Since the dust has settled now, there is no doubt that the paper was absurd.
• The normal distribution of marks would significantly narrow down this time, most of the serious aspirants 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝟕𝟎-𝟖𝟐/𝟖𝟑. Given this was the case, each additional two marks would make a huge difference.
• In some years, one or two PYQs are repeated almost verbatim and that becomes talking point and this time again two questions were repeated but they havent because of larger distress. One was Hallisalasya and other was Ancient river one. People who did PYQs multiple times and of all the CSE and non-CSE exams 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝟒 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐬.
• Some aspirants opine that how can I someone remember all the PYQs. This becomes difficult when they are not done throughout the year and revised multiple times. 𝐈𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐠𝐚𝐩 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐏𝐘𝐐𝐬, 𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐮𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦, 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭'𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐘𝐐𝐬?
4
1May 27, 2026 2.1K 2
