Extraordinary NFL Results --

[1Hit1der]

My first conclusion would be that the people who ran out of time didn't stop to think to skip the longer questions, which involve two simple calculations instead of one, or, that many of the questions repeat on the next try. However, it's something for the casino AP's. Ha.

All About the Wonderlic Test: A Common but Challenging Pre-Employment Test

Applying to jobs can be an unpredictable process. Some jobs require only a couple of interviews before you pass, while others might even ask you to make impromptu presentations or analyze case studies. For graduate-level roles, aptitude tests are already a common screening method at the start of applications. One of the most popular of these is the Wonderlic test. If your potential employer has told you that you’ll be taking the Wonderlic test for your next step, then it’s essential to be prepared--after all, it’s difficult for test-takers to pass this without practice.


What is the Wonderlic Test?

The Wonderlic test is a cognitive ability test for job applicants that’s similar to an IQ test. Its parent company, Wonderlic Inc., actually has different types of tests, but what people usually mean by “Wonderlic test” is the Wonderlic Personnel or Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test. Questions are presented in multiple-choice format. The test is normally taken online, from the convenience of your home, but you might also be invited to take it directly in your potential employer’s office.

You’re likely to encounter the standard version of the test, which consists of 50 questions that you have to answer in 12 minutes. There’s also a shorter version that only has 30 questions--but your time limit is only 8 minutes.

While the questions in the Wonderlic aren’t necessarily difficult on their own, it’s the time pressure that makes the test so hard to beat. You have to answer around four questions every minute. Some of these might even need math calculations that you have to perform in your head because calculators aren’t allowed.

For each correct answer, you get a point, so the maximum score for the standard version is 50. Surprisingly, the average score is only 21 out of 50. Even finishing it is a challenge--only 2-3% of test-takers finish the exam!


Questions in a Wonderlic Test
The questions in a Wonderlic test are diverse and mainly focused on your reasoning skills. Here’s what you can expect to see:


General Knowledge

General knowledge questions are the easiest. You can take advantage of these by answering them quickly without sacrificing accuracy, leaving more time for the other questions. For example, you might be asked to order dates or identify what well-known terms such as “FAQ” mean.

Abstract Reasoning

These questions test your spatial recognition, including your ability to visualize objects. A popular question involves studying a diagram of a flattened cube and figuring out which sides are adjacent when it’s folded into a cube. Another is looking at a series of images then deducing the next image in the sequence.


Logical Reasoning

These questions evaluate how you use inductive and deductive logic. You’re presented with several statements, and you have to make a conclusion based on those statements. These can be tricky, so it’s important to double-check your answers.


Verbal Reasoning

With verbal reasoning questions, you select synonyms or antonyms, determine the relationship between two words, or complete a sentence with the grammatically correct answer. You might also have to make analogies or choose the odd word out from the choices.


Numerical Reasoning

These are usually the toughest questions in the exam. They often show up as problems that require you to perform several arithmetic calculations. Percentages and ratios also appear frequently. You might have to pick corresponding graphs for data tables as well.


How to Prepare for a Wonderlic Test
Your performance in the Wonderlic test can determine whether you’ll move on to the next stage of your application. Given the low passing rate for the test, this means that you have to devote some time to studying it. These tips will help you get a higher score:


Take a practice test

The first step is to jump into it right away by taking a practice test. This will give you a good idea of what the Wonderlic test is like and what your current performance on it is.


Review questions

Once you have a baseline, look back at your wrong answers and study them. It also helps to keep reviewing similar math questions until your speed improves.


Take a timed practice test

When you’re confident that you can answer most questions correctly, work on your speed by taking timed practice tests until it becomes second nature to you.

https://www.wikijob.co.uk/content/ap...onderlic-tests

1Hit1der 1Hit1der is online now
Bronze
Join Date
Nov 2023
Posts
24

[Don Perignom]

Even finishing it is a challenge--only 2-3% of test-takers finish the exam!

That's surprising. I watched the clock to stay on pace. Maybe in some formats the clock isn't displayed?

Tableplay's 39 was time-impaired.

I haven't looked to see whether the questions repeat on subsequent attempts. But if I could repeat the same questions, I think I'd need a few tries to get into the 40s.

[tableplay]

My first conclusion would be that the people who ran out of time didn't stop to think to skip the longer questions, which involve two simple calculations instead of one, or, that many of the questions repeat on the next try. However, it's something for the casino AP's. Ha.

Great point Bill. Absolutely I should have just cut and run since you don't get penalized for wrong answers (50 correct questions is 50 points). Bad strategy = bad score. That fucked me up in school too since I spent too much time to get an answer right on all those exams over all those years.

[tableplay]

Even finishing it is a challenge--only 2-3% of test-takers finish the exam!

That's surprising. I watched the clock to stay on pace. Maybe in some formats the clock isn't displayed?

Tableplay's 39 was time-impaired.

I haven't looked to see whether the questions repeat on subsequent attempts. But if I could repeat the same questions, I think I'd need a few tries to get into the 40s.

The clock was displayed in my case.

[mickeycrimm]

C'mon, mickey, you knew the obvious answers before you posted this. And I never said I had "stellar" results. So why would you use a word I never used? That's an old Argentino trick. Put a word in quotes. Most people read it as a direct quote, when what you are actually doing is putting it in quotes because they signify your interpretation of something said, therefore not a direct quote at all. Old trick, mickey. Newspapers don't allow it. If you try to put something in direct quotes for a newspaper, it must be an actual direct quote.

So, to the answers you already know. LOL. I think, by the way, that mickey's line, "chasing the big money," is telling. I never chase small money or big money.

1) I'm not Leonardo Da AP. I don't claim to win at everything. Gambling is serious business to me. I play those things at which I think I can win. And my time is limited. Choosing five NFL sides a week is not what I do. Way too many required selections. If NFL totals were included, I'd at least consider it, but still probably not.

8) My whole mantra, unlike you, mickey, is staying in my lane. Not pretending to be expert at everything. Not using incorrect math to estimate "EV" or "overlays" when those are just guesses. Classic "AP" garbage. Maybe you guess good, fine, just say, "My best guess" or whatever. You nonchalantly riffed about playing poker and betting sports for profit in your first GWAE interview, I am not Leonardo Da AP.

You've bragged incessantly about good results in these free contests that pay chickenfeed. So why are you arguing over a word like steller? Just more strawman bullshit.

2). You are not "chasing the big money" but you ARE chasing the small money in the free contests. "Chasing the money" is just an expression. Nothing to write a diatribe about.

3). That GWAE interview in 2017 was not my first, it was my 2nd. I never said anything about sportsbetting. This is more made up shit from you like the 8-4 thing. But the 8-4 thing was comical as hell because you made a fool of yourself. That's why you've never said anything about it since. You think if you ignore it then it will go away. You'll never live it down. You blundered big time, dude. It shows your lack of competence in gambling math.

Now as for me talking about poker in that interview I will address it in a different post.

[mickeycrimm]

Redietz wrote:

"My whole mantra, unlike you, mickey, is staying in my lane. Not pretending to be expert at everything. Not using incorrect math to estimate "EV" or "overlays" when those are just guesses. Classic "AP" garbage. Maybe you guess good, fine, just say, "My best guess" or whatever. You nonchalantly riffed about playing poker and betting sports for profit in your first GWAE interview, I am not Leonardo Da AP."
____________________________

Imagine that. A machine player getting out of his lane by playing poker? Something the mathematically challenged redietz would never do. In gambling Ditz is a one trick pony. He doesn't get how all gambling is related. He thinks if you are good in one discipline you can't be good in another. That is all based in his ignorance of the mathematics.

First, I wasn't a machine pro that started playing poker. I was a poker player that started playing machines. I played poker in the mountain states for 4 years before I played machines. I beat the spread limit games as opposed to the split limit games. Good players always got the money in spread limit, different story in split limit. Bad players got bigger payoffs in split limit when they caught the joker on the end so it balanced things out between good players and bad players. Bad SPREAD LIMIT players didn't have that luxury. They were always getting the wrong price. That's why good spread limit players always got the money.

I constantly studied the mathematics of a deck of cards in those days. Became very efficient at combinatorial math as related to a deck of cards. It's a doctrine in probability theory called "Combinations and Permutations."

The spread limit games were drying up by 1996. The houses would rather spread split limit to keep the money going around and around and down the gator hole. So I was looking for something else.

So, luckily, in 1996, I ran into advantage slots and advantage video poker. So how does one gain an advantage in video poker? Well, by golly, it's by being knowledgeable in a doctrine in probability theory called "Combinations and Permutations" as related to a deck of cards.

Wow, Ditz! Imagine that. Live poker and video poker are relative. I used my knowledge of the math of live poker to beat video poker. Pretty smart, eh?

This is something that the math challenged Dietz doesn't get. The fundamental of all gambling games is the math. The branch of mathematics known as Probability Theory was founded in the 17th century by dice gamblers asking noted mathematicians to work out probabilities for them.

Dietz, all casino games are related through the math. A person knowledgeable in the math of gambling is not "jumping lanes" when he switches to another gambling game but rather is in the same lane. Probability is the fundamental of all casino games.

[1Hit1der]

I will take a crack at this Monday. Looking forward to it.

How did you do? Ha.

[redietz]

Just gave it a shot. Good? Bad? Who knows?

LOL. That figures. I got a 38, too. I ran out of time on that last question, which I knew, but no cigar.

Remind me to not bet on IQ tests with you guys. What surprised me was the speed necessary to do this. Maybe that's the biggest difference between me at 66 and me at 17. I just don't process info as fast.

I gotta admit -- the folding the squares questions stopped me in my tracks. I have no idea if I got them right.

[Don Perignom]

LOL. That figures. I got a 38, too.

I just don't process info as fast.

It wasn't a fair fight. On an IQ test, you would have benefited (a lot) from an age adjustment.

Here's what scientists say:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_...d_intelligence

General intelligence is divided into fluid (new stuff) and crystallized (learned stuff). Fluid falls off sharply. Stats:

https://metafact.io/factcheck_answers/2355

Fluid score for a 21-year-old is 100 which is the peak. For a 66-year-old, it's down to 83!

Crystallized peaks at 100 a little later into adulthood, and eases down to 96 for a 66-year-old.

Overall IQ decline is a blend of the two factors. Age 21 is 100; age 66 is 90.

Back to sports, considering someone like Tom Brady or Drew Brees playing into their 40s, they may have been mentally disadvantaged in addition to the physical deterioration.

[1Hit1der]

Einstein refused to take an iq test.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

About wealth,

“I am absolutely convinced that no wealth in the world can help humanity forward, even in the hands of the most devoted worker in this cause. The example of great and pure characters is the only thing that can produce fine ideas and noble deeds.”

Einstein spoke more French than English, but, stuck mostly to German. Other languages made him quite nervous. I don't think that he spoke in big words, either, but, he did fill out his ideas.

And, oddly enough, his lines don't seem to yield any neat anagrams. Ha. Might mean a different propensity for the alphabet than found in normal speech, or, to do with the translations from normal speech.

[redietz]

LOL. That figures. I got a 38, too.

I just don't process info as fast.

It wasn't a fair fight. On an IQ test, you would have benefited (a lot) from an age adjustment.

Here's what scientists say:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_...d_intelligence

General intelligence is divided into fluid (new stuff) and crystallized (learned stuff). Fluid falls off sharply. Stats:

https://metafact.io/factcheck_answers/2355

Fluid score for a 21-year-old is 100 which is the peak. For a 66-year-old, it's down to 83!

Crystallized peaks at 100 a little later into adulthood, and eases down to 96 for a 66-year-old.

Overall IQ decline is a blend of the two factors. Age 21 is 100; age 66 is 90.

Back to sports, considering someone like Tom Brady or Drew Brees playing into their 40s, they may have been mentally disadvantaged in addition to the physical deterioration.

Well, that and getting brained by a 300 pound defensive tackle every other game.

I didn't know the age adjustment stuff. Thanks for pointing it out. What I found daunting was the time limit. I don't remember IQ tests, or SATs or Iowa Basic Skills tests ever being a time issue for me. I should have, as OneHit suggested, just skipped a few of the questions. As Dirty Harry says and I often quote, "a man's gotta know his limitations." I really had too little respect for the time limit per question.

It was eye opening to see the time run out. I haven't taken IQ-type tests in ages and ages. I think I'll occasionally tackle some just to force myself to go mentally faster. That was what struck me. How I didn't process things fast and that the time limit was a distraction throughout.

Here's my snarky observation -- and maybe why "WTF" while watching NFL games is coming into my vocabulary on an increasing basis. As brain damaged as a QB might be at the age of 35 on up, the people making the calls these days are usually retired NFL players coaching the teams. Well, then you have brain damaged plus older than the QBs as coaches, so really mentally deficient. LOL. I hate to say it, but the more brain-damaged are leading the less brain damaged.

I did not know fluid fell off like that. Jesus! That is truly frightening. I think maybe I didn't WANT to know that. Now I have to compare myself to my youth and know I'm a current idiot. That's depressing. On the other hand, now I have excuses galore for being an idiot.

Coincidentally, I was talking to a famous retired bookmaker the other day, and we both got into it about our mental drop-off regarding what we can no longer do. He used to be able to feed slightly different lines to a dozen people simultaneously over phones and hold in his mind what numbers he gave to whom for literally 50 games. I could once spend 20 or 30 minutes with the box score pages of the LA Times on a Sunday and then have people test me regarding the college stats. I didn't have an eidetic memory, but I had a real good memory. I'd be within 10-20 yards for almost every stat. I can't do that any longer.

[Don Perignom]

I did not know fluid fell off like that. Jesus! That is truly frightening. I think maybe I didn't WANT to know that.

LOL sorry. I'm only about a decade behind you, so same fate for me. But those are averages. If you started at a high level, you would presumably remain well above average for your age group.

I hate to say it, but the more brain-damaged are leading the less brain damaged.

I don't know much about football or its culture, but it seems to have an anti-intellectual streak. Decisions evolve mostly through trial-and-error instead of analytics. I saw a stat showing drastic reduction in field goal attempts within 19 yards. Unless there was a relevant rule change I'm missing, they probably shouldn't have needed decades to figure that out.

[redietz]

I did not know fluid fell off like that. Jesus! That is truly frightening. I think maybe I didn't WANT to know that.

LOL sorry. I'm only about a decade behind you, so same fate for me. But those are averages. If you started at a high level, you would presumably remain well above average for your age group.

I hate to say it, but the more brain-damaged are leading the less brain damaged.

I don't know much about football or its culture, but it seems to have an anti-intellectual streak. Decisions evolve mostly through trial-and-error instead of analytics. I saw a stat showing drastic reduction in field goal attempts within 19 yards. Unless there was a relevant rule change I'm missing, they probably shouldn't have needed decades to figure that out.

The problem with those "analytics," as they're called, is that they are lumped, cumulative stats -- somewhat useful in a league like the NFL, but almost worthless in college football. It's fine to say, "fourth-and-three" is a go-for-it down on the opposition 15-yard-line, but there's quite a difference between facing Kent State and Georgia, and the analytics being used don't discern those differences.

I lost a couple thousand dollars in a handicapping competition once because Rick Kotite, coaching the Eagles, couldn't add. Sorry ass stuff.

https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...g-in-rain.html

[AxelWolf]

Redietz wrote:

"My whole mantra, unlike you, mickey, is staying in my lane. Not pretending to be expert at everything. Not using incorrect math to estimate "EV" or "overlays" when those are just guesses. Classic "AP" garbage. Maybe you guess good, fine, just say, "My best guess" or whatever. You nonchalantly riffed about playing poker and betting sports for profit in your first GWAE interview, I am not Leonardo Da AP."
____________________________

Imagine that. A machine player getting out of his lane by playing poker? Something the mathematically challenged redietz would never do. In gambling Ditz is a one trick pony. He doesn't get how all gambling is related. He thinks if you are good in one discipline you can't be good in another. That is all based in his ignorance of the mathematics.

First, I wasn't a machine pro that started playing poker. I was a poker player that started playing machines. I played poker in the mountain states for 4 years before I played machines. I beat the spread limit games as opposed to the split limit games. Good players always got the money in spread limit, different story in split limit. Bad players got bigger payoffs in split limit when they caught the joker on the end so it balanced things out between good players and bad players. Bad SPREAD LIMIT players didn't have that luxury. They were always getting the wrong price. That's why good spread limit players always got the money.

I constantly studied the mathematics of a deck of cards in those days. Became very efficient at combinatorial math as related to a deck of cards. It's a doctrine in probability theory called "Combinations and Permutations."

The spread limit games were drying up by 1996. The houses would rather spread split limit to keep the money going around and around and down the gator hole. So I was looking for something else.

So, luckily, in 1996, I ran into advantage slots and advantage video poker. So how does one gain an advantage in video poker? Well, by golly, it's by being knowledgeable in a doctrine in probability theory called "Combinations and Permutations" as related to a deck of cards.

Wow, Ditz! Imagine that. Live poker and video poker are relative. I used my knowledge of the math of live poker to beat video poker. Pretty smart, eh?

This is something that the math challenged Dietz doesn't get. The fundamental of all gambling games is the math. The branch of mathematics known as Probability Theory was founded in the 17th century by dice gamblers asking noted mathematicians to work out probabilities for them.

Dietz, all casino games are related through the math. A person knowledgeable in the math of gambling is not "jumping lanes" when he switches to another gambling game but rather is in the same lane. Probability is the fundamental of all casino games.

I didn't have a computer or any way to calculate VP when I started. I knew that 9/6 jacks was 99.54 and FPDW was 100.7, card counting was about a 1-2% advantage, and progressive slots and VP were good, but I couldn't afford to play those games. $20 was a lot of money to me, luckily for me I always had a Job where my meals were free.

With Flush Attack I didn't need any math to clearly see it was a huge +EV situation. The first time I played it was a few-hour session and I made a whopping $70. It wasn't the amount of money I made that thrilled me, it was the why and how I made that $70. I hit nothing good other than a few flushes during Attack mode. Once I factored in the low bankroll needed I could see the potential and taste the freedom. It was many months later, perhaps a year when Card Player Magazine published the exact numbers and strategy. I wasn't far off on the strategy or my estimation.
After a few obviously good promotions having to wing strategies and estimating values, I realized I needed a computer and some VP software. My first VP software was inaccurate when cross-referenceed with whatever I found published.

I finally got a copy of VP tutor, it took like 48 hours to run a game. I spent hours making my own strategies checking each had individually. The next computer I purchased got calculating games down to an hour.

I remember how thrilled I was when I got a laptop that did it in 15 minutes(a huge investment close to 4k). Now I could run out to my car and calculate games or situations on the fly. Eventually, a portable printer so I could print my own "payroll checks"

Whenever it came to reel slots there was a substantial amount of educated guessing on the values.

[mickeycrimm]

I didn't have a computer or any way to calculate VP when I started. I knew that 9/6 jacks was 99.54 and FPDW was 100.7, card counting was about a 1-2% advantage, and progressive slots and VP were good, but I couldn't afford to play those games. $20 was a lot of money to me, luckily for me I always had a Job where my meals were free.

With Flush Attack I didn't need any math to clearly see it was a huge +EV situation. The first time I played it was a few-hour session and I made a whopping $70. It wasn't the amount of money I made that thrilled me, it was the why and how I made that $70. I hit nothing good other than a few flushes during Attack mode. Once I factored in the low bankroll needed I could see the potential and taste the freedom. It was many months later, perhaps a year when Card Player Magazine published the exact numbers and strategy. I wasn't far off on the strategy or my estimation.
After a few obviously good promotions having to wing strategies and estimating values, I realized I needed a computer and some VP software. My first VP software was inaccurate when cross-referenceed with whatever I found published.

I finally got a copy of VP tutor, it took like 48 hours to run a game. I spent hours making my own strategies checking each had individually. The next computer I purchased got calculating games down to an hour.

I remember how thrilled I was when I got a laptop that did it in 15 minutes(a huge investment close to 4k). Now I could run out to my car and calculate games or situations on the fly. Eventually, a portable printer so I could print my own "payroll checks"

Whenever it came to reel slots there was a substantial amount of educated guessing on the values.

I didn't computerize until 2002. For video poker I did everything with a calculator and scratch pad, except for the few games you could buy strategy cards for.

I remember that Lenny Frome article on Flush Attack in Card Player Magazine.

I did my first empirical study on a slot machine in 96/97. It was on my first slot play, the quarter Piggy Bankin' game. I started out playing when there was at least 50 coins in the bank. Since I was making a healthy profit I kept lowering the number. I wondered just how low I could go so I collected stats on 20K spins.

The main game had a 69% return.
The bank averaged breaking every 90 spins.
The Piggy Bank started at 10 coins so was worth 10/90 = 11.1%
1 unit was added to the bank every 11 spins, 1/11 = 9.1%
That totals to a payback of 89.2%
So a bank with 21 coins in it put the game at 100% plus 9% meter movement. I stayed well above 21 coins in the bank.

A few years later par sheet information showed the quarter pigs returned 89%, which was the number I came up with. I've been using the same methodology on slots ever since. When you don't have any other information an empirical study is called for.