The problem with analogies is that in practice, what they tested was 10% reasoning, and 90% "has this student seen SAT-style analogy questions before." A student from a mediocre school would be at a severe disadvantage because they would have to spend a non-trivial amount of their limited time figuring out what the question was even asking and getting used to the notation, while someone who went to a good school could skip straight to the reasoning. SAT prep classes also focused heavily on analogy questions, which created the perception (dunno how accurate) that analogies in particular were a better measure of your parents' wallet than your own brain. That the analogy questions were poorly explained on the test is probably a solvable problem (ditch the : :: : notation!), but they still require non-trivial explanation, which will inevitably give an advantage to students familiar with the format.