Forgive me if this has already been covered, but I'm curious about different bubbling strategies. Any advice? I usually bubble before I turn the page--so after a full passage in RC, a full game in LG, and about 7 questions in LR--and then, after the 5 minute warning, I bubble after every question. It's such an important aspect of the test that I think gets overlooked. Any new ideas/strategies would be greatly appreciated!

Hey guys,

So this issue has probably been beaten to death already with the answer of the Fool Proof Method. For the most part, I've been able to see a major improvement in my LG section with it and I've been Fool Proofing ALL my games and I've done practically every game in existence up to the PT I take each time. However, I still seem to be stumped by some of the more recent random games. The first time seeing them places me off balance since they seem different. A good example would be Game 3 from PT64, which I just took today. I did the other 3 games in about 6-7min each and this one I spent the rest of the section's time on and still couldn't finish. How do you Fool Proof for these unexpected games? Or are they not unexpected and I have an issue involving recognition? I always seem to find one really hard and unfamiliar game in every one section of two PTs -- so one game every other PT frustrates me (this trend started from PT 58 onward for me).

Any ideas or tips would be much appreciated, especially from those of you have been consistently getting -0 in the recent PTs (60+). This is pretty much my last section to really improve on as LR and RC are pretty much set for me. And I've heard that LG is supposed to be the one you are the most easily able to practice and achieve -0. A lot of people have also said that the newer games are easier, but I honestly don't believe it.

Thanks, guys.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-12/

So, what's the deal w/ effective laws? How would you approach this one, in terms of a thinking through it strategy? I chose B originally, though I understood that this was not the contrapositive of the statements in the stimulus. I'm not quite getting how the international police force is a necessary condition for int law to be effective. This may be the result of mental fatigue, so please don't judge me here (:

is this lesson currently down right now?

Anyone in Pearland TX for prepping together.

Does the percent complete bar at the top of the syllabus pg. represent all things in your package you bought or only the actual lessons (at the exclusion of PTs that came w package)

Thanks,

Jake

There are some main point questions that do not have a clear conclusion. The conclusion uses "borrowed language" or "referential language". Example : Clearly, without that sympathy and the political will in engender, the needs of more obscure species will go unmet. If you see "that" referrers back to the last contextual language. In the answer, there is not such answer that states that specific conclusion, rather a inference that one can make, is the answer. How do we use the 7sage strategy in such a situation?

Question October 1991 #6 Section 1

I'm not sure what it is but I can't seem to apply the methods of diagramming as easily to these questions. I did horribly on LR after improving quite a bit in the upper 50s PTs. Many of the NA questions were same in terms of difficulty, but the questions where inferences need to be drawn seem to make pretty big leaps in logic.

PT 60 absolutely destroyed me in LR. Felt way too abstract and I'm not sure how to go about answering such questions.

For some questions, I still can't understand the gap even after watching the video explanations. At this point I am getting frustrated of getting so many questions wrong. Has anyone done PT 60 onwards? How has your experience been with LR?

Are we supposed to memorize our LSAC number to bubble in on the answer sheeT?

I hit past 170 benchmark today, i know it's not the real thing but hey! anyway, wanted to clarify because it wasn't a trigger word/phrase i had writtten down "in order to" always introduces sufficient part of the argument? if someone could just reply quick that would be great

basically atm my last pt a few weeks ago was 149 starting from a 140. Kinda thinking i am screwed for october, might have to push back to december. i ordered the bp lg game book so if I get good jumps in lg it may help a lot.

Hi,

I'll be starting the CAS process for getting my LSAC gpa computed as well as getting LORs from professors. I already have two professors willing to give me a LOR and I will be meeting with them next week.

I'm taking the LSAT in October. Can someone explain like I'm 5 what steps to take to make the application process as streamlined as possible?

I honestly looked this up but the information is so all over the place. I would like to know, if it is all right, how those of you who are in law school or have gone to law school completed the application process. What steps did you take and when?

Thanks

Is the $60 dollar 180 Watch worth it?

Hi!

I am currently stuck in a rut with my score. I have made 157-159 on the past few tests I have taken and can't seem to break 160. I BR at 171ish so I know I can do better! Any suggestions on how to make a few more improvements these last few days?

Thanks!

Video explanations for LSAT Prep Test 69 (June 2013) are finally here!

You get individual video explanations for LG, LR, and RC, all done by JY. On top of that, there's also something new that we're pretty excited about...

For LR, you get to see a real time recording of JY attempting those sections under fully simulated timed conditions. You get to see exactly how he tackles each question.

You also get his times on each of the RC passages and each of the LR questions.

For the next 3 days, we’re offering PT 69 along with all the videos associated with that PT for the special early bird discount price of $19.97. That's 33% off :D

UPDATE: Sale is over!

Get it here

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-1-question-24/

Okay, so perhaps I'm overthinking this, but here goes:

I put down (B) rather than (C) for the following reason: the stimulus indicates that the degree of immuno-effect is related to branching of the beta-glucans, but states that beta-glucan extracts from the shrooms have this effect (i.e. Whether b-g 's in general do is not stated). Thus, to say that b-g branching triggers immuno-effects in mammals (answer C) seems to overshoot what's in the passage, whereas (B), which only mentions that if extracts have an immuno-effect, then that shroom must be making b-g 's.

Tell me where i'm going wrong.

Thanks & all the best w/ practice,

Z

This thread might be geared more towards the instructors... Anyhow, I was wondering if there are certain benchmarks one should meet with X amount of weeks left to expect X range in score. For example, if writing the October test (t-minus 4 weeks!) where should one be today if they were looking to score a 165 ? A 170? I guess it's reasonable to expect a steadily increasing score until test day if you haven't quite reached your potential yet. At the same time, I think it could be strategically better to set more realistic expectations. Any advice?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-4-question-21/

Can someone please help me out with this question? It's really doing my head in.

Would A still be correct if it was phrased: Skiff's book will be published this year if it is as important as he claims it is.

Many thanks.

Anyone have this message come up? I use chrome as my browser and at least once for every video I play, I get this error. It didn't bother me too much until it happened with my exam proctor in the middle of an exam.

Hey guys,

I need help with tips of when to split the game board and how to easily spot the inferences. I'm never able to put all the inferences together that force out only a few possible boards which in turn helps you fly through the questions. Normally, I'll set up my board, see nothing, then go through the questions. The problem is it takes too long. I get almost all the questions correct most of the time, but I'm spending 8-12 minutes on each one, with the occasional difficult 14. Then I watch the explanations and it all clicks and i keep beating myself on how I missed all the inferences. Any idea how to get better at noticing what to force out?

I just took PT 59. In the PT scorer it says that section 2 LR is "easiest" and section 3 is "harder". I got 50% accuracy on section 2 but 84% accuracy on section 3. If I can fix this problem my score would probably be a lot better. My weaknesses are MSS and Flaw questions (could be that section 2 had more of these types). How do you guys approach Flaw and MSS? I feel like there's some connection I'm not making.

Anyone recall any games with bi-conditional rules similar to Game 4 in PT69 and Game 2 PT56?

Also, if anyone happens know of any sequencing games that incorporate bi-conditional rules that would be helpful too.

Thanks!

Hi fellow LSATers!

I'm looking for study buddies for the October 2013 exam, as I'll be studying full time up until the exam.

I'm currently scoring in the 167-170 range, and would like to consistently hit 170+ by October.

Bonus if you're strong(er) in Reading Comp/Logical Reasoning but weak(er) in Games, as I am the opposite and we could complement each other.

Ideally interested in meeting up/Skyping to bounce ideas off of one another, discuss strategy, and see different thought processes to arrive at the credited response.

Do any of you guys try "predicting the answer" after reading the stimulus and question stem on LR but before reading the answer choices? I recently started attacking the problems this way and have since found them more manageable. I think it's because one of the most challenging aspects of LR is parsing really convulted material in a short period of time...something so verbally taxing is only made worse when trying to juggle answer choices that are all designed to tempt you. I noticed that I started employing this method naturally over time but didn't see improvement until I did so actively. Granted, you can't always predict which angle they'll take but doing so will at least give you the advantage of understanding the parts of the argument more thoroughly.

So I'm about half way through my three months of training with 7 sage and the only PT I've taken is the first diagnostic one. Should I be taking full length tests at this point or should I be supplementing my studies with timed sections (I didn't get a lot of problem sets from 7 sage so the sections would be from preptests). I know that realistically I may only have time/energy for sections until I finish the lessons (two jobs and grad school) and if I do full length I may not be as thorough in blind review. That being said, if doing so would be worth it, I'd like to know.

Thanks!