Toggle sidebar

Step right up... STEP RIGHT UP! See what you can score on the Wonderlic test!

jakldawg

jakldawg

Redshirt
May 1, 2006
4,374
0
36
Is Febtoday next to Smarch on the calendar?<div>

</div><div>
</div><div>and for the actual test, I got a 32.5. Didn't have time to do the math for the middle ones.</div>
 
D

Dawgzilla

Redshirt
Mar 3, 2008
5,406
0
0
The question about the printer threw me, because I was thinking along the same lines as the print designer. I figured you wanted to have room for headers and stuff. Also ran out of time trying to figure out the matrix of letters. I got it eventually, but I was way over 5 minutes by then.
 
8

8dog

All-American
Feb 23, 2008
13,937
5,802
113
15 seconds per question? geez. I think part of it is figuring out which ones will take way too much time and skipping them.
 
B

BigMotherTucker

Sophomore
Aug 20, 2006
6,776
138
63
I skipped right over the 48k words, size type question and the equal profits question. I knew I wouldn't get either right. I took a few quick guesses at a few others.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,304
25,424
113
Two stupid mistakes on questions I should have gotten. But I would have probably never gotten the matrix of letters right.</p>
 
B

BigMotherTucker

Sophomore
Aug 20, 2006
6,776
138
63
in the comment section, one of the posters said this

<div class="ctext" id="ct67361647">
<div class="ctext" id="ct67361647">Jamarcus Russell scored "Cheeseburger".</div>
Click to expand...

/HI larious!</div>
 
S

Sutterkane

Redshirt
Jan 23, 2007
5,100
0
0
The "missing letter" problem I didn't think to sub numbers and multiply, but I figured it was something gay like that since it was a matrix.

I also missed the print question. I really didn't understand it at all.
 
X

Xartox

Redshirt
May 28, 2007
735
0
0
Even more surprised at how low some athletes have scored on that test in the past.
 
I

Irondawg

Senior
Dec 2, 2007
2,894
553
113
Wow - 5 minutes is not a lot of time at all, but the time your read something a second time you're toast. I got to #15 and time was already up and that was skippng the print question b/c you could tell that one alone would take 3 minutes
 
T

Topgundawg

Redshirt
Oct 23, 2010
864
0
0
but if you have never practiced it, I could see how it would clean your clock for a high score. Like taking the ACT for the first time without ever looking at any of the questions. I did pretty good on it but spent way to much time reading a couple of questions multiple times. Thanks for posting it... I find some of the scores posted pretty high, I wonder if it was there second time in taking it.....
 
vhdawg

vhdawg

All-Conference
Sep 29, 2004
4,407
1,849
113
....how in the hell do Flammable and Inflammable mean the same thing? I protest.
 
W

weblow

Redshirt
Mar 3, 2008
2,860
3
38
I had to look it up in the dictionary online and they have the exact same meaning. I was under the impression that they had the opposite meaning of each other.

Scored a 42.5
 
B

BDTS

Redshirt
Dec 20, 2010
28
0
0
One could argue that being the most different might mean not having a set ofparallellines or exactly 4 sides. I missed #4 and #14. I barely squeaked number #18 in before time.
 
missouridawg

missouridawg

Junior
Oct 6, 2009
9,388
287
83
The only differentiator between the 5 images was that one had 5 sides and the othershad 4.
 
jakldawg

jakldawg

Redshirt
May 1, 2006
4,374
0
36
here you go: inflammable is the classical chemistry term for something that can burn. But because the average person thinks of "in" as "not" (inconceivable!) the general usage was changed in the interest of public safety. As in: "sure, you can smoke next to that tanker truck. It's clearly marked 'inflammable'."Leading many a chemist to point out "you know, this thing where we keep all the alcohols should be called an inflammables cabinet. Who's with me?" Bazinga. <div>Snazzy info to clear out a room at a cocktail party, sure. But what it has to do with how well someone will do in the NFL is beyond me (and what's even funnier is the "did Greg McElroy score TOO high on his Wonderlic? train of thought).</div>
 
B

BDTS

Redshirt
Dec 20, 2010
28
0
0
The 5th image is the only one that does not contain a pair of parallel sides.
 
L

lawdawg02

Redshirt
Jan 23, 2007
4,120
0
0
So 2 had 2 sets, 2 had 1 set, and 1 had no sets of parallel lines.

4 had 4 sides, 1 had 5 sides.

I thought it was one of the easier questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.