Target petanque

So, the other day I was stuck at home, studying for an exam, and the weather was rather inclement.  This did give me the opportunity to use the word "inclement" (which is always fun), but also meant I couldn't go for a walk.

I was planning on studying steadily for several hours (ppft!  like that was ever going to happen) and then go for a walk.  I'm very easily distracted at the best of times.  Give me a rainy day and all I want to do is play.

And, for some reason, there's nothing like telling my brain that it desperately needs to focus on something important to get those eureka moments regarding other issues that are of a) no relevance to the task at hand, and b) no importance in the grand scheme of things.

So, while trying to cram separable and inseparable verbs into my head (I understand the principle, but I don't know the vocabulary), I "discovered" a new in door game that's potentially fun for the whole family.

I'd like to say I invented it but, quite frankly, it's so obvious and simple that I'm pretty sure someone has already done that, so I'm going to say "discovered".  And, on the odd chance no one has already patented the darn thing and is attempting to make money out of it as I speak, I'm giving the idea away for free.

Any enterprising soul who wants to make a version of this to sell can go ahead and do so, but it's a bit DIY, really, and anyone can do it as long as they have some juggling balls or hacky-sacks/footbags around the place.

I call it "target petanque", and it's kind of like a cross between petanque and curling.  And a little bit indoor bowling for people with limited space.

You will need:

• Two pieces of paper (or even just one)
• Some highlighters or coloured pens
• Two or three juggling balls (the bean-bag kind) or hacky-sacks/footbags per player
• A hallway or space that's approximately 1 pace wide and at least six paces long.

This is how you play:

1. Using the coloured pens, draw a target on each sheet of paper - a vertical/horizontal cross (+) with a circle around the center that has a radius about the size of one of your balls (so, in theory, two balls could fit side-by-side inside the circle).
2. Put one target at one end of the hallway, take six long steps (paces) and put the other target at that point (perhaps put another mark at the six-pace point for the younger/shorter members of the family).  Decide which areas are "out of bounds".
3. Assemble players into two teams.
4. Stand behind one target and, with your feet planted firmly on the ground, toss the balls underhand towards the farther target.
5. Like petanque, each team takes a turn to toss initially.  If team A's ball is closer to the target than team B's ball, team B keeps tossing until they have the closest ball.  Then team A tosses until they have the closest ball, and so on.  
6. When all of the balls have been tossed, the winning team is the one with the ball closest to the center of the target.  They score 1 point for each ball that is closer to the center than the closest ball for the opposing team.
7. If a ball lands on or in the circle around the center of the target, it will score 2 points - regardless of whether it is the winning ball (so, a ball that lands in the circle *and* is the closest ball to the center is worth 3 points).  Any balls that end up out of bounds are not counted.
8. Players then line up behind that target, facing the opposite direction, and play again - throwing back towards the target at the other end of the hall (if space makes this awkward, they can always throw from the same point in the same direction).
9. Play back and forth from both ends, the first team to reach 13 points wins.

And that's it.  Pretty simple - and easy enough to do on a rainy day, as long as you have enough juggling balls/footbags to give each player two balls.

If I were an enterprising soul myself (which I'm not) I would make a pack with four sets of three juggling balls (three red, three yellow, three blue and three green, for example) and two prefabricated targets.  That would enable up to six people to play at one time, and also come in handy for juggling parties.

Oh...  I should totally start throwing juggling parties...

A little less white - first impressions

So, I bit the bullet and bought that slightly more colourful fencing gear I mentioned in a previous post.

I have not, unfortunately, had the opportunity to take it fencing since it arrived.  Dang assignments and exams.  They're so needy, time-wise.

Anyway, here are my first impressions on taking the stuff out of the box, trying it on and running around the house like some deranged weirdo, lunging at random points in the hallway:

The pants are awesome.  I'm completely stoked by the Leon Paul 350N tracky-dacks.  The tags say they are part of the "Phoenix" range (that's their more expensive 350N line), and I believe it.  They are just really well turned out.  I think they're actually better quality than my 800N "Team" range breeches.

Around the waist they have that weird grippy stuff that good-quality cycling nicks have around the leg grippers, which keeps them from slipping down, and you can unzip the legs to help with getting them on and off (over shoes, if you're that way inclined).  Plus, it has a pocket.  Not just a pocket in the back to put the hitmate, but an actual pocket in the side (left side, making it a bet less useful for lefties) for keys and wallets and stuff.

Of course, I have yet to play with them properly "in combat", but so far, so awesome.

Plus, they're perfectly suitable gym wear.  I can now go through any gym I feel like wearing sword-proof pants.  This is bound to be an advantage at some point.

The jacket, on the other hand, is a bit of a disappointment.  Yes, it is a pretty shade of blue, and yes it does, in theory, replace three other items of clothing.  But...

Considering the fact that it costs significantly more than the "Pheonix" range jacket, it's just not quite as good.  It seems cheaper in design and construction.

The back of the jacket has two straps for tweaking the size, but it's a double-ring fastening system, and the size of the rings is a fraction to small for the thickness of the straps.  It's not impossible to do up, but damned difficult.

I had trouble doing up the straps with the jacket in front of me, let alone trying to do it behind my back.  It just wouldn't happen.  I could, after much struggle, get the bottom strap through the rings, but the top-strap was at too awkward an angle.  Fortunately the jacket fits well enough without the straps being done up, but then they're flapping around in the breeze.  I'd either have to remove them or get someone to help me dress (hardly the bold strike for convenience I'd been hoping for).

If the rings were just a fraction larger, this wouldn't be a problem.  But the straps aren't my greatest concern.

A greater concern is the chest protector situation.  The jacket has pockets on the inside to slip in those little round cup guards (which I also bought).  But the pockets are so big and loose (no doubt to try to allow a wide range of boobages) that they don't hold the cup guards still.

The leeway for movement is so great that a sword hitting it at the right angle would push the guard out of the way, and the blow would land full-force on an unprotected boob.  This does not strike me as being a good thing.

I suspect I'll be able to stitch up the pockets a bit to try to control the movement, but that seems like hard work, given I already own a chest-protector that covers the whole chest and stays put.  I was just looking forward to getting rid of it, because it's not the most comfortable thing to wear.

But that isn't my greatest concern, either.

My greatest concern is the throat.  This is the first fencing jacket I've ever come across that has only one layer of material over the throat.  All of the others have two layers, and while the extra thick material around the throat is a bit uncomfortable, it's also rather reassuring.  Especially given the fact that one of the girls I fence with has a habit of lunging straight at the throat.  She says she doesn't do it on purpose.  I think she has issues.

This is the one thing I can't generate a workaround for, and it seems strange to have a jacket that's über padded in most other places have less padding over your windpipe than other 350N jackets.

Fortunately my mask is 1600N, and has a bib that covers the throat.  But, still...

Still obsessing about lawn bowls

I know, I know, I should just shut up and join a club or something.

But...

...They're vaguely intimidating, and I feel like I'm both sought after and undesirable and the same time - which is a really weird feeling.

It's something about the way they seem desperately grateful to have new people, but don't particularly want to change things to make it possible for new people to ease in.

It's still very much the domain of people who are free during office hours (as opposed to people who work and/or study) - and still very much the domain of people who want to take bowling seriously (as opposed to people who just want to give it a go and see if it takes).

I've recently discovered one of the oldest clubs in town is desperate for members, and I have a vague desire to infiltrate their club and use it to conduct strange experiments regarding the future of lawn bowls in this town.

I want to install petanque/bocce courts beside the green and open the place up to families looking for a fun activity on a weekend (offering petanque, bocce, lawn bowls and table bowls - heck, maybe we could even rustle up enough indoor space to include carpet bowls).

I want to alter their opening hours so that they have mixed competition "days" after 6pm (they can still keep their mens and ladies things for their retirees during the day, if they want) to give workers an avenue into the competition side of the sport.

I want to open the joint up on Saturdays and Sundays from 10am to 6pm for "casual" games that can start and finish at any time during that period.  No one has to get their names in, they just have to turn up with someone to play with.  As long as there's space to play, they can play.

I want to throw in a regular barefoot bowls night that will allow people without playing partners to come along and join in.

I want to turn the kitchen into a kiosk, selling icecreams and cold drinks all day on the weekends, and offering toasted sandwiches at lunchtime on Saturdays and Sundays (and maybe also on the club days when the ladies and men are playing).

I want to have them open for "dinner" on Saturday and Sunday nights - a BBQ on Saturdays, and a Roast on Sundays.

I want to alter the membership schedule so that there are three different kinds of membership:

• Casual (gets you a membership card for the weekend, with all the discounts, and includes one "free" game), 
• Social (gives you all the member discounts for the year and invitations to members-only social events) and 
• Full (gives you the right to compete for the club, free entry to competition days and all the stuff the Social membership has).

There will be two prices for everything - food, drinks, games, merchandise:  everything - one for "members" and one for "walk-ins".  When members can get 15% off beer and icecream, I suspect a number of "walk-ins" will decide a Casual membership for the weekend might not be a bad idea.

Oh, and we'll get rid of that whole "nominated and seconded" by thing required for membership that I've seen at most bowls clubs.  If you want to join, we won't put hurdles in your way.

I want to sell merchandise during opening hours:  generic lawn bowls crap, generic Townsville crap, and specific "playing lawn bowls at this particular club in Townsville" crap.  Hats, T-shirts, mugs, that sort of thing.

And I want to create some sort of communication plan, where things like opening hours and membership options are made available to the general public.  Something like, I don't know, a functioning website.  Perhaps even an email address, which was really easy to find, where one can send emails and have questions answered.

That's what I'd do, if I could infiltrate this club and bend it to my wishes.  Then, maybe, I'd feel comfortable about turning up to the club to play.

There may be a flaw in my plan, though...

Almost Famous

I noticed the other day that one of the shops in town was advertising a boxed set of the complete Famous Five books, so I mentioned that to a friend who has kids about the right age to enjoy them.

She confessed that she never got into the Famous Five, and then I had to struggle to remember if I'd ever actually read any of the books myself.

I'm sure I did.  I must have.

I have vague recollections of having "I've read some of these books and I know who the characters are" conversations with friends in school.

I just can't remember which books I've read.  There was one with gypsies in it...

The phrase "smuggler's cove" is floating around in my brain, somewhere, but the actual book is called "Five go to Smuggler's Top", and quite frankly, I've just read a synopsis of the plot and I can't say it's ringing any bells.

Where the books particularly forgettable?  Is that why I can't remember anything about them?

Well, there was a dog called Timmy and a girl called George.  And gypsies.

For years I thought The Black Bog Mystery (a book I read and enjoyed when I was the right age to be reading Famous Five books) was part of that series.  But, of course, it clearly wasn't because a) it doesn't have the word "five" in the title, and b) I've just looked it up and it wasn't even written by Enid Blyton.

Lane Mitchell wrote it.  It was quite good, if I recall correctly.  There were twins and mysterious houses and bogs.  Everyone loves a good bog.  I can't remember what the actual mystery was.  I *think* it had something to do with people hiding things in the bog...  I read quite a number of Trixie Beldon, Nancy Drew and other such books at the time and I can't rightly say which plot belonged to which books.

So, somewhere along the lines the only Famous Five book I could actually remember enjoying wasn't actually a Famous Five book at all - just some other kids' mystery novel of dubious memorability.

I always meant to get around the reading the Famous Five.  Maybe I should see if I can get them in German or Estonian - that might make them a bit more interesting.

Assignment woes

This sucks.  It totally sucks.  It sucks big time.  It’s one of the suckiest things I’ve experienced this year.  Not quite as sucky as some of the suckiest things I experienced last year, but it still totally sucks.

There’s nothing quite like having something you’re usually good at used to highlight just how crap you truly are.

I’ve been given two writing tasks for my German assignment.  One is to write a “travel blog” about a place in a German speaking country.  Easily enough done (if not easy to do well).  I have plenty to say about the place of my choice.  The actual mechanics of saying it are a challenge, but that’s why we have assignments, right?  Heck, I’m already over the word limit on that one (but I’ve decided I don’t care).

The second task is to write typical classroom assignment twaddle.  The question is:  “In education a person should be viewed holistically, one should not just focus on results”.  It’s twaddle.  It’s one of those silly twaddly things that just try to get you to prove you can write a reasoned argument in a proper paragraph structure.  It barely means anything.

This is just the sort of thing I can do with my eyes closed in English.  I can churn out twaddle like the best of them.  The trouble is that I make up for the lack of meaningful things to say by falling back onto rhetoric.  I use metaphors, similes, carefully crafted redundancies, the occasional hyperbole and the odd synecdoche.  All of these are very idiomatic and language specific.  A perfectly legitimate synecdoche in English is complete nonsense in another language.  I can crank out the meaningless twaddle, but I can’t translate it.

And, when I try to pare down to sentences that are simple and straightforward and can be translated across, I realise I have nothing to say.  Try as hard as I might, every time I feel like I’ve got the wind of inspiration and can burst into something vaguely resembling eloquence, I realise I’ve come up with a sentence like the one I’ve just written.  “Try as hard as I might”?  Idiom.  “Wind of inspiration”?  Metaphor.  “Burst into something vaguely resembling eloquence”?  I just don’t know how to translate that - or even if I should.

I “write up” for frippy little tasks like these.  I can churn out three sentences to encapsulate one flimsy idea.  But to translate into another language I have to pare back.  I can’t write up and pare back at the same time.  It’s doing my head in.

And, in the back of my mind, a simple truth keeps raising its ugly head:  “It’s only because you don’t know enough.  If you a) knew what you were talking about, and b) paid attention to the things you should have learnt, there wouldn’t be a problem.”

There's nothing like trying to do an assignment in another language to give you a new appreciation for what NESB students go through in English speaking universities.

It turns out everything we expect from them is kind of unreasonable and cruel.  All lecturers and teachers should try walking a mile in their shoes before attempting to mark them.

I think there's something wrong with me...

So, today I found myself running a Google search for Masters' degrees in Educational Design, and when I saw one particular university was offering a Graduate Certificate that was only four subjects, I wondered whether the certificate would be enough for me or if I should do the Masters because it would give me the chance to do a research project.

I am currently completely swamped by the two degrees I'm doing at the moment, and I'm already lining up the next one - and it's not even a PhD.  Just a few months ago I swore my next degree would score me a "Doctor".

That postgrad cert looks good, though.  I can do two subjects on educational designy stuff and two subjects from any other course - and I've just discovered they have a linguistics subject that looks specifically at syllabus and materials design.  My current linguistics degree doesn't do that...

Semi-final 1, 2014

Here in Australia, we get our Eurovision experience distilled into one sequin-filled weekend.  So I've only just seen the first semi-final, even though Europeans would have seen it earlier in the week.

And my over-all impression is:

Meh.

I know music videos of all the songs are available well in advance of the competition, but I like to experience it "live" first, so I usually only look at the Estonian video and maybe one other before the Big Weekend.

This year's entry for Estonia struck me as being, well, nothing special.  They were okay, I just didn't particularly think they would wow the audiences enough to get through to the final - and I was right.

What I didn't know was that they would be sitting amongst a whole bunch of forgettable songs.  I honestly think that the Estonian number was probably stronger than some of the others that got through.

The Netherlands was good - I really enjoyed that one and I'm glad it got in.  Sweden wasn't bad and Aremenia had an okay song (although the singer was off-key for part of it).  I was happy to see San Marino get through this year (and I thought they had one of the better songs on the night).

The real shame was Portugal.  Their song was a) good and b) one of the only songs not in English.  For some reason the songs in English are usually just a little bit boring.  But they didn't make the cut.

In the end, though, I found myself unsuccessfully trying to remember any of the tunes an hour after the show.  All I could get was Estonia's "Amazing".  That could have been because the song actually had one of the strongest hooks in the field, or it could have been because it was the only one I'd heard twice.

In the five years I've been watching Eurovision, I think Baku has had the best set of songs.  Copenhagen is proving to be a bit boring, really.

Fortunately we have Austria tonight.  That should liven things up a bit.