Raffles Girls' School (Secondary) [*IP]
-
I must go get my popcorn then!
-
firefly38:
Sun seems to know who the winner was..
I will be watching it too.Sun_2010:
[quote=\"jtoh\"]firefly, it's not 'live'. Whoever the winner might be, it'll still be an exciting Finals because all three schools are very good.
Maybe next year we'll see your ds in it.
Let me spice it up - the winner truly deserved it. So get your pop corn ready :rahrah:
Ahhh.. Curiosity is killing the 'firefly'..
[/quote]I am a little bit disappointed with the format of NSC actually ..less exciting than old format . some time a bit of luck involved .. after watching the QF and SF,so many team (also in the past years session) that leads thru 1 -3/ bonus rounds simply become \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentally and literally take less risk, quit the Rapid Fire and response round all-together .. hoping that their opponents won't catch-up on them or killed themselves with 1 or 2 wrong answers.
Beside one and half minutes of the rapid Fire and response is hardly enough time to allow the team to do real battle. Perhaps a 3 minute Round would be more suitable.. just my humble opinion. Yeah, I do sound like a sour grape here ...
The only team that did not exhibit this \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentality in the rapid fire n response round was the NUSH team. They beat the HCI team in the QF by answering 5 correct qns and 1 wrong answer despite trailing HCL by few points. The HCI team literally quit the rapid response round hoping NUSH won't catch up on them. They were proven wrong then.
In the 1st SF, although NUSH was leading comfortably by 5 points from RGS at end of bonus round yet they show no sign of \"Kiasee\" mentality.
They answered 3 wrong qns but still won the semi-final. RGS lost by 1 point b'cos they also answered 1 wrong qn. I was told the RGS gals cried b'cos they thought they missed the final and they could have won if they have let the NUSH team do all the honour of RF..
But then as the best losing semifinalist, they have the last laugh ... -
I will be watching it too.
Let me spice it up - the winner truly deserved it. So get your pop corn ready :rahrah:[/quote]
Sun seems to know who the winner was..
Ahhh.. Curiosity is killing the 'firefly'..[/quote]
I am a little bit disappointed with the format of NSC actually ..less exciting than old format . some time a bit of luck involved .. after watching the QF and SF,so many team (also in the past years session) that leads thru 1 -3/ bonus rounds simply become \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentally and literally take less risk, quit the Rapid Fire and response round all-together .. hoping that their opponents won't catch-up on them or killed themselves with 1 or 2 wrong answers.
Beside one and half minutes of the rapid Fire and response is hardly enough time to allow the team to do real battle. Perhaps a 3 minute Round would be more suitable.. just my humble opinion. Yeah, I do sound like a sour grape here ...
The only team that did not exhibit this \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentality in the rapid fire n response round was the NUSH team. They beat the HCI team in the QF by answering 5 correct qns and 1 wrong answer despite trailing HCL by few points. The HCI team literally quit the rapid response round hoping NUSH won't catch up on them. They were proven wrong then.
In the 1st SF, although NUSH was leading comfortably by 5 points from RGS at end of bonus round yet they show no sign of \"Kiasee\" mentality.
They answered 3 wrong qns but still won the semi-final. RGS lost by 1 point b'cos they also answered 1 wrong qn. I was told the RGS gals cried b'cos they thought they missed the final and they could have won if they have let the NUSH team do all the honour of RF..
But then as the best losing semifinalist, they have the last laugh ...[/quote]
In the old format, teams must answer compulsory questions in various Maths, science and general category. To me that is a real test and excitements. This day it is more of \"showmanship and presentation skill\" when teams can hope to score good marks in round 1 to 3, they can literally switch off totally, hardly any attempts at the rapid fire round thus losing all the competitive spirit in a maths and science challenge. So the winning strategy is to secure maximum marks in early 1 -3 or bonus rounds ..and not to lose marks at all by not answering (if possible) in rapid fire round .. a sure good chance to win !!!
But a Science (and Math) Challenge is about answering tough questions .. -
walterp:
Sun seems to know who the winner was..I will be watching it too.
Let me spice it up - the winner truly deserved it. So get your pop corn ready :rahrah:
Ahhh.. Curiosity is killing the 'firefly'..[/quote]
I am a little bit disappointed with the format of NSC actually ..less exciting than old format . some time a bit of luck involved .. after watching the QF and SF,so many team (also in the past years session) that leads thru 1 -3/ bonus rounds simply become \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentally and literally take less risk, quit the Rapid Fire and response round all-together .. hoping that their opponents won't catch-up on them or killed themselves with 1 or 2 wrong answers.
Beside one and half minutes of the rapid Fire and response is hardly enough time to allow the team to do real battle. Perhaps a 3 minute Round would be more suitable.. just my humble opinion. Yeah, I do sound like a sour grape here ...
The only team that did not exhibit this \"kiasu\" or \"kiasee\" mentality in the rapid fire n response round was the NUSH team. They beat the HCI team in the QF by answering 5 correct qns and 1 wrong answer despite trailing HCL by few points. The HCI team literally quit the rapid response round hoping NUSH won't catch up on them. They were proven wrong then.
In the 1st SF, although NUSH was leading comfortably by 5 points from RGS at end of bonus round yet they show no sign of \"Kiasee\" mentality.
They answered 3 wrong qns but still won the semi-final. RGS lost by 1 point b'cos they also answered 1 wrong qn. I was told the RGS gals cried b'cos they thought they missed the final and they could have won if they have let the NUSH team do all the honour of RF..
But then as the best losing semifinalist, they have the last laugh ...[/quote]
In the old format, teams must answer compulsory questions in various Maths, science and general category. To me that is a real test and excitements. This day it is more of \"showmanship and presentation skill\" when teams can hope to score good marks in round 1 to 3, they can literally switch off totally, hardly any attempts at the rapid fire round thus losing all the competitive spirit in a maths and science challenge. So the winning strategy is to secure maximum marks in early 1 -3 or bonus rounds ..and not to lose marks at all by not answering (if possible) in rapid fire round .. a sure good chance to win !!!
But a Science (and Math) Challenge is about answering tough questions ..[/quote]
... and winning team awesome with showmanship (particularly round 2) and presentation securing 38 out of possible 40 points for round 1 and
2. In bonus round 3 (only 5 marks) (as in semi) scoring zero and zero in rapid fire n response ..if rapid fire n response is a 3 minutes round RI or NUSH would have caught up .. -
:congrats: to RGS for winning National Science Challenge 2013!! The girls did very well, leading all the way. Final scores were RGS 49, RI 46, and NUSH 37.
Well done girls! -
jtoh:
Not leading all the way ... only the final score sure leading .. not very impressive with zero for bonus round and and zero for Rapid fire round .. not competitive at all ...:congrats: to RGS for winning National Science Challenge 2013!! The girls did very well, leading all the way. Final scores were RGS 49, RI 46, and NUSH 37.
Well done girls! -
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
-
Sun_2010:
Not live, recorded. :imanangel: some of us knew the results many weeks ago. :nailbite: we can not let the cat out of the bag to spoil the show.. :rahrah:
I will be watching it too.jtoh:
firefly, it's not 'live'. Whoever the winner might be, it'll still be an exciting Finals because all three schools are very good.
Maybe next year we'll see your ds in it.
Let me spice it up - the winner truly deserved it. So get your pop corn ready :rahrah: -
For the Macbook, is it better to get the iWorks (Pages, Numbers & KeyNote) or Office for Mac?
TIA -
VALyap:
Worth the popcorns, mummies ?
Not live, recorded. :imanangel: some of us knew the results many weeks ago. :nailbite: we can not let the cat out of the bag to spoil the show.. :rahrah:Sun_2010:
I will be watching it too.
Let me spice it up - the winner truly deserved it. So get your pop corn ready :rahrah:
For those who missed it , it should be available at xin msn.com
Just my thoughts on the finals, sorry for a slight OT , but hey its is about RGS
I liked the tenacity the RGS girls displayed. Their presentation and the props they used were awesome for all the rounds. The team gave it their all it, I could feel the amount of hard work they put in, they wanted it real bad and they got it.
The RI team ( imho unlike the prev teams ) seemed to lack that \"Killer instinct\" attitude. They seemed the cool friendly smart boys, Heard they were quite helpful to the others behind the screens
But I was a little disappointed with was the performance of all the schools in the Facts of life segment in the finals. While the teams were good with the theory, they failed to know how heavy 3.5 kgs is . No not the conversion but just how heavy a 3.5 kg is . One look and an illiterate aunty can tell you that string cant lift a even 1 kg weight, much less a 3.5 kg. That simple estimation skill that we come across in normal life eluded them. They did have doubts but no one thought it was important enough to overcome it. Because without that , no way they could get the set up to work.
Of course they just have an hour and the solution was not easy. The problem was difficult and tricky - the materials given were used not used in for the obvious function . It did demand a lot of creativity and out of box thinking - all within an hour
The Rapid fire could have been a little longer. This one round the stakes are very high , and often it is not that the teams dont know the answer, but it is whether they can confidently answer in 3 sec. I still remember the way the RI team used this round to outsmart the opponents a few yrs ago. That was an awesome aggressive strategy. Perhaps that is why the duration was reduced? :evil:
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login