these schweser test exam sets are indeed ponderous

Working my may through the first set of Schweser mock exam sets and I do find the wording and data/word depth ponderous - and I find also lots of tricky conceptual nuance… The latter attribute is ok (because we will also see that on CFA) but it is a rough go. Just doing ok (around the passing point) until I got owned on the afternoon exam (test 2 first set). Score mid 50’s and it was damn depressing when I got both parts of too many of the two part questions wrong. I also find some of the assumptions built into their multiple choice correct answers can be a reach sometimes. But I am sure they have heard this before and perhaps they feel there is some “training benefit” to this baggage (like Bo Jackson running up hills to improve speed on the gridiron or marathon runners training at Altitude) I actually find the morning questions more straightforward and they were the ones I was most concerned about. Oh well - glad I have a good pair of boots! I do believe the CFA vignetted to be clearer and perhaps it is because they just have to be in the sense that they really need to have the outcome as clean and without controversy (which they prevent anyway with the lack of scores transparency) as possible. Oh well - just in a bad mood after this last result and hope I did not unduly distract the busy people on this board.

It’s the same story every year. I haven’t started them yet, I am saving them for my final sprint. But looking at the actual vignettes from the 2006 exam (in the CFAI books), they seem pretty straightforward with not much trickery going on.