Subscription pricing
Hi guys,
Just wanted to gather some opinions from you all about how you are preparing for the newer logic games. As many have noticed the games have changed after the mid PT 50s to late 50s, and it seems there are more "randomized hybrid" games that now appear on each PT. I had been practicing with the Fool Proof method for all logic games before what I consider to be the modern LSAT (PTs 53+), but I was stumped on the newer logic games when I first encountered them. I suspect the skills I've garnered from the older games should help me in the newer ones, but honestly, at the moment I see the older games as wasted effort if the newer games continue to be so different and continuously changing.
I suspect this is LSAC's response to ever more clever test prep companies and their formulaic strategies. Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks.
Regards,
Eric
1
9 comments
I actually got worse with the newer ones.. because I do tend to make silly errors when I am flooded with so many possibilities.
Somehow, I always knew they were different...I guess now (thanks to CJ) I can pinpoint to the exact difference: added labor intensity.
How is everyone else doing on the newer logic games? Were they similarly okay for you as the older ones? Or did you have to re-drill games again in order to better yourself for the newer ones?
I feel that the newer games are different in the sense that they are much more labor intensive (not restrictive).
It seems harder to pinpoint the key inferences and neatly split up the boards to cover up all the possibilities.
So yea, I guess we need to train ourselves in brute forcing quickly and accurately.
The newer games are much easier to categorize than the earlier ones.
Some of the earlier ones are VERY abstract and almost arithmetic. The newer ones conform to such categories as in/out, sequencing, grouping.
I would not say the newer LGs are easy, but certainly it is possible to get 100% of the newer LGs right as they are methodical.
Oh dear; well I hope it's not just me getting worse at games over time LOL
I agree with the other guys here.
I don't know...they just seem different. If anything, I feel like the newer ones can't quite be categorized into our older system. Instead, they're more "hybridized" and require board setups that don't quite conform to our practiced system.
Any thoughts from the 7Sage team?
I agree with Jason, I really don't see much difference other than the fact that the recent ones are feature fewer games that cannot be categorized. If anything, games seems to get easier and RC harder.
I honestly don't see that much of a difference. Some of the newer games have a few confusing conditional rules (such as A arrives before B or after C but not both), but that is all. If anything, I feel games from PTs 19-28 are harder than current ones