<p>nooooooooooooo… pls 790… PLS xD</p>
<p>@TheNikeTan - Remember you are not deducted for an incorrect grid-in answer…it will just be like you omitted the question, no loss, no gain…the SAT actually gives you 2 free incorrect questions, because they round up your raw score, so if you got 49.5/50 it would round back up to be 50/50…YOU STILL HAVE A SHOT TO GET AN 800!</p>
<p>Hey guys, what do you think the math curve will be like? I know that for 2 incorrect usually you get 770-740, but does anyone have any thoughts as to how harsh it will be?</p>
<p>@keepingcalm21 I don’t know where you heard that. If you miss one question on math you have no nearly no chance of getting an 800.</p>
<p>@keepingcalm. there are no “free incorrect questions.” while you can get two questions wrong and be unaffected by the guessing penalty (as you mentioned the way the sat rounds your scores up to the nearest integer if they end in .5 or higher), your raw score will still go down by two for not giving correct answers for those two questions.</p>
<p>getting two questions wrong in math, given that the scale for math is almost always strict, your raw score would end up anywhere from 730-750, and 760 if you’re lucky. this sat wont be that lenient though and i’d expect a lower score</p>
<p>“Wanting” sometimes can mean “missing”, “lacking”, or “needing” in certain contexts. Although the other parts of the passage suggested that the united states was greedy and too consumerist, the sentences above and below that question stated that the causes for the cold war were unsure, not simple, etc…leading the causes to be wanting meaning lacking, since the author was trying to say that the cause of the cold war was not as simple as traditionalists described.</p>
<p>Can someone explain to me why the train question was 120? i feel really stupid asking, and put 25, but something told me during the test that i was oversimplifying it :/</p>
<p>5x4x3x2x1. I think that’s how</p>
<p>is it possible for math to be experimental? I know that its very rare for the grid-in section to ever be experimental, but I had two other sections in math, some with questions no one has mentioned on here. Is it likely?</p>
<p>Wouldnt the writing question about that guy from pakistan be wrong because it said “Trained from lahore institute, he utilized his artistic abilities…” Shouldnt it be trained by not trained from</p>
<p>@fruitloop24 I had a math experimental. I had four math sections and two of them were grid-in. The problem is that I still don’t know which one was experimental… nor do I remember exactly which questions were in which section.</p>
<p>@triassiic it was “trained AT lahore institute” so it’s correct</p>
<p>What sentence if placed in front of the second paragraph would improve the passage most?
(Something like that) anyone remember? Sorry for the lack of detail</p>
<p>Did anyone get 0<a<1 for the parabola question?</p>
<p>On my test it said trained from. Unless im misunderstanding you and you are saying the correct answer would be trained at?</p>
<p>@juniorhigh, im not sure exactly, but if you’re referring to the luddite passage about technology, i don’t think the answer was any of the choices talking about people from the past or anything about resisters before our time. these choices seemed to be there to trick you b/c the next sentence said “early [opposite of resisters, cant remember term they used]” so one might have thought it was meant early as in those who came before us. make sense?</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the identifying error question with “having reported or reported having…” underlined? Was it no error or was having reported the error?</p>
<p>@triassiic I think the original was “trained at”</p>
<p>@ZCC You should provide more context. Two words does not do people much good in recalling a question. But based on those two words alone I would say that “having reported” is NOT an error.</p>
<p>Does anybody remember a question in the Improving Paragraphs section (Advancers vs. Resistors) that was like “Which phrase. if inserted before sentence X, would fit best in context?”. I put “In contrast,” but thinking back I think the answer might have been something like “Similarly” or “Comparatively”. Because the the preceding sentence was basically something like “Luddites hate Advancers”. The next sentence X was basically “Advancers hate Luddites”. “In contrast” was my first instinct but “Comparatively” seems to be the better fit.</p>