Nov 14, 2024
Current Year Results
Results Search
Biggest/Best Boston Qualifier
2024 Results
2023 Results
2022 Results
2021 Results
2020 Results
2019 Results
2018 Results
2017 Results
2016 Results
2015 Results
2014 Results
2013 Results
2012 Results
2011 Results
2010 Results
2009 Results
2008 Results
2007 Results
2006 Results
2005 Results
2004 Results
2003 Results
2002 Results
2001 Results
2000 Results
☰
Lakeshore Marathon Runner Comments
Back to Lakeshore Marathon Information & Reviews
Course 3.5 
Organization 1.8 
Spectators 2.7
Number of comments: 209 [displaying comments 41 to 51]
|
G. M. from Chicago
(6/2/2005)
"A race that needs a new director" (General Comments)
6-10 previous marathons
| 2 Lakeshore Marathons
COURSE: 1 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 2 Chicago's lakefront in the spring is the perfect place for a marathon, so why can't the idiot who runs and owns it, Mark Cihlar, figure out how to do it right? Bad mileage measurements, pathetic mileage markers, insufficient directions and maps, etc.... This is the most poorly run marathon out there. He's had problems all four years, and I won't be doing it again unless it gets better management. | |
|
n. t. from WI
(6/2/2005)
"Horribly organized race on all accounts" (about: 2005)
1 previous marathon
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 2 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 2 I have competed in my events both triathlon and running -- this was by far the worst organized event ever. The water stations (what a joke!) were too few and far between, the mile markers were nonexistent, the course was not properly measured (it was definitely long!). I fortunately carried my own water bottle and GU packets, but a friend of mine did not. He suffered the whole race, especially since it was a warmer day. I ran the half and I am so glad I didn't run the marathon. I feel awful for anyone who was trying to qualify for Boston in this race. I would not do this race again, nor would I recommend it to anyone else! What a shame! | |
|
D. G. from Rolla, MO, USA
(6/1/2005)
"Great potential but needs A LOT of work" (about: 2005)
1 previous marathon
COURSE: 5 ORGANIZATION: 3 FANS: 2 How hard and expensive could it be to put mile markers??? I saw none after 6 (on the half course). No water between 6 - 11 miles. The wave start is a good idea, but you need to let people know where to begin. Everyone knows the first wave is for top runners, but after that where should people be? It would be very easy to write on a piece of paper or inform runners which wave corresponds to which pace. Two days later I am still waiting for official results; I never waited so long. The website is not very useful and is confusing. Take a look at other websites. | |
|
m. m. from chicago
(6/1/2005)
"Don't do it!" (about: 2005)
2 previous marathons
COURSE: 2 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 3 Wow. What a disappointment! I was so happy to see a sunny sky instead of the rain that they had been warning us of in Chicago. But rain would have been the least problem. Signage? What signs? I was part of a large group that took a wrong turn due to no signs and no help. If that didn't add to my mileage, an inaccurately measured course did the trick. I couldn't figure out how my pace got so off.... Oh, maybe because the miles were all off (if marked). Between that and dodging crazy men on bikes (who actually plowed some racers over), "frustrating" is an understatement. And perhaps some food at the end would have been nice. I know I'm not the fastest runner but I expect something besides an orange when I'm done. How is it possible for one race to turn Chicago's beautiful lakefront into a spot for nightmares? | |
|
Michele Willis from Houston, Texas
(6/1/2005)
"What more can be said? Very sad experience" (about: 2005)
2 previous marathons
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 3 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 2 Good: Loved the scenery and couldn't have asked for better weather. The shirts are nice and the medal looks good. My husband ran the half and didn't have near the experience I had. However, he said there were no mile markers to go by, but his GPS read 13.1 at the finish. Bad: I don't know where to begin, and what more can be said? The organization was atrocious. I stopped running when my GPS said 26.2 miles, which was at least one mile from the official finish. I got lost so many times. I saw mile marker 16 twice because someone at the water station told me to go back the other way. When I saw them the second time they admitted they didn't know where we were supposed to go, and they didn't have a map. I ran with my fuel belt and I'm glad I did. The water stations were too far apart. Last word: We were just left out there to run our own race. I could have run 26.2 miles here at home and not spent the money on airfare, hotel, and food. | |
|
J. O. from Chicago area
(6/1/2005)
"Don't Do It!" (about: 2005)
4-5 previous marathons
| 2 Lakeshore Marathons
COURSE: 5 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 1 I ran the 2004 Lakeshore whose problems have been well documented by other runners. But the course is beautiful and based on the race director's comments on this website dated 1/3/105, I was optimistic last year's problems had been solved. I ran the 2005 marathon and wore a GPS watch. Upon finishing, my watch showed the course as 27.44 miles. I spoke to 2 other runners who had GPS watches and their watches showed the course as being 27.2 miles. I spoke to the race director who said 'guys have been coming up to me for an hour with their watches. The course was too long.' I ran this race to qualify for Boston and would have qualified on an accurate course. The race director has not responded to my emails regarding what happened or what can be done. Standing in front of me at the beginning of the race on Monday morning was a runner who had written on the back of his scalp 'Pain is inevitable. Suffering is optional.' The Dalai Lama. Don't make the same mistake I did - keep the pain down to 26.2 miles and avoid the suffering by giving this race a pass. | |
|
T. L. from Saint Louis, MO
(6/1/2005)
"All in favor of a resignation say, "I"" (about: 2005)
11-50 previous marathons
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 4 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 2 The follow-up is just as bad as the 27-miler. You think you could possibly post the results on one of your Lakeshore Marathon websites? | |
|
G. P. from Dallas, TX
(6/1/2005)
"Beautiful Day in Chicago" (about: 2005)
1 previous marathon
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 5 ORGANIZATION: 3 FANS: 3 This is my first marathon experience, so I don't have a frame of reference. But, I thoroughly enjoyed my first marathon experience. The weather was PERFECT!!! The day was so beautiful and the volunteers were trying their best to help everyone. The course was extremely scenic. It would have been nice to have the first half of the marathon clearly marked to help with the pace. I found the marker on mile 15. So, a better marking would help next time. The bikers were a little bit of a problem; I almost got hit a couple of times. The spectators were few, but very friendly and kept encouraging the runners. | |
|
Hugh Mainard from Chicago, Illinois
(6/1/2005)
"If zero stars were an option for organization..." (about: 2005)
6-10 previous marathons
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 3 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 2 I would give it that. This is absolutely the worst organized running event I could imagine, given that it takes place in a major city and the entry fee is high (somewhere between $75 and $95, depending on when you registered). I have lived in Chicago for many years, and ran this for the first time. I was surprised how 'under the radar' this event is in Chicago, considering I'd run the LaSalle Chicago Marathon four times previously, but I assumed it was due to the event's relative youth (2005 was the fourth year for Lakeshore). The representations by prior respondents that any map was available at the mandatory expo is news to me, unless someone attempted to draw one up after I went through the expo early Saturday afternoon, less than 48 hours before the race start). The website had no course map (though inexplicably the 'old website' still exists and has last year's course) and I too received no response to my e-mail to Mark Cihlar about getting one. The packet pick-up requirement was ludicrous for such a poorly attended race - forcing the fewer than 1500 participants (combined, for all of the runs - the marathon, the half, and the 5K) to go to McCormick Place on Memorial Day weekend for an expo with less than ten vendors/booths was ridiculous. While I thought the pre-race process was questionable, I had no fears that the marathon would be anything other than a small event on Chicago's lakefront path, much like the nicely run Lakefront Ultramarathon that I had completed eight weeks before (100 or so runners, using the north five miles of the lakefront running path on a triple-loop course) - small but organized. As a native who runs on the path quite often, I knew the course would be open to the usual weekend recreational runners, cyclists, and roller bladers, so that came as no surprise. Little did I know what was to come. The 'wave start' would have been a great idea if there had been any announcement about how participants were supposed to line up for the waves (I'm not kidding - you would assume the start would go by your race number, but that was never explained - marathoners and half runners clearly went off in the first wave together, with numbers ranging from 1 to 3000 something); or if there were more than 1000 people or so running. With so few people, it made no difference. The day started out surprisingly warm and sunny, so I expected hydration and pacing to be an issue. The first five miles or so were fine, with almost no one else on the lakefront that early and running out and around Navy Pier. Maybe Cihlar should be limited to organizing races of five miles or less. From mile five on, the course took many wild twists and turns that even a seasoned Chicagoan had trouble following, and forced runners onto paths no runner in his right mind would choose (the narrow path along the lagoon behind the Children's Zoo in Lincoln Park, with uneven pavement leaning toward the water and a fence keeping you out of the zoo but within three feet of the edge, springs to mind, as does the weird sharp left turn after some chain link fencing onto the grass - but watch out for the trees! - to get to the brink of the lake again). After finally navigating through a Lincoln Park course that only a headless chicken could enjoy (translation - lots of mindless turns), the remaining miles became an act of desperation trying to keep pace with many missing mile markers. The worst for me was the missing 13 and 14 mile markers, and then the appearance of two different 15 mile markers, about 250 yards apart. I don't often swear in the middle of a race, but I did then. For someone who lives in Chicago and knows that the lakefront has a dedicated path with mile markers every half mile (one of the great benefits of being a Chicago runner) stretching for eighteen miles from north to south, this course and its mismeasurement made no sense and no excuses can be made for why it turned out to be more than a mile too long (though someone sarcastically suggested that maybe Cihlar was trying to compensate for last year's course being a mile short - sorry to notify the prior comment author who might have repeated the race from last year due to his 'marathon' PR - I think we would all find it easier to PR with a 25.2 mile course). Also, another weird late loop somewhere after mile 15 was either confusing for some runners or inspired cheating, as I saw at least ten people cut the corner and knock 25 yards off the presumably intended course, as well as many people going the wrong way. The state of exhaustion-based confusion I had reached by the 23rd mile made me think the lagging pace was due to the mere perception that some of the miles were getting longer, but of course, perception and reality do occasionally match up, since the last four miles turned out to be a mile too much. Having run my first ultra (50K) on a triple-looping course on the same running path just two months before and having a great experience made it clear that this race was screwed up in ways that were entirely the fault of poor organization and had nothing to do with the inherent nature of the lakefront area. While running on the lakefront was great, I can do that anytime without paying an entry fee. I am making my short-term goal to prevent this race from ever being staged again by the same organizers, and have already contacted the Mayor's Office of Special Events, some of the race sponsors, the Chicago Area Runners Association, and of course my new found enemy, Mark Cihlar. I WILL PAY MONEY TO TAKE OUT ADS IN THE CHICAGO ATHLETIC PUBLICATIONS WARNING PEOPLE NOT TO ENTER THIS RACE. ANYONE WHO WISHES TO JOIN ME IN THIS VENTURE SHOULD CONTACT ME. IF I CAN SAVE ONE RUNNER FROM MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE, IT WILL BE WORTH IT. IT IS THAT BAD. WAIT FOR THE FALL MARATHON OR TRAVEL TO ANOTHER CITY. | |
|
J. W. from Dayton, Ohio
(6/1/2005)
"Enjoyed the 27-Mile Ultra-marathon" (about: 2005)
50+ previous marathons
| 1 Lakeshore Marathon
COURSE: 5 ORGANIZATION: 1 FANS: 3 Since this was my 208th marathon, including 60+ ultras, I have had a variety of race experiences. This event would definitely fit into the 'unique' category. The scenery was quite spectacular, and local runners/spectators were good viewing as well. However, I could have done without getting lost since some marshals did not know the course, and then running the extra mile-plus somewhere after 23. I do not have a 27-mile ultra to my credit, so this would be a first. I am not sure it is worth the price of admission however. Perhaps in 2006 I will come to this fun run marathon & wear my 2005 number to recover my cost of admission. I did feel sorry for the first-timers who had to be confused, Boston qualifiers who perhaps did not qualify, 2:30 marathoners who ran 2:37, & 50-staters still tired from Saturday marathons that were only 26.2 miles. Still, I would recommend this fun run to Chicago fans/runners who can take care of their own needs, and want a 'unique' running experience. Not every race needs to be first-class or even second. Marathons like Lakeshore were common in 1980, so I consider it 'nostalgic.' |
Quick Links
Marathon Search
Upcoming US Marathons
Upcoming International Marathons
Search Marathon Results
Latest Running News
Recent Newsletters
Race Director Tools
© 2000-2024, All Rights Reserved by MarathonGuide.com LLC
