^

Lately, I've noticed a frustrating trend in LR when taking PTs. I'm consistently getting the "five star" curve-breaker questions only to get tripped up by easy questions (1-2 star questions) that for whatever reason just don't register with me. Not sure if I am overthinking, if it's a fatigue/focus issue, or if there is some fundamental gap in my understanding I need to fill.

Anybody else been through this? If so, any tips/tricks you learned to combat this would be much appreciated!

Hi, I’m not sure why I am so stuck on this question but can someone help me help me? I think I am a bit lost on how to write the conditionals. Thanks

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-1-question-22/

For the April LSAT, where are we supposed to sign up for specific times? I read on the LSAC site that we need to register for specific times, but i couldn't find more information, such as when to register. Does anyone know/how did it work for the February test?

Hi everyone!

I was curious if anyone else struggles with this. I constantly miss between 2 and 4 on games, but almost always my misses are from the generally easier questions.

Case in point, I did PT 88's LG section and got all of questions for the last 2 games correct (both rated 5 of 5 difficulty, and includes the notorious flower game), but missed a whooping 7 questions on the first 2 games (rated a 1 of 5 and 3 of 5). This is a notoriously hard games section, so I wasn't surprised to miss so many but I can't believe they were all from the easier games.

I feel like this comes from being able to get the key inferences on hard games, but freezing on the more open ended games? I really am at a loss of what to do.

Has anyone experienced this? If anyone has recommendations on getting through this, I would really appreciate it! I've been fool proofing for a while now and nothing seems to help.

Would love some advice on this, LG is a section I'm great at when I drill untimed but test anxiety always gets me when I actually take the timed tests.

My current method is to fullproof the games from practice tests I take (after reviewing them). I've heard it's best to foolproof all the games in the CC but I'm worried about timing and how long that will take as with my current method i'm only able to foolproof a few games a day.

Hello, about a week ago I posed a discussion about my process on getting to -0(link below). Today I came across a game that is really good to know. PT 63 S2 G1. This is an IN/OUT game that has 3 questions that play on the same inference. This is the inference when in grouping games a category (group) is filled up all the other pieces have to fit in the other groups. To go -0 consistently I think we have to be sensitive to this rule every time we encounter a grouping game. This is a really easy game that you should be able to do in under 5 minutes, however, I would recommend doing this game and try not to think about the inference 'when one group is full then all the other pieces have to fit into the other group' and see how fast you can complete it, then do the game with the inference in mind, obviously, you'll be faster the second time because you will have already seen it once, but just think about that inference. I did this game with one game board and just moved the pieces around in my head. I also for all games, especially this game I would scan the answer choices before 'brute' forcing my way through them, the answers just pop for this and I recommend scanning the answers on each question before you start mapping the question, many time there is an obvious answer.

For those people who are just starting games or for those where you know you could improve in games I would recommend keeping track of all the games that gave you any sort of trouble and write why it gave you trouble after a while you will see a pattern and then you can attack the weakness and not let it trip you up anymore. I have a template of how I set up my google sheet(free to copy/use it) and my discussion on my process for going -0: here ---> https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/27505/link-to-google-slides-that-many-have-been-asking-for-i-explain-my-process-to-0-lg

I forget who, but earlier today someone posted about dreaming about logic games, this is one of those style games that I would think about in my head before going to be and sometime I would 'live out' this game in my dream.

I hope this helps someone, I posted it because I wish I would have known this and practiced this inference earlier in my studies.

Best of Luck,

Kole

--edit--

I don't recommend breaking fresh lsats but if you do not plan on taking all the PTs then here is a good game to know.

I am having trouble figuring out how I am able to just do one section instead of a full prep test (specifically prep tests 1-35 right now). My goal is to be able to do just one section - for example logic games - and get the score for just that section to review, but when I complete just one section it gives me an overall score as if I went through the other sections and got 0 correct. Any tech advice on how to do this? I just finished CC, so this is a new problem I cannot seem to find an answer to. I am sure it is a simple solution that I have just yet to find. Thank you!

Hey all. I am having trouble writing this one out. Initially, I wanted to use subscripts and fit the entities in with conditional logic chains, but I quickly got lost in determining young and old. I did some form of relative positioning using greater than, less than symbols ((,)) but this is still giving me a problem.

1) All tulip trees are older than any maples

T > M

2) A majority, but not all, of the garden's sycamores are older than any of it's maples. I wanted to diagram this like a bi conditional relationship. Is this wrong?

Most S > M

Some S ( M

(strong)3) All the garden's maples are older than any of it's dogwoods

M > D

Connecting (1) and (3)

T > M > D

Infer

T>D

Connecting (1) and (2)

T > M > Most S

T > M ( Some S

(em)Infer

T > Most S

T(---Some---) S

If I am understanding this correctly from the relationship between T, M,and D, Tulip trees comprise of the majority of the oldest trees. I kept this in mind as a reference. My problem came with translations back into english. I don't get how you can determine any of the relationships given in the answer choices, other than having worked out the stimulus in formal logic and then comparing each choice in formal logic. Even then, how do you determine old or young when you translate back into english?

I'm at a loss for this one

#help

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

I don't understand why D is correct? Can someone explain this to me. I chose A.

I've seen "large"\ "largely" in many questions. I wanna know to what extent it suggests about the scope of the sentence: some, most, or something else.

A good example is the conclusion in PT65-S4-Q12---"So jazz consists largely of voicelike horns and hornlike voices."

I deeply appreciate your help and time for my question.

Thank you,

Leon

Hi

I have a specific question for PT 58 Q12 City Councilperson: Many City Residents.

for answer choice A, don't we negate sufficient after unless?

I understand why A is the incorrect answer choice because of "causes" when we need it to say "Purpose". But many preptest websites in their explanation do not negate ~causes debate-->~qualifies as art For answer choice A. Would you be able to explain if we ought to negate, sufficient for answer choice A? thank you

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-12/

Hi!

I need a sanity check cuz I get pretty frustrated with how much my LG scores fluctuate. I completely foolproofed 10 PTs and then scored [-0, -1, -1] on the next three new sections. Started feeling pretty good about it, so I shifted my focus elsewhere. But then the last two sections were -4 and -5. Can anyone else relate? Were you able to get out of this rut?

How many PTs did you foolproof before you got your LSAT score that you applied with? I'm aiming for a -0, so I just want to be consistent with how I do before the April exam. I'm definitely going back to more foolproofing, but was I being silly for thinking 10 PTs was enough?

Edit to add: Anyone have tips on motivation to foolproof games to death? Generally, I'm really good when it comes to focusing, but I think I keep rushing to finish LG because I dislike foolproofing so much.

I took my first full section of LR after completing the CC (and for the first time ever), and I got -4 (but I kinda view it as -5 since I was really unsure about one of the questions). Because of the goals I have set for myself (to get a 175+), I was very frustrated. The 4 I got wrong were in the 17-25 range, so at least they weren't from the first 15. I watched the explanation videos, which honestly just made me angry at LSAC (lol) because I thought "how in the world was I supposed to figure this out in ~a min." One of the reasons I was especially frustrated was because the questions I got wrong all but required the use of lawgic, and I've invested a lot of time in learning lawgic; however, these questions more so relied on not only knowing lawgic but being able to manipulate it into different forms incredibly quickly. On the bright side, I now know that I need to spend a lot more time ensuring that I know lawgic like the back of my hand. On the down side, I was incredibly discouraged because I just feel like I'm never going to be able to grasp the hardest questions given the time constraint.

I've heard of the wonders of the foolproof method in regards to LGs, but does the same apply to LR? Will the patterns really start to appear? I'm probably being hard on myself since this was my first full section, but I pretty much feel like I need to be at -0/-1 in LR.

Hi All,

I just wanted to let everyone know that LSAC just sent out an email saying that we can sign up for the February LSAT-FLEX starting on Thursday, February 11th, at 12:00 PM EST. We will receive an email then with instructions on how to sign up.

Struggling to understand the "not both" rule for a logic game. We have two committees and know that P --> /Q and Q--> /P (the not both rule). Now according to the explanation, P and Q must be separated amongst the two committees. While this obviously follows the not both rule, my question is, if we fail the sufficient condition (/P or /Q), can't we have them both together in the same committee since the conditional has fallen apart?

I know this is simple but for some reason i'm stumped! any advice would be appreciated :)

Hello! I'm a first-time LSAT test taker and I received my email yesterday about registering for the multiple time slots for the flex this February. If you're a first-timer, does the LSAC email you your ProctorU login the day of registration? Or do they email you prior? As of now, I don't have any login information and I want to make sure that I'm prepared for tomorrow.

Generally feel like these types of questions should be easy points, but the translations into lawgic tend to get me crossed-up here. Can someone provide a solid explanation for the ACs? Thanks in advance.

Hello I requested accommodation for quiet environment for the Feb LSAT next week. Has anyone received an email regarding this? I’ve been checking my email/spam everyday for them and nothing has been posted. There was a message on my LSAC account that I would receive something from them no later than Feb 9, which has since been deleted.

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?

Stimulus (paraphrased)

Pamela: physicians in training work long, up to 36 hours, shifts and that fatigue impairs their ability to make the best medical decisions during final portions of their shift.

Quincy: Thousands of physicians have gone through this regiment with records to show that the system works. So why change now?

Though I realize I need to work in the stimulus to pick my answers, as someone who has worked shifts before, I know that your relief does not generally show up generously early. So if these physicians work up to 36 hours, they are in the long haul and that fatigue can be a very real risk to decision making towards the end.

Anyways, with everything in mind above, I was left with AC B vs C.

I picked AC C because of my influence from experience...hear me out: emergency-room patients needing continuity of physician care over the critical period after admission, generally 24 hours, would seem as though at any given crucial moment, the expectation would that a physician is able to make the best medical decisions. In the event where there is not a generous overlap between turnovers from one shift to the next, that leaves patients in critical conditions reliant on potentially fatigued physicians that are towards the end of their 36 hour shift. That is why I thought, this would be enough to counter Quincy's argument. Yes, the physicians do need to better working conditions to minimize fatigue that could impair medical decisions.

Meanwhile, AC B has me understanding it as there will be more seriously ill patients during their stay at the hospital than before. I felt like I had to draw an inference on this one. While not everyone in an emergency room may not be in a life threatening state, I guess AC B paints a better picture with more people requiring more attention and the need for best medical decisions??

Please help

help would there be a circular reasoning flaw if a stimulus presents 2 premises, 1 that repeats the conclusion, and another that does not repeat the premise but has a separate flaw.

hey guys I wanted to know some opinions on how long it takes to fully master logic games? and also some suggestions on how to master it. Taking April LSAT. Thanks :)

Hey, Does anyone know if a Mac 10.12.6 is acceptable for test ? ProcturU says minimum 10.13 and I wrote to clarify but they sent me to the same FAQ page.

Thanks for any help