...well...one thing and one list really, or, if you really want to break it down, one thing and a list of four things, making five things, but let's not get too picky here. Things.
So, yesterday at 10:30am, I walked out of the last Cambridge exam that I will ever have to do in my life (barring any unhappy accident whereby I end up doing a PhD). Although you'd think this would be occasion for much celebration and alcohol abuse of the highest order, this particular Cambridge degree has the sting in the tail of a behemoth of a project write up to it (my estimated report will be ~16000 words and 50 pages long), which means that the end of exams isn't really the end, unfortunately.
Putting that to one side though, it is quite a relief to be done with exams at least. I've worked very hard; the final push for the final exams for the final year of my degree, and hopefully the results will reflect that. It was amusing in a way to read back on some of my old blog posts, posted in the face of impending A-Levels, where I was lamenting the amount of work I had to do. I can scarcely imagine what my past self would have been like had he been witness to the weeks of library sessions that I did this time round.
Anyway, I worked hard, and I'm proud of it.
Obviously, a lot of this time was spent in the library, and although extended stints of the library are not something that is new to me, it's the first time that I've found some things that consistently annoyed me during my study sessions (I must be getting old).
Because of this, I've put together a list of four things that made me irate in the library:
1) People who talk directly outside the library windows. No, they aren't soundproof (design fail), yes, I can hear you. And yes, it is bloody annoying when I'm trying to do math and all I can hear is someone lamenting how drunk they were the previous night.
2) Keyboard Pianists. There are computers provided in the quiet areas so you can look stuff up on the internet. This does not mean writing an essay on them, or using them to fire off long-ass e-mails every five minutes (go to the computer room to do that, seriously...). I mean, the fact that they've even been fitted with extra quiet keyboards does not seem to have registered with these wanton scoundrels, who fill the entire room with the incessant drumming of their keyboard keys. It was like having a swarm of flies hitting me in the head with tiny hammers.
3) Rhythmic Sniffling. You know the sort, someone obviously has a bit of a runny nose, but instead of using tissue to sort it out, they instead rely on the big sniff. Unbelievably distracting as, of course, it is not a one time event. In fact, I have realised that sniffs occur with great regularity and at quite a well defined period, dependant on the amplitude of the previous sniff. This made it hard to concentrate because I was always expectantly looking forward to when the next sniff would occur, and when it inevitably did, whatever chain of thought I had was inevitably broken by a raging desire to shout at the offender to blow their effing nose.
4) Darth Vader Syndrome. These people obviously haven't had their legs chopped off by a lightsaber and then set on fire by a nearby lava flow before being put in a suit with an assisted breathing device, so why the hell do they sound like they have? During the last few days before exams, I shared a study room with one of this kind. "You will not pass Tripos," his breaths intoned, with a touch of sith-like sibilance. Well, not with you sounding like an ox with asthma I won't.
Showing posts with label cambridge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cambridge. Show all posts
14 May 2011
18 March 2011
The Lent Term Experiment: Week 8!
Week 8 finally ended on Wednesday.
So, that's it.
I'm officially done Learning Stuff. No more lectures as an undergraduate left. It's now just my project and exams to go (five of them to be precise).
The first of my exams will be startng on the 2nd May, around 6 weeks from now. It's an odd feeling, knowing that it will all be coming to an end in a few months. Right now though, it's a sort of distant thought on the horizon, not something to be considered too deeply in light of all the Tripos goodness that awaits me first.
The fact that Week 8 comes to an end also brings to an end my time keeping experiment.
Personally, it has been quite interesting for me. I have discovered that I sleep a lot more than I thought I do - however it could just be an artifact of that fact that I am a 4th year, and thus old by Uni standards. Old people need their sleep, okay?
I have also discovered that I spend a lot of time procrastinating - not that I didn't know that already, but to quantify it is a little eye opening. However, it has also been revealed that I do put in a reasonable amount of consistent work throughout - which is good, although it was by far not enough given that I am yet to do any examples questions from the latter half of the four courses I am taking this term.
I've been told that this is not uncommon for 4th Years, but whether it is or not, I am not going to worry about it too much, and instead I'm taking solace in the fact that my project is going well and that in the last meeting, my supervisor got so excited by the latest batch of results that he idly suggested that I should write a paper on it and get it published.
Cue incredulous "Are you joking?" look.
Apparently he wasn't: cue one boggled undergraduate mind (as if the degree wasn't enough).
It doesn't seem right to even suggest something like that to me. I mean, writing papers and stuff are for those academics who live on a different plane of existence and have IQ's far higher than mine. For me, it's crazy talk! Although, I have to admit that the idea of having a published paper under my name does tickle my intellectual ego somewhat.
Anyway, self aggrandising diversion aside (I'm allowed to talk myself up okay? It's MY blog!), I decided for the final week to have a look at some total stats which were interesting to me.
Total Productive Work Time: 259 hours (average of ~30 hours per week)
Total Sleep: 480 hours (average of ~8 hours per day)
Total Procrastination: 82 hours (average of 9.5 hours per week, or ~1.4 hours a day)
Procrastination took up 24% of my work time, this figure is probably a little higher in reality, but it's still quite a lot!
It also appears I spend on average 3.8 hours per day not really doing much of anything. This is probably not true - some of this time is probably more accurately labelled as procrastination, although I know do tend to spend ~2 hours eating dinner and ~1 hour on lunch most days, along with showering and cycling to places etc, so maybe that figure is quite representative.
If you are wondering what that massive spike of Free Time in the final week was all about, it was because I went to the Yonex All England Badminton Championships - a whole weekend of nothing but (mostly) guilt free watching of international Badminton, and cheering myself hoarse for China. Fun times.
In the first post of this series, I said I hoped it would enlighten people as to how much time the degree takes out of your life, and well, given that I have worked (or attempted to work) ~40 hours per week on average, and am still far far behind on things, the conclusion can only be "a lot".
Anyway, I hope you have enjoyed this series of posts, or at least found them mildly entertaining, or maybe just found them as something to read to procrastinate with, it's why I write this blog after all!
Peace out for now!
So, that's it.
I'm officially done Learning Stuff. No more lectures as an undergraduate left. It's now just my project and exams to go (five of them to be precise).
The first of my exams will be startng on the 2nd May, around 6 weeks from now. It's an odd feeling, knowing that it will all be coming to an end in a few months. Right now though, it's a sort of distant thought on the horizon, not something to be considered too deeply in light of all the Tripos goodness that awaits me first.
The fact that Week 8 comes to an end also brings to an end my time keeping experiment.
Personally, it has been quite interesting for me. I have discovered that I sleep a lot more than I thought I do - however it could just be an artifact of that fact that I am a 4th year, and thus old by Uni standards. Old people need their sleep, okay?
I have also discovered that I spend a lot of time procrastinating - not that I didn't know that already, but to quantify it is a little eye opening. However, it has also been revealed that I do put in a reasonable amount of consistent work throughout - which is good, although it was by far not enough given that I am yet to do any examples questions from the latter half of the four courses I am taking this term.
I've been told that this is not uncommon for 4th Years, but whether it is or not, I am not going to worry about it too much, and instead I'm taking solace in the fact that my project is going well and that in the last meeting, my supervisor got so excited by the latest batch of results that he idly suggested that I should write a paper on it and get it published.
Cue incredulous "Are you joking?" look.
Apparently he wasn't: cue one boggled undergraduate mind (as if the degree wasn't enough).
It doesn't seem right to even suggest something like that to me. I mean, writing papers and stuff are for those academics who live on a different plane of existence and have IQ's far higher than mine. For me, it's crazy talk! Although, I have to admit that the idea of having a published paper under my name does tickle my intellectual ego somewhat.
Anyway, self aggrandising diversion aside (I'm allowed to talk myself up okay? It's MY blog!), I decided for the final week to have a look at some total stats which were interesting to me.
Total Productive Work Time: 259 hours (average of ~30 hours per week)
Total Sleep: 480 hours (average of ~8 hours per day)
Total Procrastination: 82 hours (average of 9.5 hours per week, or ~1.4 hours a day)
Procrastination took up 24% of my work time, this figure is probably a little higher in reality, but it's still quite a lot!
It also appears I spend on average 3.8 hours per day not really doing much of anything. This is probably not true - some of this time is probably more accurately labelled as procrastination, although I know do tend to spend ~2 hours eating dinner and ~1 hour on lunch most days, along with showering and cycling to places etc, so maybe that figure is quite representative.
 | |
| Pie Chart showing time breakdown. |
 |
| The complete 8 week timeline. |
In the first post of this series, I said I hoped it would enlighten people as to how much time the degree takes out of your life, and well, given that I have worked (or attempted to work) ~40 hours per week on average, and am still far far behind on things, the conclusion can only be "a lot".
Anyway, I hope you have enjoyed this series of posts, or at least found them mildly entertaining, or maybe just found them as something to read to procrastinate with, it's why I write this blog after all!
Peace out for now!
11 March 2011
The Lent Term Experiment: Week 7
Apologies, this is a day late again.
Firstly, my thoughts and prayers go to those who have been affected by the earthquake off the coast of Japan, and I wish them the very best in dealing with this huge disaster that has befallen them.
This week, I have been busy getting frustrated by Computational Fluid Dynamics, or rather, the excessive amount of time it takes to do it.
Expectations for computers have changed a lot over the last decade or so - in the early 2000's, it was pretty much expected that if you wanted to view a picture, you'd need to wait for a few minutes. Streaming movies? Don't even think about it.
Nowadays though, our expectation for computer response is that it should be instantaneous. If a website takes over a few seconds to load, people complain at it being slow. Think about that for a (slow) second.
How does this relate to CFD and frustration? Well, as it so happens, CFD is very slow. This is because simulating air, believe it or not, is actually pretty difficult and as such hogs an inordinate amount of computer time. We use local workstations with 24 Gb of RAM and the Intel High Performance Cluster in Swindon which has 384 Gb of RAM on tap, as well as the latest Xeon 64-bit processors, and yet our mesh generation still takes anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes, and a complete set of iterations to reach a solution anywhere from 3 to 5 hours.
This is mildly frustrating, because the meshing program we use is powerful, and thus by the inverse relationship governing how Powerful a program is versus how User Friendly it is, it is not particularly user friendly. For example, there is no undo button; if you mess something up, be prepared to either reload a previous save, or to travel in a roundabout way to fix your mistake.
Also, if you make a mistake in say, Excel, it will usually take a few seconds to fix (even without the use of an undo button). If you make a mistake here, it could be one which sends the computer into it's own little happy world of number crunching for a LONG TIME, and you as the user will be left stranded, staring at a non-responsive screen, for however long it takes. Clicking the wrong button can feel like writing a deliciously dirty text to your significant other, and then realising it's been sent to your mum.
Anyway...here is the week 7 graph.
Firstly, my thoughts and prayers go to those who have been affected by the earthquake off the coast of Japan, and I wish them the very best in dealing with this huge disaster that has befallen them.
This week, I have been busy getting frustrated by Computational Fluid Dynamics, or rather, the excessive amount of time it takes to do it.
Expectations for computers have changed a lot over the last decade or so - in the early 2000's, it was pretty much expected that if you wanted to view a picture, you'd need to wait for a few minutes. Streaming movies? Don't even think about it.
Nowadays though, our expectation for computer response is that it should be instantaneous. If a website takes over a few seconds to load, people complain at it being slow. Think about that for a (slow) second.
How does this relate to CFD and frustration? Well, as it so happens, CFD is very slow. This is because simulating air, believe it or not, is actually pretty difficult and as such hogs an inordinate amount of computer time. We use local workstations with 24 Gb of RAM and the Intel High Performance Cluster in Swindon which has 384 Gb of RAM on tap, as well as the latest Xeon 64-bit processors, and yet our mesh generation still takes anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes, and a complete set of iterations to reach a solution anywhere from 3 to 5 hours.
This is mildly frustrating, because the meshing program we use is powerful, and thus by the inverse relationship governing how Powerful a program is versus how User Friendly it is, it is not particularly user friendly. For example, there is no undo button; if you mess something up, be prepared to either reload a previous save, or to travel in a roundabout way to fix your mistake.
Also, if you make a mistake in say, Excel, it will usually take a few seconds to fix (even without the use of an undo button). If you make a mistake here, it could be one which sends the computer into it's own little happy world of number crunching for a LONG TIME, and you as the user will be left stranded, staring at a non-responsive screen, for however long it takes. Clicking the wrong button can feel like writing a deliciously dirty text to your significant other, and then realising it's been sent to your mum.
Anyway...here is the week 7 graph.
8 March 2011
The Varsity Report
Warning: This is a long one, you might want to bring some food and drink for the ride, and perhaps a tent.
26th February 2011.
On this date, a most epic of confrontations was confronted by the confrontational Badminton teams of Oxford and Cambridge, for it was the date of the Badminton Varsity.
The day kicked off at 9.30am, as the doors to The Perse Sports hall was opened and the competitors flooded in. Setup work began, with the nets being put up, and the banners and scorecards. A buzz of nervous tension flooded the atmosphere - the anticipated day had finally come, and all the players were raring to go, eager to prove themselves and grab glory for their University on the courts.
For those unfamiliar with the format of Varsity Badminton (which will be most of you, I imagine), it is as follows:
Each team comprises of 6 players. Each of the players plays one match against their opposite number in singles. The 6 players will then form 2 doubles pairs. All the doubles pairs will play each other. This results in the final score for each team comprising 6 singles matches and 9 doubles matches. Each match is played as a best of 3 ends, to 21 points. The overall victor is determined by totalling the score of the 1st and 2nd teams. The 3rd team results do not count.
The 3rd team, captained by Tom Beaumont, began with an exceedingly strong showing. Eric Lai of Cambridge took down his opposition Ben Morgan 21-17, 21-9 to secure the first win for Cambridge. This appeared to open the floodgates for the light blues, as Tongtong Zhu and Tomoki Otani followed it up with straight set wins against their Oxford opposition.
However, the Oxford men rallied, and the remaining 3 singles was more of a close fought affair. Tim Barendt of Oxford took the first end off Chris Kassam of Cambridge 21-15, however, the experienced PhD student, displaying nerves of steel and a level head, bounced back to take the next two 21-11 and 21-12. Next up was David Cheuk of Cambridge, who started poorly and dropped the first end 17-21. However, like Chris, he bounced back to win the next two 21-12, 21-12. This put the overall score at 5-0 in favour of Cambridge.
Tom Beaumont stepped on court, hoping to make it a clean sweep for Cambridge in the singles. However, his Oxford opposition, Bao Yiyang had different plans in mind. A closely contested first end ended up 14-21 in Oxford's favour. Tom then recovered in the second end to take it 21-17, setting up yet another rubber. Unfortunately, Tom was unable to keep his composure and consistency and Bao romped away to a 21-10 victory, securing one point for Oxford.
With the singles over, the doubles started in earnest. Oxford, rejuvenated by Bao's win, began to play with fury, and this made for some exceedingly close games. Of the 9 doubles matches, 6 of them went to three ends. Commendations must go to Tom Beaumont and Tomoki Otani, who took all three of their doubles matches - a clean sweep!
Although Oxford pushed Cambridge close, the majority of the games still went to Cambridge, and after the play was done, the final score stood at Cambridge 12, Oxford 3. A triumphant victory for the light blues.
In the opposite half of the hall, the Women's matches were taking place, starting off with the 2nd team.
This marked the first time since 2004 that the Women's 2nds had lost to Oxford.
The Women's 1st team then stepped on court. Although the squad had suffered from the graduation of two of it's top seeds, the players were determined to do their best and retain the title for Cambridge.
Sammy Jones gave Cambridge something to cheer for straight off the bat, by winning a rather epic first singles game. She came back strongly after dropping the first end to win 13-21, 22-20, 21-17. Mary Wang, the 5th position player, took an assured 21-14, 21-19 win to move Cambridge 2-0 up.
However, the run of good results would not continue, with Laura Birkinshaw-Miller struggling to find form against Rachel Kenny of Oxford, losing 18-21, 16-21.
Ploy Achakulwisut, the 3rd seeded Cambridge player started off positively, looking to prevent Oxford from drawing level. She played well against Ishani Khazanchi of Oxford to take the first set 21-15. However, the dark blue competitor was not phased, and outmanoeuvred Ploy to take the second set 11-21. The 3rd set was a closely matched affair for most of the way through, however, the Oxford player's composure could not be broken, and she took the 3rd end 14-21.
The overall score now stood at 2 apiece.
Katie Scotter started off strongly against Sarah Finch, Oxford's 2nd seed. Unfortunately, she could not quite manage to grab the first end, losing it in a closely fought 18-21. Sarah Finch, buoyed by her success, romped home to take the second end 21-10.
Emily James, top seed for Cambridge, struggled badly with nerves. The tenseness hampered her movement and shots and she was unable to provide a challenge for Simone Finkmann of Oxford, who breezed the match 21-6, 21-10 to put Oxford 4-2 in the lead after all the singles had been played.
The doubles was a much more positive affair for Cambridge.
The 3rd pair, Sammy Jones and Ploy Achakulwist, managed to push Oxford's 1st pair very close in their first game, however, could not maintain the intensity in the 2nd, and lost 21-23, 6-21. However, they took heart in their strong performance and carried that into their second match against Oxford's 2nd pair. The light blue pairing took a closely fought first game 21-19, the second game was even more well matched, with no pair having the advantage at any point in the game, however, the dark blues managed to squeak through 24-22. The Cambridge pairing started off the 3rd end badly, trailing 8-14 at one point, however, they managed to find their form again, and clawed their way back to win 21-18 in thrilling fashion. Their energy spent, they found Oxford's 3rd pair a challenge to play, and lost in straight sets.
Laura Birkinshaw-Miller and Katie Scotter were Cambridge's veteran 2nd pairing, having played with one another for a number of years now. In their first match, they took an assured and confident win against Oxford's 3rd pairing, 21-15 and 21-17.
They then became embroiled in a series of gruelling 3 setters.
Against Oxford's 2nd pairing, they lost the first game 19-21, after some fierce rallies which they could not close out, however, this did not affect their composure and they took the second game 21-17. Going into the decider however, the Cambridge pair hit a rough spot in their form and could not recover, leading Oxford to win 8-21; a disappointing result.
They then went against Oxford's 1st pairing, and lost the first game 9-21. However, they managed to re-focus and picked up their game to dominate the second game 21-13 to set up another rubber. The decider was a nervy affair at the start, however, as the score progressed towards the business end of the match, the Cambridge pair began to play increasingly better, and edged out their opposition to win 21-16.
The Cambridge first pair of Emily James and Mary Wang were a fresh pairing, and as such were relatively inexperienced compared to Oxford's offerings, some of whom had been playing together for years. This showed in their matches, as they struggled to convert defense into attack, which put them on the back foot in a lot of rallies. This saw them lose against the Oxford 1st pair 16-21, 16-21, and then against the 2nd pair 21-19, 19-21, 16-21. However, after a tense and nervous fight in the first game against Oxford's 3rd pair, they took the match 26-24, 21-10 to give Cambridge another point.
At the end of play, the scores stood at Oxford 9, Cambridge 6, leaving a delighted Oxford women's team to celebrate breaking the stranglehold which Cambridge women had held since 2003.
With only the Men's 1sts left to play, the scores stood at Cambridge 27, Oxford 18. This meant that in order to claim the overall Varsity victory, the men would only need to win 4 matches of a possible 15. This would be no mean feat to achieve however, as the Cambridge team had been convincingly thrashed 14-1 in the previous Varsity. However, with a new year came a shuffling of the teams as players joined and left, and this year the Cambridge men were hopeful, after training hard in the weeks leading up Varsity, of performing well and achieving a creditable score.
The singles began with Ben Watson representing Cambridge against Mike Senior of Oxford. Ben was hampered by jangling nerves, however, managed to play himself through them and took the first end 23-21. After getting a game under his belt, he then went on to take the second end 21-14, getting Cambridge off to a great start.
Next up was George Zhao, the 5th singles player, playing against David Williams of Oxford. There was history between the two opponents, with both having trained and played together for the same county for a number of years, before moving to their respective Universities. In their previous competitive match-ups, George had never managed to take the win from David. Today, he hoped to break that duck.
The first set was a tense affair, as both players struggled to find form with a lot of unforced errors. However, George fought through his nerves to take the first game 21-16. David came back strongly in the second set, and the score was neck and neck the whole way through. The scores reached 20-20, with neither opponent being able to open a gap until five points later, when George finally managed to secure the second game 25-23.
This put Cambridge up 2 points, leaving the team needing only two more to take the Overall victory.
James Li was up next, against the Oxford captain, Christopher Lim. Both players settled in quickly and the result was a dynamic and fast paced game which saw plenty of deceptive and attacking play. However, James could not quite keep pace with the deception of his opponent and lost in two closely contested sets 18-21, 18-21.
Samuel Pickup, Cambridge's 3rd singles player, stepped up next, facing off against Russell Kueh of Oxford. Sam capitalised on early errors from his opposition to take the first set 21-19. However, Russell bounced back in the second set 21-18. Going into the 3rd, there was nothing to tell between the two players, Sam found holes in Russell's net play, whilst Russell employed fast attacking smashes down the lines to pick up his points. In the end, Sam's defense was unable to hold, and Russell took the 3rd end 21-18, closing out a great match and denying Cambridge the chance to creep closer to the overall victory.
Amit Alleck then faced Alistair Reed. The two players had similar playstyles and both played fantastic Badminton, in what was probably one of the best singles matches of the day. However, Amit found himself unable to break the consistent play of Alistair and lost in two thrilling sets 19-21, 15-21.
Chin Kiat Tan then faced James Buffham, and quickly found himself outplayed in all quarters by the Oxford top seed, who had previously been in the England development squad. The result was foregone conclusion, with Oxford winning 21-10, 21-14.
The doubles began, with Cambridge hunting for the final two points that would give them the Overall victory.
Amit Alleck and Chin Kiat Tan opened up for Cambridge, however, the two were a fresh pairing and were still relatively inexperienced in the art of doubles play. The Oxford pairs, as soon as they recognised this, exploited this fact to win comfortably, by being patient and moving the Cambridge pair out of position by well placed counter attacks, and then exploiting the subsequent holes to finish the rallies.
James Li and George Zhao, now a veteran pair of 3 years, were the 2nd pair for Cambridge. They started off slowly, losing to the Oxford 3rd pair in straight sets - 15-21, 16-21.
This was a disappointing start for them, however, they stayed focused for the remaining matches. Against the Oxford 2nd pair of Christopher Lim and Alistair Reed, they again did not manage to get the best of starts, and dropped the first game 21-16. However, the light blue pairing came out all guns blazing and forced Oxford to yield 21-12 in the second set. The 3rd set began in a tense fashion, with both sides getting off to a slow start. However, George Zhao made a string of mistakes which gave Oxford the lead, and they kept that until the end of the match, closing out the 3rd end 21-16.
Against Oxford's 1st pair, George and James again started off slowly, and struggled with getting on the offensive. They dropped the first set 16-21. However, in the 2nd game, they tried some different strategies which put them on a level footing with the Oxford pairing of James Buffham and David Williams. The rallies were fierce and fast as both sides liked to play a very flat and attacking game. James and George focused their attacking efforts on David, as they discovered he had a slightly patchy defense. After an intense game of high quality Badminton, they took the second set by the slim margin of 25-23. The 3rd set became a psychological battle more than anything, as the players struggled to maintain focus and intensity. The two pairs were neck and neck until the scores began to creep past the 15 all mark. Then, the Oxford pair put in a concentrated attack and managed to pull away, leaving the Cambridge pair with no answer, eventually losing 16-21 in the 3rd.
The scores were now 29 - 28 in favour of Cambridge, as the Oxford Men's 1st team showed again their dominating doubles play. Cambridge's hopes now rested on the first pair of Ben Watson and Sam Pickup. They began strongly, playing with controlled aggression and perfect placement of defensive shots, allowing them to take Russell Kueh and Mike Senior, Oxford's 3rd pair, in straight sets 21-17, 21-13. This put the scores at Cambridge 30, Oxford 28.
If Oxford won the next two matches, then Varsity would have to be decided by game difference.
They played next against Oxford's second pair, Christopher Lim and Alistair Reed. In the first game, the intensity of Oxford's play caught the Cambridge pair a little off guard, and Oxford sported a very solid defence which Sam and Ben found very hard to break. This led them to lose in a closely fought set 18-21.
In the 2nd set they changed up their strategy, and fought much harder for control of the net. This proved to be a great tactical move, as it put pressure on Oxford's lifts and netplay, with the result being many easy net kills and many lifts which Oxford forced long and wide, handing the next set to Cambridge with a convincing score of 21-11.
Going into the decider, there was everything to play for. Both pairs threw themselves into the fray, feeding on the energy of the moment and playing some thrilling Men's doubles, Ben provided big smashes from the back court and Sam was lightning quick at the net, setting up the attack neatly and also darting in to make decisive kills. As the scores neared the 19 mark, there was still nothing to seperate the pairs by. Finally, at 19 apiece, Ben and Sam broke free of their opposition, and scored two quick points in succession to take the decider 21-19.
This meant that Cambridge had reached the magical 31, and had claimed the overall victory!
In the final match, Ben and Sam faced off against Oxford's 1st pair of James and David, and were beaten soundly 18-21, 14-21, unable as they were to regain the intensity of and focus of their previous match.
Overall, a fantastic day of Badminton was played by all, with ups and downs and plenty of thrilling matches for the spectators to enjoy. Cambridge reclaimed the overall win from Oxford by the slenderest of margins, as the final score stood at 31-29, and this concludes the Varsity report.
All there is left to say in closing is:
26th February 2011.
On this date, a most epic of confrontations was confronted by the confrontational Badminton teams of Oxford and Cambridge, for it was the date of the Badminton Varsity.
The day kicked off at 9.30am, as the doors to The Perse Sports hall was opened and the competitors flooded in. Setup work began, with the nets being put up, and the banners and scorecards. A buzz of nervous tension flooded the atmosphere - the anticipated day had finally come, and all the players were raring to go, eager to prove themselves and grab glory for their University on the courts.
For those unfamiliar with the format of Varsity Badminton (which will be most of you, I imagine), it is as follows:
Each team comprises of 6 players. Each of the players plays one match against their opposite number in singles. The 6 players will then form 2 doubles pairs. All the doubles pairs will play each other. This results in the final score for each team comprising 6 singles matches and 9 doubles matches. Each match is played as a best of 3 ends, to 21 points. The overall victor is determined by totalling the score of the 1st and 2nd teams. The 3rd team results do not count.
The 3rd team, captained by Tom Beaumont, began with an exceedingly strong showing. Eric Lai of Cambridge took down his opposition Ben Morgan 21-17, 21-9 to secure the first win for Cambridge. This appeared to open the floodgates for the light blues, as Tongtong Zhu and Tomoki Otani followed it up with straight set wins against their Oxford opposition.
However, the Oxford men rallied, and the remaining 3 singles was more of a close fought affair. Tim Barendt of Oxford took the first end off Chris Kassam of Cambridge 21-15, however, the experienced PhD student, displaying nerves of steel and a level head, bounced back to take the next two 21-11 and 21-12. Next up was David Cheuk of Cambridge, who started poorly and dropped the first end 17-21. However, like Chris, he bounced back to win the next two 21-12, 21-12. This put the overall score at 5-0 in favour of Cambridge.
Tom Beaumont stepped on court, hoping to make it a clean sweep for Cambridge in the singles. However, his Oxford opposition, Bao Yiyang had different plans in mind. A closely contested first end ended up 14-21 in Oxford's favour. Tom then recovered in the second end to take it 21-17, setting up yet another rubber. Unfortunately, Tom was unable to keep his composure and consistency and Bao romped away to a 21-10 victory, securing one point for Oxford.
David Cheuk in flight.
With the singles over, the doubles started in earnest. Oxford, rejuvenated by Bao's win, began to play with fury, and this made for some exceedingly close games. Of the 9 doubles matches, 6 of them went to three ends. Commendations must go to Tom Beaumont and Tomoki Otani, who took all three of their doubles matches - a clean sweep!
Chris goes up for a smash! Tongtong at the net.
Eric and David have a tactical discussion at the interval.
Although Oxford pushed Cambridge close, the majority of the games still went to Cambridge, and after the play was done, the final score stood at Cambridge 12, Oxford 3. A triumphant victory for the light blues.
Tom laments a mistake.
Tomoki laments Tom's mistake. ;)
Attention now shifted to the 2nd team matches, which began to rage on the courts of the Perse School. A big win was predicted by Phil Bao, the 2nd team Captain. However, this prediction had been met with much skepticism, given the historical strength of the Oxford Men's squad.
 |
| Clockwise from Top Left: Balint Gal, Phil Bao (captain), Roger Yin, Chin Lik Tan, Hung Duong, Haixi Yan |
However, history proved to be just that - history, as the singles games got underway. Hung Duong took a confident 21-11, 21-17 win for Cambridge, notching up the first point for the 2nd team. Haixi Yan, the 5th singles player, struggled with nerves and ended up dropping the first game 18-21. However, after a little coaching and calming down, went on to easily win the next two ends 21-15, 21-8. The next three singles were easy straight set affairs for Chin Lik Tan, Phil Bao and Balint Gal.
 | |
| Hung takes the first point for Cambridge! |
 |
| Haixi Yan fighting hard. |
Finally, Roger Yin, playing as the number one singles player for the Cambridge second team, stepped on court to face Keshav Nahar of Oxford. Roger's nerves got the better of him, and he struggled with length and consistency, and as a result fell to the Oxford player 16-21, 9-21.
 |
| Roger Yin. |
Despite this disappointing loss, Cambridge were still 5-1 up going into the doubles.
It appeared that the Oxford Men's seconds had had their expectations turned upside down, and they were struggling to cope with the intense and aggressive Cambridge play. This manifested itself in a complete rout for the dark blues in the doubles, as they lost all of them. Cambridge took 8 of the 9 doubles in straight set victories, and finally, after a gruelling 3 ender which went all the way, Chin Lik Tan and Hung Duong perservered against Clinton Lau and Keshav Nahar to secure the final match 21-17, 19-21, 22-20.
 |
| Phil Bao in full flight. Balint Gal looking for the net kill. Oxford on the defensive. |
The final result for the men's seconds stood at Cambridge 14, Oxford 1. A huge result for Cambridge, and vindication for Phil Bao, whose faith in his team was rewarded in full, as the result was the best the 2nd team had had since 2002.
In the opposite half of the hall, the Women's matches were taking place, starting off with the 2nd team.
 |
| Left to Right: Annie He, Sophie Wu, Sarath Latham, Jo Brant, Jessie Ke, Jennifer Li |
The Women’s 2nds match was perhaps the most closely contested one of Varsity. Jennifer Li made a promising start for Cambridge, after taking her singles in a gruelling 3 ends. Sophie Wu and Sarah Latham unfortunately could not quite match up to their Oxford counterparts, and lost in straight sets. Next up was Jessie Ke, who provided another win for Cambridge after another gritty and hard fought 3 setter. Annie He stepped up to the plate next, and again could not quite match up against the Oxford offering, falling short in straight sets. Finally, Jo Brant, the Captain, finished off the singles with a convincing 21-17, 21-18 win for Cambridge against the number one Oxford player, Clara Ng.
 |
| Jennifer Li. |
After the singles were played, the scores stood level at 3-3.
Things were equally close in the doubles, as Jo Brant and Sarah Latham lost against the Oxford 1st pair in straight sets, won against the 2nd pair in straight sets, and then proceeded to fight the 3rd pair in a nailbiting 3 setter of a game which unfortunately saw Oxford triumph.
 |
| Sarah Latham and Jo Brant in action! |
Jennifer Li and Jessie Ke took two of their matches in straight sets, but were unable to make an impression on the Oxford 1st pair, losing in straight sets.
 |
| Flying Jessie. |
Annie He and Sophie Wu lost against the Oxford 1st pair, but managed to push them to three sets. They then took a closely fought game against the 2nd pair. This meant that the score for the Women’s 2nds stood at 7-7 as they went into their final match.
 |
| Annie He (left), Sophie Wu (right). |
Cambridge took the first set convincingly, winning 21-18. However, Oxford came back strongly in the second, to take it 21-11. Annie and Sophie tried to regroup and fight back in the deciding end, however, the Oxford pair had gathered too much momentum and could not be stopped. They took the match, claiming a narrow 8-7 victory for the Oxford Women 2nds.
This marked the first time since 2004 that the Women's 2nds had lost to Oxford.
The Women's 1st team then stepped on court. Although the squad had suffered from the graduation of two of it's top seeds, the players were determined to do their best and retain the title for Cambridge.
 |
| Left to Right: Mary Wang, Sammy Jones, Emily James (Captain), Ploy Achakulwisut, Katie Scotter, Laura Birkinshaw-Miller |
 |
| Mary Wang in action! |
Ploy Achakulwisut, the 3rd seeded Cambridge player started off positively, looking to prevent Oxford from drawing level. She played well against Ishani Khazanchi of Oxford to take the first set 21-15. However, the dark blue competitor was not phased, and outmanoeuvred Ploy to take the second set 11-21. The 3rd set was a closely matched affair for most of the way through, however, the Oxford player's composure could not be broken, and she took the 3rd end 14-21.
 |
| Ploy! |
The overall score now stood at 2 apiece.
Katie Scotter started off strongly against Sarah Finch, Oxford's 2nd seed. Unfortunately, she could not quite manage to grab the first end, losing it in a closely fought 18-21. Sarah Finch, buoyed by her success, romped home to take the second end 21-10.
 |
| Katie Scotter clears. |
Emily James, top seed for Cambridge, struggled badly with nerves. The tenseness hampered her movement and shots and she was unable to provide a challenge for Simone Finkmann of Oxford, who breezed the match 21-6, 21-10 to put Oxford 4-2 in the lead after all the singles had been played.
The doubles was a much more positive affair for Cambridge.
The 3rd pair, Sammy Jones and Ploy Achakulwist, managed to push Oxford's 1st pair very close in their first game, however, could not maintain the intensity in the 2nd, and lost 21-23, 6-21. However, they took heart in their strong performance and carried that into their second match against Oxford's 2nd pair. The light blue pairing took a closely fought first game 21-19, the second game was even more well matched, with no pair having the advantage at any point in the game, however, the dark blues managed to squeak through 24-22. The Cambridge pairing started off the 3rd end badly, trailing 8-14 at one point, however, they managed to find their form again, and clawed their way back to win 21-18 in thrilling fashion. Their energy spent, they found Oxford's 3rd pair a challenge to play, and lost in straight sets.
 |
| Sammy and Ploy engaged in a fierce rally. |
 |
| Laura and Katie on the attack! |
Against Oxford's 2nd pairing, they lost the first game 19-21, after some fierce rallies which they could not close out, however, this did not affect their composure and they took the second game 21-17. Going into the decider however, the Cambridge pair hit a rough spot in their form and could not recover, leading Oxford to win 8-21; a disappointing result.
They then went against Oxford's 1st pairing, and lost the first game 9-21. However, they managed to re-focus and picked up their game to dominate the second game 21-13 to set up another rubber. The decider was a nervy affair at the start, however, as the score progressed towards the business end of the match, the Cambridge pair began to play increasingly better, and edged out their opposition to win 21-16.
The Cambridge first pair of Emily James and Mary Wang were a fresh pairing, and as such were relatively inexperienced compared to Oxford's offerings, some of whom had been playing together for years. This showed in their matches, as they struggled to convert defense into attack, which put them on the back foot in a lot of rallies. This saw them lose against the Oxford 1st pair 16-21, 16-21, and then against the 2nd pair 21-19, 19-21, 16-21. However, after a tense and nervous fight in the first game against Oxford's 3rd pair, they took the match 26-24, 21-10 to give Cambridge another point.
 |
| Emily James and Mary Wang. |
With only the Men's 1sts left to play, the scores stood at Cambridge 27, Oxford 18. This meant that in order to claim the overall Varsity victory, the men would only need to win 4 matches of a possible 15. This would be no mean feat to achieve however, as the Cambridge team had been convincingly thrashed 14-1 in the previous Varsity. However, with a new year came a shuffling of the teams as players joined and left, and this year the Cambridge men were hopeful, after training hard in the weeks leading up Varsity, of performing well and achieving a creditable score.
 |
| Clockwise from Top Left: Amit Alleck, Sam Pickup, Ben Watson, Chin Kiat Tan, James Li (captain), George Zhao (captain) |
 |
| Ben goes up for a smash! |
The first set was a tense affair, as both players struggled to find form with a lot of unforced errors. However, George fought through his nerves to take the first game 21-16. David came back strongly in the second set, and the score was neck and neck the whole way through. The scores reached 20-20, with neither opponent being able to open a gap until five points later, when George finally managed to secure the second game 25-23.
 |
| George Zhao stretches in mid-air. |
James Li was up next, against the Oxford captain, Christopher Lim. Both players settled in quickly and the result was a dynamic and fast paced game which saw plenty of deceptive and attacking play. However, James could not quite keep pace with the deception of his opponent and lost in two closely contested sets 18-21, 18-21.
Samuel Pickup, Cambridge's 3rd singles player, stepped up next, facing off against Russell Kueh of Oxford. Sam capitalised on early errors from his opposition to take the first set 21-19. However, Russell bounced back in the second set 21-18. Going into the 3rd, there was nothing to tell between the two players, Sam found holes in Russell's net play, whilst Russell employed fast attacking smashes down the lines to pick up his points. In the end, Sam's defense was unable to hold, and Russell took the 3rd end 21-18, closing out a great match and denying Cambridge the chance to creep closer to the overall victory.
 |
| Sam Pickup in full stride! |
 |
| Amit in action! |
 |
| Chin Kiat Tan lunges! |
Amit Alleck and Chin Kiat Tan opened up for Cambridge, however, the two were a fresh pairing and were still relatively inexperienced in the art of doubles play. The Oxford pairs, as soon as they recognised this, exploited this fact to win comfortably, by being patient and moving the Cambridge pair out of position by well placed counter attacks, and then exploiting the subsequent holes to finish the rallies.
James Li and George Zhao, now a veteran pair of 3 years, were the 2nd pair for Cambridge. They started off slowly, losing to the Oxford 3rd pair in straight sets - 15-21, 16-21.
This was a disappointing start for them, however, they stayed focused for the remaining matches. Against the Oxford 2nd pair of Christopher Lim and Alistair Reed, they again did not manage to get the best of starts, and dropped the first game 21-16. However, the light blue pairing came out all guns blazing and forced Oxford to yield 21-12 in the second set. The 3rd set began in a tense fashion, with both sides getting off to a slow start. However, George Zhao made a string of mistakes which gave Oxford the lead, and they kept that until the end of the match, closing out the 3rd end 21-16.
 |
| Favoured formation - James Li up for the smash, George Zhao covering the net. |
The scores were now 29 - 28 in favour of Cambridge, as the Oxford Men's 1st team showed again their dominating doubles play. Cambridge's hopes now rested on the first pair of Ben Watson and Sam Pickup. They began strongly, playing with controlled aggression and perfect placement of defensive shots, allowing them to take Russell Kueh and Mike Senior, Oxford's 3rd pair, in straight sets 21-17, 21-13. This put the scores at Cambridge 30, Oxford 28.
 |
| Ready to receive. |
They played next against Oxford's second pair, Christopher Lim and Alistair Reed. In the first game, the intensity of Oxford's play caught the Cambridge pair a little off guard, and Oxford sported a very solid defence which Sam and Ben found very hard to break. This led them to lose in a closely fought set 18-21.
In the 2nd set they changed up their strategy, and fought much harder for control of the net. This proved to be a great tactical move, as it put pressure on Oxford's lifts and netplay, with the result being many easy net kills and many lifts which Oxford forced long and wide, handing the next set to Cambridge with a convincing score of 21-11.
Going into the decider, there was everything to play for. Both pairs threw themselves into the fray, feeding on the energy of the moment and playing some thrilling Men's doubles, Ben provided big smashes from the back court and Sam was lightning quick at the net, setting up the attack neatly and also darting in to make decisive kills. As the scores neared the 19 mark, there was still nothing to seperate the pairs by. Finally, at 19 apiece, Ben and Sam broke free of their opposition, and scored two quick points in succession to take the decider 21-19.
 |
| Ben and Sam on the offensive. |
In the final match, Ben and Sam faced off against Oxford's 1st pair of James and David, and were beaten soundly 18-21, 14-21, unable as they were to regain the intensity of and focus of their previous match.
Overall, a fantastic day of Badminton was played by all, with ups and downs and plenty of thrilling matches for the spectators to enjoy. Cambridge reclaimed the overall win from Oxford by the slenderest of margins, as the final score stood at 31-29, and this concludes the Varsity report.
All there is left to say in closing is:
3 March 2011
The Lent Term Experiment: Week 6
Well, a month and a half has passed now since I started this little graphing experiment.
To be honest, I'm quite surprised that I've managed to keep it up, given so many of my personal projects in the past have been abandoned halfway through due to laziness and general slacking.
I wish I applied myself to my degree work this consistently, although, to be fair, the cumulative hour or so it takes every week to update the excel spreadsheet, do a little write up and upload a picture isn't that big of a commitment.
There are several things that have been annoying me this week though (apart from my own inability to work), and I'm going to take this as an opportunity to rant about them.
1. It's cold. Given that we have just left February behind and are now a few days into March, shouldn't the weather be getting warmer? I feel the inclement weather directly affects my ability to do my 4th Year Project, as I am far less eager to stay late in the Engineering Department if I know I face a bitingly cold cycle ride home.
2. Why does Cambridge not have a sports centre? As captain of the Badminton team this year, I have seen the vast majority of our finances go on providing a paltry amount of hours of on-court training for the squad. It's frankly farcical that University of Cambridge's stature is not able (or not willing) to provide even a basic level of indoor sports facilities for their students. It's beyond farcical when you think that the college rowing clubs are able to provide more hours of training than the University Badminton team is physically / financially able to.
3. CUED. Not for any particular reason, just CUED.
To be honest, I'm quite surprised that I've managed to keep it up, given so many of my personal projects in the past have been abandoned halfway through due to laziness and general slacking.
I wish I applied myself to my degree work this consistently, although, to be fair, the cumulative hour or so it takes every week to update the excel spreadsheet, do a little write up and upload a picture isn't that big of a commitment.
There are several things that have been annoying me this week though (apart from my own inability to work), and I'm going to take this as an opportunity to rant about them.
1. It's cold. Given that we have just left February behind and are now a few days into March, shouldn't the weather be getting warmer? I feel the inclement weather directly affects my ability to do my 4th Year Project, as I am far less eager to stay late in the Engineering Department if I know I face a bitingly cold cycle ride home.
2. Why does Cambridge not have a sports centre? As captain of the Badminton team this year, I have seen the vast majority of our finances go on providing a paltry amount of hours of on-court training for the squad. It's frankly farcical that University of Cambridge's stature is not able (or not willing) to provide even a basic level of indoor sports facilities for their students. It's beyond farcical when you think that the college rowing clubs are able to provide more hours of training than the University Badminton team is physically / financially able to.
3. CUED. Not for any particular reason, just CUED.
2 March 2011
Badminton
As I stood next to the court, watching the final match of the 2nd Women's team draw to a close at the Badminton Varsity, I couldn't help but be reminded that this was why I like sports so much.
The score for the Women's 2nd match was at that point 7-7, and the deciding match had gone into the 3rd end. Suddenly, not only for the players, but the spectators too, each serve and stroke took on increased meaning, and became it's own little heart thumping drama - would the clear be deep enough? Would the smash be strong enough? Would their defense hold?
I guess it's this sort of drama which makes any sport - not just Badminton, so enthralling for spectators and such a thrill for competitors. The intensity and adrenaline rush of competition is quite unique to this theater of human activity, and it can unite (or divide!) people regardless of race, gender or religion.
Digression aside, for this post is not meant to be a treatise on sport and it's societal implications (although that would be interesting to discuss...hmm...possible future topic mayhap?), I did want to talk about my chosen sport; Badminton, and why I love it so.
I feel that, especially in places like America, and more so amongst western culture, Badminton has a bit of a bad rap as being a nerdy sport. In America especially, Badminton is regarded as a backyard game, and people lie blissfully unaware of the depth of the seemingly simple game that they indulge in on lazy sunday afternoons (whilst making jokes about hitting cocks around).
In my mind, Badminton is a beautiful and involved game. It requires a lot of commitment from the player to progress, as it is a technical and challenging sport to learn. It can take a beginner weeks of practise to do a full clear from one end of the court to the other, and that's just one of the myriad of shots and techniques to get to grips with.
In a way, it's a shame that the entry barriers are so high, because Badminton becomes exponentially more enjoyable the better you are at it (more so, I believe, than other sports). The way the shuttlecock flies is so different to any other projectile based sport (like tennis / squash) and it gives a Badminton rally it's own unique rhythm and tempo. It is incredibly satisfying to string a good sequence of shots together.
Contrary to popular belief, Badminton has probably one of the highest all round fitness requirements of any sport - it requires explosive power in both the upper and lower body for movement and playing shots, strong core muscles, a good aerobic system for endurance and a good non-aerobic system to power the body during the rallies themselves, which are usually short and intense.
Not convinced? Would you believe me if I said that a professional player could smash a shuttlecock at over 200mph, and even crack open a watermelon with it?
To be honest, I don't understand why it doesn't get more exposure in the west, because as sports go, it's possibly one of the most dynamic and exciting around.
Don't just take my word for it however, go grab a racquet and find out what all the fuss is about.
You know, I originally wanted to do a Badminton Varsity report, since it was played last Saturday. However, I seem to have spent my allotted blogging time on a digression (a great digression, but a digression nonetheless), and so the actual report will have to wait until sometime later this week.
Peace out.
The score for the Women's 2nd match was at that point 7-7, and the deciding match had gone into the 3rd end. Suddenly, not only for the players, but the spectators too, each serve and stroke took on increased meaning, and became it's own little heart thumping drama - would the clear be deep enough? Would the smash be strong enough? Would their defense hold?
I guess it's this sort of drama which makes any sport - not just Badminton, so enthralling for spectators and such a thrill for competitors. The intensity and adrenaline rush of competition is quite unique to this theater of human activity, and it can unite (or divide!) people regardless of race, gender or religion.
Digression aside, for this post is not meant to be a treatise on sport and it's societal implications (although that would be interesting to discuss...hmm...possible future topic mayhap?), I did want to talk about my chosen sport; Badminton, and why I love it so.
I feel that, especially in places like America, and more so amongst western culture, Badminton has a bit of a bad rap as being a nerdy sport. In America especially, Badminton is regarded as a backyard game, and people lie blissfully unaware of the depth of the seemingly simple game that they indulge in on lazy sunday afternoons (whilst making jokes about hitting cocks around).
These guys are definitely doing it wrong.
In my mind, Badminton is a beautiful and involved game. It requires a lot of commitment from the player to progress, as it is a technical and challenging sport to learn. It can take a beginner weeks of practise to do a full clear from one end of the court to the other, and that's just one of the myriad of shots and techniques to get to grips with.
This guy is definitely doing it right.
In a way, it's a shame that the entry barriers are so high, because Badminton becomes exponentially more enjoyable the better you are at it (more so, I believe, than other sports). The way the shuttlecock flies is so different to any other projectile based sport (like tennis / squash) and it gives a Badminton rally it's own unique rhythm and tempo. It is incredibly satisfying to string a good sequence of shots together.
Contrary to popular belief, Badminton has probably one of the highest all round fitness requirements of any sport - it requires explosive power in both the upper and lower body for movement and playing shots, strong core muscles, a good aerobic system for endurance and a good non-aerobic system to power the body during the rallies themselves, which are usually short and intense.
Not convinced? Would you believe me if I said that a professional player could smash a shuttlecock at over 200mph, and even crack open a watermelon with it?
Watch from 0:15 onwards! ;)
To be honest, I don't understand why it doesn't get more exposure in the west, because as sports go, it's possibly one of the most dynamic and exciting around.
Don't just take my word for it however, go grab a racquet and find out what all the fuss is about.
You know, I originally wanted to do a Badminton Varsity report, since it was played last Saturday. However, I seem to have spent my allotted blogging time on a digression (a great digression, but a digression nonetheless), and so the actual report will have to wait until sometime later this week.
Peace out.
17 February 2011
The Lent Term Experiment: Week 4
Halfway through term.
Motivation seriously dying.
I've often said this to people, but wouldn't University be the perfect place if only you didn't have to do a degree?
Perhaps at this halfway point, it would be good to take stock of just how far behind I am on everything.
4C8 - Applications of Dynamics - 3/8 questions attempted.
4A10 - Flow Instability - 4/15 questions attempted.
4A8 - Environmental Fluid Mechanics - 4/13 questions attempted.
4A12 - Turbulence and Vortex Dynamics - 5/17 questions attempted.
4th Year Project - The Gantt chart says I'm actually only a few days behind schedule, surprisingly.
This should scare me, but for some reason, I'm just not hugely worried, despite the fact that exam timetables have been released and my first one is due on the 2nd May - that's only 2 and a half months away.
Shiiiitttt.
Having checked the time till exams in order to put it in this blog, I'm now thoroughly terrified. Expect to see the red line soaring over the coming week.
Motivation seriously dying.
I've often said this to people, but wouldn't University be the perfect place if only you didn't have to do a degree?
Perhaps at this halfway point, it would be good to take stock of just how far behind I am on everything.
4C8 - Applications of Dynamics - 3/8 questions attempted.
4A10 - Flow Instability - 4/15 questions attempted.
4A8 - Environmental Fluid Mechanics - 4/13 questions attempted.
4A12 - Turbulence and Vortex Dynamics - 5/17 questions attempted.
4th Year Project - The Gantt chart says I'm actually only a few days behind schedule, surprisingly.
This should scare me, but for some reason, I'm just not hugely worried, despite the fact that exam timetables have been released and my first one is due on the 2nd May - that's only 2 and a half months away.
Shiiiitttt.
Having checked the time till exams in order to put it in this blog, I'm now thoroughly terrified. Expect to see the red line soaring over the coming week.
10 February 2011
The Lent Term Experiment: Week 3
And so, Week 3 ends, and well, surprisingly (or not), Week 4 begins.
During this week, I've managed to come up with a three phase plan for not doing work. It goes as follows:
Step 1: Get work out.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Don't get any work done.
For you see, even though the red line denoting Total Time spent on work seems to indicate I've spent quite a few hours doing that stuff, I have cheekily included procrastination time within that measure, seeing as it's time spent "trying" to do work.
How much time do I spend procrastinating? Well, that will be a mystery to be revealed at the end of week 8.
Anyhow, here is the Week 3 chart.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
During this week, I've managed to come up with a three phase plan for not doing work. It goes as follows:
Step 1: Get work out.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Don't get any work done.
For you see, even though the red line denoting Total Time spent on work seems to indicate I've spent quite a few hours doing that stuff, I have cheekily included procrastination time within that measure, seeing as it's time spent "trying" to do work.
How much time do I spend procrastinating? Well, that will be a mystery to be revealed at the end of week 8.
Anyhow, here is the Week 3 chart.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)