-1
Out-and-Back Routes Are Better Than Loops for Long Runs. Prove Me Wrong. | Runner's World
(www.runnersworld.com)
this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
-1 points (33.3% liked)
Running
3087 readers
9 users here now
A place for runners.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah just this weekend Brisbane had the Bridge to Brisbane, from the southern end of the Gateway Bridge in the east, up over the (very tall) bridge, then straight along the river to just outside the CBD. Previously (from 2014 to 2020, I think?) it was a circuitous route from just northwest of the CBD up and down across various bridges in the CBD vicinity, finishing directly south of it.
Most races start and finish in the same place because it's logistically easier, and it's a good way to automatically be recognised as eligible for records and official PBs, since rules for road races included a maximum distance between start and end points equal to half the length of the total race, and a maximum altitude decrease of 0.1%. So often it's only "fun runs" like Bridge to Brisbane, Adelaide's City to Bay, and Sydney's City to Surf (no offence Adelaide, but that's just a better name than yours) that are point to point.
I'd argue Adelaide's is better because it is an actual place-to-place name, as opposed to Sydney's which is just made up AFAIK. But I am very biased!
I'm a sucker for alliteration, what can I say.
But I guess that makes Bridge to Brisbane the perfect name. It's alliterative and describes exactly what the race is (in its new and old-old form…the old-new route was a much better route, but a less accurate name).