RC is my weakest section. I plan on drilling RC passages every day until I get a better grasp. Right now, I usually miss 1 or 2 questions per passage. How many passages should I drill in a single day? Should I aim for 4 passages since there's only 4 on the test or should I drill more?

Curious what y'all think of the following - below was my translation of a Powerscore logical reasoning quiz, and then what they had listed...

The strike will end only if management concedes a pay raise.

Only if, necessary

The strike will end: /S

Management concedes a pay raise: McPR

/S-->McPR

/McPR-->S

If management does not concede a payraise, then the strike will continue.

Powerscore says:

SE = strike will end; MCPR management concedes a pay raise

SE-->MCPR

(if the strike ends, then management conceded a pay raise)

/MCPR-->/SE

(If management does not conced a pay raise, then the strike will end.

I guess what I'm wondering is how many of you would consider SE to be strike will end vs hstrike will end being equated to /S

After a 10 (and a bit) month long journey full of stress, I can proudly say that I’m done with this test forever!! And I very much have 7Sage to thank. This platform is absolutely phenomenal for all test takers, and was an enormous!! help to me in my studying. I have this site to thank in part for this final score. :)

If anyone has any questions about studying advice please do not hesitate to ask. And best of luck to everyone looking to write again!! And thank you again to 7Sage :)

Was torn between AC-C and E. Having difficulty seeing the difference as such.

I cant even comprehend why AC-B is correct. The stim mentions nothing about medical reimbursment policy nor seriously ill patients

On a side note: I've caught that sometimes the most abstract of ACs seem to be the correct choice for these and other LR. Again purely anecdotal but wondering if others have seen the same/any tips as such

Hi y'all,

Got my Jan Flex score back and it's bad news. I went down to a 163 after having scored a 168 on the July 2020 Flex, and consistently PT'ing in the 170s prior to the January Test.

Has anyone else experienced this kind of drop before? I have literally never PT'd that low in my life, so I'm really struggling with how to approach studying for the upcoming test, as I want to retake to get in to the 170s. What strategies would you recommend going forward?

My diagnostic was below a140, my RC was a nightmare but I did it. And you can do it. Don’t give up. Take a failure as an opportunity to get better and stronger.

Bye,7sage community.

Having some difficulty comprehending in lawgic terms the argument flaw. Can anyone help clarify?

It only took me three attempts but I was able to score almost 20 points higher than my diag. I could not have done it without the support from 7sage the community and of course, the LSAT wizard himself, J.Y.

Stimulus

I fell into a trap and selected 'D' as my answer choice. After reviewing the question again, I realized that I made an assumption when choosing 'D' as the answer choice.

A) "Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents". This was easy for me to glance over because I was looking for a STRONG weakener. However, the correct answer choice doesn't have to be super strong to work. This answer choice works because it demonstrates the "it will probably won't happen to us" mentality. These business may meet the sufficient condition of "values their profits" but there may be an alternative reason or an explanation for their lack of environmental safeguards. If this is true, the conclusion doesn't follow. Therefore, A is the correct answer choice.

B ) We don't know if preventing accidents are long-term or short-term, so what?

C) Business sense is NOT equal to profit. NEXT.

D) This is tricky. "Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense". If you're like me, you made an assumption if you selected this answer choice. You probably assumed that businesses wouldn't install safeguards because the cost of the fines are worked into the budget. However, this answer choice could actually strengthen the argument. If businesses meet the sufficient condition of "Values their profits", avoiding accidents could improve their bottom line. Then there's a reason to install safeguards.

E) What does this have to do with their profits???

Thanks for coming to my TED talk. Please critique or provide your reasoning.

Racking my brains on this one. Anybody have a solid lawgic explanation?

Anyone have any good advice on how to recognize assumptions better? I feel like a lot of my LR answers are wrong because I can't figure out the assumption.

Went from a 149 Diagnostic in August to scoring a 164 on the Jan Flex!

SO happy with this score after just a few months of on & off studying.

Thank you JY and 7Sage!

I originally chose 'D' as my answer choice but after reviewing it, I can see where I went wrong. The stimulus describes a theory that had been rejected due to lack of proof/reasoning for the occurrence of the event. The stimulus goes on to say that the theory is now accepted despite not having reasoning/proof. But we accept this theory because we can see the event through observation( because of our technological advances).

A) This answer choice mentions the "aim of science". We are not concerned with the "aim of science".

B ) This answer choice mentions a "mathematical description". The stimulus only says "force". We can't assume that "force" and "mathematical description" are related. Or even technology. If we accept that "science has become far more accurate at identifying underlying forces", our stimulus wouldn't make much sense. It could be weaken because they didn't accept Wegner's theory on the basis of force.

C) Eliminated. Technology and measuring instruments are not the same. Even if it were, the theory isn't harder to work out. The author never mentions this phenomenon.

D) "Employing statistics and the laws of probability". No.

E) "When the event a theory postulates are detected" or when we can observe an event..."the theory is accepted without even an explanation" Yes. It is the correct answer and it matches the example in the stimulus.

Please critique or reply with your line of reasoning.

----> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BP1NnndhE5i6cbuF2GLPetUgzwtr3rUaDfEZuaIJXhE/edit#gid=0

The google sheet I made has every Core curriculum game in it(I believe) and broken down by color for each question type, plus a few games along the way I kept to keep my skills fresh(to the right). Once I started to keep track of the questions and what I did wrong, for example if I missed an inference I would write down the game and what I did wrong and also the inference that I missed, the number of questions I miss dramatically decreased.

I would mark down every game that I had the slightest struggle with or that I did not feel 100% comfortable with. I would also color code the games that I got a question wrong with or went over by 0:45 (red) plus I'd note if it was one question, setup or just slow overall.

I would code the ones I got correct and undertime but did not feel comfortable yellow.

I would code the one I got correct, undertime, and feel comfortable green.

On the sheets if you scroll down you will find the CC games by question type. If you scroll to the right you will see the games from actual exams and games from 1-35. I left some games here to show you how I coded them and put them in descending order, I deleted a bunch because I had lots of inner dialog that was not PG rated to help remember certain things, but the categories are there and so is the color coordination of the ones I got wrong.

I would appreciate that everyone who wants to use it just copy it to there drive to start working on personalizing it so it does not mess up the original.

I also made a list of the LR questions that I would use to keep notes about certain styles(someone deleted my notes working on getting them back) and what to look for on those particular style questions along with a color code system of priority and difficulty.

I also would put words I came across studying that I did not know at the bottom with their definitions.

Lastly there might be a few swear words I did not get rid of...

I hope people find this as useful as I did and kick the LSAT's ASS!

edit:

Where are you at -4? (-15where I started?)

I would keep track of every single game that gave you any sorts of trouble and also note what it was that gave you the trouble: setup, inference, rule, question, ect...

I would start with the games you are somewhat good at I would assume sequencing since that is the common one people grasp first, and I would get these games down then move to the next 'pure' form of a game grouping pure, in/out basic. And work on the fundamentals of those then once you feel comfortable with those branch out on what ever is your worst/give you the most trouble.

Have to know when rules trigger versus when they don't and the 4 groups.

Sufficient

Necessary

Negate Sufficient

Negate Necessary

(I don't think one can go -2/-0 if they do not have a strong grasp of this).

--I would try and get comfortable with as many game types as possible before PT'n because fresh PT's are a non renewable resource. However that said, if you plan on taking the exam in a few months and know you wont take any exam after, then I would start in the 60's. and then jump to the 70's once I start to get comfortable with the LSAT jump to the 80s.

--Drilling: I would do about 4 games per day everyday. I would not recommend too many more than that because then its likely we just burn up games. At first I would do 2 new games from PT 1-35 and as I got closer to -0 around --4/6ish (depending on score goal & time frame)I would start PTing

--Do not be afraid of redoing games you've done before, as long as you do not specifically remember the inferences and answer choices its okay to keep redoing the games. if you do happen to remember the AC's put that in a new category on the google sheet or color code it so you know to come back. I have learned that the LSAT implies the same tricks 95% of the time and once you have the bones of the structure you can build any style structure.

----timing help make many if not all of the critical inferences up front(try to) or at least be aware of them if they need to map them out for a question. Learning when to split I think is more of an art form I normally stick with the general rule less, game boards than questions excluding the acceptable situation question. Tune your approach to you, you know yourself the best. I normally do a partial spilt on pure grouping because I personally hate them more than any other game type.

-- super important to combine rules into chains and see what comes from that, always push the new rules up to the old rules and see if any inferences drop out.

---Keep track of the words that indicate different style games such as:

--sequencing will normally use words like--before, after, ahead, behind, IN front of, between; these normally indicate sequencing. Selecting, placing, combining, are going to be grouping games.

--Paring groups Xs & Ys together is likely going to be a double layer sequencing. matching witnesses to police interviewers or another dreadful one books to bookshelves.

--only having two categories is going to be in/out EX. I have 2 floors and I have to select which employees are going to be on which. Or the once dreadful (some will get it) assigning photographers to two different schools, or doctors to 2 different hospitals. In out is a grouping game, however it is a grouping game with only 2 groups. A common inference in this style game is once one category is full then all the other pieces have to go into the other category and the common correct ACs in the piece that makes one category too full, or a game piece always has to be in the same category.

---grouping---placing pieces into categories EX bones to time periods

---once you are able to identify the games quickly it allows you to setup the game board fast and in turn makes you faster in LG.

---keep going back to old games that gave you trouble.

--start watching/tracking question types that you should look at all the answer choices before starting to eliminate ACs because many times its a super obvious AC. or look for ACs that should be tried first you do not need to eliminate A first and so on eliminate (or try to) pick ones that look suspicious. EX on sequencing a common trick they like to employ wrong ACs is by having followers in the leader spots and the leaders in follower spots many sequencing questions/games employ this and it is easy to spot once you're made aware and this increase the chance of a correct answer and the speed at which you can get through questions.

grouping they like to ask which piece must be in or must be out, is easy when you know the

A----->/B (both cannot be in)but they can both be out --fail sufficient rule falls away

A/---->B( both can be in) but both cannot be out.

A(---)B forever together

A(---)/B forever apart

((((if this does not make sense keep going through the CC or go back to the CC)))))

---if you get to a game and the setup is giving you trouble Skip the game. this is one of the best lessons I have learned. SKIP SKIP SKIP move on get the low hanging fruit then come back and you'll be more relaxed and see the game from 'fresh' eyes. especially when first starting out because you'll be slower generally.

--- do not (force yourself) to not let the past question affect the next question and do not let the last game effect the next game. chances are if you struggle with the game many other people will too, and the other games will make up for that or the curve will.

--Be honest with yourself, do not give yourself little cheats here or there because those will be crutches and you won't get those on the exam this is true when drilling in a less extent but this is mandatory when practice testing.

--Blind review is the biggest advantage on the LSAT you can give yourself. take it just as serious you are taking the actual exam, this is where you will notice (if done properly) mistakes that you make undertime make sure to keep track of them so you can work on them and not repeat them. this is true for every section of the exam.

--I have more of a math oriented brain so LG came way easier than RC. that being said find things to do in the off time to increase you analytical skills: sudoku, rush hour,(try and get the odd color block out through a particular spot by moving all the other blocks around it)apps/games order/number sequences, of shape matching/finding the similarities between things in pictures or words. Doing these style games will workout the part of the brain LG calls on. I found these games to be super fun when I was a kid, maybe that is why I like LG.

---Positive Attitude is key. If you go into games with 'ughh this sucks' or 'ill never get this' 1) it'll make studying that much worse. 2) you will start making stupid mistakes and the cycle will repeat.

---Burnout is real, take breaks when needed. I learned a panful lesson on this, 2 hours of quality studying beat 6 hours of mediocre studying---many hours wasted, and it just compounds on itself.

You got this I believe it, you have already taken the initiative and spent the money, You can do it!

-Kole

In March of 2019 I took the test after 2ish months of studying and received a 161. I wasn't ready. I picked up studying again in June of 2020. I had to cancel my November Flex because of technical issues. I just got my January FLEX back and it was a 166. I'm honestly dead inside -- my last 5 PTs averaged a 173 and my overall average is a 169.

I genuinely don't know what to do at this point. I'm considering walking away because:

(1) my transcript would now read 161, CANCEL, 166. I'm worried about how taking the test 4 times would be viewed.

(2) I'm working full-time now and this test is mentally exhausting.

(3) I don't know how I could prepare differently -- I felt ready for January.

On the other hand, I don't want to sell myself short. I have PTs left and I'm not planning to apply for at least 2 more cycles.

I'm targeting T20 schools. Should I retake? Let it be? Wait to see if the 5 section test comes back? Lmk your thoughts.

I just got my LSAT score back. Really bad as expected. I had a terrible November experience that the LSAC had to cancel my session as I was unable to complete the test which I think really threw me off and discouraged me for January. The whole month of November was a traumatic write off for me due to numerous things, so I really only had about six weeks to cram. Top that off with the holidays and a global pandemic exploding in my province. I made the mistake applying to law schools before my November LSAT as I was feeling confident only to be shattered and waste hundreds of dollars on applications.

So now what? Should I just restart 7Sage and write sometime in the summer?

Hello I have a limited time constraint in trying to take the April Flex so with this I have 2 questions.

I have school, and LSAT studying to balance out. I also cant just do Foolproofing LG drills for the rest of the 2 months and ignore other sections as well as PTs. In the course syllabus am I correct to assume that each problem set is harder the higher you go? So if time is of the essence should I just do the middle and last problem sets of each type of LG in the course Syllabus (Sequencing, sequencing with a twist In/out, Grouping, Grouping/Sequencing etc., For example problem sets 2 and 4 out of a possible 4 problem sets or 3 and 5 out of a possible 5 problem sets? I dont think I have the time to get the full experience of LG training such as watching every video and foolproofing every game for every problem set. I have 2 months and 3 sections to study for as well as sub categories of problems to study for in each section and that is not counting doing and reviewing PTs. Sorry if my post seems out of the blue and a blob of text to decipher but I need advice from you experts on here.

Also how do you recommend diagramming really fast with master and copy gameboards dotted down within the first question. Cause as one can see if one has the gameboards with all the inferences jotted down then the games are a piece of cake. Yet when I realize how much time is ticking making the inferences and making the boards- I start to blank out and mess up quite bad. Its the darn diagramming, once that is taken care of in full- the games are easy to solve (so far in my experience at least). If I try to rush and solve the questions with a poor diagram and do a lot of calculations in my head- things start to get bad to say the least........

Sincerely,

Midas79AU

I've had a long battle with this test and thought it might be over after January 2021.

I began with a low diagnostic of a 142 in November 2019, I cancelled my January 2020 score, scored a 151 in February 2020. I joined 7Sage during that month and spent the summer really studying and practicing well. I had scored my first 160 the weekend before Jan 2021 and just received a 150 back.

I'm absolutely devastated and confused on how I could score 10 points lower after months of practice. I have no idea where to go from here?

Hello everyone!

I just first want to say kudos to everyone who took the January test. It was my first time taking it and it was really tough, a lot tougher in my opinion than taking practice tests. I'm just curious on what some of your thoughts may be about my experience. So I received the score today and I got a 163. Honestly, it isn't a bad score and when I look up at the 7sage school predictor, I see a lot of pretty good law schools I could consider as "target". But for me personally, when I first saw my score I was really disappointed. My average score from the 85 or so practice tests that I took in preparation was around 170 and I was consistently in the 170's weeks before the test. Also, I had thought I did pretty well on the actual test despite my nerves. Nerves did get to me though -- and I knew that they would -- and this is why I'm completely lost on what I should do. The test was pretty fair and I know I was prepared and yet I received a score that was way lower than my average. So I'm thinking that if I re-take the test, it might just be the same thing all over again. And I for sure know that I don't want to put myself through all the mental stress only to get similar results. I've also recently started my first semester of senior year and everything's going pretty well so I don't want to go on a leave and postpone my graduation. I've heard (from people talking about the LSAT on YouTube and from podcasts) that people usually don't do very well on their first test. But I'm really not sure what I should do.. Does anyone have any advice?

Hey Everyone! This may seem like a simple example of an "only" lawgic example, but I can't for the life of me understand why this diagrams the way it does. I was trying to diagram this sentence (which is from another resource), "I only work on Tuesdays." I used T for Tuesday and W for work. I originally diagrammed it as T->W because I thought "only" introduces a necessary condition, however, when I looked up the answer it said W->T.

Another example that is similar to this is "Sarah only dates funny guys," and I diagrammed it F->D, again thinking that only introduces necessary, when the actual diagram is D->F.

I have been looking at these for the past hour and would love some feedback/help on what I may not be seeing! Thanks

I'm about to cancel my Jan LSAT-Flex score.

if I cancel my LSAT - Flex score, law schools can find out that I cancelled my score?

I've done this question a couple different times, and each time I get wrecked.

Stimulus

To have the most successful economy you need to train as many people to:

Japan seems to be thriving in regards to the standards set above.

Europe, on the other hand, is in a weaker position :

There aren't enough scientists to research and develop tech. It also lacks labor to use the tech.

Then we are told that Japan has a shortage of "technically qualified" people. They have a lot of people qualified to complete menial tasks.

A couple of things that I was still confused about:

Answer choices:

A. "worldwide shortage" - in the stimulus we are only told about what's going on in Japan and Europe so we can't make any inferences about what's going on worldwide

B. I went with this answer choice, because of the sentence that said that Japan didn't have "technically qualified" people. I did question whether or not you needed to have qualified people in order to meet the criteria that was outlined in the first sentence, but it seemed like a better answer choice than the others

C. "highly skilled labor" - all we know about Japan's labor is that it's based on people who aren't "technically qualified"

D. I confidently eliminated this because the stimulus said that Europe had a shortage of scientists who could research and develop new tech. I thought this implied that there was a shortage of new tech. If there's a shortage of new tech, why would you need more people to apply new tech? If you hired a ton of new people there wouldn't be any tech for them to work with, right?

E. "other countries" again, we don't know about other countries. The stimulus only tells us about what's happening with Japan and European countries.

Would greatly appreciate an explanation on why D is correct and C is not.

Thanks in advance!

I'm about to cancel my JAn LSAT-Flex score.

if I cancel my LSAT - Flex score, law schools can find out that I cancelled my score?