Hi everyone! I am taking the January LSAT flex and had a quick question about score conversions on PT's. When I get my actual score back after taking a PT, I usually go look at the "score conversion" beneath in and find that specific PT with my matching number of incorrect answers. However, there is a wide gap between those two scores. For example, I just took PT 70 and made a 163 actual score, but the conversion score is a 169. Which score is correct?

Thanks!

So I just don't see how this stimulus is flawed

From the conditional statement: squeaking sound---> machine turned on, why can't we conclude that if the machine usually makes a squeaking sound, the machine is not usually turned on?

And what are the differences between D and E?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-2-question-22/

To current law students / law school grads: how have the analytical lessons from Logic Games transferred over to your work?

I’m confident LG will help me as a law student (although right now how it will help me still belongs to this abstract mist of “it’s good for me, just keep your head down, and keep doing it!”), but I’m curious how exactly. If anyone who is now doing something law-related has been seeing the effects of their LG training (the spatial elements of LG, manipulating rules, etc) play out in their law-related lives, I’m curious to hear your thoughts!

After reading this stimulus, I thought the author was assuming the dire wolves were trapped in the tar pits while hunting and scavenging. Is that correct? I was confused about the use of language in answer choice D; what does most frequently actually mean? I tried negating it and it still didn't strike me as correct? Is "most frequently" synonymous with typically or usually?

Help.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-2-question-07/

Why is the answer B and not C?

What is the best strategy for the final month? Looking for as much detail as possible.

I posted this before but no one commented so I was wondering if there was a way to see explanation videos for substituted conditions in logic games? Or just some general help with them? I don't know how to answer them.

How do I become consistent in LR, when I do untimed and BR I get upwards of 4 wrong but sometimes I get 8 wrong when its timed. How do I bridge this gap and not lose my accuracy? Not restricted to any one question type.

I was able to narrow it down to B and D, but I am struggling to figure out why B is wrong?

Ok so I feel very confident at identifying these errors in conditional logic, however when they are in abstract terms in the flaw questions it slows me down because I get a little unsure.

I just took PT64.S3.Q4 and was stuck on a mistaken negation where the correct AC says: "does not present any evidence that the document names every member of the trade group"

How exactly does that indicate a mistaken reversal? I was stuck on this question for 2 minutes when I had the right answer selected by process of elimination the whole time.

What are the other common written examples that I should keep an eye out for? I'm looking for common answers or key words to look for that indicate: mistaken negation, mistaken reversal, as well as confusion of necessity versus sufficiency.

Are there any other than these three that I should be aware of?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-3-question-04/

Could someone help me to see if I reasoned this out properly. This test really testing my patience in life. I didn't even know lake trout was a fish.

Conclusion: If anglers are looking for lake trout in deep temperate lakes while they are partially iced over the winter, their best bet is to avoid lake trout's summer haunts and fish for the shallow parts or close to the surface.

The premise tells us that there are four seasons:

Winter-the coldest water is at the top (goldmine for lake trout)

Late Winter- the "turnover" period when the coldest water is transitioning to the bottom

Summer-the coldest water is at the bottom (goldmine for lake trout)

Fall: another "turnover' where the cold water is cold water is transitioning up

Another premise: We can find lake trout in the coldest water.

If they're partially iced over the winter, it means they're not fully cold yet for anglers to find lake trout - and if the author is concluding that they avoid the summer haunts and fish for the shallow parts, it ought to be that when the deep temperate lake is partially iced, the coldest water is still at the top, and that the partially iced status isn't a full indicator of the turnover that's supposed to happen which will transport the cold water to the bottom.

A. I thought A could work but the stimulus doesn't address anything about the ease at which we could catch them. Whether it takes me 4 hours or 30 minutes to catch, this assumption doesn't need to hold because so long as I am able to catch my fish during the time of the year when they are expected to be abundant, then I'm good. The conclusion precisely advises anglers to avoid the summer haunts if they are looking to catch any lake trout in deep temperate lakes.

B. Heavy, light, denser, we don't care. I eliminated.

C. They are only found in deep tempreature lakes? Groundbreaking. Eliminate.

D. I literally do not care about how they feed. I want to know why the author is make such a specific recommendation. If their feeding habit was connected to their ability to get caught, we would take a second look. Because it's not, we gracefully, eliminate.

E. This is the last contestant in the running towards becoming my next top answer. As they are partially iced over the winter, the expectation is that the cold water is making its way to the bottom where I can get lake trout butttttttt the author is telling me to avoid it. Why? It ought to mean that the partial ice is a false alarm and that the cold water isn't ready yet to make its way to the bottom (summer) where lake trout can be found. If we negate this, "in deep temperate lakes with the ice residue, the turnover has occurred" which will put the coldest water at the bottom. That would mean the author is sabotaging us, and destroys the argument.

This question took me a good 30 minutes to break it down but typing it out actually help. Can anyone let me know if I overlooked anything. And more important, how do you quickly attack such a heavy stimulus under time constraints.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-1-question-17/

I am drilling reading comprehension and I average around -11 timed, not able to finish answer questions, to getting around -3/-4 untimed. I feel like I take forever.

Any tips on bridging the gap? Completing all passages on time? Links to your favorite resources or tips already mentioned in discussion forums?

Thank you very much in advance.

What is the best way to improve Logic Games performance? My issue is lacking speed. I have been re-doing Logic Game problem sets, but have run into the problem of running out of problems to do. I did poorly on the last actual LSAT in November as result.

Does anyone who has taken the Flex have a recommendation on a time slot to choose? I have been taking PT's usually around 12/1PM but not sure if its a good idea to continue doing that as I'm sure the volume will be higher during that time on test day, just trying to avoid any technical difficulties.

Any other Flex advice would be greatly appreciated!

can anyone help me the availability of the book "the loophole in LSAT logical reasoning" written by ELLEN Cassidy?

I stay in India, the book is unavailable on amazon, flipkart and other online websites.

I need a readable copy or atleast a PDF that can be printed.

the website of the publisher itself has not mentioned the international courier facilities for the book to reach me.

If there is anyone, with anyleads, I 'll be obliged.

thank you.

The structure of the stimulus in both of these argument part questions seem very similar and the argument part identified in question stem seems similar as well.

Why is it that the last sentence in 8 "our sun has an unusually high abundance of these heavier elements for its age" is not an intermediate conclusion but that the last sentence in 20 "the heavy industrial activity of coal mining would force most of them to close" is an intermediate conclusion?

#help

Admin Note: PT87.S3.Q8: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-3-question-08/

PT87.S3.Q20: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-3-question-20/

Hey guys,

Hope studying is going well for everyone. I am at the stage of my LR studying where many times when I am doing a question, I find two answer choices attractive. And I am left between which one to choose. Sometimes I will get the question right and sometimes wrong. Any recommendations on how you guys approach this problem on LR questions?

Any help would be appreciated

Thanks

Could someone explain this question to me please?

Lol at this discussion thread title, but I truly think my test anxiety will be the death of my score.

I am blind reviewing in LR between -3 and -5, took PT 83 S1 couldn't even finish the section and scored -11 (left 5 questions blank).

I could feel that I was really anxious because I knew I was being timed and I wasn't able to understand the stimuli/think as logically as I do when there is no pressure. I need to close my gap and kick this test anxiety before January! I really feel that it hinders my ability to think properly. :(

If anyone has been in my position or has any tips, I would greatly appreciate it.

I do like to take positives away from each test and all the strengthen, weaken, NA, MSS/MBT questions I answered were correct. Ironically I got the SA/justify/RRE questions wrong which are usually pretty straightforward for me. My Bernese Mountain dog was barking during my test so I'm hoping it was just a once off lol.

anything would help. i really sturggle on these

Hi! I don't really understand why B is wrong even after reading numerous explanations. If areas subject to more fires (which is true when the level of rainfall drops below normal for an extended period of time like in a drought) tend to be less densely populated than areas where there are few such fires (where there is normal rainfall), doesn't this explain why there is less damage in areas during long periods of drought? There is less population or structural damage by the fires if there aren't a lot to begin with as opposed to ONE fire in a densely populated area would be disastrous even if there is normal rainfall.

A little while ago I was on here and people were talking about "nicole.hopkins" webinar on her reading comprehension strategy. Does anybody have the link to that or know where I can find it? Thanks everyone!

Not sure how the answer is E. I located the conclusion in the middle not as the first sentence.

Can someone let me if I did this question correctly? don't even know how to think normal anymore

This is a nasty question and I would appreciate it if anyone could let me know if my approach was correct.

For a set of 50 sterilization equipment made of nylon, it requires 3.4x the energy it takes to manufacture.

For stainless steel it requires 2.1 the energy it takes to manufacture

If it requires 100 watts to manufacture nylon, it takes 340 to sterilize the 50 set

If it requires 100 watts manufacture SS, it takes 210 to sterilize a set of 50

A is wrong because it makes a mistake of trying to compare the two. If it takes 200 watts to manufacture SS, the it would require 410 for the set of 50.

B is deadly confusing. I took a nap and came back to it. If it takes 340 to sterilize a set of 50, the it takes 6.8 watts for each complete sterilization (340/50 = 6.8). If I'm still sticking with 100 watts as a requisite to manufacture my nylon instruments, with an s, there it no way it requires more energy for each complete sterilization that it requires to manufacture the nylon instruments, with an s.

C. I don't even know why this is wrong. I was thinking this has to be false because the stimulus tells us it's 50.

D. This could be true because either one could require more energy.

E. Nobody mentioned cost. It felt good to call an answer "out of scope." Felt like I'm finally speaking LSAT language.

Can someone help me if my think on B is on track. Also, how do I eliminate C

Okay I'm pretty pissed because I'm pretty sure I got this question wrong for a stupid reason.

AC A says: _Admin Note: I deleted the text as it is against our Forum Rules to post the answer choice text verbatim.

Everything sounded good except for 'in no way implicates the defendant' - is this answer choice basically saying the argument overlooks that a witness may think a defendant is guilty even though their testimony might not match that?

IE: in no way implicates/involves the defendant? As in, maybe they called her in to testify and asked her what she ate for breakfast?

I picked AC B for some reason, I knew the others were wrong which I'm glad about because apparently AC E was a debate for many.

If anyone has tips on matching flawed reasoning when your prephrase is correct (mine matched up perfectly!) but you have trouble navigating abstract terms, that would be helpful!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-4-question-13/