IIFT analysis, discussions, experiences

hi ppl, i did the test badly…screwed up gk…di/lr was bad too…quant and verbal were pretty ok…dint count my attempts.

hi ppl,
i did the test badly...screwed up gk...di/lr was bad too...quant and verbal were pretty ok...dint count my attempts.

seems like i just donated 1000 bucks to the Tsunami relief fund...

english was lengthy compared to previous years...
also, there were more higher math questions than last year...
lr+di definitely tougher...
GK = no idea me never prepared for it

cutoff shud be arnd 45, highest shud go arnd 62...
(more or less like last year...)

best of luck for the next test 😃

The test was a little tougher than i expected.The real decision Making was in return on investment because of the Pattern.I didnt count my attempts..but i persume a call getting score would be between 42 and 44 not more than that.To convert without puuting in a spectacular GD PI you probably would need around 50 give or take 1 or 2..

English was allright although lenghty..DI was allright Logical reasoning wasnt too bad.Quant was testing fundamentals more than Application
GK was a little difficult though. :shock:
Lets all hope for the bast and All the best for XAT

hi. i found the paper tough too. va/rc was good . gk had some attemptable questions but maths was soooo...oo...ooo tough!! so many questions on trignometry. .. left di attempted only logical reasoning.
my attempts- 90

1000 bucks down the drain

paper was much tougher than last year
di/lr was very tough :shock:
gk....out ot the blue
qa....manageable 😃
eu....didnt attempt rcs. ..so cant comment

can any1 put the no. of questions in each section and their respective weightages

hi junta

found the paper tough..va/rc was gud though it was lengthy...quant was tough specially with all those trigo problems..gk was so-so types

dnt know how much i attempted but defiently it wud be arnd 95-100.

correction couchy....
1000 bucks to the tsunami relief fund wold have done some good i think i donated 1000 bucks to the IIFT shocker fund.
screwed up badly.... eng /di/ quant everything
what was with tangent vector and identities in math?? and the corved and flow rc
somehow admission somewhere this year seems to be another distant dream
by the way three cheers to IIFT for the horrible management at the venue...give the paper 15 mins bef time then take it back and the give it again 5 mins after the bell rings....the supervisor arguing that he will give the answer sheet only with the question paper...etc etc etc

and btw in our centre-joseph boys school, bangalore we were made to sit in a third standard classroom. the desks were so chote chote. upar se they gave big chairs couldnt even stretch our legs. it was so uncomfy.

Guess I am not alone in the forum to feel gassed cant even express my feelings correctly:shock:

GK - 20 attempts felt ok after this one
QA- big gas ,dont know what hit me, arnd 20 attemps in 45 min
DI/LR- OK was manageble again 20 gud attempts
VA- what was that -a novel or some thing,was fully psyced out 10 min in to the section and started to fire wildly(marking choices) and suspect will not find the mark

conclution it is ambitious for me to expect a call :D:D:D

cutoffs-hmmm...... there are some gr8 brains out there so i guess will be arnd 55

😁 😁

Hi Junta

I second Nisha. Me at St Josephs. Blore. Std 4, made to sit on Nilkamal Plastic Chairs(they had replaced the usual baby chairs with these, the baby chairs could be seen piled up in one corner of the class).

The desks were so small that , I had a doubt whether to keep my knee under it(then the desk would move upwards) or to keep next to it(that would push the desks farther). The guys shouldn't have put us in such an uncomfortable situtation(both seating and the paper).

Had no sense of deja vu when I opened the paper. I did not feel a bit that it is an IIFT paper, which I happened to clear last time.....

GK last year was so easy, but this year lots of long questions.

QA was one big shocker with CATtish questions, with atleast on question from old CAT(remember the North, East etc circular wall question).
Last year QA was like could attempt all types, never this time. Vectors and coordinate geometry getting a place in IIFT, unbelievable!!!

Next had a doubt if to RC VA or LR/DI. Appeared to be screwy either ways. Did a bit of VA then to LR , back to RC.

RC passages last year were all small small ones, this year oh Gosh!!!!, all text book or some research paper stuff!!!!

No hopes, as I know how I did.

Cursing myself for botching up last year's IIFT PI.



hi folks,

guess our money was better put in Tsunami relief fund...shocker of a paper from iift!!! guess they had too many ppl writing and so wanted to filter out a whole big bunch of crowd...but even so the questions being so lenghty didn't make things any easier...

RC was long and very ambiguous...one gk question had the two answer choices same...ya that fdi one and both were correct!!! and quant was not to be termed easy...even reasoning can't be said to be easy..overall a tough paper...guess cutoffs wll be low as well...my attemepts close to 100...hoping to get around 40-50 ...

will someone discuss the answers for some gk questions...eager to know the answers!!!!



will someone discuss the answers for some gk questions...eager to know the answers!


some of the questions i remember

which of the following is not a member country of EU?
magnetic field does not affects----- stationary charge
baku is......
where was saarc meet b/w comm. minister held
molecular weight can be determined by.....
something related 2 greenwich time...
somethng related to location of rivers ravi beas etc.

Nice analysis all. My take on the paper:

Eng: Va was easy. The ratio of RC psg lenth to no of q's was bad. Better of question 1st and look in psg for the ans.

GK: Prob my strength in all the sections, could attempt about 18 odd, few guesses.

Qa: Man, this was tough. 2 q's from CAT paper, one was that NSEW diameter thing and X% increase and X% decrease thing. Lot of trig and vectors

LA/DI: Went for inference q's and some DI. Moderate diff.

I think why this paper was tuff in a way as the options were 5 not 4 so chance of right down by 5% pts. I made about 140 attempts, about 25% guesses :wink:

Edit, some gk q's which I remember:

Mothere Teresa-Agenes ...
Puma-germany, Nike-USA
SAARC- Katmandu
BIMTEC- India, Myanmar etc...

Shockin GK, pathetic supervision at centre( KV, Naraina,Delhi)... english RCs were horrible....... DI went allrite...

it was one helluva paper. It started wit me wonderin wats the score weightage. Total confusion. Can someone clarify.

VA = 50 * .55 = 27.5
GK = 50 * .4 = 20
QA = 48 x .6 = 28.8
DI = 48 x .6 = 28.8

So roughly 105 marks whereas it says 100 marks paper. So someone can clarify on tat.

My performance was shady, nuthin great, no great feeling. Felt almost everythin tough.

Last year the cut-ff was 45.
If I have gauged it well, them my guess is that cut-off should be around 36-38.

I made some 96 attempts.
15 GK
36 Quant
15 DI/LR
30 VA/RC

screwed up exam ...
felt all sections vrey tough ..including english...
cos of the 1/5 negative marking took some risks.
overall not too confident of making it...
but just abt everyone is of the same opinion ..so who knows???
attempts around 115....
eng did 3 passages ...not very confident of the answers ..
va almost all .. okish..
gk ...okish .. again not confident..
qa ..hmmmm...left all trignomery qs..think i hv done most of the easy ones..so not much to complain...
di/logic.....as usual screwed....the logical part of my brain was not working at all ... so attempted all the coding questions,one di caselet..some faltoo qs...attempts very low...
Bottom line:Another test bites the dust ..

well 90 attempts and looking not so good on the accuracy!
does nebody kno wwhen the calls r out?

hi all,
for me di was tough ,va was easy and maths was moderate.
gk -----can't tell .

i did approx . 96 questions n expecting a call in my category that is SC.

abt that puma and nike question the ans should be none of these bcoz bata is indian n india was not there in any option.hope im correct.