Hi everyone,

When sequencing games use years instead of the basic numerical set-up, it really confuses me. Tips on how to speed up my process when I get something like 1989-1995 instead of 1-7? Should I put the years on my game board?

Thank you in advance for any help.

Hi everyone,

What is the best way to diagram spatial (circular) sequencing games? And am I likely to see one on test day? I tried to diagram a circular sequencing game close to the beginning of my prep (I think it was the June 1991 PT) and literally drew a circle for each board, which took way too long and felt way too artsy (lol), and I don’t think I should have done it that way, since the only thing that the circle was conveying was that certain game pieces were across from each other.

Thanks in advance for any help.

So, I've been foolproofing LG and this is my process.

Most times (like 90%) I only have to foolproof once after BR. I make sure I know the game inside and out during BR which is why I mostly don't have to foolproof again.

Is this okay? or do people usually foolproof a couple of times even though they keep getting the question correct?

Tell me what you did.

For disagreement questions, are the disagreement tends to be the conclusion or premise? Or it could be both?

Best advice for LR diagramming? I still find it a bit difficult to do to get the right answer.

Hi everyone,

Whenever I complete a sequencing games drill, my set-up time is always way too long…I don’t know how to speed this process up because I usually make all of the relevant boards and inferences during my set-up time. As a result, I always finish the questions quickly and under time. My time is usually collectively less than the target time, but my set-up time is always over the target set-up time.

Is this sustainable in the long run, or should I focus on taking my set-up time down? If I need to speed up on set-up, how should I work on doing so?

Thank you for any help.

This happens to me the majority of the time I end up getting an answer wrong. Most of the time ( and I feel stupid for saying this) the right answer choice looks too easy and I feel like I'm being suckered into choosing that answer - 90% of the time that "easy" answer choice ends up being right. Any tips to overcome this?

Finding a claim to be false on the grounds that it would if true have consequences that are false. If not, then why?

Hello fellow 7Sagers! I figured we were all in this LSAT Journey together, so I decided to create this discussion thread for this particular question/type. I did get the answer correct, so in this thread I will be going through my thought process; I am open to advice.

Answer Choice A - Incorrect. Why? It is irrelevant to the naturalists' claim.

Answer Choice B - Incorrect. Why? Optimum means "best." Therefore, since the claim is about the survival and adaptability of mice, how is it supporting the naturalists' claim?

*Answer Choice C - Incorrect. Why? Though the fossil remains do in fact prove that mice are able to survive and adapt, the mention of harsh and unbearable weather for human conditions is mentioned in the conclusion/claim, thus making the answer choice incorrect and irrelevant. (Someone discuss this with me please! I almost got tripped up with this one. How can I avoid that?).

Answer Choice D - Correct. Why? Shows that mice are able to adapt and survive in harsh climates by providing an example that is deadly for human life (i.e., Antarctica).

Answer Choice E - Incorrect. Why? It is irrelevant to the claim.

This question was more on the easier side, but - for right now - these are the question types I need to focus on. If you have any tips for strengthening questions, once again, I am open to advice!

Hi I know MC and MP questions are fairly easy to tackle first. I am wondering what I should approach next. Does anyone have suggestions?

I've wasted a lot of time trying to create scenarios for games that ultimately didn't need to or couldn't work with hypotheticals. Sometimes it's obvious, if there's too many possible scenarios then you just power through it, but several times (for me) it's not. Any tips?

Sometimes during sequencing games I find myself being able to brute force my way through them even though the more efficient way would be to split the game up into sub game boards, but often am able to finish the game within the suggested time or even way under. Should I focus on trying to understand the sub game boards or just keep doing what I've been doing?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-3-question-20/

Hi,

I understand why A is correct, but I'm having a hard time interpreting the argument itself. From my understanding the author's argument in the stimulus is as follows:

P1: Political utility determines the popularity of a metaphor

P2: "Society as body governed by head" metaphor is pervasive

C: Thus, "Society as body governed by head" metaphor promotes greater acceptance of authoritarian regime than society as family metaphor

Doesn't the argument confuse necessary for sufficient here? In other words, the argument determines that the"Society as body governed by head" metaphor is politically useful from the fact that it is pervasive (P -> PU), but P1 says the opposite of this (PU -> P).

Am I wrong for thinking that the argument is flawed to begin with? Would really appreciate some feedback. Thanks!

Why is the correct answer B?

I am currently going through the logic game drills from preptests 1-35. My process is to do the logic game (ex. logic game 1 from preptest 1) first under timed conditions, blind review and watch the explanation, and then repeat the game consecutively 10 times under timed conditions. Is this correct?

I was also wondering how much improvement in the logic games score you can get from foolproofing preptests 1-35

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.

I don't have trouble with generating possible numerical distributions for In/Out or Grouping games, but for some reason I struggle to be able to quickly write out all the possible distributions for linear sequencing games with repeating variables (i.e. June 2007 Game 3). Is there a quick and easy trick to doing this? I find it involves a lot of overthinking and is a slow process for me.

I've gotten good at getting -0 or -1 in LG unless I run into one of the really old misc games. Does anyone think it is worth my time to review them? Every time I go to watch an explanation video, J.Y. says something along the lines of "I don't think you'll see this on a modern LSAT," which is really discouraging me from putting in more work to get them down. Thoughts? Is anyone else running into this issue?

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, 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?

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.

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!

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?

My LR section is my worst and most inconsistent section, ranging from 17 to 23 on any particular test. I really want to get it up to a consistent 23, but I'm not sure how.

Things I've been doing:

I take the LSAT in a month, and I've been plateauing on my LR for about two months. Any help would be much appreciated.