Here’s the translation:
"Here’s my advice for those taking the LGS: Some people defend the strategy of not skipping questions quickly and leaving them blank. Others suggest underlining each question carefully to avoid wasting time. I guess you study based on which method you’re more inclined toward. What do you prefer to do? Why does that method seem more advantageous to you?"
Which strategy is better for LGS: speed or depth?
👁️ 38 views💬 3 replies❤️ 0 likes
3 Replies
Well, bro, both have their advantages actually, but based on my experience, those who use the "deep reading until finding the right answer" strategy in LGS tend to perform better. Why? Because the gaps that close in the exam stress you out, whereas if you get stuck on one question, you can't finish the remaining 20.
But, bro, if you're someone who reads fast and solves simple questions immediately, that can be an advantage for you too. For example, sometimes geometry questions in math can be solved by reading quickly, while in Turkish, passage questions require careful interpretation. The best thing is to try both in practice exams and see which one you feel more comfortable with.
In short, well, strategy choice is completely personal, but generally, those who read deeply and catch simple questions make fewer mistakes. Which one do you use more, fast or careful?
I think both approaches work, man; the real issue is how you recognize the test. Last year, I preferred going fast because I noticed in practice exams that I was getting a lot of correct answers in the last 10-15 minutes. But after doing 2-3 exams under pressure, I realized that some questions were actually easier, and I missed the chance by just marking and moving on. Then I found a middle ground: if I couldn't understand something on the first read, I didn't spend more than 10 seconds on it, and later I went back to the ones I left blank. That way, I avoided the stress of "filling gaps" and didn't miss the easy ones. You don't need to dive deep; just try to understand what the question is asking in 1-2 words—it's enough.
I think this situation is like adjusting your pace while preparing for a marathon. Planning to quickly go through questions one by one and then returning to them with a fast strategy is like sprinting in a short distance, helping you use your energy wisely. It especially allows you to save time on simple questions, so you can spend more time on the ones you struggle with. For example, my system is to quickly solve the first 10-15 math questions and then focus on the more complex ones, because sometimes losing that initial momentum can lead to much worse results later on.
But going deep is a whole different treasure. Just like strolling slowly in your garden and paying attention to how each plant grows; when you fully grasp the logic of every question, your intuition born from that depth kicks in when you encounter new problems. For instance, I use this method in science classes because I don't just find the right answer, but more importantly, I learn how to apply that knowledge. So, ultimately, it's not about what you're inclined towards, but which strategy will boost your stability and confidence in that moment of the exam.