don't like that lah...u can do better with some competition.Originally posted by spencer99:fastest time is 9:52. Last year 10:12... scared this year will be slower....![]()
Originally posted by SGpork:kops..
how come u nv post ur timing ?![]()
![]()
![]()
Old man leow lah, no point talking about the past.Originally posted by SGpork:kops..
how come u nv post ur timing ?![]()
![]()
![]()
now ??Originally posted by kops21:Old man leow lah, no point talking about the past.
I should be good around 10:30 currently.
long distance pace is slower whereas 2.4km should be consider short or middle distance(depending on the definition) and require faster acceleration.Originally posted by SGpork:now ??
u dont run 2.4 meh?
oh u only do..long dist?
2.4 no kick for u right...![]()
![]()
![]()
i guess you dont exercise much nowadays.Originally posted by Eragon:6.12min? well can be done. if u r a marathon runner.
me 9.40min best.
now? fail fail fail!!!
y do u think marathon runners can do 6mins12sec??? Even local top marathoners like Elangovan and Khoo chin poo can't do that...Originally posted by Eragon:6.12min? well can be done. if u r a marathon runner.
me 9.40min best.
now? fail fail fail!!!
u kwn them?Originally posted by redheaded:y do u think marathon runners can do 6mins12sec??? Even local top marathoners like Elangovan and Khoo chin poo can't do that...
khoo chin poo onlyOriginally posted by Eragon:u kwn them?
oic..Originally posted by kops21:long distance pace is slower whereas 2.4km should be consider short or middle distance(depending on the definition) and require faster acceleration.
my timing isn't anything to proud about for 2.4km, i should be able to get the timing down for 2.4km below 10mins within the next 2 months.