That is simply not true.ranger wrote:...
Rowing well at low drag, I'll now pull 6:16.
You have not provided a shred of evidence to conclude otherwise.
That is simply not true.ranger wrote:...
Rowing well at low drag, I'll now pull 6:16.
Where's the screen shot, where's the IND_V ranked entry.ranger wrote:Rowing well at low drag, I'll now pull 6:16.
I won't need a screen shot or a ranked entry.Citroen wrote:Where's the screen shot, where's the IND_V ranked entry.
Sure.rjw wrote:That is simply not true.ranger wrote:...
Rowing well at low drag, I'll now pull 6:16.
You have not provided a shred of evidence to conclude otherwise.
Honestly, I don't think Roy has a hope in hell of beating Brian Bailey's 60s lwt WR.aharmer wrote:So one week before WIRC 2012, when we haven't seen your FM yet, what will the excuse be? I'd recommend we all go over to the UK site and follow Roy's blog to see a real pursuit of a WR.
6:50?! That is waaaaayyyyyyyy better than you and your 7:03!ranger wrote:
At 34 spm, 9.5 SPI is 6:50.
ranger
No, I would be a bitter old man who drinks a lot and lies about his training... oh wait, fait accompli.ranger wrote: I am pretty darn happy.
Wouldn't you be, if you were me?
That's not how you come across.ranger wrote: I am pretty darn happy.
I won't be there. Not that you'll do it anyway. You'll either DNS or DNF or haul anchor to a 7:02.ranger wrote:I won't need a screen shot or a ranked entry.Citroen wrote:Where's the screen shot, where's the IND_V ranked entry.
I'll row the 6:16 2K at WIRC 2012.
You can watch me do it.
Sorry?KevJGK wrote:That's not how you come across.ranger wrote: I am pretty darn happy.
Well, just preparing to race again won't be an "honest effort" this time.aharmer wrote:Roy will either break the record or he won't, but he'll give it an honest effort
In a word - NO!ranger - Mr. Happy wrote: So...
I am pretty darn happy.
Wouldn't you be, if you were me?