JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[griffin.811]

F%*#!!!!

Just finished PT 41 --> 161. -7 on games. All on the last game because I misread H sits next to Neither, for H sits next to EITHER!

Over this test...

[Daily_Double]

F%*#!!!!

Just finished PT 41 --> 161. -7 on games. All on the last game because I misread H sits next to Neither, for H sits next to EITHER!

Over this test...

Still, great work. If you would have done things differently, you would have surely hit 169/170s, which if I remember correctly is an increase from your previous PTs. I'm looking forward to the review tomorrow, I have some decent insights to some of the tricky ones as well.

[griffin.811]

F%*#!!!!

Just finished PT 41 --> 161. -7 on games. All on the last game because I misread H sits next to Neither, for H sits next to EITHER!

Over this test...

Still, great work. If you would have done things differently, you would have surely hit 169/170s, which if I remember correctly is an increase from your previous PTs. I'm looking forward to the review tomorrow, I have some decent insights to some of the tricky ones as well.

Yeah man, me too. A little frustrated at the moment so I may go play some 2k, or real ball for a few, come back and do some self review.

Game wasn't even that difficult. Just a sequencing with a little twist smh..

[CardozoLaw09]

F%*#!!!!

Just finished PT 41 --> 161. -7 on games. All on the last game because I misread H sits next to Neither, for H sits next to EITHER!

Over this test...

Don't worry about it happens to everyone. Happened to me on that game actually but luckily I had enough time to go back and make the necessary adjustments... and yet I still went -3 :/ Just another lesson to be learned about reading closely.

[objection_your_honor]

Damn I probably won't be available at that time. If there are others that are okay for tomorrow as well, can we reschedule for then?

Yeah I suppose we could, I'm busy all afternoon tomorrow though, leaving tomorrow morning, until noon, or anytime tomorrow evening after 5:00 PM. I'm also referring to the central time zone.

Is this 41? I took 39 today, but can take 41 tomorrow if that's what is happening. Otherwise I'll have to catch the next one.

[Daily_Double]

Damn I probably won't be available at that time. If there are others that are okay for tomorrow as well, can we reschedule for then?

Yeah I suppose we could, I'm busy all afternoon tomorrow though, leaving tomorrow morning, until noon, or anytime tomorrow evening after 5:00 PM. I'm also referring to the central time zone.

Is this 41? I took 39 today, but can take 41 tomorrow if that's what is happening. Otherwise I'll have to catch the next one.

Yeah, we're referring to 41. Take it And we'll see you tomorrow night. Good luck.

[shieldofachilles]

I'm pretty sure the game were talking about from 41 wasn't a sequencing game--it was a mapping game. The problem with that game I think was trying to shove it into a ps type diagram when you really can't. Totally screwed that game up but after the fact was just like..shit this game wasn't even that hard it was just a curveball I wasn't ready for and got caught off guard.

[objection_your_honor]

I haven't taken this test before, but I've definitely see the RC section and several of the LR questions seemed familiar from PS/MLSAT. I only did 4 sections, used a digital timer (+ proctor video), did not use a bubble sheet, mechanical pencil, and I stood up and did a lap around my apartment in between each section. So not exactly test-like conditions.

I did blind review only on the two LR sections before grading. It takes forever but you can feel yourself "level up."


PT39

LG: -2
LR: -1 (#11, principle)
RC: -1
LR: -1 (#22, weakensX)

96 / 177

My highest PT last cycle was a 172, so it's nice to see something 175+. I thought I had LG in the bag, and even had time to check over a couple of the games. Still, I've struggled with games throughout my prep, and a -2 sure beats what I was averaging last time around.

[Daily_Double]

Good work objection, I know it takes forever to do both a PT and the blind review so your dedication was pretty awesome. Think you have the energy to take PT 41 tomorrow? The more people at the review, the better it will be.

[objection_your_honor]

That's the plan. PM me the link, if you can — I have an old one that I'm pretty sure you guys aren't using anymore.

[crazyrobin]

Damn, every time I saw you guys posting your full time PT progress I get a little anxious.

[CanILive]

Moved on to drilling grouping games today.

Getting handled pretty badly by the binary games....

Can't wait to get to PTs! PT > Drilling.

[eliztudorr]

Damn, every time I saw you guys posting your full time PT progress I get a little anxious.

me too..cuz im no where near their progress....

[jmjm]

Began prep for June today with PT-38 LR.
-2, -3 in LR1 and LR2
LR-2 has an "item removed from scoring". Would the real test-takers have seen the item?

I think so, but you don't get credit even if you get it right.

That makes a difference. Real testtakers would have had no way of knowing it would not be scored and invested time in answering it, something a PT taker would not do.

[Daily_Double]

Today I drilled and dug as deep as I possibly could into PTs 39-41, I'm still not done digging, it takes so long. I think I'm beginning to get into the mind of a test maker, and I like it. I also redid some complex ordering games.

Games: Complex Ordering
4 games, (17:01), level 1, -1, I'm an idiot for this one, the question asked if X is four, and Y is Six, how many remaining positions can you determine, and I read it to mean how many total positions
4 games, (16:58), level 1/2, -0
4 games, (19:11), level 2, -0

[griffin.811]

I'm pretty sure the game were talking about from 41 wasn't a sequencing game--it was a mapping game. The problem with that game I think was trying to shove it into a ps type diagram when you really can't. Totally screwed that game up but after the fact was just like..shit this game wasn't even that hard it was just a curveball I wasn't ready for and got caught off guard.

Technically mapping, but its easier to think of it as sequencing IMO. Just unwrap the circle and you have a straight line. That's why I said with a twist, but the important thing is that you get it correct, which I clearly didnt.

[shieldofachilles]

I get what ur sayin but there's no linearity to the game..it's a circle and ur not assigning a number to a seat. The seating arrangement is what it's important and who sits next to who but there's no inherent ordering to the game. Think the best pseudo diagram for this is just seats in a circle bc of the rule that says three spaces between is across. Of u think about it it's pretty logical. Draw a round table with 6 seats and every three seats is across. I tried the straight line and it worked horribly for me. Just my two cents

[Daily_Double]

I get what ur sayin but there's no linearity to the game..it's a circle and ur not assigning a number to a seat. The seating arrangement is what it's important and who sits next to who but there's no inherent ordering to the game. Think the best pseudo diagram for this is just seats in a circle bc of the rule that says three spaces between is across. Of u think about it it's pretty logical. Draw a round table with 6 seats and every three seats is across. I tried the straight line and it worked horribly for me. Just my two cents

I did mapping, I'll explain why tomorrow, but it's the best, because its easier to see the relationships, diagramming method for this game.

[alpha kenny body]

Doing preptest 30 today (4 sections timed-3 back to back) once I get through 38, I'll start adding another section and catch-up with you guys.

[griffin.811]

I get what ur sayin but there's no linearity to the game..it's a circle and ur not assigning a number to a seat. The seating arrangement is what it's important and who sits next to who but there's no inherent ordering to the game. Think the best pseudo diagram for this is just seats in a circle bc of the rule that says three spaces between is across. Of u think about it it's pretty logical. Draw a round table with 6 seats and every three seats is across. I tried the straight line and it worked horribly for me. Just my two cents

I see what you mean about the ordering piece...Just the first thought that popped into my mind when I saw it. I thought "this would be the same exact thing if I drew these place holders ins a straight line, but the lack of ordering would make this a mapping.

I actually did draw this out as a circle with the place holders.

[natashka85]

Guys here from Feb Thread,ended up withdrawing my test,taking this in June,need an online study partner that can take tests 2 a week for 7 sections and share w me all the things ,but that person has to be scoring above 170 anyone volunteers?

[wtrc]

Guys here from Feb Thread,ended up withdrawing my test,taking this in June,need an online study partner that can take tests 2 a week for 7 sections and share w me all the things ,but that person has to be scoring above 170 anyone volunteers?

What do you mean 7 sections? What do you mean share with me all the things? And what are you scoring at?

[natashka85]

Guys here from Feb Thread,ended up withdrawing my test,taking this in June,need an online study partner that can take tests 2 a week for 7 sections and share w me all the things ,but that person has to be scoring above 170 anyone volunteers?

What do you mean 7 sections? What do you mean share with me all the things? And what are you scoring at?

I am scoring above 170 ,so i need someone on the same level w me,i mean doing drilling during the week,and a timed test once a week for 7 sections to build endurance ,by sharing i mean discussing particulars from the material,thanks.

[Daily_Double]

I am scoring above 170 ,so i need someone on the same level w me,i mean doing drilling during the week,and a timed test once a week for 7 sections to build endurance ,by sharing i mean discussing particulars from the material,thanks.

If you don't mind me asking, why did you cancel if you're a 170+ scorer? Admittedly, I'd retake a 171 or lower, but still I probably would only know that I scored below 175 and above 170, unless I was able to see my score.

[natashka85]

I am scoring above 170 ,so i need someone on the same level w me,i mean doing drilling during the week,and a timed test once a week for 7 sections to build endurance ,by sharing i mean discussing particulars from the material,thanks.

If you don't mind me asking, why did you cancel if you're a 170+ scorer? Admittedly, I'd retake a 171 or lower, but still I probably would only know that I scored below 175 and above 170, unless I was able to see my score.

well,if u know how to read u will notice that I mentioned in my post that i withdrew my test not that I cancelled it,don`t know didn`t wanna rush things ,somehow felt good taking that in June.