Chelsea manager Antonio Conte ended speculation over his future last night. The Italian signed a contract extension to keep him at the Stamford Bridge club until 2021. Conte brought instant success to Chelsea, guiding them to the Premier League title last season. His new deal is likely to bring him in line with some of the Premier League’s top-earning managers.
Tag: 不准不开心论坛 Duncan And Associates Donations Really Stack Up
Submitted by Duncan & AssociatesThis is one example of a sculpture created with donated canned food by Duncan and Associates employees to benefit the Food Bank.Beginning each October 1, Duncan & Associates begin a canned food drive donation to benefit the Thurston County Food Bank.Each associate donates canned food and then splits into teams and puts their creative efforts together to create a “sculpture” using the canned goods.Each entry is then judged and a winner chosen based on their level of crativity.The winning team recieved a monetary prize which they donated to the food bank as well as the food collected. Facebook2Tweet0Pin0
Tag: 不准不开心论坛 Former Chelsea boss ‘makes move to sign Ashley Cole’
Former Chelsea boss Carlo Ancelotti wants to sign Ashley Cole for Paris St-Germain, the Daily Mirror say.There has been speculation about the England left-back’s future because he is now in the final year of his Chelsea contract.And it is claimed that Ancelotti is looking to capture him on a three-year deal.The Mirror also suggest Fulham are leading the chase to sign Ivory Coast striker Arouna Kone from Spanish club Levante.The 28-year-old is reported to have snubbed moves to Russia and Qatar because he is keen to play in the Premier League.Tottenham have also monitored him, with Sunderland and Wigan said to be interested as well.Meanwhile, The Sun say Fulham have had a £4.5m bid for winger Matt Jarvis rejected by Wolves.The Daily Mail report that Blackburn are close to signing Fulham midfielder Dickson Etuhu and have moved ahead of the Whites in the race for Huddersfield striker Jordan Rhodes.Raheem Sterling is again linked with a move from Liverpool to Tottenham – this time by The Sun.It is suggested that Spurs will offer £7m for the 17-year-old from Harlesden and that he would welcome a return to the capital.Sterling was recently linked with a loan move back to QPR, who lost him when he left Loftus Road to join Liverpool in 2010.This page is regularly updated.Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Tag: 不准不开心论坛 Chelsea v Stoke: Costa misses out
Diego Costa is left out of the Chelsea squad for the game against Stoke because of a minor tendon injury, despite manager Guus Hiddink saying the striker would start.Cesc Fabregas is on the bench, but there are recalls for John Mikel Obi, Willian and Baba Rahman – who replaces the injured Kenedy.Eden Hazard also starts again, his 200th appearance for Chelsea, while young defender Jake Clarke-Salter is on the bench.The Blues and the Potters are both chasing a fourth consecutive Premier League victory. A Chelsea win would take them above Stoke in the table and could take them up to seventh place.Stoke have a number of missing players, including defender Phil Bardsley who is out with a calf injury, but Geoff Cameron plays despite an ankle problem.Chelsea: Courtois; Azpilicueta, Baba, Ivanovic, Cahill; Matic, Mikel; Willian, Hazard, Oscar, Traore.Subs: Begovic, Miazga, Clarke-Salter, Loftus-Cheek, Fabregas, Pato. Remy.Stoke: Butland; Muniesa, Pieters, Cameron, Wollscheid; Whelan, Imbula; Shaquiri, Afellay, Arnautovic; Diouf.Subs: Ireland, Joselu, Walters, Teixeira, Crouch, Krkic, Haugard.Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
SharePrint RelatedFebruary Featured Geocacher of the Month Nominees – Add Your CommentsMarch 1, 2012In “Community”Featured Geocacher of the Month Nominees – Add Your CommentsOctober 13, 2011In “Community”March Featured Geocacher of the Month Nominees – Add Your CommentsApril 10, 2012In “Community” A panel of Lackeys will use your comments to help decide the featured Geocacher of the Month award. Each featured Geocacher of the Month will receive an exclusive special edition featured ”Geocacher of the Month” geocoin along with a Geocacher of the Month hat and certificate acknowledging their contributions signed by the founders of Geocaching.com: Jeremy Irish, Bryan Roth and Elias Alvord.If you know an outstanding geocacher who should be the Geocachers of the Month, send an email to [email protected] of the Month geocoin front and back Every nomination must meet the following requirements. Please include your name, the name of your nominee, their username, at least one picture of the nominee and description (in 500 or fewer words) explaining why he or she deserves to be the Geocacher of the Month. Please inform your nominee that you’ve submitted them for the award. Nominations for the October Geocacher of the Month must be received by October 3rd.Once we have received all of the nominations, we will choose the top candidates and post them on the blog. You will then get a chance to champion your favorite. Our goal is to involve the entire geocaching community in this process so we might learn from each other.Share with your Friends:More Geocacher of the Month GeocoinGroundspeak needs your help featuring a geocacher each month that stands out by inspiring other geocachers with their innovation, creative hides and/or logs, respect for the environment, and helpfulness. More than a fifty geocachers submitted outstanding nominees from around the world.The featured Geocacher of the Month recognition celebrates geocachers for their contributions. A panel of Lackeys had the difficult task of selecting three of the most outstanding nominees. You can help name one of these nominees the featured “Geocacher of the Month.”Each geocacher you see below displays extraordinary geocaching qualities including generosity and inventiveness. Write a comment on this blog post about which of these three geocachers you’d like to see as the September featured “Geocacher of the Month.” Those not recognized as a nominee or as the featured “Geocacher of the Month” are encouraged to submit nominations again next month.Read the testimonials below and leave a comment with your suggestion. Some testimonials have been edited for length.AussieCacher(Member since 2006)AussieCacherNomination by pkreun: “AussieCacher has hosted events in both the US and his native country, Australia, helping experienced and new geocachers alike. He is always willing to go out of his way to help others. In 2007 he organized a Travel Bug race from Sydney, Australia to Sioux Falls, South Dakota with 33 Travel Bugs taking part in the race. He laminated each competitors TB details and delivered them all to the starting location in Australia. AussieCacher has created and hidden some very unique and creative geocaches in both Australia and the US. Many of these geocaches have not been seen anywhere else and were hand made from scratch.AussieCacher thoroughly enjoys the outdoors and respects the environment immensely. During his travels geocaching he has performed CITO many times and rescued animals from turtles, birds, frogs to dumped kittens. AussieCacher has taken part in 12 CITOs and just last month he hosted his first CITO. He has developed 12 EarthCaches as well as finding over 180.” SuperGoober(Member since 2005)SuperGooberNomination by The Weasel: “Jeff has hosted five “official” 101, 201, and 301 events. What I would like to stress is that Jeff has done WELL over 50+ 101 events for SEVERAL groups from the Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Libraries, and any group that asks for a class to be held. Some of these events have been several hours away, but Jeff is always willing to lend a hand and do this.Jeff has hosted 8 “unofficial” trips to a 5×5 caches of his, The Siege!. This is a very extreme cache which involves going over a cliff face. Jeff is ALWAYS willing to take groups to this cache to ensure their safety.Jeff is a VERY active member of the Iowa Geocachers Organization where he has held a position on the BOD for several of years as well as part of the Land Management committee.Jeff is a volunteer with the Linn County Conservation, and has donated several hours helping them with various events.Jeff is a model geocacher which all of us in the area and beyond can be proud of. He is always willing to lend advice/help to any cache that approaches him or contacts him.” pilgrimsprogress(Member since 2006)PilgrimsprogressNomination by OddAngles: “David and Tina would be an excellent choice for this award. This team has a Fire Love for Geocaching. They will take anyone who wants to caching and take them to do any and every cache that their heart desires.David and Tina are always willing to participate in CITO’s and have co-held many CITO Events.They have been caching since December 2006.I would say David and Tina are well rounded cachers in experience when it comes to terrains and difficulties. Their cache hides are as versatile as the caches that they’ve hunted. The Pilgrim’s have hidden water caches and high terrain land hides as well.When Pilgrimsprogress help’s with an event, they will go to no end to make it fun. David and Tina will come up with the most exciting and fun games. Besides the Human Checkers, they did a boardwalk team race once…where a team of 3 had to walk using boards as their feet. Pilgrimsprogress also co-managers of a Geocaching Group out of Augusta, Georgia called “CSRA Geocachers”. They are the heart and soul, the brains and backing behind many of the group’s monthly events.”
Tag: 不准不开心论坛 Is Nuclear Power Our Energy Future or a Dinosaur?
Nuclear power is dead. Long live nuclear power. Nuclear power is the only way forward. Nuclear power is a red herring. Nuclear power is too dangerous. Nuclear power is the safest power source around. Nuclear is nothing. Nuclear is everything.It is now generally agreed that the world must rapidly reduce carbon emissions in order to fight off dangerous climate change, but the “how” of that process remains up for debate. And within that debate, nothing seems to produce such starkly opposing viewpoints as nuclear energy. Some experts and advocates argue that carbon-free nuclear power represents the only real hope of keeping the planet’s temperature in check. Others claim that nuclear is risky, unnecessary and far too expensive to make a dent.The same basic data set — nuclear plants currently in existence, those under construction, the status of new technologies, the history of costs and delays, and a few striking accidents — produces those totally contradictory opinions and predictions. Nuclear power is a Rorschach test: You see what you want to see — a rosy nuclear future or an old-world dinosaur in a slow death spiral — reflecting your own views on the energy present and future. In all likelihood, no one will be proven right or wrong for decades. The Fukushima shadowAlong with price hikes, the specter of major accidents hovers over every discussion of a nuclear scale-up. By most measures nuclear power is among the safest forms of energy ever devised. But when it does go wrong, it goes wrong in spectacular and terrifying fashion.The accident at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan in 2011 led to a shutdown of all the plants in that country (with very limited reactor restarts coming only last year), and it has convinced Germany and Belgium to phase out the energy source entirely. Though those phase-outs will account for only a handful of total reactors, they put a damper on the idea of a revolutionary nuclear scale-up.Many argue the fearful reactions and phase-outs are not entirely logical in the context of climate change. Fukushima clearly did result in a drop in global support for nuclear energy, but public opinion continues to vary sharply by country.In the U.S., a Gallup poll on nuclear favorability has shown a decline since Fukushima, but not a dramatic one. In 2015 public support for the use of nuclear energy hovered at 51%, down from a peak of 62% in 2010. The same poll, though, found that only 35% percent think the government should place “more emphasis” on nuclear; for comparison, 79% want more focus on solar power.Cousins to the fear of a massive meltdown are both the worry over nuclear weapons proliferation and concerns over waste disposal. Spent nuclear fuel is currently stored on the site of nuclear plants in pools of water or sealed in dry cask storage, and decades-old arguments over geologic repositories are unlikely to be resolved any time soon.With regard to weapons, nuclear plants produce plutonium during the course of their reactions, which can be made into bombs if enough is accumulated; terrorism and theft are thus constant worries. Both of these issues work to extend the shadow of risk stretching out behind nuclear power, and both lack immediate solutions. Will nuclear have to be part of the mix?The heart of Hansen’s and Oreskes’ disagreement regards the necessity for nuclear and the technical feasibility of scaling up renewables: Are other energy sources sufficient to wean us from fossil fuels? Or is the reliable, large-scale (a single new reactor can reach 1,600 megawatts capacity, three times the size of the world’s largest solar plants) baseload power that nuclear provides a necessary component of the low-carbon future?The anti-nuclear side of the argument focuses on several studies that have illustrated a renewables-only way to the goal, which could be cheaper and free of the risks associated with nuclear. Mark Jacobson, director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, has published state-specific plans showing how 100-percent renewables penetration would be achievable. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory, part of the U.S. Department of Energy, published its “Renewable Electricity Futures Study” in 2012 and explained a clear path to 80 percent penetration in the U.S. Others have shown similar routes forward.When it comes to any energy source, it is cost that sits at the root of the discussion. Nuclear proponents argue that there are impediments to having a grid entirely run on renewables. Buongiorno, for example, says that the intermittency of solar and wind can realistically only be addressed by adding large amounts of electricity storage (in the form of large batteries or other newer tech such as compressed air) to the grid, and that would change the ongoing “renewable prices are plummeting” narrative.“When I hear people say ‘Oh, the costs are coming down,’ the costs for generation may be coming down, but if installing that capacity forces me to have energy storage, you have to add those costs,” he says. Think of it like buying a car: The baseline price sounds okay, but it’s all the options and add-ons that’ll get you. Buongiorno says he expects the costs of nuclear construction will come down, and that when storage costs for renewables are factored in, nuclear — with its reliable, 24/7 output — starts to look much more attractive as an alternative. RELATED ARTICLES Costs are a key considerationAdding more nuclear to the grid could reduce some of the burden on renewables and storage, but the economics of nuclear itself could prove an insurmountable roadblock.In general, the more experience accumulated with a given technology, the less it costs to build. This has been dramatically illustrated with the falling costs of wind and solar power. Nuclear, however has bucked the trend, instead demonstrating a sort of “negative learning curve” over time.Construction of a new reactor at Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant in Eurajoki, Finland, is nine years behind schedule and more than $US5 billion over budget. [Photo courtesy of Foro Nuclear.]According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the actual costs of 75 of the first nuclear reactors built in the U.S. ran over initial estimates by more than 200%. More recently, costs have continued to balloon. Again according to UCS, the price tag for a new nuclear power plant jumped from between $2 billion and $4 billion in 2002 all the way $9 billion in 2008. Put another way, the price shot from below $2,000 per kilowatt in the early 2000s up to as high as $8,000 per kilowatt by 2008.Steve Clemmer, the director of energy research and analysis at UCS, doesn’t see this trend changing. “I’m not seeing much evidence that we’ll see the types of cost reductions [proponents are] talking about. I’m very skeptical about it — great if it happens, but I’m not seeing it,” he says.Some projects in the U.S. seem to face delays and overruns at every turn. In September 2015, a South Carolina effort to build two new reactors at an existing plant was delayed for three years. In Georgia, a January 2015 filing by plant owner Southern Co. said that its additional two reactors would jump by $700 million in cost and take an extra 18 months to build. These problems have a number of root causes, from licensing delays to simple construction errors, and no simple solution to the issue is likely to be found.In Europe the situation is similar, with a couple of particularly egregious examples casting a pall over the industry. Construction began for a new reactor at the Finnish Olkiluoto 3 plant in 2005 but won’t finish until 2018, nine years late and more than US$5 billion over budget. A reactor in France, where nuclear is the primary source of power, is six years behind schedule and more than twice as expensive as projected.“The history of 60 years or more of reactor building offers no evidence that costs will come down,” Ramana says. “As nuclear technology has matured costs have increased, and all the present indications are that this trend will continue.” Changing perspectivesIn the coming years, it may come down to just how dramatic the effects of climate change become to force the Rorschach muddle to resolve into a clear image.“As time goes on, and the impacts of climate change become more and more real — droughts and heat waves and sea-level rise and storm surge, coastal flooding issues, more powerful hurricanes and devastating storms and things like that are also a wake-up call to people,” says Clemmer. “Hopefully at some point it will be enough of a wake-up call that we’ll be demanding action to address climate change and reduce emissions. In that world, maybe there’s more of a positive light that would be shed on nuclear.”Macfarlane also suggests that the changing perspectives on energy requirements could shift nuclear fortunes. “We go through these different transitions as a society,” she says. In the past, these transitions have replaced wood with coal to help cities grow, and added oil to feed a boom in transportation.“Nuclear never fulfilled one of those kinds of needs,” she says. “We’re going through another transition where we need to decarbonize our energy sources, and maybe it will fill more of a natural need now. We’ll see.” In the run-up to that agreement, a group of the most prominent nuclear proponents — climate scientist James Hansen, Stanford’s Ken Caldeira and others — wrote in the Guardian that “nuclear will make the difference between the world missing crucial climate targets or achieving them.”This was met with particularly harsh disdain from Naomi Oreskes, Harvard science historian and co-author of Merchants of Doubt, who wrote a response at the Guardian branding this “a new, strange form of denial.” Today and tomorrowNuclear power today accounts for around 10% of the total electricity generation around the world. This varies sharply by country — in the U.S. the rate is about 20%, in Russia and Germany it is a bit lower than that, while some other European countries get 40% and 50% from nuclear reactors. France has long led the way proportionally, at more than 75% percent. (It has the second most total reactors, behind the U.S.) China, though building rapidly, drew less than 3% of its power from nuclear in 2014.There are 442 reactors currently in operation globally, and the International Atomic Energy Agency says 66 are currently under construction. Twenty-four of those are in China; no other country is currently building more than eight.That’s the nuclear landscape now. The question is, how will it change in the coming years? And equally important, how should it change? The answers to both of these depend on whom you ask. Nuclear power capacity varies widely from one country to another, with the U.S. leading in installed capacity and China in capacity under construction.The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2014, which includes a close analysis of nuclear power, projects a 60% leap in global installed capacity by 2040, with almost half of that growth coming from China.“I think we definitely need it in the battle against climate change. This is broadly recognized,” says Jacopo Buongiorno, a professor of nuclear science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “Because now there is such an overwhelming concern about climate change, it’s like a tide that lifts all boats. Anything that is perceived as clean is going up. I think it is absolutely necessary.”That type of take on nuclear isn’t particularly hard to find, but neither is this one: “I don’t think nuclear power is a necessary component at all,” says M. V. Ramana, a research scholar at Princeton’s Nuclear Futures Lab. “Nuclear power as a share of electricity generation is only likely to decline in the foreseeable future. If we hold that up as a means of emission reductions, then we will not be successful with meeting any of the ambitious climate goals set” in the recent Paris agreement, in which 195 countries agreed to reduce emissions sharply. Cost declines are rareSome experts, however, dispute the idea that the “negative learning curve” is intrinsic to the nuclear industry. In a recent paper Ted Nordhaus of the energy think tank The Breakthrough Institute pointed out that the history of nuclear plant construction costs varies dramatically by country. South Korea, for example, has demonstrated a fairly consistent drop in costs over time; it imported its first designs from foreign companies with more experience before homegrown designs took hold, and all the country’s plants are built and owned by a single utility. Nordhaus wrote, “with the right policies and institutions, nuclear plants can be built quickly, safely, and cheaply.”Still, most countries have seen costs increase. As it stands, only China’s non-free market may allow for a truly rapid build-out of nuclear plants; the country’s current domination of the nuclear construction world reflects this idea, and the 2016 Five-Year Plan includes provisions to approve and build six to eight new plants each year.The industry, for its part, argues that the benefits of nuclear are worth the price tag. The Nuclear Energy Institute, which represents plant owners, builders, designers, suppliers and related companies, notes that in the U.S. nuclear power generates as much as $50 billion each year from electricity sales and revenue, and provides around 100,000 jobs. The lack of carbon emissions, of course, only adds to the benefits. Technological breakthroughs?Supporters of nuclear power hold out hope that new technologies will improve the economics and reduce the fear factor. There are ongoing efforts to develop small modular reactors, which produce about a third or less of a full-size reactor’s output and can theoretically be built faster and cheaper.Allison Macfarlane, director of George Washington University’s Center for International Science and Technology Policy and the former chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, notes that of the various companies working on these, only one (NuScale Power) is currently expected to actually submit application materials to regulators in 2016 — a step that is still years removed from actual functioning reactors.Long-term storage of spent fuel remains a problem. This is a fuel storage pool at the decommissioned BarsebÃ¤ck nuclear power station near Copenhagen, Sweden. [Photo courtesy of Foro Nuclear.]Other technological unicorns, though in many cases on the drawing board for decades, still remain off in the distance: different fuel sources such as thorium, molten salt-cooled reactors, even building plants on floating platforms like those used for oil drilling (a project that Buongiorno at MIT is heavily involved in) are all on the table.These have varying potential advantages: A floating plant could use seawater as a cheap and easy way to cool the reactor and would alleviate some of the safety fears by keeping the plant away from people and near a coolant should an accident occur; thorium could reduce waste and produce power more efficiently, though a U.K. government report in 2013 called the benefits “overstated” and experts have warned it could increase proliferation risks; and molten salts can operate at lower pressures than standard water-cooled reactors, offering some safety benefit.Nuclear research and development, though, moves at a snail’s pace, largely for safety reasons. If the goal is rapid emissions reduction, it is unclear if any of this new tech can play a role.“I think we need to do some work on it, see if we can develop some new technologies, but they are not going to be a solution in the near term at all,” Macfarlane says about the small modular reactors. “Some of these other things that just exist on paper right now? I think they’re much further out.”Clemmer, of UCS, agrees that the next 15 years or so are unlikely to feature much of a nuclear revolution. He says the 2030 to 2050 period, though, will be a crucial time for nuclear, with many existing plants in the U.S. and elsewhere due to retire — the IEA projects almost 200 reactor retirements by 2040. In that time frame, perhaps some of the new technology could make it to market. The Case for Nuclear Power — Despite the RisksSafe Storage of Nuclear WasteOn the Closure of Vermont YankeeThoughts on Nuclear PowerThoughts on Nuclear Power — Part 2Fukushima and Vermont YankeeFukushima’s No-Entry ZoneNuclear Meltdown in Japan and Our Energy FutureBuilding Resilience for a ‘Close Encounter’ with DisasterReport Gauges Future of Untapped Renewable EnergySolar Potential Is Far Greater Than Earlier Estimates Dave Levitan is a freelance science journalist. This post originally appeared at the website Ensia.
In this post, we’ve rounded up the best info on aspect ratios – learn how they’ve evolved over time and which one is right for your film or video project!One of the fundamentals of film and video is aspect ratios – the relationship between height and width in regards to image size. The aspect ratio of an image is dependent on the camera in which it was shot, as well as the method used for delivery/projection. Many people are most familiar with aspect ratios when looking at televisions, as we’ve moved in recent years from the classic 4:3 sets to HD widescreen 16:9 sets. These are the two most common video aspect ratios.To understand a bit more, check out this aspect ratios overview from the early days of film to modern HD standards. John Hess from FilmmakerIQ.com knocks it out of the park with his terrific history of film and video aspect ratios:Today HD video is most commonly shot on the 16:9 (1.77:1) widescreen standard, while films often use a 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 ratio.So, with a multitude of choices, how do you know which aspect ratio is right or your film or video project?For a practical perspective on aspect ratios geared toward film and videomakers, watch this quick tutorial from video pros Rich Harrington and Robbie Carman. The Lynda.com tutorial is applicable to all film and video creators, covering topics like shooting for multiple devices and cropping a 4:3 aspect ratio from a 16:9 HD image:Aspect Ratio CalculatorsHere are a few handy aspect ratio calculators that will assist you in determining the aspect ratio for common video formats or scaling an aspect ratio up or down (great for resizing video for web usage).Digital Rebellion’s Aspect Ratio Calculator covers the aspect ratios of common film and video formats including Super16, 35mm, NTSC and PAL.If you need to modify the height or width of your video image but you want to scale it commensurately with the aspect ratio, you’ll need to know the missing variable. For instance, if you change the height from 1920 to 1300, what should the width be to preserve the original aspect ratio? This calculator will quickly show you the missing variable so that you can ensure that the aspect ratio is maintained and the video doesn’t distort. Super useful!Lastly, the following image shows the most common film and video aspect ratios and how they compare to each other in size and proportions:
Tag: 不准不开心论坛 Students protest in Kashmir, colleges shut
LATEST STORIES MOST READ Coming back to action this conference, Slaughter is averaging 14.69 points, 8.75 rebounds, 1.69 assists, and 1.63 blocks to be the difference maker for the Gin Kings in this title retention drive.Meanwhile, Newsome has been the best local talent for the Bolts with his 13.06 markers, 6.25 boards, 5.0 assists, and 1.0 steals to help the team top the eliminations with their 9-2 record in the eliminations.The Best Player of the Conference will be awarded before Game 3 of the Finals on Wednesday at Smart Araneta Coliseum.ADVERTISEMENT NCAA: JRU claims 3rd Final Four slot BSP sees higher prices in November, but expects stronger peso, low rice costs to put up fight Frontrow holds fun run to raise funds for young cancer patients Read Next PBA IMAGESLeading their respective teams to the 2017 PBA Governors’ Cup Finals, Greg Slaughter and Chris Newsome are seen as favorites to claim the Best Player of the Conference award.But with another finals meeting coming up, the two are simply unconcerned about the plum, saying that it’s the championship they are chasing after.ADVERTISEMENT Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. “If I score zero and we win, I’ll be happy with that. We always look on winning the championship over individual awards,” said Slaughter, who is currently third in the statistical points race with 32.625 SPs.“The one thing that’s important for me is making it back to the Finals. Now, my top priority is winning in the Finals. It’s always good to hear that you’re part of the BPC race. That means I’m playing at the level that I expect to be playing at, but the individual accolade is not my top priority at the moment,” saidNewsome, who’s sitting at fourth with his 30.875 SPs.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutoutSan Miguel center June Mar Fajardo is still the pacesetter for the highest individual award per conference with 38.455 SPs, followed by TNT guard Jayson Castro who has 33.563 SPs.But with Fajardo and Castro failing to help their teams reach the Finals, it’s almost certain that the award will be disputed between the two former Ateneo studs, who could take home their first BPC trophy. Fire hits houses in Mandaluyong City Nonong Araneta re-elected as PFF president Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH Kammuri turning to super typhoon less likely but possible — Pagasa Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice PLAY LIST 01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice00:50Trending Articles02:11Trump awards medals to Jon Voight, Alison Krauss01:37Protesters burn down Iran consulate in Najaf01:47Panelo casts doubts on Robredo’s drug war ‘discoveries’01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games LOOK: Loisa Andalio, Ronnie Alonte unwind in Amanpulo for 3rd anniversary View comments
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Liverpool fullback Robertson: We want to intimidate oppositionby Paul Vegas10 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveLiverpool fullback Andrew Robertson admits they want to start intimidating the opposition.The Reds face Manchester City on Thursday.The full-back is not sure whether Liverpool carry that aura just yet, though when asked if it is something they hope to achieve, he said: “Of course. If teams are coming here maybe a bit worried then of course that works to our advantage.”But it only works to our advantage if we make it. Today we did that by going behind (against Arsenal) and we hit them hard straight after it so it was really good.”If people are worrying coming here then it’s a good sign for us, but it’s up to us to continue that and we need to keep winning games by doing that.”