Based on prior test date discussion boards it looks as though those scheduling emails typically go out ~2.5 weeks in advance, but curious if anyone has anything more concrete than that to share. I would love to have my time slot figured as I do have some potential conflicts on the 12th/13th... it stresses me out a little bit to have little information about when to expect the email and I'm paranoid I'll miss it/only notice it once all the most "desirable" time slots are gobbled up.

I don't even know if that's how it works.

Hi, I am struggling with games because I am not yet quickly able to make inferences to decipher the possible set ups. It seems this is the key to easily going through the questions, so I was wondering if there are any drills anywhere to practice this skill?

Where can I find how difficult a LG full-section for a given PT and not just how difficult a given Game is?

For example, say I did a PT number X's LG section. where can I find it's difficulty comparison with PT-Y's LG section?

Looking for something other than adding difficulty of individual games of pt X to compare with PT Y.

Hi all! I have been doing well with the concepts behind how to weaken an argument. Don't attack the premise or conclusion, rather thin out and weaken the support structure. However, I seem to get it on the first round but in my BR I end up falling for the trap answers and just changing my course of reasoning. Helppp!!! Any and all tips are welcome!

I need help, I suck big time in LR and I’m terrified, my test is in September! What should I do, I quit my two jobs and still can’t feel, I’m able to grasp this LR section. Never felt this way toward an exam before.

For each drill question, it shows a "curve" for the likelyhood of someone with that score getting the question right. But im feeling a bit confused on what that exactly means. So if the black bar is at "135" for example, it means that someone with a 135 was likely to get that question right?

Just started RC for like a month. Realize that most of questions I got wrong are either because I think too much or think too little (ignore some details which are stupidly obvious). Also struggling with time… Too much time wasted on reading and overthinking… I am not a good reader. The only books I ve read in my life are textbooks… Did my best to follow what JY suggested but got -14 on the Feb 1997 PT and scored 155. Feel crashed… I mean at least I need get over 160… A lot of people say I just need to practice more. But seriously, can practice actually make you better (not even perfect) on RC?

What I put; A irrelevance to argument.

Wrong bc.

The conclusion itself is that selfishness is true of all time periods. This is the argument, it is not irrelevant to the argument. It is just argued poorly.

The correct anser is E.

The argument uses selfishness in two ways.

At first, characterizes selfishness as individualism.

Them, says that acts on behalf of the human species are selfish.

Acting on behalf of the human species may be selfish, but it is not individualistic.

The argument that all periods, not just the 80s, can be characterized by selfish individualism, is not advanced by saying acts on behaf of humankind r selfish

Hi, I'll be taking the August test and I wanted to know if anyone had any tips on timing for LR and problem solving. My goal score is a 170-175 and I'm finding myself stuck on certain question types. I'm currently scoring in the mid 160s and have majority of my wrong answers in LR. Thanks!

Can someone explain why B is the right answer? The stem states that it is unknown why people purchased broadsides, or how their beliefs related to the broadsides. If these statements are true, why does having having crime and adultery in the broadsides show that people may not have been serious about moral values? Aren't the two given statements proof that the broadsides don't have to be truly moral for the 17th century people to be moral?

Just broke 170 on a PT (174 BR), with -0 in LR and RC. -10 or something in LG.

I very consistently get to the last game with about 5 minutes remaining, which just isn't enough.

I think I lose a lot of time on must be true/must be false questions where the answer isn't immediately obvious just by looking, bc I have to go through each answer, making inferences based on its condition, eliminating it, and repeating the process with the next one.

Question explanations aren't very helpful because, given enough time, I can get the correct answer to basically any LG question--the issue is just timing.

I feel like there's either some technique or strategy I'm missing, or I just need to practice lots more and build up an intuition that will help me move through them quickly?

I'd love to hear input from people in a similar boat as me: high diagnostic test (-2 and -3 on RC/LR) with bombed LG, then rapid improvement on LG but still struggling with time. Does it get better?

This question doesn't have an explanation, so here's my thought process.

Question Stem- Principle Question

Stimulus- Machines and tech alter our choices. (example). Clock altered our choices by allowing synch +. HOWEVER, clock also closed some doors. Living without clock is kinda impossible now.

So Machines and tech that alter our choices can have some downsides as well.

A. This makes sense, however, the use of "enslave" and "liberate" sounds really extreme. Keep for now.

B. No. The stimulus no where says what people should and shouldn't do.

C. That MAY be true, however, not what the stimulus is saying.

D. The stimulus does not weigh the pros and cons, so we don't know if it was worth our dependence or not.

E. "Most"??? We only know about one instance that made our life more synchronized and productive. There MAY be more machines. However, that is not within the scope of the premises, and therefore out.

Only answer remaining- A. Correct.

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

Is there a difference between MP and MC questions? To my understanding, MP applies to arguments. Are you supposed to approach them differently ?

Thank you in advance :)

To my understanding, the push stoke was a defect with the new garden rake. And if it is the only defect, then the evaluation between the new gardening rake and the straight rake stands cause it is base on the whatever defect the new gardening rake has and it is the push stoke.

Hi everyone,

JY often says that it's a good idea to scan the question types in a LG before deciding whether to split: if there will be more gameboards than questions without additional premises, then it's best not to split; if there are more questions without additional premises than gameboards, it's worth splitting.

I understand that it would be easy to scan these on paper versions of the test, but I am wondering whether others do this on digital versions of the test? Do people click through the questions to see what type they are before diagramming? Is this time efficient on the digital version of the test?

Thanks!

If anyone feels dejected by their current slow pace at LG, I am here to tell you it will get better. Below, I share how I went from -8 to -0 in three months on my LG section, which will hopefully inspire/help you out.

The Beginning: Before I get into the specifics, I think it's important to address the mental shift I went through a couple weeks after my diagnostic. After missing 8 questions on my first PT, I thought that correctly answering 23 questions in 35 minutes was simply impossible. But then I showed the problems to my partner, and he whizzed through the games. I was gob smacked, impressed, and proud! I was also, admittedly, insecure about my own lack of skill.

My first mistake was comparing my weakness to someone else's strength. In the back of my head, I thought things like "How will I ever do well in law school if these dumb puzzles are giving me so much grief?" The LSAT made me feel like I lacked this shiny quality of intelligence that someone could only be born with. Studying felt like a waste of time. Every missed question felt like a thorn in my foot. So, for a couple of weeks, I danced around the topics I was worst at, focusing on areas of less priority. Obviously, this method wasn't yielding any results, and I felt frustrated with my lack of progress.

But then I read a post on Reddit that changed my entire approach. It said that improving your score requires ignoring your sense of pride and/or shame. I cannot overemphasize how important it was to hear someone telling me to get my head out of my ass. If you're in the same place of insecurity that I was, I'm here to tell you to snap the heck out of it. You. Can. Do. It. The LSAT is a SKILL that can be sharpened, not a measure of innate talent or intelligence that some people either have or don't have. Do. Not. Give. Up. Improvement took me three months, but there is no shame in it taking longer than that! The LSAT isn't going anywhere. Quit taking it personally. Buckle down and focus on what you're bad at.

Here's how I did it:

April - May: After realizing that I was being silly, I bought the Logic Games Powerscore Bible, which was helpful, but not perfect. It definitely familiarized me with all the different types of games and provided a LOT of drills and explanations that improved my accuracy, but I was NOT fast enough. If I were recommending it to someone, I would say that it was probably a good place to start. However, I probably gained the most improvement from listening to multiple test-prep sites explain games in different ways and picking the methods that worked best for me. After about four weeks of going through PowerScore and using a lot of its drills, I took another practice test and got -4 because I ran out of time and had to guess on a handful.

June: I had to take a break from studying for a few weeks for personal reasons, but I came back around June 20th.

Late June - July: When I took my first PT after returning, I was SOO rusty. After a few days of doing more LG drills from Powerscore again, though, I noticed my skills returning to their previous level. However, I was consistently still running out of time on the LG section. So, I drilled at least 2 hours a day for a week using Khan Academy because I thought maybe a different platform would be beneficial, but it didn't seem to be helping too much. I was STILL averaging -3/-4 on each LG section.

July: That's when I sought out 7sage. I felt like I needed a COMPLETELY different approach to the LG than what the Powerscore Bible had given me. If you also used that book, you'll know it told you to write down Not Laws when possible. Because I had gotten 15/23 on my diagnostic test, I assumed that I had to follow the Powerscore Bible religiously (pun intended) and hadn't even considered deviating from its instructions.

However, I feel like writing Not Laws slowed me down considerably. For some reason, JY giving me permission in one of the first LG videos to NOT write the Not Laws was exactly what I needed. After a week on 7Sage and giving up on my Not Law notations, I've noticed serious speed improvement and achieved my first perfect LG section yesterday!!

Final takeaways? As you can see, progress isn't always linear or predictable. Try multiple platforms and see what explanations work best for you, combining them if you want. Be kind to yourself at the beginning. You're learning a new skill, not testing an innate quality. And lastly, practice practice practice. Don't shy away from the difficult stuff if you want to actually improve.

Hi 7sagers!

I browsed all RC courses but I found that there's no specific video teaching what we should be aware while reading comparative passages.

And I also searched the Forum but didn't find any post concerning this question.

Does anyone has any suggestion?

Thank you very much.

I think I reasoned my way though this as I wrote it out. Figured I’d post it in case anyone might be helped by it. Please point out any issues.

I get that every NA is an assumption the argument actually makes. Why? bc for an argument to work, the NA must be true which entails that if the argument has a NA, the argument is obviously making that assumption. But is the inverse also true? Is every assumption the argument actually makes a NA?

My understanding is that most SAs are assumptions we impose on the argument, not ones that the argument actually makes. Sometimes the assumption the argument makes happens to also be a SA. Eg

P: A

C:B

A->B is the NA as well as SA. This seems to affirm every assumption argument actually makes is a NA.

Is it wrong to think of SAs as assumptions we impose on the argument?

Are there times an argument actually makes an assumption that isn’t necessary? I guess technically there could be an assumption within a stimulus or argument that’s unrelated or irrelevant to the conclusion’s reasoning and therefore it being false wouldn’t wreck the conclusion and isn’t needed. LSAT typically doesn’t do this though.

Okay I think I figured this out. Just bc the argument assumes something doesn’t make it a NA but every NA is something the argument assumes. So to check whether a NA Q ac is wrong, ask if the arg assumes that AC. If it doesn’t then eliminate. 8/10 times if argument does assume AC, it’s the correct ac. That’s typically what I do when I’m a bit unsure on NA Qs instead of negation test. More intuitive for me.

I have been using 7sage for over a year now and ive barely taken practice tests.

Im having trouble concentrating after the first section.

Is there any way to improve or lengthen the amount of time I can study for?

I have about a month left and im not even sure how much ive improved since I cant finish a practice test.

wanting to get into the 160s what can be done to reach that score

I've been studying for about 5 months and am taking the August LSAT. I've gone from a 156 diagnostic to solid mid-160 PTs using Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer in tandem with 7Sage explanation videos and analytics.

I recently got two scores of 168, was feeling really close to reaching my goal of 170+, but on the last two PTs I missed a lot on LR and fell back down to 165 and 163, respectively. I'm especially nervous because I had no idea that I was bombing LR and actually felt pretty confident.

Any tips for sharpening my LR in this last month push?

(I have a full-time job and am currently devoting 10-15 hours a week to studying; an expensive tutor isn't an option)

Thanks in advance!

To those who weren't good at RC in the beginning and got significantly better through practice,

I would appreciate if you could give me some advice!

I've been studying for almost 10 months now, and still scoring low in LR (not much different in RC...)

in the beginning I used to get -13 wrong and got better constantly scoring just below -10

some times I got around -5 but those sections were the ones that had 2-star difficulty...

feel like I'm spending my time and energy for nothing.

so demoralizing

I have to do a lot of catching up lol, I'm thinking the best way to study would be if other people study WITH me. Live Discord/Zoom sessions could be pretty awesome! If you're interested, here's the server: https://discord.gg/tK2P6sRd

I'm having so much difficulty with these types of problems (which argument is most similar to the structure of the paragraph), does anyone have any advice for these?