30 Game 1
- « 29 RC Passage 4
- 64 of 3815
- 30 Game 2 »
- You must Log in or Sign Up to post comments
When reading the description of this game, I inferred based on it having several different elements (types of bread, number of spaces, and sliced/unsliced) that it would be time consuming and so skipped it, subsequently running out of time on the section. When I returned to it, it was very quick. Is it just a case of not being familiar enough with the setup formats I could use (which I questioned) or are there markers I should be looking for to determine relative ease so I don't miss easy points?
Amazing timing for your question—this week's blog post is on exactly this topic. I think you'll find it gives you some specific things to look for that will help.
And yes, ultimately a greater familiarity with the process is the best way to predict difficulty. So keep up the good work!
I swear I've looked at it a few times...for question 3, isn't A not true as well? "If two or more of the loaves are unsliced, then at least one of the unsliced loaves is rye." The only unsliced loaves can't both be oatmeal, because then we would also have to have one unsliced rye?
I'm 100% with you; the wording is unfair. It is not possible for there to be multiple unsliced loaves of oatmeal without rye.
The plural is very misleading; it's totally possible for there to be only one unsliced loaf and for it to be oatmeal.
I'm sure I've used that sort of phrasing in my life ("The only things they had left on sale was one belt"), but I certainly feel that it's incorrect and VERY SHITTY.
On the bright side, it is the single instance of such a problem in the over-5,000 questions published since PrepTest 29. So don't worry about it too much, and know that you're not crazy.
Hi Dave - when I drew my binary grouping diagram I categorized as sliced or not sliced (vs D or ~D). I then wrote O/R/W in a row if it was delivered and otherwise didn't write it. Do you think this approach is worse than yours and if so, can you help me understand why? Thanks!
I cannot think of any good (that is, principled or theoretical) reason that my organization was better, which is a normal, natural part of the process!