so i noticed that the way it was solved didnt really eliminated any choices and instead was lucky to find one that matched our previous scenario. Is that common? as in even if we dont check every single choices if we found one that matched a previous scenario can we just choice it as easy as that?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Question 17 in Game 4, as noted by Mehran in the video, is a time trap question that is designed to waste precious time on the test. We're given a set of parameters in the problem, and using the inference that Mehran makes, we know that the hypothetical has to include WSY in that order somewhere.
Since we've already done work for other problems, it behooves us to see if any of our previous work includes the parameter required by question 17 to answer the question. In this case, it does, and because of it, we're able to answer this question without doing any more work.
You could try and create hypotheticals for all of the answer choices in question 17, but that would waste a ton of time, making you less likely to finish the section.
In logic games, it's imperative that you're always seeking to make as many inferences as possible from the information they give you and to also use work you've already done for games to answer the questions later on in the game. Sometimes it works wonderfully, as it does in this particular question. Other times, you may be forced to make another game board or multiple game boards in order to answer the question. But even if that's the case, it always helps to try to see if the work you done can get you the answer because it'll save you more time.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!
