I'm not sure you're making the point you think you are. As I recall the SAT many years ago, there were definitely question forms like X:Y as A:? which rely on vocabulary to some degree but may also be hard (or at least take some extra time) if the form is unfamiliar. Also even a surface-level understanding of some areas of math you realize you sort of didn't really get can be useful. So with that fairly modest knowledge and refresh, you got what's a possibly useful but also relatively modest uptick.
Don't discount the bump from understanding the pacing and difficulty of the exam. You might have 25 questions in 30 minutes for a math section. Understanding that which sections are easy and which are hard allows a student who has seen the exam before to allocate their time more efficiently.
Sure. And even taking the test once under real live conditions is probably beneficial to complement a bit of study. Just as really giving a presentation to even a few people almost certainly beats just mentally walking through it in your head.
Obviously you can try to create a real simulation but it's probably not the same thing.
The increase from 1320 to 1490 is pretty significant when it comes to college rankings. Although 1490 isn't anything stellar, it's the top 10 or 5 percent at my school. My main point was just the fact that, by paying collegeboard more money for more retakes, your score will increase. The SAT doesn't seem like a great indicator of anything besides one's ability to perform on the SAT
