BOB LBO common mistakes
BOB LBO · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Spending several minutes on a single seating-arrangement or puzzle set before confirming the clues are consistent, then abandoning it with the clock already drained.
Puzzle sets look solvable at first glance and candidates feel committed once they have drawn a grid; sunk-cost thinking keeps them on a set whose clues are contradictory or under-specified, and there is no time checkpoint to force an exit.
What to do instead
Before solving, spend 20 seconds checking clue count against unknowns and scanning for a definite anchor (a fixed position or a direct pair). Set a hard 90-second cap per puzzle set; if no anchor emerges, mark and move on. Practise with a timer so the exit decision becomes automatic.
Treating 'either A or B is true' and 'A or B is true, but not both' as identical in syllogism and inequality questions, then marking the conclusion valid when it is only possible.
Everyday speech uses 'or' loosely, and candidates transfer that habit to formal logic where inclusive and exclusive disjunction, and 'possibility' versus 'definiteness', are strictly distinguished.
What to do instead
Build a one-page rule sheet: definiteness conclusions need a forced chain; possibility conclusions need only one consistent arrangement. For each practice question, write 'definite' or 'possible' beside the conclusion before judging it, and review every error against the rule sheet.
Estimating percentages and ratios by rounding both numbers aggressively (for example treating 17.6% as 20% and 49 as 50) and then selecting an answer option close to the estimate without checking the direction of the rounding error.
Speed pressure pushes candidates toward approximation, but they round in inconsistent directions, so errors compound; the options are usually engineered so that one distractor matches the naive estimate.
What to do instead
Round one number up and the other down deliberately, or use a fraction anchor (17.6% is close to 1/6, not 1/5). After estimating, verify the sign of the error: state whether the true value is above or below the estimate, then pick the option on the correct side. Drill 20 such items with a 45-second limit each.
Leaving Data Interpretation sets until the end and then attempting all five questions of a set, including the two that require multi-step ratio comparisons, instead of harvesting the two or three direct-read questions first.
Candidates treat a DI set as an indivisible block, and the first question often looks easy, so they stay in the set and run out of time before reaching the cheap marks.
What to do instead
Scan all questions in the set, answer the direct single-operation ones first, and skip comparative ones until the rest of the section is secure. In practice, log time per question within each set to see where the minutes actually go.
Reading the passage once, then answering questions from memory of the overall theme rather than returning to the sentence that supports the chosen option.
Passage-based questions reward gist reading, but inference and tone questions hinge on single words; memory reconstructs a plausible version of the passage that supports attractive wrong options.
What to do instead
For every answer, locate and underline the supporting phrase before marking the option. If no single phrase supports it, the option is probably an over-inference. Train by doing three passages where you must cite the line number for each answer.
Choosing an answer option because the word appears in the passage, ignoring that the option reverses the relationship or changes the scope (for example 'all' instead of 'some', or swaps cause and effect).
Word-matching feels safe under time pressure, and distractors are deliberately built from passage vocabulary; candidates stop reading the option's logical structure once they recognise familiar words.
What to do instead
Read the option first, predict the answer in your own words, then compare. Flag options containing absolutes (all, never, only) or causal verbs (causes, leads to, results from) and check those words specifically against the passage.
Answering general-awareness items on banking history, regulators, and scheme launch years from vague recollection, then changing a correct answer during review without any new evidence.
These facts are learned as isolated trivia rather than in a timeline, so recall is unstable; review-time second-guessing is driven by anxiety rather than by retrieved knowledge.
What to do instead
Build a dated timeline (nationalisation, regulator establishment, major scheme launches, key committees) and a table of institutions with their founding year and function. During the exam, change an answer only if you can name the specific fact that contradicts it.
Confusing the roles of RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, and NPCI, or mixing up which body regulates payments, insurance, and securities, when answering regulatory-awareness questions.
The institutions overlap in public discussion and news coverage, and candidates memorise names without mapping each to its statutory mandate.
What to do instead
Make a three-column table: institution, statutory mandate, one concrete instrument it issues or operates. Test yourself by covering a column and reconstructing it. Add new items to the table as you encounter them rather than memorising them in isolation.
Mixing up volatile and non-volatile storage, RAM and ROM, or primary and secondary memory when answering basic computer-awareness questions, and confusing input and output devices.
Everyday usage blurs these terms (people say 'memory' for storage), and candidates rely on that casual vocabulary instead of the technical definitions tested.
What to do instead
Learn one crisp definitional test: volatile loses contents on power loss; primary memory is directly addressed by the CPU. Classify ten devices and storage types against these tests, and redo the classification a week later without notes.
Reading a computer-network or internet question and answering from the acronym's expansion alone, without checking what the question actually asks about the protocol's layer, function, or direction.
Acronym recall is fast and feels like mastery, so candidates stop reading after recognising the term and pick the option that echoes the expansion.
What to do instead
For each protocol, memorise three attributes: layer, function, and a one-line example of use. In practice, cover the options and state the answer from those attributes before looking, then check the option that matches all three.