Wah Lao...

so little money
grrrr

My blog is worth $564.54.
How much is your blog worth?

the link to the site to calculate our blog value is:
http://www.business-opportunities.biz/projects/how-much-is-your-blog-worth/

My Weight

since July 2007, my weight has increased from 61 to 68 kg.
some fats around the waist, yes, i admit.
but mostly muscle mass around my biceps and thighs. :)
thanks Sporting Saturday!

I'm Back

its been a while since I last blogged.

I just had been really caught up with work, and the end of a rather exhausting day, I decided it might be a good time to write again. I thought I could talk about the last few months, take stock of what had gone on, and some of my recent thoughts.

several months had passed, since i left the civil service to join the private sector. probably the most tumultous time of my life. And ultimately i havent been happy. I had entered into this phase, perhaps naively, that so long as I quit the civil service, all would be well. I would be earning a lot more money, I would be challenged in my work, and everything would be fulfilling and good.

how wrong am I.

first of all, i am not happier. in fact if anything I am even more upset. the civil service isnt half as bad as i thought it was; its actually quite a friendly working environment!

secondly and more importantly, I had grossly thought wrong. my unhappiness stemmed from a much deeper source. it had to do with my relationships, my family... and the bond / civil service was just a convenient target for me to beat up. i channeled all my unhappy thoughts into this one convenient target, and eventually drove myself into a corner that i had no choice but to leave the service.

ultimately though, i had learnt much over this past year. and i am determined to change my life and pursue what i am really passionate about. I am somewhat clearer now what I am interested and passionate in.

i am going to make a big career jump this june. wish me luck my friends. a lot of things to resolve but i have made up my mind.

Rome

I am watching or should I say re-watching the HBO series, Rome.

One of the characters said this of the problems in ancient Rome.

"The plebians (common Roman people) are angry. The noble men are making all the money and the slaves (enslaved foreigners) are taking all the jobs."

Hmmm....

Moral Dilemma

I had a most interesting conversation with my friend this morning.

Let me give everyone the background of our conversation first. My friend said he hates "greedy soccer players" like Frank Lampard of Chelsea United because they draw very high wages (reports suggest around 130k pounds a week). This is contributing to soccer being increasingly inaccessible to the general public, with higher ticket prices, and more expensive cable tv fees / subscription rates.

I found his "hatred" irrational because to me, Frank Lampard and all these players, to the best of my knowledge, are just pawns in the game. The clubs find the players are worthy of the high pay, and hence offer them appropriately so. We cannot expect the players to not want to seek the highest pay possible, and this does not constitute greed in my opinion. And hence as its the clubs ultimately who offer them these wages, I do not think the players are "responsible" for the escalating cost of soccer.

We had a fairly long debate on this. And ultimately we realised that we had fundamentally very different views on "responsibility" and "blame". Here I will offer a moral dilemna that captures the essence of our differences for my readers, would be very happy to hear your views.

"You are a golfer. You are about to strike your golf ball, after having done your best to check that the way infront is clear. You have abided every possible rule there is, you are absolutely sure the way infront is clear. Now you strike the golf ball. A small girl suddenly ran from the bushes 100m infront and the ball struck her temple, and she died. Are you "responsible" for her death?"

My friend thinks that regardless of the situation, the fact that the ball was struck by him, means he is in some way responsible for the death. I on the other hand, strongly believe that i would not be responsible for the death, for i could not have done better.

This is a fundamentally different way of looking at things. My friend's concern is really more on the end result -- the process does not really matter. My concern is more on the process -- could i have done better? If I could not have done better, why should i be blamed? How could I be responsible?

It extends to the first situation about the footballers, because my friend attributes "responsibility" and "blame" to the footballers, as he thinks the players' acceptance of the high wages, whether they had insisted on it or not, ultimately did "cause" the escalating costs to some degree. I on the other hand do not think so. I think every player should fight for the highest wages possible, as do any of us given any job. If the club does not think they are deserving of the wages, they would sack them, its that simple. In other words, the players could not have done better. For that reason, I don't hold the player responsible.

What do you all think?

Dangerous to allow ambiguity in legal system

I had sent this letter to the Straits Time Forum, dated 25th October 2007.

-------------

I applaud the Government and especially PM Lee, for its open-ness in engaging the public in the ongoing repeal 377a debate. It shows how far our civic society has progressed, and makes me proud of our Nation's strong democratic process.

However, regardless of the arguements either for or against repealing 377a, the ambiguity that is left outstanding, is necessarily dangerous and needs resolution.

Singapore's reputation has been built upon a legal system that is absolute, firm, and most importantly, clear. This is a strength of Singapore, and has contributed much to our success. In issues like Michael Fay and even chewing gum, we have built an international reputation for a transparent and strong legal system, a system where ambiguity has no place. For these same reasons, the Singaporean citizen is guaranteed safety within the legal system.

The introduction of ambiguity into the system may forseeably result in citizens misinterpreting the law. But more frightening, is the thought that a citizen may no longer feel safe within the thickets of the law, for he can no longer be sure which law will be enforced, and which will not be.

Borrowing a phrase from Robert Bolt's famous play "A Man for All Seasons", let us keep the law as a causeway upon which, so long as he keeps to it, a citizen may walk safely.

鲨鱼王子

apologies to my loyal fans for not updating my blog. had been quite caught up at work last 2 weeks, and thankfully, i think the meetings went very well yesterday.

like to just talk about my recent purchase, the Prince O3 Hybrid Shark OS (110 sq inch face). i strung it at 60 lbs, exactly middle of its recommended string tensions, using Prince Elliptic polysynthetic 16L gut. i went for an eighth inch smaller grip as opposed to my usual 4 3/8 as an experiment -- some articles had said that a smaller grip can help prevent twisting of racquet in hand, and also enhance spin potential.

so far, the racquet feels fantastic. i had been looking for a racquet to give me added stability and control, and this racquet thus far has been everything. it took me a while to get used to the dampened feel and the slightly unusual *ping* of the ball thundering off my stringbed, but after that, it just feels rock solid. i could really swing hard and the racquet does not overreact.

compared to my Fischer Spirit FT, this racquet is definitely more solid, a lot more control, and being slightly head light, does not overcompensate for my aggressive Eastern Forehand strokes. the 16/19 open string pattern has also given me a lot more ability to generate spins, which is an area i am really looking for technological assistance.

this is my fifth racquet over the last 18 years. and so far this racquet has represented to me the biggest leap in feel and performance since i switched from my second to third racquet. here, have a look at my racquets over the last 18 years...

my first racquet. ok this isnt the actual racquet, i could not find a picture of it on the web, but it looks somethng like this.

it was a horrid racquet and although my skills are really not good by any means, this racquet was painful to play with. actually its really my sister's racquet back in 1989, but i used it for a while.


my second racquet, the Dunlop X10. another alumnimum racquet and similarly painful to play with. (1992)

my third racquet represented my first serious racquet, a Wilson power something. Oversize (110 sq inches), one piece graphite construction. it was very cheap (90 bucks i think) but my first graphite racquet. its sold to renegade already but i loved it very much. i bought it in 1995 after my O levels, as a treat to myself. i cant find pictures of it (renegade, post it if u still have it!), sorry.



my next racquet was bought in 2003. i had wanted to get the Prince Triple Threat Scream, but edwin in Queensway Shopping Center recommended me the Fischer Spirit FT OS. FT stood for frequency tuning. decided to try it. its an extremely head heavy racquet, very stiff, close string pattern. it gives good power, control is not exceptional, and rather hard to generate spins. i don't really particularly like it, nor hate it, but it accompanied me through the period when my game really improved. will keep this as my backup racquet. costed me 170 bucks.

and now finally, the Prince O3 Hybrid Shark OS. a fantastic steal for such a highly rated racquet (maria sharapova used the non O3 port version of this in her victorious 2004 Wimbledon campaign!), only 165 bucks!