OCT 2011 Experimental Section Forum

[qbt1990]

I probably should have been more specific. I meant around longer than just this past test, and for that matter, longer than last June, as I took that test as well.

If this were a discussion that happens every so often, I would be inclined to imagine it a consequence of fading memories. Though if it were unique to this test, to me that does seem to make the sec. 4 thing more likely. Not that I am sold on that either, but I guarantee I have read every post on it, as I too have a vested interest in the experimental not being sec. 4.

What is kind of compelling evidence to me, as a 25 26 25 version tester, is that those with only 2 sections, regardless of their recollection of specific questions, felt that one section seemed above avg, and the other below. For me, my first was difficult, and the other 2 much more manageable. I'd love to think my first section was experimental, as I believe that would probably swing my score 3+ points in the right direction.

I don't believe clarity is forthcoming until I get that much anticipated e-mail that never opens fast enough. I am ready to call LSAC. Does anybody have an 'in' with like a mailroom clerk or orderly that works there, a janitor?

Wait, quick question for you. What were some of the topics (be vague) from your first, difficult section?

[qbt1990]

.

[EMZE]

Ugh. I don't even know anymore what really was where. All of the questions people with 2 LRs say they had I can place in all 3 of my sections. I thought my section 1 had the hotspots and alzheimer proteins ?, but that could have been my 2nd LR too. I thought my 2nd LR had a tourist/resident question, but that could have been my 3rd LR. And of course, after working through like 50 PTs, they all sound the same.

Hope that is vague enough. Certainly it is more so than most out there.

[3v3ryth1ng]

See, that's just it. I didn't have apes and mirrors. I had aggressive breast feeding macaques. There seem to have been 2 experimentals, which makes sense since they test experimentals for future tests, and obviously would need 2xLR validated before administration.

And I feel pretty sure that was not my sec. 4, in fact I thought that was my sec. 3 or 1. But I don't know quite what's what anymore.

Yeah, I've actually had a hard time figuring out which LR's were experimental (I'm just glad my 25-er isn't, because I nailed it!). I remembered pretty vividly a couple days ago, but now I'm second guessing myself. However, talk to some people who had 2 RC sections; some of them are saying with absolute certainty that their section with Mexican proverbs/Dostoyevsky appeared in section 3, with another RC in section 4. I've heard it from enough people that I wouldn't doubt it. If it's possible for RC, it's also possible for LR.

[EMZE]

I feel like gas tax rings a bell. That could well be from a PT. Dino bones sounds a little more distant, but again, after doing 1000+ LR questions they all sound the same. Especially if some topics. Like judging art, or corporation/employee relationship, or global warming. Everyone of those is on every test. Probably on ours too, but I can't tell the difference anymore.

I do believe that there probably were 3x LR sections. I have seen that mentioned before. I, as well, had nothing on flowers

[3v3ryth1ng]

Ugh. I don't even know anymore what really was where. All of the questions people with 2 LRs say they had I can place in all 3 of my sections. I thought my section 1 had the hotspots and alzheimer proteins ?, but that could have been my 2nd LR too. I thought my 2nd LR had a tourist/resident question, but that could have been my 3rd LR. And of course, after working through like 50 PTs, they all sound the same.

Hope that is vague enough. Certainly it is more so than most out there.

Right there with you. I'm not going to figure out LR at this point. It wouldn't even matter if someone else was certain, because I'm not even certain where each of the questions occurred now.

[EMZE]

3v3rything:

That's the thing that's throwing me off. My 25 q was sec 1 and 4, 26 was 3. Now, there are certainly many people out there smarter than I, especially on here, but I have been at this for long enough to know what a hard LR section looks like. That said, my 1st 25q LR was downright hard. My second I believe I nailed. So while most are saying the LR sections were both about avg, with a little bit difference, I believe my 2nd and 3rd to have been similar, and the first in a different leage. Not impossible, but I had a very hard time getting questions done in time, and made an educated guess on one, whereas I finished the other two with about 30 sec to spare.

[3v3ryth1ng]

3v3rything:

That's the thing that's throwing me off. My 25 q was sec 1 and 4, 26 was 3. Now, there are certainly many people out there smarter than I, especially on here, but I have been at this for long enough to know what a hard LR section looks like. That said, my 1st 25q LR was downright hard. My second I believe I nailed. So while most are saying the LR sections were both about avg, with a little bit difference, I believe my 2nd and 3rd to have been similar, and the first in a different leage. Not impossible, but I had a very hard time getting questions done in time, and made an educated guess on one, whereas I finished the other two with about 30 sec to spare.

I wish I could say you can infer something from difficulty, but you just can't. First of all, it's all relative. I thought the "bikes" games was easy, but the consensus is that it was hard (games are not my strength btw). Secondly, they can have difficult sections, and they frequently do. It doesn't mean it's experimental, and there's simply no reliable way to guess which it is on that basis alone.

Read back to the early posts in this thread or the other similar one. People were much more confident/clear on the content of their sections back then (on Oct. 1). Perhaps that will clear some things up.

[EMZE]

On a similar thread, a new poster to the discussion recalled a question about the calories in alcoholic beverages in sec. 4. I hope someone remembers that one?

And I don't mean that the section was hard so it must be exp. I just mean there's usually a general consensus on what was difficult and what wasn't I didn't think game 3 was terribly hard either, certainly no mauve dino game, but it was much more of a time suck in the absence of deductions.

[rivermaker]

so are you guys saying 25 26 25 section 4 is exp. 25 26 26 section 3 is?

[mmk33]

On a similar thread, a new poster to the discussion recalled a question about the calories in alcoholic beverages in sec. 4. I hope someone remembers that one?

And I don't mean that the section was hard so it must be exp. I just mean there's usually a general consensus on what was difficult and what wasn't I didn't think game 3 was terribly hard either, certainly no mauve dino game, but it was much more of a time suck in the absence of deductions.

I only had one LR, I don't remember this question, and I'm pretty sure I would remember it (big drinker/exerciser).

[Lemon Lyman]

They may have made more than 2 LR exp sections. I had LR (26), LG, LR (26), LR (25), RC and feel pretty confident that I had the movie rental question in my 2nd LR (3).

[mmk33]

my LRs had movie rental, pizza coupon, alzheimers, killer whales. that should be enough for anyone to figure out their LR.

[skitlets]

LG LR RC RC LR

First RC, 3rd section overall, was the exp? I don't remember anything about the topics but I thought the 1st RC was easier than the 2nd.