To be clear, I am not sure the definitions of a simple operation versus a series of short steps really matter. What I call a simple operation might be viewed by others as two or three. My point is all about first looking at the proposed answers (since it eliminates two) and most importantly looking at the format of the answer, which was not about solving for neither x nor y.
It might have been a coincidence that the short step that includes the subtraction yielded an equation that was easily transformed into the format required, but I considered it a … brilliant move by the test writer. Brilliant because it opened the trap to someone blindly following the lengthy path as well as gave sufficient ammunition to the astute test taker to pick the right (and only plausible) answer.
As far as what comes in the future, I am happy to agree with the notion that the SAT will probably turn into more of a formulaic and “dumber” math test as it will follow the Common Core. The intuitive and more mentally agile test taker will find a lot fewer low hanging fruits in the next versions.
But then, “we” have been rewarding mediocrity in education for several decades in a departure from the ROW.
PS To be clear, I do not consider the graphical method in 46 to be dumber. Not at all!