I am a diehard fan of Roger Federer, the Swiss Tennis Maestro. Watching him play in the last three tournaments (he won all three!) has been nothing short of a spiritual experience for me. What is so good about watching him is not that he is the greatest tennis player ever (still arguable for many people), but just that his game is definitely the most beautiful ever (no arguments here). The way he moves, or rather... glides, the smooth serve motion, the smoother forehand action, and the world's prettiest backhand...WOW!
It is this beauty of his game that makes watching him so much fun even in totally one-sided matches. I have been a big fan of some other players in the past, and have developed a liking for many current players as well, but nobody has ever evoked the kind of feeling of pure joy in me as Federer does. Even at the age of 31, his smoothness and cat-like reflexes haven't lost their magic. I don't think any other athlete in any other sport can match the adulation that Mr. Fed evokes among his fans.
If you are not a tennis fan yet and want to develop some interest in the sport, just watch couple of Roger Federer matches. I promise you will be hooked!
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Olympics and Politics
Recent protests in Tibet and the typical Chinese hardheaded response has caused unrest and demonstrations around the world. China, deservingly so, has gotten a lot of bad press as a result, but maybe not bad enough. For instance, the Communist Party of India has termed the latest developments as "China's Internal Affair" and has advised others to stay off the issue. This is unfortunate, considering how China has suppressed the freedom and culture of Tibet for more than 50 years. All that Tibetans are asking for now is autonomy, not freedom. Even then, Chinese government is not willing to yield. In fact, they are systematically trying to dilute the cultural identity of Tibet by moving more and more people from other parts of China to Tibet, thus making Tibetans a minority in their own region.
The timing of the protests has assumed greater significance due to the Olympics games, which are scheduled to be held in China this year. There have been some miffed calls for boycotting the Olympics by various individuals and organizations. People opposed to boycott are arguing that sports cannot be mixed with politics, something I believe is very naive to say.
The fact is, Olympics have been used for political purposes a lot in the past, and will continue to have a great political significance in future as well. A chronological list of instances where Olympics were politicized can be found here. As for the 2008 Olympics, China is banking hugely on the sports event to showcase and promote their country, hoping to improve their image around the world by leaps and bounds. Isn't that politics? So, I ask the people who are criticizing the Tibetans and their supporters for 'politicizing' the Olympics: Isn't that what China is doing as well? When China and other countries can use the Olympics to achieve political gains, why shouldn't the bruised and battered Tibetans do the same?
The timing of the protests has assumed greater significance due to the Olympics games, which are scheduled to be held in China this year. There have been some miffed calls for boycotting the Olympics by various individuals and organizations. People opposed to boycott are arguing that sports cannot be mixed with politics, something I believe is very naive to say.
The fact is, Olympics have been used for political purposes a lot in the past, and will continue to have a great political significance in future as well. A chronological list of instances where Olympics were politicized can be found here. As for the 2008 Olympics, China is banking hugely on the sports event to showcase and promote their country, hoping to improve their image around the world by leaps and bounds. Isn't that politics? So, I ask the people who are criticizing the Tibetans and their supporters for 'politicizing' the Olympics: Isn't that what China is doing as well? When China and other countries can use the Olympics to achieve political gains, why shouldn't the bruised and battered Tibetans do the same?
Sunday, February 10, 2008
The MBA Paradox
I have finally fallen into the trap and will most probably be joining either Duke or UNC for an MBA, starting fall 2008. During the process of applying to schools, I spent 2-3 days doing some research on internet, mainly forums and blogs, to find out what goes on in minds of other people while deciding about quitting their cushy jobs to go back to school for an MBA. I found out that there is a huge, cult-like presence of starry-eyed MBA aspirants and B-school students on the internet. I am intrigued and amused by the intensity of MBA bloggers and their readers alike.
What I found very singular is that most people applying to top 10-20 schools seem totally consumed by the idea of doing an MBA. I find it funny that while 9 out of 10 aspirants are clearly pursuing the MBA dream to make more money and feel more important, they try to confuse the issue by needless philosophizing. Is it shameful to say that I want an MBA because I think it will help me make more money and climb the corporate ladder faster and farther? Absolutely not, I think. But many of the MBA worshipers like to say that "MBA is more than just education", as if all other degrees are utterly useless. They talk about little things in their business schools (such as a room, a club, a professor etc.) as if they are talking about Mecca or Vatican City. One blogger spent an entire post explaining that "there is nothing you cannot achieve without an MBA", while the other 999 posts on her blog were just day-by-day account of her GMAT and MBA-application preparation. My whole point is: I don't understand why so many MBA applicants are so much obsessed by the thought that MBA is the greatest thing in their lives, and measure their self-worth wholly by the number of offers or 'dings' they receive!
While many MBA dreamers claim that they are risk-takers and are ready to quit their jobs and take huge loans to pursue their 'dream', i believe in many ways, we are also risk-averters. That is why we seek the security and launching pad provided by a top 20 school. The real risk-takers, outside of military and social service, are entrepreneurs because they are risking a lot against very uncertain outcomes. A Harvard or a Sloan applicant is really risking nothing by accepting an admission offer, in fact it is the other way around.
Again, most people who pursue MBA are an ambitious and smart lot, who are either dissatisfied or bored with their present careers, and there is no problem in that. What puzzles me is that why do so many of them get uncomfortable with this reality and instead of talking straight, try to give the whole MBA thing so much spin and seek a higher meaning in it?
What I found very singular is that most people applying to top 10-20 schools seem totally consumed by the idea of doing an MBA. I find it funny that while 9 out of 10 aspirants are clearly pursuing the MBA dream to make more money and feel more important, they try to confuse the issue by needless philosophizing. Is it shameful to say that I want an MBA because I think it will help me make more money and climb the corporate ladder faster and farther? Absolutely not, I think. But many of the MBA worshipers like to say that "MBA is more than just education", as if all other degrees are utterly useless. They talk about little things in their business schools (such as a room, a club, a professor etc.) as if they are talking about Mecca or Vatican City. One blogger spent an entire post explaining that "there is nothing you cannot achieve without an MBA", while the other 999 posts on her blog were just day-by-day account of her GMAT and MBA-application preparation. My whole point is: I don't understand why so many MBA applicants are so much obsessed by the thought that MBA is the greatest thing in their lives, and measure their self-worth wholly by the number of offers or 'dings' they receive!
While many MBA dreamers claim that they are risk-takers and are ready to quit their jobs and take huge loans to pursue their 'dream', i believe in many ways, we are also risk-averters. That is why we seek the security and launching pad provided by a top 20 school. The real risk-takers, outside of military and social service, are entrepreneurs because they are risking a lot against very uncertain outcomes. A Harvard or a Sloan applicant is really risking nothing by accepting an admission offer, in fact it is the other way around.
Again, most people who pursue MBA are an ambitious and smart lot, who are either dissatisfied or bored with their present careers, and there is no problem in that. What puzzles me is that why do so many of them get uncomfortable with this reality and instead of talking straight, try to give the whole MBA thing so much spin and seek a higher meaning in it?
Monday, January 21, 2008
The first piece
Well, here I am. Despite technology being a big part of what I do for a living, I have usually been sort of a late adopter when it comes to using technology in personal life. Limited myself just to sending and receiving emails thus far. I know, i know it sounds so ninety-ish!
I guess my fear was that blogging might get addictive...and I am already not short on addictions, therefore the hesitation.
Anyway, from now on, I will try to use this little corner to share my mind with you all...unseen and unnamed travelers of the cyber-space. I hope I will enjoy this journey with you all!
I guess my fear was that blogging might get addictive...and I am already not short on addictions, therefore the hesitation.
Anyway, from now on, I will try to use this little corner to share my mind with you all...unseen and unnamed travelers of the cyber-space. I hope I will enjoy this journey with you all!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)