GMAT Strategy

I am really annoyed - either with myself or with Veritas GMAT simulator CATs. I started my preparation on a positive note by scoring a 710 in GMAT prep1 - q48, v39. After studying close to 80 hours over a span of a month, I took 3 Veritas CATs to produce the following great scores(pun intended):

• 630(q41, v37)
  620(q41, v35)
  630(q41, v37)

I got 9 quant questions wrong in each of the three exams. I don't UNDERSTAND the score of 41 for only 9 questions wrong. I understand the exam is adaptive and the questions are weighted. But whatever combination I get those questions wrong, Veritas awards me a score of 41.

So I took GMAT focus to find out my real ability. It has predicted(with 80% confidence) that I will score in the range of 47-51. In between I took a MGMAT test and scored 670(q:48, v33).

I keep telling myself that I have to take the mock test results with a pinch of salt. My intention is to take the test to improve my timing and identify my weak areas. But sometimes it gets to you. I am not sure of my current ability level now.

All the while I completely neglected verbal. Did nothing except finishing half of MGMAT SC guide. My test is only 15 days away. So, what should be my ideal strategy from now? I haven't done any official material till now. Should I finish all the official material that I have(GMAC paper tests, Offical Guide 12, Verbal and quant reviews)? Or should I postpone the exam by 15 more days(can't afford to postpone more than that) so that I can hone my math and verbal skills?

Don't take any non-official test score as gospel. You should take the second GMATPrep - or even take the Official GMATPrep Test 1 over again (you will get mostly new questions) if you want to save the second one.

Do not obsess too much on the scores that you are given. For each different test the scores are what they are...Remember that on test day you will simply get a score with no explanation at all.

So you can see that your scores on the different exams have been different. Veritas scores are low, GMATPrep are high and Manhattan in between. Of these you should give the most credit to the GMATPrep.

There is no need to be annoyed at your self, nor at the various tests that you take. Instead, take another GMATPrep as mentioned above and see where you stand. Remember to use CAT tests for the purpose intended -- to work on timing and taking the test on the computer, etc. rather than to predict the score.

I have known people score 100 points higher than their Veritas Prep GMAT Simulator score and for that matter at least a couple who scored 100 points higher than their GMATPrep score.

Before you do any postponing, take another GMATPrep and see where you stand.

Thanks David for the great suggestion. I will take GAMT prep1 today.

If the CATs are intended only to improve our timing and strategy then why have we given scores at the end of the exam? After taking all the tests I concluded that I SHOULD not even look at the scores - I could be right or wrong; only time will tell. I fail to understand the relevance of the scores given at the end. Probably if I am doing very well in the mocks, it's an indication that I am pretty good. Otherwise, it's an indication for me to improve.

I feel that from 710 in GMAT prep1 to 630 in Veritas CAT, I came a long way, learned a lot. I just can't digest 630 after all that. Blame it on human psychology
~ Prodizy

@david I scored 720 in prep1 Q:48, V:40. 13 mistakes in quant(11 from data sufficiency). Full circle - I started my preparation with 13 mistakes. After all the work I have done, there's no improvement in the score.

Data sufficiency is clearly killing me. Will focus in it.

Verbal is looking bright. 3 mistakes in CR and 5 in SC. Will finish the official material for verbal first.

I am inching towards postponing the exam. Is it me or every test taker goes through this phase?

~Prodizy

Prodizy -

720 is a good score on that GMATPrep. That is a more reliable score for you.

Yes - Data Sufficiency is the problem here and the one thing that is holding you back.

Do you have a consistent strategy to help you avoid mistakes in data sufficiency?

Is there one thing that you do every time.

Let me put together some things for you on data sufficiency. I will post them here in this thread. Data Sufficiency theory is one of the things that really interest me about the GMAT. If you can get over that hump you should be more in the 740 + range.

Thanks, David. I look forward to your post.

yes, I follow Veritas decison tree approach and it is solid. But the problem here is with my thinking. I dont't think clearly when I see a DS question - either my understanding of underlying concepts is not solid or my application of those concepts is not proper. I think I over complicate DS questions.

Hey prodizy,

I got your PM but it looks like David beat me to the original question. A few other thoughts, though:

1) Regarding the practice test score and your question "why have a score if it's only to improve timing/strategy?" - people want scores so you have to give it to them. It's why people watch their weight (even though they're really concerned with body fat) and golfers use those tiny pencils on scorecards (when they're really just trying to have a fun day on the links). We're motivated by numbers and when motivated properly to improve, that's a good thing. Just don't let the measurement get in the way of true progress.

2) Regarding data sufficiency... Let me know if this sounds like you but I think this may help. Often on DS people are surprised by or irritated by those questions in which "I forgot about a negative" or "I forgot about 0", or any of those "special case" numbers that give the opposite answer from the usual, creating a not-sufficient answer.

One way to alleviate DS anxiety is to turn those numbers in your favor. Make your goal on those plug-in-numbers questions to get "insufficient", and to do so you have to see the "freak" numbers (nonintegers, 0, negative numbers, infinite numbers, etc.) as weapons in your arsenal. You "get to" use those numbers as tricks up your sleeve - they don't exist as the GMAT's tricks to beat you because you're looking forward to using them.

I guess what I mean is - see Data Sufficiency as a game, a challenge between you and the author. I think often students see the questions' weapons ("special case" numbers, convoluted algebraic equations, inequalities where you have to remember negatives change the whole thing, etc.) as traps...those devices are evil. My take - turn them into your favor. Look for opportunities to use them and then they're just as much "yours" as they are "the GMAT's".

I hope that makes sense...I do really think you can learn to love the gamesmanship of Data Sufficiency, and when you go on the offensive usually that makes a big difference.

Hey Brian, Thanks.

What you said completely makes sense, but I would like to see an improvement in the Veritas scoring algorithm in the quant section. I am not saying all the hard work you guys put into it is not good enough. Thanks a lot for that. Just saying that I don't think Veritas' scoring algorithm is close to the true picture. Same is the case with MGMAT tests. MGMAT tests are even worse because they just give you a false sense of comfort. If you are a math whiz, you will easily crack the MGMAT's computing intensive math tests, otherwise you will feel you don't know anything about maths. I think, neither the math whiz nor average math guy is going to score great in the actual GMAT.

I took GMAT prep exam twice & GMAT focus once and the questions I have seen are completely different from the MGMAT and Veritas tests. The questions are never computing intensive. They are mostly logical questions that tests basic concepts. If you are someone who can solve/analyze problems logically without even knowing the underlying concepts, you will get great a score in GMAT quant section(after getting hang of all the basics, ofcourse). Probably this is what is higher order thinking everyone's talking about. Veritas CAT questions are somewhat similar to GMAT compared to MGMAT, but the scoring algorithm is not

Maybe I am talking too much ahead of time without even not going through the GMAT experience, but this is what I feel. Having said all this, I have to say that Veritas' and MGMAT's are the two best third party CATs available for GMAT aspirants.

OK, let me come back to my more pressing problem - Data Sufficiency. My problem is that when I see a DS question, my vision/thinking is foggy. In a PS question I know what to do. In DS, as I try to do so many things at a time, I miss one point or the other - a given constraint, silly assumptions(positive, non-zero, integers etc) etc. Most of the time I end up spending too much time on a DS question. That's ironic because we are supposed to spend less time on DS questions as we don't have to actually SOLVE the question in DS.

My plan is to take each and every question I have solved in DS and see what my thinking was and how I can improve it. Anything else I can do?

Thanks,
Prodizy.