As it is presented in the passage, the approach to history taken by mainstream U.S. historians of the late nineteenth...

XpZgato on December 30, 2018

game 4 question 17

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?

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Ravi on December 31, 2018


Great question.

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!