Mud is big business in the racing world. Maybe it is because your parents told you not to get dirty; perhaps it has to do with the pressures of living in a world where hand sanitizer is as omnipresent as silverware or napkins. Either way, it is hard to argue with the success of mud-themed obstacle races. Every year, since the inaugural Muddy Buddy launched competitors into the muck, a new race series crops up.
Rugged Maniac, one of the latest such series, debuted in a handful of cities last year and will host 12 events in 2012. These races feature a dozen or more physical obstacles ( such as wall climbs, tires, fire and even the “superhero jump”) over muddy, sticky terrain. Travlete was on the ground for the race in Southwick, Massachusetts and, after scraping the grime off, filed this review.
Let’s start with the course. From an athlete perspective, the course can be a little confusing. The race map included in the packet looks like an Escher drawing. But once you arrive at the venue and see the course and the signage, you begin to understand its circuitous route. Never once was it unclear where I needed to go, and this was greatly appreciated, especially with mud and grime in my eyes.
It should also be noted that this is the perfect race for spectators, as it takes place on a closed moto-cross course. There are plenty of vantage points to see and be seen along it and competitors are never at a loss for crowd support. However, this can turn ugly: fail to get over an obstacle and all you can hear is “OHHHHHHHH” from the assembled masses.
Maniacs teamed up to conquer over a dozen obstacles. (Greg Saulmon / Courtesy of The Republican and MassLive.com)
The obstacles themselves were challenging and worthwhile, particularly the mud slide/water ones. The organizers did make it very clear that racers could circumvent any obstacles that they found too difficult, the only penalty being the removal from award consideration. However, there was one challenge on the course that deserved special attention.
The “superhero jump” required participants to run down a steep hill and jump 7-10 feet across a steep drop and water hazard, to the other side. Most racers were not able to complete the jump fully, landing instead on a foam crash pad and then scrambling up a rope net to reach the top. This obstacle came fairly late in the race, once fatigue had set in and many runners hit the crash pad and rocketed back into the water. At one point in the day, an athlete was so badly hurt on this that the race had to be re-routed around the obstacle.
All together now, "OHHHHHHHH!" (Greg Saulmon / Courtesy of The Republican and MassLive.com)
The race organizers did an excellent job of pre-race communications via email. On race morning, the packet pick up and race start were efficient and well run. Each wave went off precisely as scheduled and there was little congestion along the course. Post race, the operation ran into trouble. Despite the fact that the event was a 5k that was chip timed, race results were not available. 24 hours later, the times were still nowhere to be found on the web and a hastily constructed post race email from the race series said that they would be available in a few days. While this was a sizeable event, with 7,000 participants, there was no reason for race results to take 48 hours or more.
Rugged Maniac bills itself as an adventure race and music festival and it is clear from all the literature that the organizers want you to come, bring your friends and family and stay a while. With participant waves going off every half hour, from 9 am until 4pm, plus multiple bands and a kids “Mini-ac Course” it is clear that they expect most folks to make it an all day affair.
However, the choice that this race series (and others like it) makes to CHARGE spectators to come onto the property seriously undermines this attempt. Every spectator (over the age of 13) has to pony up $10 to hang out and watch their loved ones race. In all my years running, I have NEVER encountered this and I sincerely hope not to again. Why, when the early registration price is $58 and the day of race price is $98, can this cost not be absorbed in the race fee? Also, if you spend $10 just to come out and watch, how likely is it that you will buy an official Rugged Maniac t-shirt ($25) or purchase food or beer from the local vendors?
Another thing that made me scratch my head was the inconsistency of the event’s culture. Just before my 9am start time, I heard a song, with an f-word laden chorus, being blasted over the loud speakers, while literally dozens of tiny kids waited patiently for their moms and dads to start. Yet, at the finish line, I could not collect my “free beer” until 11 am (over an hour later). Make up your mind, Rugged Maniac. Either you are a family event, or you are not. You party down or you don’t.
Course: B Well-marked and challenging. And it’s a 5k, so it’s perfect for folks looking to get their feet dirty for the first time.
Organization: B- Waves went off as planned and were well organized (something that is becoming increasingly hard to come by). Overall pretty well-run, but results should go up faster, especially with timing chip technology.
Atmosphere: C- Decisions need to be made as to whether this is a family event or not. And if you’re a race director and are reading this, please do NOT charge spectators. Up the registration, charge more for beer, do anything else other than this.
Logistics: B+ Getting to the start was a snap and there was plenty of free parking. Race volunteers did a great job of moving traffic in and out of the parking area. The race course and pre and post event areas were carefully laid out and all of the crew was able to answer questions about where amenities were located.
Overall: C+ While the race course was challenging and the event logistics well executed, it doesn’t yet stand out from the crowd and just yet. While this might be fun as a starter adventure race, there are bigger and badder mud-themed obstacle races out there.
-Mary
Comments
I participated in this event, and I think this review is a bit off. The atmosphere rating is the lowest given, yet I felt it was the strongest part of this event. In fact, I have never attended a race that had quite so much post race energy, with the exception of perhaps Warrior Dash, although I think RM had the nod with the fantastic viewing area and stands.
I agree that charging spectators isn’t the greatest practice, but did it really warrant so much attention in your article? I would have liked to hear a bit more about the course, or the party, etc. And, at least we parked for free … unlike other races (Warrior Dash, Ruckus, and others).
Finally, there might be bigger and badder obstacle races out there, but not of the 5K version. I have participated in Warrior Dash, Spartan Race, Ruckus and Tough Mudder. And, I think as far as fun and challenging races go, This event took the cake. The course at the Amesbury WD was a disappointment, Spartan was harder, but RM had better obstacles and was much morefun, Ruckus lacked the upbeat vibe and Tough Mudder is a 12 mile race and shouldn’t fall into the same category.
Have you participated in other mud runs before? I see none reviewed.
I love Travlete, but this is the first time I have felt obligated to post. This review misses the mark and, in my opinion, gets a “D”.
Two more things;
I didn’t hear the song with the “f” bombs, but I agree that is not appropriate.
Also, times were available and posted at the race, they just weren’t posted online until today.
great review, very detailed and well written. One thing I am thoroughly confused by is the charging spectators rant. I read all of your race reports and this is the first time I have heard of a complaint. You have reported on several Tough Mudder events in the past, TM charges $15-$40 (day of) and this anger has never been pointed in their (or anyone else)direction?
Confused……
So it’s ok for Tough Mudder to rape people just to watch, but no one else can? This review is terrible. I was at Rugged Maniac 2010 and can verify that Rugged Maniac 2011 was a whole ‘nother ball game. They took all the criticism that people were throwing at them last year and improved in every way. The course was bad ass and the after party was great. You can’t beat the ability to spectate, which was the only thing that Mary really got spot on in the above review.
I have kids and can really appreciate the fact that there was a free inflatable obstacle course that the money grabbers at Tough Mudder would have charged $5 per go-round for. I think the RM staff did a great job at bridging the gap between participants with families and the younger crowd. There was a little something for everyone.
First, I appreciate the feedback from runners who have competed in all of the different series: RM, Spartan, Tough Mudder, etc. Prior to this race, I had only participated in one obstacle race (the Urbanathlon) which is sans mud.
With the surge in popularity of these events I think it is important for folks to get an idea of what makes each series different. RM may be the best race for one group, Tough Mudder for another, Run Amuck or Down N Dity for others.
Second, when I mentioned the cover charge for spectators, I was decrying the practice INDUSTRY WIDE. I don’t think it is right for any race to do it, especially when they bill themselves as an all day party for your family and friends. Since I had not raced any of the other series prior to this review (and I try to be as objective as possible)it was an honest reaction to a practice that, I think, is unfair to the racer and their support team.
Finally, I am all about races that actually take feedback and USE it. Dave L, I am glad to hear that RM made drastic improvements from their first year. That’s progress and that’s good.
I think you have contradicted yourself a bit with your previous statement – over and over and over again.
I particularly like the use of CAPS. Please try to stay objective while reviewing. You have “decried” the practice of charging spectators, industry wide, but failed to take this into account when handing out your C-. Apparently also based on one swear laden song.
If you have only run an Urbanathalon, what “crowd” are you writing about? What are these grades based on? Shouldn’t grades be consistent across Travlete? You can’t compare a marathon to an obstacle run, or a 12 mile obstacle run to a 5K. Yet you do. Who is bigger and badder?
How can you give the course, which many experienced obstacle runners have identified as the best to date, in the region, for its class, a B, when you have never run a similar event/
Further, your timing discussion is ignorant and inconsistent with previous reviews. Many of these events don’t even provide timing, it is all about the experience. Even then, your standards seem to be based on marathon type events, where one group heads off together and finishes all at once… fairly quickly. These events have waves every half hour, they allow participants to change waves, and many cross the line sans bib. The event ends well into the evening and it seems to me that a Monday turnaround for a Saturday event is reasonable, as well as the norm … again, if timing is even provided.
There is no consistency here.
This could go on and on.
The atmosphere grade really gets me. You seem to ignore the fact that many similar runs don’t offer live music (let alone three great bands), or even a DJ at the start. You also ignore the thousands (literally thousands) of people who hung out all day, enjoying music and beer and food, and cheering so loud that it sounded like being in a baseball stadium. It was truly a unique race experience.
This is all contrasted against previous grades given by Travlete and there doesn’t appear to be any context here.
Perhaps I have been ranting and need to go for a run, but this review is completely arbitrary. I am sorry, it needed to be said.
For New England and NY obstacle course venues…
At first I was thrown off by the fact I had to pay for a spectator but when I arrived at the event the venue I realized it was well worth it. Participants and spectators were not charged for parking unlike other courses. No parking fees, Awesome! but lets not give them any ideas.
The set-up is different from Amesbury MA and Windham NY and is a spectator’s show. There are bleachers for seating and you are able to view almost all obstacles and cheer your family and friends on. It was a brilliant idea and I support the $10 spectator fee while children under 14 are free.
When I was a young man, I loved James Bond movies. Loved em. Much to my chagrin, no film reviewer of any note would ever give those films good reviews. Turns out, from the point of view of someone who takes film seriously, they weren’t very good films (although they were, indeed, great fun). I could have called the reviewers “ignorant” for not appreciating the finer points of the Bond genre, but then I would only be advertising my own ignorance. Having read all of Mary’s posts on Travlete, and as someone who knows good writing when he sees it, and quite a good deal about endurance events, I can tell that her take on these events is worthy of respect. I may disagree with a film reviewer whose cup of tea just isn’t James Bond, but I must respect him or her, at least, as a learned opinion.
In simpler terms, I think you (in particular Mr. Dobson) should tone it down. If you loved Rugged Maniac, or any other mud race for that matter, you ought to be able to disagree with the reviewer without saying things such as, “your timing discussion is ignorant.” It degrades us all, and frankly, assaults my senses as an intellectual. Furthermore, and again I refer to my earlier James Bond film analogy, the reviewer isn’t always going to be writing it from your perspective. You must take all reviews with a grain of salt. The purpose of them is hold events to a high standard, not to be the be all and end all, thumbs up or thumbs down for a particular event. Many great races get lackluster reviews, here and elsewhere. And many not so great ones get wonderful reviews.
By the way, if you haven’t read Mary’s posts on the Leadville 100, you should do so at your earliest convenience. They are charming and moving. Be prepared for tears.
My point is, if you are utilizing a grading system, there needs to be standards. A reviewer’s opinion is fine, but when set in the context of a website wide grading system, there needs to be some consistency. That does not exist here.
I didn’t personally run this race, but, accepting Mr. Dobson’s observations (not his tone or attacks), I think I get where he is coming from; inconsistent standards undermine the integrity of the grading system, not so much the review, which is, of course, the reviewer’s well deserved opinion.
Here is another analogy – Billy and Britney each take the same test. Billy gets 80 out of 100 questions right, Britney gets 90 questions right. The grading system employed by their school leaves it to the grader to determine what grade the student receives, as opposed to a conventional 80/100 = B-, or something of that nature. Nevertheless, the grades awarded carry the same weight on the students’ report cards. Billy’s and Britney’s tests are graded by different instructors. Billy’s instructor thinks 80 out of 100 is a great job and gives Billy an A. Britney’s instructor thinks 90 out of 100 is okay and probably worth a B. However, he is really annoyed that she didn’t get question # 32 right, because it was discussed in class (Billy also got this question wrong), and therefore he awards her a C as a final grade. When applying to college, Billy, who has an A on his report card, gets into Harvard, while Britney is rejected from every school to which she applies, despite being the superior student.
I thought the article was excellent. It gave a clear and concise view of the runner’s experience. For the record, I don’t run….EVER! I am a spectator and avid reader who happens to have been born and raised in Western Mass. For this reason, I know that on any given Saturday in the wonderful town of Southwick,MA you CAN find a beer, a band and a party. Mud just comes with the territory. The people of Southwick are a hardworking, lively bunch and know exactly how to blow off steam from a hard week of work. That’s how they roll. To Michael and Chris I say; Kudos! for the analogies and I “TOADULLY” get you. To Mr.Dobson I say: “DUDE??? IDK IGNORANT??? WAY HARSH!! You should come back to Southwick for a beer, a band and perhaps their bike trail it’s quite beautiful. Thanks to all for an enjoyable Saturday morning coffee. I look forward to our next adventure…P.A. I love my CAPS they’re like tiny exclamation points for my finger tips.
As a high school teacher, I can tell you that your analogy is excellent. Consistent grading standards are something we teachers are constantly striving to achieve. Nevertheless, it is nearly impossible to reach complete consensus, as individual teachers will be, well, individual. I can’t expect one reviewer, therefore, to be completely consistent with another.
Again, I refer to my earlier film reviewer analogy: I have often read two reviews of the same film in the same paper that completely contradicted each other. I think for this site to work well, we need to continue to have intelligent dialogue about the races reviewed here. Rather than waste our energies wondering why one reviewer hated that an event charged spectators and another didn’t mention it. Perhaps one reviewer brought someone to the race while the other did not, thereby never even learning of the policy in the first place. Instead, let’s discuss the policy. Let’s decide, as a community of people, if this charging of spectators is acceptable. If it is not, perhaps races will hear our disapproval, and maybe, just maybe, stop doing it.
Do we really want to dilute our democratic power by worrying over whether One reviewer is completely consistent with another?