This is going to have to be a crappy blog because I gotta go (piano practice ^^), so I just wanted to ask a few questions.
1) How is the SAT? This could be a very premature or late question depending on your point of view; the nearest test is October 9th. I'm taking classes at this place called Ivymax, and I've been beasting the practice tests (which are essentially old SAT tests). However, every time I take them, I have a feeling that I screwed up horribly (i.e. I chose b/w two answers and I somehow end up picking the right one every time) and I'm working under a ton of stress/pressure. I've received three practice tests back so far, and I scored very high on all of them, but I keep thinking that each one is a fluke .__.
2) How were AP French, AP European History, Honors Physics, and [normal] Chemistry for you guys? My school has a prerequisite that forces us to take AP Euro in sophomore year (we have to take it if we want to take AP American History, etc.), so I'm taking it. It's highly school-dependent, but I've heard widely varying stories (literally from "HOLY SHIT DEATH, DON'T TAKE IT MAN" to "LOL skating dude~ FREE CREDITZ MRAWRZ (-_____-)")
3) How do you guys manage your time? By now, after realizing how much time TL is taking up in my life, my only sources of "playtime" are on Team Liquid in some way, shape, or form. I'm beginning to follow that one dude (Hidden Motive)'s semi-guide to preventing procrastination, but I don't have very high hopes for it. Another question is "How do you guys prevent yourselves from getting distracted in general?"
4) How can I hit my one-hander (tennis backhand) harder? I've been told by everyone to convert to the two-handed backhand, but I definitely cannot do it (and like the one-hander better). Unfortunately, there's a huge power disparity, and I can't hit angles all the time. Obviously, I'm not THAT good, so I'm requesting help, but I'm definitely not bad, either.
5) Goodies for making it thus far! :3
As always, thanks!! :D
Update: Thanks for all the super-nice and well-mannered answers! c: I'm about to go to bed, and I thought I'd check up on my widdle entry/post, and I realized that my SAT question should also include the information that I'm scoring in the 2300 area right now, that my goal is to get AT LEAST a 2300, and that the area in which I'm making the most mistakes in each practice test tends to vary.
Perhaps a better question would be: "How can I maintain consistency?"
Of course, any and all answers are still appreciated!
1st Practice Test: Critical Reading=750 Writing=680 (Essay was counted as a 4 b/c the essay wasn't graded yet, and they just assume it's a 4/12; I got a 6/12 :/ Mathematics=790 Total=2220 (I assumed this one was close to 2300 after the few extra points from the essay)
2nd Practice Test Critical Reading=780 Writing=620 (Essay was counted as 4, I got a 12/12) Mathematics=780 Total=2180 (I think the full essay score boosted it somewhere close to 2300 here ><)
3rd Practice Test Critical Reading=730 Writing=800 (Essay score of 10 was put in, and I didn't get any of the questions wrong) Mathematics=770 Total=2300 :D
The weird thing is that each and every time I take the practice test, I have a feeling like a failed, and it's not an overachiever/super-high-standard type of feeling. I truly, logically think as if I'm doing badly. There will be several questions in which I think I screwed up on, I had to choose between two answers, or I feel as if I might have gone through too quickly (but I cannot exactly remember which, everything SEEMS fine when I look back, etc.). So far, I've been scoring high, but each time I still don't think I did that well. Then, when I go to the review session (where the Ivymax people go over all the questions people missed), I'll look at how people all around me missed those questions, and I somehow miraculously pulled through o-o;
No arguing over tennis please! I have observed this sooooo many times while I have been compulsively lurking
Since you guys have responded with wildly positive accolades to the first yummy (grand total of one mention :D), here's another:
1) It depends a lot on who you are. I didn't think it was hard at all, except that the writing part is complete and total bullshit. The best way to practice is to just get access to a ton of old tests and take them. And especially take the parts you need help on just over and over. For instance, go through and take 10 of the fix-the-sentence sections one day (since they're short). Then do 5 math sections another day. Etc. And trust your instincts on pick-between-two questions. At least in my experience, my instincts are much more reliable than my reasoning, as just the fact that I'm in that situation means that my reasoning/knowledge has failed me. But maybe my subconscious knows something I don't, so I pick based on gut and keep going.
2) Didn't take AP Euro, but in general I've never found AP history classes hard. Memorize some stuff, review well at the end, know how to write, and you'll be fine.
3) In high school, you honestly don't need to manage your time even close to perfectly. Just a) go to the things you have to go to, like school, practice, w/e, and b) make sure you finish everything. You should have a pretty good idea how long it takes you to finish things, so just make sure you finish them. I know this isn't the best advice, akin to "just-do-it", but really, that's all you need to do. You should have plenty of time to go on tl or whatever if you want to.
The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
Everyone has their own method or approach to manage their time effectively but myself I adopt a "work first, play later" mentality. Hence I stay at the campus library late into the evening and then go home lift weights and eek out some starcraft or just go straight to sleep. I mass game on weekends during semesters though. I basically have no social life outside of going to school and going to the gym however (could be a problem depending on your preferences).
I also don't bring a laptop with me to school (since I don't need it), that might have helped me in not getting distracted (ie. browsing TL when I should be studying).
On August 10 2010 15:22 kzn wrote: The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
yeah No pros EVER use 2 handed backhand. *rolleyes* Rafael Nadal is terrible...>.>
On August 10 2010 15:22 kzn wrote: The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
yeah No pros EVER use 2 handed backhand. *rolleyes* Rafael Nadal is terrible...>.>
Honestly, it's a matter of comfort, I used to use a two-handed but then I grew and got silly hands and one-handed is better. The trick I'm using to compensate for power to hit really fucking hard.
Honestly, that's it. Go to the gym and get one of those pulley thingies and pull across your chest. I ain't no kinestiolology major but it's seeming to help.
1) The SAT's difficult really depends on how good you are. If you have been scoring well so far, you should have no worries. The format of the SAT allows you the margin of a few mistakes and still score well (2200+), except for Maths. You should be doing more than just 3 practice papers though. Most of my classmates, including myself, did at least 6 to 10 papers (one whole SAT book), and scored 2200-2370. Of course, this is an "Asian bias" example :p
I agree that the writing section is somewhat subjective, and hence you should not be expecting to score from there. It is still possible to get an 800 on the Writing section, even if your essay score is about 10, but you'll need to practice and practice the MCQs!
1) The SAT test difficulty rarely varies from year to year so if you're doing well on the practice ones, you should be fine. What I did when taking the practice tests was only answer the ones that I was 100% sure about and score the test. That way, you have a better understanding of what your true score may be. ( I understand that you are doing to an SAT prep class so that you may want to impress your tutors and score better but it's not worth it in the long run.) As long as you do enough practice tests, 2100+ is easily obtainable.
2)You're definitely correct in that the difficulty of AP classes greatly vary from school to school. The best way to find out more information about these classes would really be from students that have taken the class already. Also, sites like ratemyprofessor.com has a high school section and offers valuable feedback on the teachers and the class.
3)Personally, I procrastinated my way through high school and while it worked out fine for me, I certainly wouldn't recommend it for everyone. The only reason I survived was because of my horrible sleeping habits that have me staying up all night finishing up projects/studying for tests. Looking back at my high school years, I probably would have had a lot more free time if I just finished my homework right when I got home and have the rest of the night to myself.
4) When I played tennis competitively (top20 in North California until boys18s) most people actually used two handed backhands. One of the biggest advantages of the one-handed backhand is that acts as a much more fluid approach shot into the net. So if you're not really a volley specialist and more of a baseline grinder I would really recommend getting that two handed backhand down. However, if you're insistent with staying with then one hander the areas that you want to focus on are: Core Leg strength Positioning Followup swing
On August 10 2010 15:22 kzn wrote: The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
Don't mean to be an ass, but that's some bad advice.
The SAT is not any harder or easier compared to the old one. It's just a different scale of scores. For instance, if you are trying to go to a top 15 school, you still want to score a 2250+ to be safe, just as you needed 1500+ on the old one. Getting a 2250 is just as difficult as scoring 1500 (99%). Oh, and it's something you can most definitely practice for. Practicing raises your score. Period. You learn how to make fewer errors, how to solve problems faster (which is critical for the SAT), encounter various types of problems for each section, and other very valuable techniques.
A two-handed backhand is not inferior by any means. Where the hell did you hear this? Look at the top pros. Watch some good amateurs. Go to tournaments/tennis centers, and see how many of those really good players use two-handed backhands. A majority of them do it. Each backhand has its advantages and disadvantages - it's a matter of preference and what feels comfortable.
Anyway, here's some of my advice for your questions:
1) SAT: Honestly, the SAT wasn't too difficult for me. I studied over my sophomore summer and finished it junior year with a satisfactory score. But the thing is, it's really hard to describe how exactly the SAT is for everyone, though - there are simply too many factors and variations, such as how high you are aiming for, how you deal with standardized exams in general, and so on. The higher you are trying to score, it becomes exponentially harder as the curve gets tougher. For example, trying to raise your math score from 770 to 800 is a matter of one question, whereas it's around five to six for lower 700s/higher 600s. Try to get good enough to a point where you can pick out the right answer between the two likely ones with a decent rate. Practice tests are usually easier because you are working with less pressure.
4) Backhand: I have a one-handed backhand, too. And I love it! If you learn how to hit it well, it looks much sexier than a two-handed, in my opinion. But the single most important key to hitting harder is fine-tuning your form and timing. Trust me, everybody is strong enough to powerful one-handed backhand winners. I have seen small kids hit them. You won't be able to hit them harder just because you work out at the gym or something (although I am sure it helps after a certain point). There's less room for error with one-handed backhands, which is why you must learn the correct grip, form, timing, release, and follow-up. Getting a coach and working on this over and over should help a lot. You don't need to switch.
Thanks for all the super-nice and well-mannered answers! c: I'm about to go to bed, and I thought I'd check up on my widdle entry/post, and I realized that my SAT question should also include the information that I'm scoring in the 2300 area right now, that my goal is to get AT LEAST a 2300, and that the area in which I'm making the most mistakes in each practice test tends to vary.
Perhaps a better question would be: "How can I maintain consistency?"
Of course, any and all answers are still appreciated!
This was typed on my cell phone, so forgive me for any typos
On August 10 2010 15:03 Z3kk wrote: 4) How can I hit my one-hander (tennis backhand) harder? I've been told by everyone to convert to the two-handed backhand, but I definitely cannot do it (and like the one-hander better). Unfortunately, there's a huge power disparity, and I can't hit angles all the time. Obviously, I'm not THAT good, so I'm requesting help, but I'm definitely not bad, either.
You can use the one handed backhand but ad the other hand to the swing just as you are about to hit the ball to stabilize for hard hits. Or you could start working out, if you are stronger you of course get a stronger one handed backhand.
Uhm how are you feeling like your tests are "fluke" if you are scoring ~2300? You even said you are "beasting" them so I don't think you need to worry at all. I don't understand why you are worrying about consistency when you have scored consistently...
For your one handed backhand, try the heel to toe weight transfer method to generate more pace onto the ball. Also, don't fully close the face of the racket but leave it slightly open. Make sure you have good hip rotation as well.
1) For me, I didn't have the SAT scores that I should have gotten (well in my parents' opinions and to some degree my own). I didn't study for the first one, studied and did worse the second time, and then improved the third: point being is, you can take them again if you don't like your score.
2) AP French... have fun. I had a hell of a hard time in that class. Only other class I've ever averaged less than an A for the year (For the record, my quarter grades were B/low A/B/low A, and two Bs for midterms and finals so I'm only slightly exaggerating). If you've been barely scraping As in all your other French classes like me you might be looking at a B, but you never know.
It really does vary from teacher to teacher though. I liked my French teacher a lot but that didn't help me really with the class, heh. So you could find a different experience. I can't help for any of those other things.
3) If there's one thing I didn't do well throughout high school, it's time management. I had awful sleep all the time and tried to make it up during breaks and weekends, but that doesn't really help. Even some long-term projects were held off till the last few days. I couldn't help myself though. If there's anything that did help me, it was doing homework NOT in front of a computer or TV. Try and take breaks when you're on the computer. You don't need to keep up with TL every waking moment
4) Didn't play tennis. Have fun ^^;;
5) Oh.
Update: Thanks for all the super-nice and well-mannered answers! c: I'm about to go to bed, and I thought I'd check up on my widdle entry/post, and I realized that my SAT question should also include the information that I'm scoring in the 2300 area right now, that my goal is to get AT LEAST a 2300, and that the area in which I'm making the most mistakes in each practice test tends to vary.
Wow 2300 o_o You don't need my help then! (2100 here)
If you want a 2300+, my advice would be to concentrate on getting 800s on critical reading and math. Maybe it's just me, but I consider writing somewhat of a crapshoot (this is where taking it multiple times also helps, as you can take your best composite score). As I said earlier, just practice the relevant sections over and over again. If you've ever done math competitions, those are also great practice for the SAT, as they are essentially the same type of stuff only a ton harder. But if you haven't, the math on the SAT isn't like the math you learn in school generally, so you just have to take a lot of SAT tests. That's where the practice books you buy are great, ignore everything they say pretty much, but the fact that they come with 5-8 full tests is amazing.
So, in conclusion, grind sections. Do 10 fix-the-sentence sections. Then 10 passage-reading sections. Then 10 math sections. Then 10 whatever-is-left sections. Then repeat.
On August 10 2010 15:22 kzn wrote: The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
yeah No pros EVER use 2 handed backhand. *rolleyes* Rafael Nadal is terrible...>.>
And he's flat out worse than Federer.
One of the biggest reasons Roddick could never compete with Federer was that using a 2 handed backhand puts you at a default disadvantage against a 1 handed backhander in terms of covering the entire court.
Obviously the best option is to use both, if you can, but if you have to pick one 1 handed is the optimal choice.
On August 10 2010 16:03 OneOther wrote: The SAT is not any harder or easier compared to the old one. It's just a different scale of scores. For instance, if you are trying to go to a top 15 school, you still want to score a 2250+ to be safe, just as you needed 1500+ on the old one. Getting a 2250 is just as difficult as scoring 1500 (99%). Oh, and it's something you can most definitely practice for. Practicing raises your score. Period. You learn how to make fewer errors, how to solve problems faster (which is critical for the SAT), encounter various types of problems for each section, and other very valuable techniques.
That might have been what was intended but it is not the case. It might well be the case that there are as few people who score 2250 as there are who score 1500, but thats a matter of the grading curve, not the actual difficulty of the test.
And the new SAT doesn't even have the section that was commonly considered the most difficult of all sections in the old one.
On August 10 2010 15:22 kzn wrote: The new SAT is easy as fuck compared to the old one. If you've scored well, consistently, its highly unlikely (although not impossible) that all of them are fluke scores.
I wouldn't worry about it. Its not something that you can particularly practice for unless you flat out dont know what its testing, which is almost impossible if you went to school in the US.
And definitely do not go to a 2-handed backhand. Its flat out inferior for serious play.
yeah No pros EVER use 2 handed backhand. *rolleyes* Rafael Nadal is terrible...>.>
And he's flat out worse than Federer.
One of the biggest reasons Roddick could never compete with Federer was that using a 2 handed backhand puts you at a default disadvantage against a 1 handed backhander in terms of covering the entire court.
Obviously the best option is to use both, if you can, but if you have to pick one 1 handed is the optimal choice.
Last time I checked, Nadal has a lobsided record against Federer and has more slams than Federer when they were the same age. And this is coming from a huge Federer fan who hates Nadal. Your argument makes no sense.
How does Nadal defeat Federer? Nadal hits high to Federer's one-handed backhand every time. It's an inherent weakness for every one-hander. There is no default disadvantage. There are advantages and disadvantages for each type that negate each other. That's why it depends on preference and comfort. Check how many of the top ten pros use two-handed backhands. Your Roddick/Federer is argument is immensely flawed. Having more coverage is an advantage for one-handers, but there are disadvantages that compensate for it e.g. being weak versus high ball, requiring more time for set-up, needing to follow through more, and such.
I'm almost starting to believe that you have never played tennis on a serious competitive level. I don't see how anyone with some experience like that can actually believe a two-handed backhand is in nature inferior to a one-hander.
That might have been what was intended but it is not the case. It might well be the case that there are as few people who score 2250 as there are who score 1500, but thats a matter of the grading curve, not the actual difficulty of the test.
And the new SAT doesn't even have the section that was commonly considered the most difficult of all sections in the old one.
That was the intention and that is exactly the case. That's how the SAT works - seeing how you compare to kids going to college the same year. Benchmarks and the difficulty of achieving your goals remain the same. It's just dumb to argue that the old one was "harder" because that's a subjective issue and I, for one, think the old one is easier because it focuses on a smaller array of topics.
First up, let's not argue a bunch about tennis. It's a sport that's meant to be enjoyed by us mere mortals, and we all have our own opinions, but arguing isn't appreciated. I tend to side with OneOther not because I'm sucking up to a mod, but the truth is that the one-hander isn't inherently "superior" or anything like that (neither is the two-hander, for that matter). There are pros and cons to each. One way to think of it: back then, everyone used a one-handed backhand, and it was the norm--does that mean the 1hbh is better? Nope! Nowadays, most people have begun to use the two-handed backhand--does that mean it's better? Ye--nope. "But Federer/Nadal uses the 1/2hbh!" That means nothing.
I'll try to lift some weights or something, but I'm also worried since my right arm is already a ton more buff than my left arm, so I'm not sure whether I should just work on upgrading my left arm from twig to stick.
Also, I'm going to Ivymax in Norcal :D
@loser777: before I made the blog I was also thinking that it might turn out to be a brag blog (and I suppose it is ><"), but I decided to go through with it anyway :/
The weird thing is that each and every time I take the practice test, I have a feeling like a failed, and it's not an overachiever/super-high-standard type of feeling. I truly, logically think as if I'm doing badly. There will be several questions in which I think I screwed up on, I had to choose between two answers, or I feel as if I might have gone through too quickly (but I cannot exactly remember which, everything SEEMS fine when I look back, etc.). So far, I've been scoring high, but each time I still don't think I did that well. Then, when I go to the review session (where the Ivymax people go over all the questions people missed), I'll look at how people all around me missed those questions, and I somehow miraculously pulled through o-o;
I'm not sure if I should share my scores, but (as I've said before) I trust our community here <3 so here goes:
1st Practice Test: Critical Reading=750 Writing=680 (Essay was counted as a 4 b/c the essay wasn't graded yet, and they just assume it's a 4/12; I got a 6/12 :/ Mathematics=790 Total=2220 (I assumed this one was close to 2300 after the few extra points from the essay)
2nd Practice Test Critical Reading=780 Writing=620 (Essay was counted as 4, I got a 12/12) Mathematics=780 Total=2180 (I think the full essay score boosted it somewhere close to 2300 here ><)
3rd Practice Test Critical Reading=730 Writing=800 (Essay score of 10 was put in, and I didn't get any of the questions wrong) Mathematics=770 Total=2300 :D
There ya go. At first, I thought my Critical Reading was my beast part, but after the latest practice test, I think otherwise... During the 3rd practice test, however, I was already thinking that I would do the worst on its Critical Reading out of all the tests, and I'm not just saying this in retrospect.
Thanks again to everyone! My favorite player is Roger Federer, and I'll be rooting for him for his match against Chela! :3
Edit: as to the debate about the difference between the "old" and "new" SAT, my uber-smart Ivymax English teacher (a really cool lady who graduated from Harvard) stated that the "old" was literally a "Scholastic Aptitude Test"--that is, the test was directly designed to measure your inherent "aptitude" for something. Logically, then, you couldn't have studied for it. College Board said so, and they were essentially correct. The "new" SAT can, however, be studied for, and therein lies its (I believe) reduced level of difficulty.
On August 11 2010 05:10 OneOther wrote: That was the intention and that is exactly the case. That's how the SAT works - seeing how you compare to kids going to college the same year. Benchmarks and the difficulty of achieving your goals remain the same. It's just dumb to argue that the old one was "harder" because that's a subjective issue and I, for one, think the old one is easier because it focuses on a smaller array of topics.
The point I'm making is they could create a test that merely involved thousands of basic addition problems and still maintain that kind of "difficulty".
And of course its subjective now because nobody has actually looked into it, but the data I'm aware of suggests that the older one was a more accurate test of aptitude than the current one in terms of predicting college performance, which suggests it was harder in an objective sense.
The 1 hand backhand is all about the shoulder and chest muscle. Therefore, you need a shitload of footwork to get those muscles in a position where you can rip the shot wherever you want it.
When you make contact with the ball, make sure that instead of hitting the ball with your arm, you're hitting it with your shoulder and then using your shoulder and chest muscles to follow through with the shot.
Basically, if you want to break it down like an actual build, here it is: 1. Draw back your racket. You should be using your shoulder to do this. Your shoulder should sort of be parallel to the net, and your eye is focused ont he ball.
2. fuckload of footwork to get your body in position (this will take some time for you to adjust properly). Watch Federer if you want to see what footwork is like.
3. Step in with your lead foot and bend both of your knees as LOW AS YOU FUCKING CAN (This is one of the reasons why I never won any tournaments. I just got lazy with my legs)
4. Use your shoulder muscles (like we explained), and make contact with the ball. NOTE: When you make contact, it should be out in front of you, and not right near you. One of the biggest mistakes you can make with the one-hand is to hit the ball too late. It is better to hit EARLY than late.
5. Follow through. If you don't know what it means, it just means keep the ball on your racket as long as possible. If you hit the ball at the right time, it should be easy as hell. It's almost just using your racket to bounce the momentum back towards your opponent.
6. Roll up. At the very end of the shot, as you're finishing the contact and are about to let go, roll your racket up to generate some spin on the ball. This way, instead of flying back into the fence, you get some spin to let the ball drop into the court.
Ultimately, I will say this: The one-hand backhand is not designed for "power shots". It's a shot that utilizes the power of the opponent against them. You use swift and clean strokes to bounce balls into angles and corners that the two-hand backhand is unable to accomplish.
Think less about power, and think more about generating top spin on that ball, hitting the ball early, and placing the shots were you want it.
In tennis, power is nothing if you don't put it in the right places.
REMEMBER. Unlike what other posters said in this thread, to gain power is NOT to hit really fucking hard. The one-hand backhand is a move focused on technique and grace.
DO NOT HIT LIKE A MOTHERFUCKER. You will miss. Trust me. -_-x
I would comment on all that other shit, but I think tennis is the best advice I can give at this point.
I would also use images to help you...I'm lazy...maybe I'll make a thread about it someday. Hahahahahahahaha. ^^
On August 11 2010 05:10 OneOther wrote: That was the intention and that is exactly the case. That's how the SAT works - seeing how you compare to kids going to college the same year. Benchmarks and the difficulty of achieving your goals remain the same. It's just dumb to argue that the old one was "harder" because that's a subjective issue and I, for one, think the old one is easier because it focuses on a smaller array of topics.
The point I'm making is they could create a test that merely involved thousands of basic addition problems and still maintain that kind of "difficulty".
And of course its subjective now because nobody has actually looked into it, but the data I'm aware of suggests that the older one was a more accurate test of aptitude than the current one in terms of predicting college performance, which suggests it was harder in an objective sense.
Source? I have no idea how you are making that kind of claim without even a mention of a source or reference. Even if you cited a source that the old one was more "accurate," how does that mean that it was "objectively harder?" Accuracy of predicting college performance does not have enough correlation to the test's actual difficulty for you to make that assumption. Do you just like to talk about things you don't really know about? I hope it's not my fault that I don't take your arguments with much trust after seeing what you have argued about tennis.
EDIT: Just realized you didn't even bother replying about tennis :o
On August 11 2010 06:16 OneOther wrote: Source? I have no idea how you are making that kind of claim without even a mention of a source or reference. Even if you cited a source that the old one was more "accurate," how does that mean that it was "objectively harder?" Accuracy of predicting college performance does not have enough correlation to the test's actual difficulty for you to make that assumption. Do you just like to talk about things you don't really know about? I hope it's not my fault that I don't take your arguments with much trust after seeing what you have argued about tennis.
I'm not actually a psychometrician. My "source" is talking with people I know who are college counselors and thus have to pay attention to this stuff. If you really want me to, I can try to find the source.
As far as how predictive capacity correlates with objective difficulty:
I hope we both agree that the SAT is intended to generate a metric with which to predict a person's future college performance. If thats true, the SAT will obviously be a more accurate predictor the more closely it mirrors the kind of challenges presented by a college education.
Now, if you assume that college is actually hard, it is a possibility (and I would argue a quite likely one) that a less accurate predictor is less difficult, although there is always the possibility that its just testing something else entirely and gets most of its difficulty from there instead.
EDIT: Just realized you didn't even bother replying about tennis :o
Because I'm not knowledgeable enough about it to continue arguing, so whatever.
I'm quite sure that the SAT is designed to give colleges a bell curve with which to work; it isn't necessarily a predictor of performance in college (I thought).
I'll be back with a more constructive response later, as I must work my ass off for the time being. I might even need to request a temp ban or something because I lack self-control like Apple products lack flash support ;x
I switched to a one-hander four years ago, and it's improved quite a bit. It takes about a year to actually get comfortable with it, and if you've been using one for a while, don't switch back, just so you can be consistent. For increased power (and accuracy, and just general performance) you have to do several things.
Two-handers can just hit the moonball if they want, or reach out a bit and hit an open stance backhand, simply because they have their other hand to support the racket, and don't rely on the same hitting motion for power. Since they're rotating through with their shoulders, they can do more of a back to front motion.
If a one-hander rotates his shoulders (especially before he hits the ball), he risks losing a significant amount of accuracy. That's why you see the stroke form like what Federer does (chest stays closed, racket goes from bottom to top). To get power from this motion, you absolutely need to hit the ball in the sweet spot, which is at waist level, a comfortable distance away from your body (out and in front). If you reach too far, you lose balance from your base, and then there's no power. If it's too close, you lose topspin. Therefore, you need better footwork than the two-handers to achieve the same result. Improving your footwork should show immediate results.
The muscle that a one-hand backhand puts the most strain on is the shoulder muscle of the hitting arm. Strengthen this muscle so that you have the stamina to keep on hitting backhands in long matches.
When you hit the ball, counterbalance your self with your other hand, extending it backwards. Also, DO NOT watch the ball after you hit it. Look at the ball all the way to your racket. Make a conscious effort to do this. Many tennis players and baseball players (the two athletes who have to hit a moving ball in mid air) watch the ball for as long as possible, but then ignore it for the last two feet that it travels. Those last two feet where you're not watching the ball are often what mess you up and make you shank. With your head looking over your shoulder (right shoulder for a right-hander) watch the ball as long as possible until you actually make contact. Then, keep your head in the same position that it's in. If you turn your head to see where the ball goes, you will probably end up rotating your body. This is okay if you do it late, but many people will rotate prematurely, which will make the ball go anywhere but where they want it to go.
So yeah, to repeat: 1.) Emphasis on footwork to get to the ball 2.) Strong base with good balance 3.) Make contact in the sweet spot of your stroke, swinging all the way up. 4.) Non-dominant hand moves back to counterbalance after it lets go of the racket's neck. 5.) Head hangs around for about half a second after you make contact, so that you don't risk rotating prematurely. Fight your urge to immediately watch the ball, just like you must fight your urge to stare at your army fighting in BW. You must trust your stroke form just as you must trust your micro.
EDIT: also, yeah, the point of a one-hand backhand is not to send the ball flying at ridiculous speeds. It's to hit the ball with significant topspin, and to use that topspin to get some crazy angles.
On August 11 2010 11:24 Z3kk wrote: I'm quite sure that the SAT is designed to give colleges a bell curve with which to work; it isn't necessarily a predictor of performance in college (I thought).
I'll be back with a more constructive response later, as I must work my ass off for the time being. I might even need to request a temp ban or something because I lack self-control like Apple products lack flash support ;x
To continue on about the SAT... keep track of the number of questions you miss... not just the score, since prep places tend to scale differently.
For example, when I took SAT classes at ELITE (similar to IvyMax), missing 5 or so questions in CR would land me a 760-780 in that subject. Missing 5 questions on the actual SAT, however, results in a 730-740. Of course, the actual SAT tends to be easier, but if you're the type of person who likes harder tests where you can miss more (as I was) as opposed to easier tests where you must miss fewer, you should be careful about this (oh silly me the "this" is ambiguous). The vocab can also be hit or miss if you slack off (like I did)... missing just one or two more questions than you usually do can have huge consequences -in the 20-30 point range.
This may not apply to you, but one of the most important things is to develop consistency in your writing -you need to have an example bank (not necessarily lengthy) of examples that you can toss out on the fly for essentially any subject. My lack of examples killed my essay grade, but thankfully I am a Grammar Nazi....
As for the math section, newer tests tend to have really lame curves (one question wrong = 770/760, etc)... so you need to learn to be a robot and NEVER EVER make ANY mistakes.
If you think you "guessed" your way to your score, listen to some of the reasons people gave for choosing the WRONG answer -you'll quickly realize that other choices -even the ones you tempted to choose, don't make sense at all.
On August 11 2010 12:57 DTK-m2 wrote:Many tennis players and baseball players (the two athletes who have to hit a moving ball in mid air) watch the ball for as long as possible, but then ignore it for the last two feet that it travels. Those last two feet where you're not watching the ball are often what mess you up and make you shank.
Interestingly, it's actually been proven that a baseball player can't actually see the baseball for those couple feet before it hits the bat, simply because the eye can't physically change it's focus fast enough to keep track of the ball moving at that speed. Watching the ball hit the bat is simply an illusion, in the last fraction of a second you eye just can't catch up.