anotherlongshot (anotherlongshot) wrote,

Two victories, one defeat.

I have A LOT to do for Civ Pro but I'm currently feeling tremendously lazy and tired. Thus, I shall write an entry before embarking on the arduous feat of finishing 2/3 of the syllabus before 2 a.m.

1. London: Federer d. Murray 3-6, 6-3, 6-1!

I must first complain about BBC's crap-ass satellite: In the final set the score was 3-1 to Roger, then the transmission got cut off, then I fast-forwarded my recorded match and all of a sudden it was 5-1 Roger and the first of many deuces on Murray's serve.

I WAS SO ANNOYED. How often does Roger play such a decisive deciding set against stupid Andy Murray? Not very often, I'm sad to say (save for the 2008 US Open final. But that was more than one year ago), and when it actually happens, THE FEED GETS CUT OFF.


Anyway, I hate Andy Murray. I hate the way he squawks "come on" whenever he wins a big point. It's super annoying. I also hate his stupid boring pusher tennis that will put me to sleep against an opponent not named Roger Federer.

Having said that, I like watching Roger play him - I like watching Roger work his genius magic and hit through Murray's defensive, pusher tennis and come out the winner. It hasn't always been the case, but when it has, it proves that a solid attacking game will always beat a near-perfect defensive one. And, like it hasn't been said enough, I love attacking tennis.

To be fair though, Murray didn't play super well - no first serve and 8 double faults. What the hell is that? But he got out-manouvred by Roger a lot. Totally got out-classed too, even in the first set that Roger lost.

I'm very happy with the result and the match. I LOVE ROGER. He's seriously so amazing. Once he hit this super WTF amazing backhand slice that floated so dangerously low that it barely made it over the net. Too bad the stupid lines person wrongly called Murray's return out; Roger was ready to win that point, and if he'd had the chance to, it would've been spectacular.

And his inside out forehand. OMG. Thing of beauty.

On a superficial note, I think it's damn cute how the colour of his shirt matches the colour of the court.

On a negative note, the O2 arena kinda sucks. I hate the stupid scrolling marquee thing that blasts (doesn't have sound from my TV but it feels like it's been blasted) the word 'ACE' whenever a player hits an ace. I'm sorry, but unnecessarily stating the obvious much? What a waste of electricity.

Lastly, on an incredible note, Roger is officially the year-end #1. This makes him the second player in the history of EVER to reclaim the year-end #1 spot after losing it (the other player being Ivan Lendl).

May I also draw your attention to the fact that this guy is ancient compared to the other top 4 players? He's not as dominant as before, but he's still every bit the man to beat. Djoke may be the favourite to win coming in to London with wins in Basel (boo) and Paris, but Roger, in my very biased opinion, will always be the one to beat.


2. Criminal Procedure d. Yelen

So the Crim Pro paper. It's most aptly summed up by Mag's reaction to it after the scripts have all been accounted for and she showed up at my desk: "Hahahahahahaha."

And um, it's not a good "hahahahahaha". I totally think that expression applies 100% to the paper, but not in the Wei Chuen sense of laughing with joy throughout the paper because it's too easy. In fact, it's the exact opposite. It's way harder than I'd thought and they totally cheated by setting one 5-mark question based on some whatever case that came out THIS YEAR.

What's the problem with that? Apparently the case was brought up in lectures but I didn't attend 99% of the Crim Pro lectures so I had no idea it existed. I didn't bother reading lecture notes either. All I read for the exam was the mugger notes that everyone passes around, and the muggers are from like years ago. YEARS AGO. NOT THIS YEAR. THEREFORE, THE FREAKING CASE WASN'T IN THE NOTES.

I didn't even know what the hell s. 68 of the CPC is; I didn't bother printing the CPC as I didn't want to waste my money. So for that entire question, which had a part (i) and part (ii), all I wrote was, "Yes."


Also rather hilarious? The last question on whether some woman can appeal the decision of the judge in a disposal inquiry was the first time EVER I'd heard of this "disposal inquiry" thing. I never knew it existed. It was the first time EVER I read anything related to it. The beauty of these open-book exams is that you can just copy from your notes - which was exactly what I did.

I'm not sure if I should be worried that I'm not worried that I'm going to fail. My answers weren't spectacular by any stretch of the imagination, but I didn't think they were stupid either. I think I had enough to squeak out a pass - hopefully. I'm quite glad I spent a lot of time yesterday figuring out the stupid s. 121/s. 122(6) statements nonsense because that was pretty much the only part of the whole exam that I thought I did a bit more than okay. Everything else was okay at best and LOL OMG SHIT at worst.

In any case, I'm just freaking glad this behemoth of a paper is over. It was like Criminal Law + Evidence rolled into one. ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE.


3. Love d. Sadness

We made up yesterday and yesterday was probably the first time I've ever felt as deeply as I did how much he loves me.

When the shit was in the process of hitting the fan I invariantly thought back to another break-up, 3 years (? I think it was) ago. It was a different person, a different situation; but the crux of the impetus was essentially the same. Something I did, unknowingly, unintentionally, offended the other party so much that it almost derailed everything.

Three years ago, it did. Despite my attempts to salvage the situation, the "situation" died the night he came back from Vietnam and broke up with me, one day before Year 2 Semester 2 started.

Yesterday, it didn't - and it could have. It wasn't just the primary issue that hurt him; it was also the secondary issue that suggested he's more invested in this than me. Funny to think that a few weeks ago I was wondering if I loved him more than he loved me.

I find it almost impossible to fathom, to comprehend, the depth of his feelings for me. The second issue impressed me more - the fact that he was able to hold me, tell me he loved me, and say in the same breath, "Try not to care about other guys, okay?" Before that he said I was the only girl in the world that mattered.

It's not the same as three years ago. It's better. It's so much better. It's not even the same - there is no basis for comparsion. I thought it was as good as it'd ever get three years ago; but Wei Chuen has completely proven me wrong.

He could have left - but he didn't. As far as my ability allows me, I will never, ever forget that.

Tags: andy murray, bar exam, exams, love, rant, relationships, roger federer, tennis, wei chuen, world tour finals (wtf)

  • (no subject)

    E left Singapore last night. It was his first time in Singapore--in Asia--and he stayed with me at my parents'. We were also in Hanoi for six days; I…

  • Two Important Decisions

    Wow. It is incredible that I did not write in here for the whole of October. To be fair, nothing much really happens in my life. My typical day…

  • (no subject)

    I'm writing this on the ferry from Dover to Calais; and the reason I'm writing this on the ferry, instead of last night in my room like I had…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.