PM.

[SMC42K]

The water under Gipps Rd can get over 30mm during high rainfall, which would mean getting your feet a bit wet. With the rain we have had this year, a couple of races days would have had to be cancelled if they were held there this series. With the start/finish at the Gipps Rd complex, this spot would be avoided.
At present, the buses do not use the stretch of road where the new course intersects. If that remains the case, the course would be completely vehicular traffic free. Although the pathway is concrete, there are several areas alongside which have either a gravel or grass track alongside. Running on them would not have much impact on the distance. However, there are a couple large sections between the sports ovals & the creek where someone may try to get an unfair advantage. These sections would have to be monitored. At present, we have the assistance of the SES in traffic management. As that duty will no longer be needed, they could be used to monitor these sections of the course.

[brewer]

I like the look of the new course and I'm looking forward to the change.

Are there showers at the start/finish area?

[Eagle]

Thomo

I mentioned at the start of my post it was a shared pathway. I should have been clearer and said when we run we will share it with other runners and cylists not associated with SMC. That is SMC will not have exclusive use.

Traffic free should have said - free of cars.

[slowmc]

Hi there,

First of all ratdog, thanks for your work with the map, great stuff and really gives us a good idea of the proposed new layout.Lets hope Holroyd council gives it the ok. I think it's what's needed . I also think it will work with alot of positive input and assistance from all the runners who do SMC.

One other comment.At Girraween we've been washed out with track the last two Saturdays at Gipps Rd athletics field.Coincidentally we have put on a couple of 2km,4km and 8km runs using the track as per the above map as far as the 2km marker & turning around at the 2km marker to make a 4km course. That part of the course is ok.It worked pretty well, granted numbers were not like the start of SMC races but we all spread out pretty quickly and stayed to the left which gave plenty of room for any other people on the course. I think it can work well.

Cheers

slowmc

[Colin]

SMC42K, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

The water under Gipps Rd can get over 30mm during high rainfall, which would mean getting your feet a bit wet. With the rain we have had this year, a couple of races days would have had to be cancelled if they were held there this series.

It actually rises much higher than that, but since we are using Gipps Rd Oval as start/finish, this is irrelevant so not sure why all the discussion about it. We are moving the entire event,lock stock and barrel from Rosford Res to Gipps Oval

SMC42K, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

At present, the buses do not use the stretch of road where the new course intersects. If that remains the case, the course would be completely vehicular traffic free.

The buses will be back using that shortly , if not already.

SMC42K, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

Although the pathway is concrete, there are several areas alongside which have either a gravel or grass track alongside. Running on them would not have much impact on the distance. However, there are a couple large sections between the sports ovals & the creek where someone may try to get an unfair advantage. These sections would have to be monitored. At present, we have the assistance of the SES in traffic management. As that duty will no longer be needed, they could be used to monitor these sections of the course.

The concrete pathway will be the officially measured course, not the gravel or grass next to it. It is a road race. We don't want to encourage twisted ankles etc.
I don't believe there are any areas where runners could gain unfair advantage or need to be monitored. The path is fairly straight- and straightfoward. If you don't run on the path you certainly would be taking longer.

Edited by Colin, 12 February 2012 - 10:40 AM.

[Paul Every]

A timely inititive and congrats to all at SMC who continue to strive to provide runners with a better quality race. As someone who has been running at SMC since the days of dirt roads, market gardens and poultry farms, it is wonderful to see the club delivering its races more professionally than ever.

I think the main deterent for some runners with the old/current course is the soulless industrial park atmosphere. I wouldn't be surprised to see the new, more attractive and scenic course attracting greater numbers of runners.

SMC, runners and the sport in general will all benefit.

[Colin]

Paul Every, on 12 February 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

I think the main deterent for some runners with the old/current course is the soulless industrial park atmosphere. I wouldn't be surprised to see the new, more attractive and scenic course attracting greater numbers of runners.

SMC, runners and the sport in general will all benefit.

I agree. Getting on the shared path one could imagine you are in any other suburb.

...and BTW, the track is wider than that of the CC Half where the turn is narrower too and you have a 10km at same time.

We are working on ideal start time differentials to minimise the contra flow of the different events.

Putting the proposal in this week, let's hope that Holroyd Council 'jumps at the opportunity to host this iconic series'

[ratdog]

Is the map of the course visable to others?  

[ratdog]

brewer, on 12 February 2012 - 04:38 AM, said:

I like the look of the new course and I'm looking forward to the change.

Are there showers at the start/finish area?

I'm not 100% sure about the shower situation. The council guy we spoke to who was talking about the facilities did say there were some showers but that might be in the section reserved for the discus, shot put, hammer and javelin throwers.

I'll take that on notice.

Currently the facilities have got 2 little athletics clubs operating out of the building so space is tight now. We may have to keep the old facilities until the little A is sorted.

Girraween oval is under reno's is my understanding. Slow MC can tell us more maybe. Time frame and the likelihood of sharing some storage.

[brewer]

Paul Every, on 12 February 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

I wouldn't be surprised to see the new, more attractive and scenic course attracting greater numbers of runners.

I hope it doesn't start to sell out   and we have to enter months/years in advance...

[bobbys]

Brewer,

With the new course, it will sell out in 9 minutes on the internet and we'll then have wait lists each month.

Great initiative Colin and committee - I will miss March and April and knowing my luck, that's when the new course will come in.

[Blues Buffett]

Congratulations guys, you've done an excellent job in relocating SMC out of necessity, and it seems like the new course will be an improvement in many ways.

Apologies if I've got this wrong, but it looks like we set up camp at the Gipps Rd sporting complex. This is where the West Met run is held.

My only question is about parking: we have been lucky with the overflow area at Rosford St. Gipps Rd has been difficult for parking for West Met and I'm sure SMC will attract more entrants.

Is there a parking management solution?

cheers, BB

Edited by Blues Buffett, 12 February 2012 - 06:07 PM.

[OurDogScruff]

Nice one Ratdog.

I've run and biked the potential new course and I think it's great.  'Scenic', compared to the current course and although the word narrow has been thrown about, it's not as narrow as running in the gutter on the road with trucks driving next to you.

The start, finish and registration area will add to the SMC experience as it will all be in one location.  Hopefully meaning there will be more people to cheer others on when they finish.  It also means there would be a loo stop at the 10k point in the longer runs.

BB - There is space for around 100 (perhaps more) cars there if we can get access to the grassed car park.  There are 64 real spaces, in the paved car park.  We may need more than this, but there is other parking around if people are prepared to walk more than 5 metres to the start area   There is also a grassed area where people have parked, nearer the AFL ground, but people we've spoken said they don't open the gate there for parking.  That doesn't mean it can't be opened and it has been open every time I've been there.  That would give us a lot of overflow parking.

Cheers

[ratdog]

Re: parking

As ODS said there is parking down Long Street with traffic lights and a green walking man to cross the Gipps Rd. a very safe alternative to what we currently have.

[Ding]

The proposed course looks a marked improvement on the current course in so many ways...

Well done to all involved who are making this happen.  

The YouTube video is brilliant too....

[greyhoundracer]

I like it.

Should be good for spectators too seeing alot more of the start and finish looking out over the AFL oval!

[Bakerman]

Thanks Ratdog for the youtube clip, the course looks conducive to quick times. I’m looking forward to running over it.

[backofthepack]

Colin, on 11 February 2012 - 11:38 PM, said:

I know this is not the thread to debate this, but that is an old furphy. Just think about it, most of us are running on shoes with soft rubber underneath. The softest material is the one that 'gives'. The impact from this flat rubber is an unmeasurable poofteenth different (if one acknowledges that there may be a difference) on asphat as compared to concrete. There simply is no difference that will make your legs feel it more. There are other things that may make your legs feel it, but not the surface.
Yes, if we were to run on shoes with metal spikes underneath then it may sink into the asphalt more than the concrete, but then you'd also have to pull them out again each step.
Sorry if that sounds like a lecture , but the surface is actually conducive to good running conditions, so I hope you do run the distance you are training for.

.

Colin, after 35 years of competitive running (and injuries), I unfortunately am one of those runners who does feel the difference between concrete and bitumen tarmac - and thats using well cushioned shoes. Regretfully I'll need to pass on the half marathon, 25km, 30 km and marathon options on this course.

Further to comments made by others, I'm also concerned at the narrowmess of the path given we'll have two way SMC traffic plus other walkers (possibly with dogs), runners and cyclists all potentially wanting to occupy the same 2.4 metre wide space. At the aquaduct we don't even have the option of stepping off to the side. I've run in 2 of the sydney park parkruns in recent weeks, even with 98 % one way race traffic, other path users including those using ipods/mp3s and dog walkers, especially when travelling in the same direction have been apparently unaware of rummers and have caused 'passing problems'.

I appreciate the course change is needed, it's probably a fait accompli, but I want to highlight the possible issues before all is set in stone.

[Colin]

backofthepack, on 14 February 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Colin, after 35 years of competitive running (and injuries), I unfortunately am one of those runners who does feel the difference between concrete and bitumen tarmac - and thats using well cushioned shoes. Regretfully I'll need to pass on the half marathon, 25km, 30 km and marathon options on this course.

Further to comments made by others, I'm also concerned at the narrowmess of the path given we'll have two way SMC traffic plus other walkers (possibly with dogs), runners and cyclists all potentially wanting to occupy the same 2.4 metre wide space. At the aquaduct we don't even have the option of stepping off to the side. I've run in 2 of the sydney park parkruns in recent weeks, even with 98 % one way race traffic, other path users including those using ipods/mp3s and dog walkers, especially when travelling in the same direction have been apparently unaware of rummers and have caused 'passing problems'.

I appreciate the course change is needed, it's probably a fait accompli, but I want to highlight the possible issues before all is set in stone.

Thanks for feedback. We'll agree to disagree on the impact forces until proven one way or other by a study- there are, but can't be bothered looking. If someone says grass has less impact on shod runner than asphalt and concrete then I will immediately agree, but the shod foot does not find a difference between a 10MPa or 50Mpa surface- a hammer falling on it yes, the one will chip quicker.

I just don't want to discourage others from following that without sound reasoning.

Anyway, for the rest of it- have you run the CC Half Marathon and/or 10km. Well the path is much narrower they have close to 1,000 on there and they have a 10km which contra flows back on the HM before the 5km mark. The path is also not  closed with much more people using it compared to this one. Even on the aquaduct the chances of a casual walker/cyclist is minimal- I haven't seen many people on there.

Again, I want people to give it a go before before reading the negative. It is pretty much already 'set in stone' because if Holroyd deny permission then we will have nowhere else to go and may have to do it fat ass.

[runhard]

Having only run the current course I feel I can only comment on my experience there. At the start runners seem to spread single file almost by the road and the single path that we run on at about the 3k to 4k part seems to handle two way traffic pretty well and it is nowhere near as wide as the shared pathway on the new course. I think the spread of runners will thin out pretty quickly both ways and wont be an issue.

As for others using it not in the race, well apart from warning them what else can be done. Surely they will work it out. Im not sure how many will be on it early on a sunday morning in winter when it is raining anyway.


BoP - with the current way shoes are, surely the difference is very small.  Maybe you should try some Hoka's. I havent myself but they look like trampolines.

RH

[greyhoundracer]

I don't see this as an issue at all.

I also don't think that area of the path will be have much 'traffic' at all on a Sunday morning.

Hoping to join the guys for a hit out there next month.

[Colin]

Here is a thread from 2007 on bitumen and concrete.

Pay particular attention to the explantions Yeti (a Geophysicist) gives - as well as Kato too- and note that the naysayers pay little attention to the science or mm of shoe compression etc.
Or just go straight to Yeti's first post #27 on thread- that's really all you need to read. A foot in shoe takes approx 9 micrometres longer (out of approx 10,000 micrometres) to come to a halt.

Perceptions are hard to change

Edited by Colin, 14 February 2012 - 02:27 PM.

[OurDogScruff]

Not sure where 2.4 metres has come from, and I'm happy to stand corrected, but the aquaduct is 3+ metres wide.  I think I measured it roughly at 10.5 feet.  Going from memory here, so I may not be 100% right.  Other parts of the course are wider.  Where you cannot 'step off the course', it is generally wider than the grassed verge areas.

It'd be great if the path was 10 metres wide but the reality is that it's probably equally as wide, if not wider than the existing course.  Of course we can step off into the road, but not when there's a 20 tonne truck there.  And it's much wider than the footpath on the current course on Victoria Street, and we cope there.

I've also been held up by traffic on the existing course, trucks turning into/out of warehouses, so we do have 'traffic' now.  It'd be a change from vehicles to mammals.  



Cheers

[HillsAths1]

With the choice between cancelling the series for safety concerns and having a course change I vote (not that my vote counts for much anyway) for having  the change of course. The number of walkers and cyclists on the course at 7.00 to 9.00am on a Sunday morning is likely to be fairly small. Yes there may be others out there but on the current course there are big rubber traffic humps, not to mention concrete slabs with signs embedded. People this is not the Olympics, just go and have a run, if there is a bike(s) they are likely to be in more danger than what you are, lone cyclist v 200 runners I am pretty sure who is going to come off worst!! Then we can start a thread Cyclist V Runners!

[Evil]

Good point about the width of the footpath on Victoria Street - and that hasn't presented too many problems.

I am looking forward to giving the new course a try and think we are very lucky to find a suitable alternative course.

[Stem]

Will there be an issue with the lead bikes? I know on the narrow path on Victoria St the bike stays on the road (well I did anyway).

[Whippet gal]

HillsAths1, on 14 February 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

With the choice between cancelling the series for safety concerns and having a course change I vote (not that my vote counts for much anyway) for having  the change of course.

I'm with HillsAths on this one. Personally, I like the current course but if it's gotta go, it's gotta go. I certainly don't want to get hit by a bus.

Thanks to everyone who's spent time looking for alternatives rather than throwing their hands up and declaring it the end of SMC.

Looking at the photos probably isn't the best way of determining how good the proposed course is - I'd really like to go and have a run on it with Ratty on 10 March.

"5. Toilets at Start and Finish, also the 10 and 20km points."
With my history of needing to find a loo on the SMC course, this point makes the proposed course a winner all on its own!!

I do have one suggestion, (and Colin's already alluded to it being possible), instead of having to run the extra 550m out and back for the half, couldn't we make it two laps of 10.55 (and two laps for 25k/30k)?

[Paul Every]

Whippet gal, on 14 February 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

I do have one suggestion, (and Colin's already alluded to it being possible), instead of having to run the extra 550m out and back for the half, couldn't we make it two laps of 10.55 (and two laps for 25k/30k)?

If the extra 550m out and back was tacked on at the end, then the km markers for the 10km and both the first and second lap of the half would be the same, ie four pairs of km markers located at the 1 & 9km, 2 & 8km, 3 & 7km and 4 & 6km points.

If you run 5.225km out and then turn, that would require a lot of extra signage and time to mark the course.

[Acidosis]

Having only run the current course a couple of times, I have no attachment to it.  Some of the traffic is a little concerning (lost trucks).

The proposed off road course looks pretty good to me, if council / caretakers can schedule the mowing of edges of the path in the week before the runs it would be good for escaping the 'hard' concrete.

I Agree with Backofthepack's comment about sliding the start to avoid the 5km u-turn on the aquaduct, or perhaps a couple of hundred metres can be "found" somewhere? Perhaps a mini leg down and back the new road (on f/path of course).

Some form of awareness / supervision at the course entry points to warn cyclists plus communications with local BUG's (bicycle user groups).

There should be some good lessons learnt available from the race organisers of the M7 42k.  The race control issues would be pretty similar.

Edited by Acidosis, 14 February 2012 - 07:21 PM.

[backofthepack]

OurDogScruff, on 14 February 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Not sure where 2.4 metres has come from, and I'm happy to stand corrected, but the aquaduct is 3+ metres wide.  I think I measured it roughly at 10.5 feet.  Going from memory here, so I may not be 100% right.  Other parts of the course are wider.  Where you cannot 'step off the course', it is generally wider than the grassed verge areas.

It'd be great if the path was 10 metres wide but the reality is that it's probably equally as wide, if not wider than the existing course.  Of course we can step off into the road, but not when there's a 20 tonne truck there.  And it's much wider than the footpath on the current course on Victoria Street, and we cope there.

I've also been held up by traffic on the existing course, trucks turning into/out of warehouses, so we do have 'traffic' now.  It'd be a change from vehicles to mammals.  



Cheers

Ratdog quoted the turn as being 8 ft wide at the aquaduct. Eight feet is 2.44 metres.

[OurDogScruff]

I'm pretty sure it's wider than that at the turn.  Might check it out this weekend if we get time.

[bobbys]

Stem, on 14 February 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Will there be an issue with the lead bikes? I know on the narrow path on Victoria St the bike stays on the road (well I did anyway).

I was thinking the same thing Stem (you just beat me to the post). It also depends on when the long run and the 10km run meet up. Not an unsurmountable obstacle but worth a thought in case there are other users about at the same area.

I'm used to running on a shared pathway along the Cook's River and sometimes, it feels like Pitt St on Christmas Eve - people, dogs and cyclists everywhere. I still manage to not have any issues so I'm sure this can work the same way.

[Colin]

Whippet gal, on 14 February 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

I do have one suggestion, (and Colin's already alluded to it being possible), instead of having to run the extra 550m out and back for the half, couldn't we make it two laps of 10.55 (and two laps for 25k/30k)?

See Paul E's comment-- probably only for the marathon if we have one.

Acidosis, on 14 February 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

....if council / caretakers can schedule the mowing of edges of the path in the week before the runs it would be good for escaping the 'hard' concrete.

If you didn't run on the grass when the course was on bitumen then there is no need to do so now. See Yeti's post I linked earlier about the difference between the two surfaces.

Acidosis, on 14 February 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

I Agree with Backofthepack's comment about sliding the start to avoid the 5km u-turn on the aquaduct, or perhaps a couple of hundred metres can be "found" somewhere? Perhaps a mini leg down and back the new road (on f/path of course).

The current space that runners use is half that of the width of the path, and the popular CC HM is heaps narrower too. The only reason you would want to bring it forward 150m  is to have the turn just before the historic pumphouse because that would make an obvious landmark. We discussed it and it wasn't logistically possible.

Acidosis, on 14 February 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

Some form of awareness / supervision at the course entry points to warn cyclists plus communications with local BUG's (bicycle user groups).
There should be some good lessons learnt available from the race organisers of the M7 42k.  The race control issues would be pretty similar.

We are not going down that path so to speak. We are asking the council permission with no impact on current usage. That usage is minimal with respect to the size of our race.

If we say to council that we need to control usage then we will have conditions placed on us such as advertising signs well prior to event at each entry and then marshall or cone off those points on race day.
This is what M7- Cities have to do, but M7 owns the path and both they and council have heaps of workers to do that and the race itself has lots of volunteers. We don't own the track nor have the resources.
And BTW, re 'lessons learnt' we are actually technical advisors to M7-Cities.

Guys, thanks for the comments but lets keep it logical and logistical. We are trying to make the organisation easier not harder.

Edited by Colin, 14 February 2012 - 10:32 PM.

[ratdog]

backofthepack, on 14 February 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

OurDogScruff, on 14 February 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Not sure where 2.4 metres has come from, and I'm happy to stand corrected, but the aquaduct is 3+ metres wide.  I think I measured it roughly at 10.5 feet.  Going from memory here, so I may not be 100% right.  Other parts of the course are wider.  Where you cannot 'step off the course', it is generally wider than the grassed verge areas.

It'd be great if the path was 10 metres wide but the reality is that it's probably equally as wide, if not wider than the existing course.  Of course we can step off into the road, but not when there's a 20 tonne truck there.  And it's much wider than the footpath on the current course on Victoria Street, and we cope there.

I've also been held up by traffic on the existing course, trucks turning into/out of warehouses, so we do have 'traffic' now.  It'd be a change from vehicles to mammals.  



Cheers

Ratdog quoted the turn as being 8 ft wide at the aquaduct. Eight feet is 2.44 metres.

Sorry my fault, could be more like 10 feet.  Either way im sure a three point turn will not be needed.

[Bakerman]

I think all the "opinions" voiced so far are valid but until we actually race the course then they should not be objections.
Stage a race and then retune our procedures and if after the second race we have to tweak it again then tweak it.
Run for fun and don't stress over details you cannot control.

Hope to see you all Sunday.

[CulturalStereotype]

well done on the new course, i know it can't be easy to find somewhere suitable given all the variables involved.

i did the 25k in the lead up to GCM in 2010 and it was a great hit out regardless of the location - for me the biggest positives of the run were the organisation, and relatively small but enthusiastic field which provided great atmosphere/conditions for a running event.  i assume that these factors will remain regardless of the course so i have pencilled in the 30k next month during my next Sydney visit as my reality check for GCM in July.

am looking forward to the reports of sundays run!

[AJS]

I ran on the old course quite a few years ago and enjoyed the whole atmosphere and the experience.  I may or may not get to do this new one because it is a bit of an effort for me to get to Sydney for any race.  So good luck with it.

I'm no expert on running surfaces and sometimes dirt roads seem just as hard as anything.  But there was an article last year in Running Times Magazine about looking after your joints.  And one of the points made was to avoid running on concrete like the plague.

I am a bit like backofthepack (except with near 50 years of running) and I also notice a difference on concrete.

[Colin]

AJS, on 15 February 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

I'm no expert on running surfaces and sometimes dirt roads seem just as hard as anything.  But there was an article last year in Running Times Magazine about looking after your joints.  And one of the points made was to avoid running on concrete like the plague.

I am a bit like backofthepack (except with near 50 years of running) and I also notice a difference on concrete.

Don't want to keep on with that, perhaps the other thread is a better place, just to make sure that people don't "avoid SMC like the plague' because of perception.

The Running Times article is disappointing because no research actually exists and they are similarly basing it on perception or personal experience/feeling.

There is no doubt that concrete 'feels' different, but that is simply because concrete is usually dead flat and conducive to repetitive strides. That can actually be a good thing because one of the impediments to good marathon times is that repetitive strides are what tires the muscles more than say on the extreme a gentle trail where you are running slower if that's where you train.

The bottom line is that the only 'evidence' is that provided by someone like Yeti who is a Geophysicist - and he still couldn't win the argument though because people don't like their perceptions challenged by fact- where he actually states the relative deformations of each surface when impacted by a runner wearing a shoe.

As I said, I am merely stating this for the benefit of those that may be put off by other's perceptions of it and decide not to visit us, not to change your particular view ...you are entitled to it.

cheers

Edited by Colin, 15 February 2012 - 03:36 PM.

[thomo]

Bakerman, on 15 February 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:

I think all the "opinions" voiced so far are valid but until we actually race the course then they should not be objections.
Stage a race and then retune our procedures and if after the second race we have to tweak it again then tweak it.
Run for fun and don't stress over details you cannot control.

CR West are planning to give the new course a test run next month. Not sure of all the details. But Ratdog and OurDogScruff are regulars at both SMC and CR West, along with Stem, BeesKnees, to name several. Colin turns up when he can as well as myself at CR West.

So a test run sounds like a great excuse for a get together and a run.

[ratdog]

Thanks Thomo, Yes CR West 5 km regulars will be testing out the Proposed New SMC Course on the Saturday 10th March 2012.

We will be running as much of the course as possible (nopting that some of it is still in the area of construction.  There is about 400m which we may not be able to run on the 10th.  We will be able to make a very good assessment of the course from running it.  Everyone is welcome to come along for a run.

The distance you do is totally up to you but the objective is to finish at 8am for a breakfast at the canteen area.
The course can be modified to test out all aspects of the course inclding the Aquaduct.

The more the merrier.

Breakfast is free.

Meet at Gipps Rd Sporting Complex at 7:15am

More info about the regular CR West 5km run is here

This is the same day as 6ft Track.