Stage 2 - Band 2 (601-3100)

ShodenMcClane

n32 wrote: »

I m in the 900's and its very frustrating to be this close but not to have a definite idea of if or when I ll get a shout. The more I look at it , I cant see how they can take 600 people from 2 unsupervised internet tests and fill 300 very important positions from them. Either they are taking a very lazy approach or else they are examining people in batches of 600. PAS should be giving out a lot more information to clarify where they are going with this in the long term instead of leaving a few thousand people in limbo

To be fair I don't think they can know the numbers until the have the results to stage three and see how many progress.

n32

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

To be fair I don't think they can know the numbers until the have the results to stage three and see how many progress.

I just think that 600 is way too few to bring through considering the tests were unsupervised up until now

Rothmans

n32 wrote: »

I just think that 600 is way too few to bring through considering the tests were unsupervised up until now

Realistically though, those who got this far wouldn't have cheated.
If you tried to cheat in those time constraints, it wouldn't have ended well for you. They can't afford to supervise thousands of people at a time like the old days. Not ideal, and a lot more stressful for us who have applied, but it cuts costs, and that's all that matters.

ShodenMcClane

n32 wrote: »

I just think that 600 is way too few to bring through considering the tests were unsupervised up until now

Well, if those 600 aren't good enough to fill those 100 places I'm sure they'll call up more to test. Everyone seems to think they are making this up as they go along. These guys have planned this based on numbers percentages and their budget. Without knowing their budget and exactly what AGS are asking them to do I think it's very unfair to be blaming them at all. I'm really at a loss to see what people are complaining about. What other way could they have done this?

StevieF3

Well to be honest one of the lads told me today that his brother did the test for his cousin and he placed in the top 100, slightly frustrating knowing that there are probably more people out there who used similar methods of cheating

ShodenMcClane

StevieF3 wrote: »

Well to be honest one of the lads told me today that his brother did the test for his cousin and he placed in the top 100, slightly frustrating knowing that there are probably more people out there who used similar methods of cheating

That's precisely why they will be running the verbal and inductive again in a supervised environment. I've said it before and I'll say it again, anyone who thinks that they could have or should have brought 25,000 people to chapter house is living in lala land.

n32

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

That's precisely why they will be running the verbal and inductive again in a supervised environment. I've said it before and I'll say it again, anyone who thinks that they could have or should have brought 25,000 people to chapter house is living in lala land.

Not 25,000 obviously but surely something along the lines of 2000 could be supervised over a few weeks

KERSPLAT!

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

Well, if those 600 aren't good enough to fill those 100 places I'm sure they'll call up more to test. Everyone seems to think they are making this up as they go along. These guys have planned this based on numbers percentages and their budget. Without knowing their budget and exactly what AGS are asking them to do I think it's very unfair to be blaming them at all. I'm really at a loss to see what people are complaining about. What other way could they have done this?

Completely agree with this. This recruitment drive, I'm sure, has been planned for a while. PAS aren't doing this and that on a whim. People are getting frustrated because of the lack of information, and that's fair enough, but I'd be fairly sure they know what they're doing and doing it as best they can using the resources they have at their disposal

Rothmans

StevieF3 wrote: »

Well to be honest one of the lads told me today that his brother did the test for his cousin and he placed in the top 100, slightly frustrating knowing that there are probably more people out there who used similar methods of cheating

Only fooling himself tbh. Finishing in the top 100 is well in the 99th percentile of all those who applied. If he falls too far away from this, he'll stick out like a sore thumb.

ShodenMcClane

n32 wrote: »

Not 25,000 obviously but surely something along the lines of 2000 could be supervised over a few weeks

I'm sure there will be at least that many tested over the next couple of months, but they don't know how many people will need to be tested yet so they can't get peoples hopes up. Bare in mind, also, that they are only taking in 100 in the next few months with 200 more before the end of the year. These batches of people to be tested may be done at different times too. Bare in mind this is only speculation.

standtwo

There will be a few who have people impersonate them for the test and will be caught out.

All the info for stage 2 said if your scores don't match in the supervised test your out... And good enough for anyone dishonest trying to join.

ShodenMcClane

standtwo wrote: »

There will be a few who have people impersonate them for the test and will be caught out.

All the info for stage 2 said if your scores don't match in the supervised test your out... And good enough for anyone dishonest trying to join.

Yup, my only worry is that I did too well in stage two, I got 100% in one of the test and over 95% in the other and came in the top 35. What if I have just a bad day and can't repeat these fecking scores? Arrg I'm thinking about all this way too much!

Rothmans

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

Yup, my only worry is that I did too well in stage two, I got 100% in one of the test and over 95% in the other and came in the top 35. What if I have just a bad day and can't repeat these fecking scores? Arrg I'm thinking about all this way too much!

Same position as yourself.
But, PAS made sure that they used the same company, and they will be using a test of similar difficulty. This has reassured me tbh, as it will more than likely catch out the cheaters for whom the tests will be a completely new experience. We on the other hand will know exactly what to expect!

standtwo

Exactly lads they will take nerves and stuff into account as my granny would say you can only try your best

Chem Lord

Exactly, I know it's hard not to, given the circumstances but there really is no point worrying and you can only try your best!

StevieF3

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

That's precisely why they will be running the verbal and inductive again in a supervised environment. I've said it before and I'll say it again, anyone who thinks that they could have or should have brought 25,000 people to chapter house is living in lala land.

Oh don't get me wrong, I realise it would be completely unrealistic to expect them to bring that many people to chapter house! It just left a sour taste in the mouth when I heard about him because I only finished a 100 places off the top 600 and I started feeling sorry for myself! Best of luck in the next round anyway

D Trent

Rothmans wrote: »

Realistically though, those who got this far wouldn't have cheated.
If you tried to cheat in those time constraints, it wouldn't have ended well for you. They can't afford to supervise thousands of people at a time like the old days. Not ideal, and a lot more stressful for us who have applied, but it cuts costs, and that's all that matters.

Just while we're talking about costs, does anyone think after interview AGS will ask applicants to do physical/pct in Templemore before bringing them to Phoenix park for medical?

I would imagine there's more equipment needed for medical and thus higher costs

ShodenMcClane

D Trent wrote: »

Just while we're talking about costs, does anyone think after interview AGS will ask applicants to do physical/pct in Templemore before bringing them to Phoenix park for medical?

I would imagine there's more equipment needed for medical and thus higher costs

What's in phoenix park? Why don't they just do the medical in Templemore?

D Trent

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

What's in phoenix park? Why don't they just do the medical in Templemore?

Garda HQ in Phoenix park where the medical was always done, and easier to get to for majority of applicants

ShodenMcClane

D Trent wrote: »

Garda HQ in Phoenix park where the medical was always done, and easier to get to for majority of applicants

Cheers, that makes sense!

Br4tPr1nc3

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

Yup, my only worry is that I did too well in stage two, I got 100% in one of the test and over 95% in the other and came in the top 35. What if I have just a bad day and can't repeat these fecking scores? Arrg I'm thinking about all this way too much!

have you checked both of your placings on an average?

say for example you got placed 35 in stage two, that would you in the 0.7 percentile roughly out of the 5000 people tested.

my guess would be you came in around the 175th to 425th place out of the 25k people in round 1??(thats if you placed 35th exactly)
possibly a bit higher in ranking.

with your average percentile from both tests you could get a rough estimate of the percentile expected in stage 3.

I dont know what margin they are giving to people to be called out for cheating but if you didnt cheat your percentile should be fairly close to the two previous tests.


stage 1 and 2 for me were a 2 percent difference. and I went from place 4200 roughly to 735 in stage 2

ShodenMcClane

No, that's not my exact placing, I just want to be vague so as not to giveaway my identity to any P. I also did a LOT better in stage 2 than stage 1. I was only in the early 3,000s in stage 1. To be fair though, I was in Oz for stage 1 and didn't get any practice done or give it any forethought beforehand.

StevieF3

Br4tPr1nc3 wrote: »

have you checked both of your placings on an average?

say for example you got placed 35 in stage two, that would you in the 0.7 percentile roughly out of the 5000 people tested.

my guess would be you came in around the 175th to 425th place out of the 25k people in round 1??(thats if you placed 35th exactly)
possibly a bit higher in ranking.

with your average percentile from both tests you could get a rough estimate of the percentile expected in stage 3.

I dont know what margin they are giving to people to be called out for cheating but if you didnt cheat your percentile should be fairly close to the two previous tests.


stage 1 and 2 for me were a 2 percent difference. and I went from place 4200 roughly to 735 in stage 2

I don't think getting the percentile would be of much use though!? The demographic of people was different in stage two as it was all people who had scored well in stage 1!? Just my opinion, could be wrong

Br4tPr1nc3

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

No, that's not my exact placing, I just want to be vague so as not to giveaway my identity to any P. I also did a LOT better in stage 2 than stage 1. I was only in the early 3,000s in stage 1. To be fair though, I was in Oz for stage 1 and didn't get any practice done or give it any forethought beforehand.

calculating for place 3100 its rougly 10 or 11 percent difference.

Br4tPr1nc3

StevieF3 wrote: »

I don't think getting the percentile would be of much use though!? The demographic of people was different in stage two as it was all people who had scored well in stage 1!? Just my opinion, could be wrong

yeah your probably right!
im trying to think of a method they would use to determine what they would consider a cheater, or what information used to base the margin off of.

my initial thoughts were based on a percentage on my place from a group of people, which gave a small difference in percentage.

after comparing both my test scores the difference as a percentage there was only a 3% difference in overall score.


I dont know man! im sure they will somewhat explain eventually what they used.

ana2676

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

Well, if those 600 aren't good enough to fill those 100 places I'm sure they'll call up more to test. Everyone seems to think they are making this up as they go along. These guys have planned this based on numbers percentages and their budget. Without knowing their budget and exactly what AGS are asking them to do I think it's very unfair to be blaming them at all. I'm really at a loss to see what people are complaining about. What other way could they have done this?

New here, so don't mind silly questions please why do you said 100? why not be 150 places for summer?

WilcoOut

StevieF3 wrote: »

Well to be honest one of the lads told me today that his brother did the test for his cousin and he placed in the top 100, slightly frustrating knowing that there are probably more people out there who used similar methods of cheating

And you have already contacted PAS and alerted them to this fraud?

Canyon86

StevieF3 wrote: »

Well to be honest one of the lads told me today that his brother did the test for his cousin and he placed in the top 100, slightly frustrating knowing that there are probably more people out there who used similar methods of cheating

Ya thats annoying now alright,

prob many out there at similar,

we can only hope they get found out,

if they cheat in these tests, likely open to do similar further down the line,
no benefit to anybody, themselves or AGS

ShodenMcClane

ana2676 wrote: »

New here, so don't mind silly questions please why do you said 100? why not be 150 places for summer?

I'm sure I read somewhere that they were taking on 3 batches this year; one in July, one in October and one in December. Also, the total number is supposed to be around 300. I'm open to correction though, have you heard it will be 150 in the summer?

sdanseo

Frustrated by Stage 2 - Band 1 around 1,400 mark so still in with a shout in the future but what annoyed me was that I was doing badly in the Verbal practice tests and doing really well in the logical, yet ended up acing the verbal and only scraping through in the logical.

Makes me wonder, both by the fact that I dramatically under-performed in one test and dramatically over-performed in the other. Odd.