So I am learning Logical reasoning through the book "The Loophole". So it says that "Your loophole and resolution have to be powerful" and "Your inference and controversy have to be provable" But then when I got to the Provable question stem section it said that the question stems-- conclusion, NA, Method, Argument part, The flaws-- all used loophole. Can someone please explain this? I don't understand.. because the book initially said that loopholes have to be powerful.

What makes AC C different from AC D? I would appreciate some input.

Admin note: Edited Title. Please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description of question]"

When I do a game in a PT or a drill, I do it timed first, then again during BR, and if after BR I still am not at a -0, I take a few hours or a day and repeat the entire game untimed. If I can figure it out on my own (using my own inferences and my own gameboards), then I'll just go foolproof the game using my own strategies, rather than watching JY's explanation video. Am I wrong to be doing that? I'm wondering if this is preventing me from getting to a -0 as quickly. I have improved on my own though (averaging at about a -6), but I was just wondering if I'd be improving more and faster if I were to just always follow every single step that JY takes in his explanation videos?

Hi everyone,

I'm having a hard time understanding why answer choice E is wrong and why answer choice B is correct can someone please explain

Thank you in advance!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question." Also deleted the stimulus because it is against our Forum Rules to post the LSAT questions or Answer Choices on the forum

Can someone please explain to me what the difference is between AC C and D? I'm probably not mapping it out correctly, but C and D seem to have the same pattern of reasoning as the question stem. I chose D the first time but C when I did blind review and that makes me nervous.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Can someone explain the grammar of the question stem, "The statements above, if true, serve LEAST well as evidence for which of the following?"

I'm having trouble understanding what it's truly asking.

Thanks!

I have been enjoying 7Sage right up until the LG section. I cannot learn these games this way. Can anyone recommend another resource that teaches the games in a different style? Not disloyal to 7Sage in any way, but this is making me a total head case and affecting my performance on all the sections. Before starting LG I was scoring -1 or -2 on LR and -3 or -4 on RC and now my scores are tanking across the board. #help

Hello,

I figured I should write this to get a feel for what I'm doing wrong. I have been taking practice sections for LR, and have been stuck in the -8 to -11 range. Terrible, I know. I have been blind reviewing and I will maybe see the light on some of them, but others I stick with the answer I chose. I feel like I can't make certain connections with the arguments I'm seeing and I'm not entirely sure how to fix it.

After the explanation videos I have a clearer understanding of the argument and why the correct answer is correct, but I do another practice section and the same thing happens. I have been missing the questions that are at the 158 curve and above.

Is there something different I can be doing?

Thanks for any advice.

I can understand why answer choices A, C, D, and E are incorrect. What I can not quite understand is why B is right. Any thoughts?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Dont understand this one

Hi everyone!

I'm hoping to get some advice on when you can book your writing sample for the January 2023 exam date. On my lsac account it says that the Launch LSAT Writing link will appear on my account 8 days prior to my testing date. Therefore, 8 days prior to my actual lsat test, will I then register for a ProctorU day and time for my writing sample?

Any advice or experience would be appreciated as this is my first time completing the writing sample so I'd love some clarification.

Hi, the explanation videos for Sufficient Assumption Questions Problem Set 3 are not playing for me. Any idea what I need to do to watch these videos?

Any help with this question and translating the stimulus?

https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/forums/q23-ecologist-without-the-intervention-of-t579.html

The question is described here. It is PT 56 Section 2 Question 23. I was stuck between D and E and eventually chose D. I have read that it is incorrect because it is an illegal reversal, I just do not understand how.

I basically wrote it out like /Intervention -> Extinct and contraposed that as /Extinct -> Intervention which led me to answer choice D. What did I do wrong?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-2-question-23/

#Help

Can anyone explain to me how A is correct? I don't see the idea of a "comprehensive approach" being discussed in the passage. From my understanding, the passage is letting us know that the current approach - the piecemeal approach - is not working. How are you able to infer from this that a comprehensive approach could be successful?

Thank You!

Hi everyone,

This is in reference to LG but applicable for all sections, does anyone have tips for finishing on time more regularly? My blind review prep test scores are pretty good but without fail I leave a few questions blank (often 5 or 6 for LG) when I do practice tests.

TIA!

Hello all, I barely registered for the February lsat yesterday and didn't know that accommodation requests were also due yesterday. Unfortunately, I did not sign up for the accommodation request in time and this will severely jeopardize my performance level on test day. I decided to register for the April LSAT that way I will have proper accommodation. Would I be able to submit my application prior to taking the April LSAT? Or do you think I should just try the February LSAT, send the score in, submit application, and then take the April LSAT? For reference, Im applying to SOCAL schools such as UCI, U of SD, Cal Western, Chapman, Loyola, Western State, Southwestern, and others. I know these schools do accept the April LSAT but Im just worried that this can seriously jeopardize my chances. Any advice?

i had trouble really explaining why A and B were wrong. Only that E felt the best in matching. And this was after mapping out each answer choice and BR... any idea?

Hello 7sage, it's been a while, good to see the forum is still bustling with activity and people putting in hard work in pursuit of their LSAT dreams!

It's October 2015, I was 6 months out from convocation, and I knew I had to get started. I thought it would be a good idea, in November, to enrol for the February 2016 sitting. After I signed up, I set out to find the right study materials. I asked a friend who'd just started their first year at Queens, and he recommended 7sage! So, it's November 2015 and I'm signed up for the February 2016 LSAT without a clue what I was doing. DO NOT DO THIS, wow, time and time again people on the forum say this and I wish I had listened, do NOT sign up until you are ready. In hindsight this was a ridiculous amount of pressure to put on myself, I hadn't even finished the curriculum when people sat the Feb '16 test...

A little bit of context, I had moved into my Aunt & Uncle's house with my two cousins in high school, because I knew it was a good environment for learning. Both of my cousins are extremely hard working, excelling academically and athletically. This provided the structure I lacked in University, where I finished with a 2.9 GPA. I found full time work in the construction industry, 7am-3:30pm, roughly 20km from my home, it was physical labour, for a good hourly. When the weather was good, I would cycle to and from work. I studied after work and on weekends, either after a long bus journey or bike ride. It is important to note that I was in a long-distance relationship at the time, so I was often travelling to or hosting my partner on weekends.

Anyhow, first things first, right? I learned about arguments and grammar. My English and Philosophy background helped, but it was eye opening, I was surprised by how much I learned from these sections. Then, it was time for my diagnostic! I ploughed through it, LG -13, LR1 -8, LR2 -11, RC -8, for a150/159 BR after to figuring out the LG section and changing some correct answers for LR and RC.

Because of my GPA, I knew I needed a good score, my initial aim was 90-94th percentile.

One thing I did not do at first was purchase any prep tests... I didn't think I would need them, and I had zero disposable income after paying for the 7sage Ultimate+, the LSAT administration, and maintaining my romantic relationship. I made cue cards as I worked through the syllabus, reviewing them every morning on the bus.

Once I hit the problem sets I spent SO MUCH TIME taking screen shots, rebuilding the worksheets into word documents, and printing them out. I got this down to a science, but still, it was a ridiculous endeavour that I did throughout the entire curriculum; doing it was mentally exhausting.

As I worked through the sets, there were times I blind reviewed really well, but never like any of @"Accounts Playable"'s posts... I highly recommend using hi posts as the blueprint for your BR.

There were times I wanted to quit, I relied heavily on my partner, my family, and this forum to keep me going while battling through the urge to pack it in after a long day of work and the 40km of cycling or the 2 1/2 hours of public transit. That being said, I did fall off... I had a massive addiction to Clash of Clans and Boom Beach, there were a couple weeks where I didn't study at all after work. My diet also took a nose dive, safe to say this was my all-time low. I'm pretty sure this happened from mid December through the beginning of January.

I essentially paid for the test again to push my sitting back to June 2016. But the universe delivered a gift when I dropped my iPhone in a heroic toilet that killed the phone and my CoC and Boom Beach addictions with it! That might be the greatest thing outside of my control that happened during my journey.

My grind through the core curriculum was completed April 5th, 2016. It was a great milestone, I remember my partner tearing up with joy, it was a long process, watching that green circle fill ever so slowly.

After that point I ordered every PT ever published, and patiently awaited the begging on my final phase of prep.

It is important to note that by late April/early May I started doing the guided meditations, cut alcohol out completely (aside from a sherry on my late Nana's birthday, and a shot at my Uncle's wedding), was doing approximately 90mins of cardio 5 days a week, and followed the "Dolce Diet" as best I could.

I developed what routines that I could, did what worked for me, and focused on not stressing about the things I couldn't do. I would often visualize test day, I was talking to people about the LSAT at every possible opportunity, and I kept telling myself and everyone who would listen that I was confident I would score in the 170s, confident in my preparation, and I would succeed.

Part of my routine was a list of positive affirmations, I would say theses to myself every day after my morning meditation. I also discovered "bulletproof coffee" and after the fall/winter where I consumed like 5-8 double doubles a day... cutting down to 32oz of bulletproof coffee was a huge change, but I think it paid dividends for my sleep quality and energy levels.

My first prep test was actually PT 35, not realizing I had "seen" the questions before until afterwards when I realized the syllabus called for 36. I wound up completing 12 PTs before my sitting in June, including the diagnostic. I also watched every webinar that I could find time for, though I must admit, I rarely watched them work through the questions at the end. I took what I needed from the explanations, updated my cue cards, and focused applying those principles during my PTs and especially during my BR.

I did not have the luxury of writing at 1pm during the week, so I tried to do that on the weekends as best I could. That being said, it did not always work out. The only thing I really could control was how strict I was while taking the PT, I added an extra section from the curriculum PTs, and dropped my pencil when the proctor said so.. There was no way I was going to be tagged for a violation during my sitting.

I was diagnosed with ADHD in 2014, and didn't apply for any accommodations because I was told by my learning strategist that the test would involve "draconian measures" to prevent cheating, and I wouldn't be given accommodations because I didn't have them for exams during my undergrad. So it was 5x35mins for me, to be honest I never wrote a single timed writing sample before my sitting, but I reviewed JY's pointers and made sure to review it close to June 6th. I made sure to force myself to BR every PT as best I could, by the end of the whole process, I think I had filled out 2 whole notebooks between the curriculum and the PTs. Sometimes it would take me a week to complete a review, sometimes less.

3 weeks out from my test, my partner decided to end our relationship, she had her reasons, but the next 3 weeks were a blur. I know that I ate the same breakfast, drank the same amount of coffee, would do the 24 min guided meditation before and after work, and was riding my bike like a madman to and from work. I probably averaged 6.5 hours of sleep a night, with my alarm going off at 4:15-4:30, I tried to be in bed between 9-10pm every night.

I did score a 173 on PT 65, the week before my test... so I felt quite confident and encouraged, especially after briefly participating in the June pep rally. Hearing JY and Nicole's advice and feeling the love from everyone in that webinar was amazing.

When I wrote PTs on the weekend, I recorded the time and amount of my water and food intake, along with my bathroom breaks. There was only one PT where I had to run to my bathroom toward the end of S3.

For my last three Weekend PTs, I tried emulating my bike ride to the testing centre, I ate the same meals, I wore the same clothing I planned to wear on test day. I became obsessed with these details.

The day of, I did everything the same as I'd done on my dry run on Saturday the 4th. I woke up, same coffee, breakfast, I warmed up, I biked the 14km to the campus; after completing my undergrad there, I had no issues accessing the room. After arriving I stretched, meditate, I sauna'd a bit in order to ensure any excess water was gone, that wasn't part of the routine but it helped, showered, ate my same meal, sat down and wrote out my game plan for each section, writing out how many minutes I wanted to allot to each RC passage, I think it was a 7,7,9,10, listened to my Eminem pump up playlist, and walked over to the testing area. The game planning wasn't part of my routine either, and in hindsight, I should have warmed up then on top of the game planning, since it had been hours after warming up at home when I finally started by test around 130pm.

After arriving in the registration area, I was relaxed, sat off in a corner by myself, ignoring everyone, waiting for the proctors to take us over the the testing area. I didn't say a word to a single person other than a proctor.

Once I opened that booklet, I went into auto pilot, except S3... It was the second LG section, after opening with LG, I knew that it could be the experimental section AND I SLOWED DOWN once the first two games were ridiculously easy sequencing games... I also knew the first section had rules very similarly worded to the game from PT 76 that I'd warmed up with that morning. THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA, DO NOT DO THIS!! I didn't even finish the section in time, guessing the final 3 questions. That is awful, considering I knew I had to go -0 on LG in order to score 170+...

I was extremely lucky to walk away with a 169 (LG -1, LR -3, RC -6, LR -2), if my gamble on that experimental section had gone badly, I could be sitting here telling you about how I'm sitting down again for a re-write, but, I'm not. I had scored bang on my average, despite the break up, despite the 6 years of my life where I was a brutal student and at times never thought I'd pursue academics or even finish the degree. I had a construction job to fall back on, I had grown complacent, at one point using ADHD meds without any of the proper studying habits in place to make proper use of them... but persistence paid off, I didn't give up, and 7sage never gave up on me.

My aim for writing the LSAT was to show law schools that I was capable of working that hard and achieving such a good score, I intend to argue that my ADHD diagnosis late into my undergrad was a big turning point for me, and turning that around couldn't have happened over night, but it has, and I am more than ready to pursue my dream of a legal career.

Thanks to you, 7sage, I will do that with confidence.

Sorry for the length!

Looking back, I would have put way more work into RC, and worked on trusting my gut more... I had changed an answer in the first LR section from the correct one to an incorrect one, and with that my 170 became a 169! Those short cuts with the webinars and BR early on might have made the difference, but in the long run, I never reached @"Nicole Hopkins"'s benchmark of 15 PTs for a 170+... maybe with 4 or 5 more... who knows.

Cheers everyone, thanks for reading, best of luck moving forward! I will lurk around here for a bit but, I'm training for my first sprint distance triathlon in 6 weeks and might be busy sleeping more than ever before!

(spoiler alert if you havent taken PT41) :

its the question that begins with "poor nutrition is at the root....."

the logic in the argument seems to me to look like "high nutrient diet ---> improved behavior ".........but the credited response was answer choice E which states " ~high nutrient diet-----> ~improved behavior"

intuitively, this answer choice feels correct, but wouldnt this be whats called "denial of the antecedent"?? other books call it illegal negation or denying the sufficient condition, but the point i guess is that its logically invalid. and yet that invalid logical structure is present in the correct answer choice for this question. Can someone explain that to me? thank you

Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-14/

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Could someone please help me understand why the answer is D?

Thank you!!!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

I'm doing some LR drilling right now, and I just wanted to make a discussion post and share my reasoning for a question (as prompted by 7Sage).

C: the glacier that melted to reveal the ancient body is at least 4,000 years old

Reasoning: Artifacts found on the man's body indicate that he lived at least 4,000 years ago, and that he died on the same spot where his body was discovered. Therefore, the glacier - the spot on which he died and was discovered - must be at least 4,000 years old. None of the other answer choices were even close to enticing and were easily eliminated.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

So I registered for the Jan LSAT, expecting to get more info on exactly how the test was administered, what devices are compatible, what I need to bring etc. So can someone explain the dynamics of how you actually take the exam? I have an new 2021 Ipad with keyboard and want to make sure that’s compatible with taking the test.

Are there restrictions on where I can take the test? I dont have a place to take it at home so I’m looking into the best places for taking it that also satisfy all LSAC requirements (aka renting private study room in Library).

What am I allowed to bring with me? Ive been doing all my PTs with a blank piece of paper to write notes or draw diagrams but if im taking it online am I allowed to do that?

LSS: how do I make sure I’m fully prepared for the exam and dont have anything surprise me on exam day. Any suggestions/rules are appreciated!

Lots of words below outlining my issues with the section. If you're also struggling with RC and/or have come up with novel solutions, please consider sharing ideas.

Reading comprehension is consistently my lowest performing section, I've got a pretty static -4 to -0 band on LR and LG, but reading is something that I'm worried I'm not effectively getting better at just from reading more passages.

Current Method:

I find that writing things down sucks up time and misdirects effort away from holistic understanding, because if I try to write a one sentence summary or comment on the structure I'll be focusing on that PARAGRAPH at the detriment of understanding the author's point as a whole. Currently, I don't use any paper in my RC strategy. This is probably a big area I need to consider. I'm entirely mentally reading for detail, and thinking about how things relate to each other as I go, keeping it in mental storage.

Concerns:

-Topics are too foreign/difficult/boring. I don't care about how 18th century English medieval common law courts carried out sentences pertaining to women's rights and how research methodology pertains to whatever. This makes it difficult for me to even recognize important details, let alone remember them. I also straight up don't know anything about art history or shit like that. I've noticed a significant boost in performance when it comes to science/natural history, things that I'm interested in, or technology/economics/finance, things that I've studied. Prior knowledge clearly helps but I don't see how I can get enough of a broad base of knowledge for the entire LSAT.

which leads to

-Struggling with inferences. Things that aren't explicitly stated are inherently fuzzy, and then I'm legit coin-flipping for those 5* Q's. I can't generate a mastery of the detail in these passage inside of 4 minutes. Current approach is to try and isolate relevant sentences from the passage, but then you inevitably miss things.

-General shitty reading ability? Like, I didn't have to write essays in college, so getting hit with these academic paper writing styles is tough.

Current stats:

170 Avg, 175 peak timed over 5 most recent PT's taken, up from roughly ~160 2 months prior. Need to get to 175 as a floor. RC consistently holding me below 175.

Thanks for any insights guys, let's make this a discussion. Feel free to dm me or call me a poopee head, I just need ideas for how to approach prepping this gd section.

How do you deal with this type questions? I am so confused. Watch the video by JY in CC. It looks simple but when I am doing it my brain is jammed…