Law School Discussion

#49 games versus Sep. 30 games

#49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« on: September 28, 2006, 07:02:29 PM »
just did the #49 games and found them much harder than the previous 5 or so...

anyone else feel this way?

is this a return towards harder games sections??

if so then i am most likely screwed.

what do you all thinK?

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2006, 07:03:24 PM »
hmm, i thought they were quite easy. I think our games will be somewhat more challenging, or at least will be considered more challenging. But who the heck knows?

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2006, 07:06:37 PM »
why do you think that?

Jets

  • ****
  • 1898
  • At least the Pats missed the playoffs...
    • View Profile
Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2006, 07:08:30 PM »
why do you think that?

What's the difference? Your guess is as good as his. For what it's worth, I didn't think June '06 games were easy. I will say that the difficulty ordering was seemingly reversed.

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #4 on: September 28, 2006, 07:10:37 PM »
well im  just worried because w/ easy games i have 170+ w more difficult games like i say, i am screwed

BirdMang

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2006, 07:12:06 PM »
Last 3 diagnostics seemed to have easy game sections.... which ones did u get stuck on?

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2006, 07:13:27 PM »
the ones on 49

BirdMang

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2006, 07:14:26 PM »
any one in particular?

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2006, 07:19:26 PM »
i dont know.

i missed questions on every game. but i did not even get through the grouping one with five pieces of mail and 3 people.

working through it now and it seems simple.

maybe i am just having some pretest anxiety

BirdMang

Re: #49 games versus Sep. 30 games
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2006, 07:20:56 PM »
probably