Thanks to 7SAGE for helping me improve with the games. Took the Feb 2020 LSAT and forgot to post this. GPA is around a 3.78 at the moment (1 semester left). Thoughts on what schools I'm in range for? Thanks!

Any tips? Pleaaaaaase

On a recent PT I put so much energy and effort into the first 3 passages so maybe that's why- but I totally died by the 4th passage and just guessed everything. I was also running out of time.. how do I get faster and better? And stay alert through all of them.

Hey guys quick question about going through logic games. For those that fullproofed, did you do every game from 1-35, and did you do all of that before you started taking timed pt's or after a few pt's where you were struggling on the games? Just started the logic game curriculum and I am trying to plan out my studying and see if anyone had recommendations about how to go about it. Thanks in advance for your help!

I'm trying to make sure I keep certain LR topics fresh and also work on ones I struggle with most. I am completing the CC question sets as I move along through the sections.

What can I use to "drill" certain questions after I complete the CC question sets?

What is the best way to study for LR? Currently, while I BR, I type out the conclusion, premise, and why each AC except one is wrong. Any tips? What worked well for you?

How do you review LR questions that you got wrong?

What is the difference between LR questions in the 70's and 80's compared to earlier PTs?

For example, is it that recent LR questions hinge on really subtle interpretations of words, like conflating "method" and "reason" and these two words are spaced far apart in the paragraph? Is it picking up on really subtle flaws? Did the old tests just test your basic understanding of logic and not really test your ability to hunt for subtlety?

I ask because I did really well in PT 60, then did 5x worse in a pt from the 80s. This is pretty consistent too for LR. Why?

Hi, over the past year or so I've constantly been updating my blind review template based on what instruction from tutors and mentors, from the 7Sage CC, from The Loophole, from all-star sages and also based on what I find benefits me most when I BR a question.

If you have any questions or suggestions I'd love to hear them! Hope this benefits you.

PT, Q, Q type:

The best way to do these questions is:

Motto for Q type:

Translation Drill (after looking at the stim once, process the information and repeat it in abbreviated form here.):

Conclusion Premises Background info:

Referential phrasing:

Cookie Cutter logical layout (Method of Reasoning and structure):

Flaw:

My Prediction / prephrase:

Blind Review (BR) and Answer Choices (ACs) - why is the AC right? Why wrong?

Test writer review (TWR) – Why is this AC on the test in the first place? What is the trap set for this wrong AC? Who are they trying to fool?

Seek mastery

A.

TWR.

B.

TWR.

C.

TWR.

D.

TWR.

E.

TWR.

Teach a parallel question:

Takeaways:

When I first started logic games, making inferences looked like some sort of voo doo that I would never quite get. I brute forced games that should have been split, I tried to split games that had way too many possibilities and ran out of time because I was trying to make 6 game boards. I have often forgotten to circle the floater or even think about how it can help answer questions or make inferences. If this sounds like you, I am writing this post primarily for you.

Understanding the power of the floater is helpful for multiple situations:

You are learning logic games and having trouble seeing inferences

You didn’t split the game or the game is open ended

You are looking at a question and don’t see any obvious inferences, so you trying to brute force the answer choices. Understanding the power of the floater will help you be smarter about which answer choices to test.

Here is how the floater (s) can help you:

You have a “ Could be True” question

Sequencing Example: Who could be the 4th person in line? Because your floater should be able to go anywhere, if you see the floater as one of your answer choices, try placing the floater in that 4th position first in a mini diagram and see if it works.

In and Out Game: If you have a true floater, it should be able to go into either the In or Out group. So, if you have a question asking you which variable can go into the In Group and you see your floater showing up as an answer choice, this should be the first answer choice you try.

Grouping: Your floater should be able to go into any group so if you have a question asking you which variable could go into Group C, try your floater first.

You have Must be true question:

Sequencing Example: If you see your floater listed in the answer choices, Eliminate, you know that your floater can go in more positions than just 4th position for example, because there is no rules attached to it.

In and Out Game:

If you have a true floater it should be able to go into either of the groups. If you see your floater in the answer choices, don’t check it.

Grouping Game:

Your floater doesn’t have to be in any specific group, eliminate any answer choice regarding this.

You have a Must be False Question:

Sequencing Example: Who can’t be the 4th person in line?

If you see the floater in one of the answer choices, this should be the last answer choice you try. Remember, your floater should be able to go anywhere so it is highly unlikely the answer to the question, unless it has been eliminated by another rule such a large block or sequencing chain.

In and Out Game:

If you have a floater it should be able to go into either group so if the question is asking who can’t go into the In group, you should skip checking any answer choices involving your floater.

Grouping:

Your floater should be able to go into any group so don’t check any answer choices involving your floater for a question stem that asks you something like who can’t go into Group C?

You have a hypothetical question where your floater has been placed

Sequencing example: If H is 4th, what must be true?

Since H was your floater and has now been placed, do you have any large blocks or variables that can’t go together? Check to see if placing your floater has now limited the block (s) or variables that need to be seperated.

In and Out Game:

You have a limited number of variables so when something has been placed it limits the possibility of other variables. This is particularly true in In and Out Games with limited distribution possibilities. For example, if you have a game where you can have a max of three variable in the In Group, you already had a variable in the In Group and now you have placed your floater into the In Group, you know that your block can’t go into the In Group because you only have one spot left.

As a second example, you have placed your floater into the Out Group which is now full, you now know that all of other variables which haven’t been placed yet are now in the Out Group.

Grouping Game:

If the groups are open ended placing your variable may not help you much but if you have a game with limited distribution and restrictive rules, than the floater may just be the key to the inference the question wants you to make.

For example: You have 3 groups A, B, C Each Group can have a maximum of two variables. You have just placed your floater into Group A, and Group A is now full because another variable had already been placed into it based on another rule. You know that you need to seperate R and S. R has been placed into Group B. This pushes out the inference that S must be placed into Group 3.

You have a hypothetical question involving a large block or variables that need to be seperated

Sequencing example: A question like this may severely limit the possibilities of your floater. This is particularly true when considered in conjunction with other rules of the game like blocks, variables that can’t go together or sequences. For a question like this, create a mini diagram and place your large block or variables. Check out how this impacts other variables in the game. Chances are that your floater is now restricted. While, this won’t always turn out to be the answer choice itself, noticing this can help you find the inference the question is asking you about.

In and Out Game:

If there is a limited number of positions, this makes it harder to separate variables that can’t go together. When you seperate variables that can’t go together or place variables that have to go together, your possibilities to distribute the remaining variables may become severely more limited.

Grouping Game:

If you have placed variables that need to go together or separated variables that can’t go together, your floater likely has more limited distribution possibilities, especially if your groups have limited distribution possibilities.

You have more than one floater:

Your floaters are interchangeable. If C and T are your floaters these are essentially the same answer choice.

If you have any question that you see both your floaters show up as answer choices, you can eliminate both answer choices. There is only one right answer.

Hi guys,

For RC, I'm just wondering whether any 170+ scorers employ a skipping strategy commonly seen in LR, where you do 10 questions in 10 minutes and15 questions in 15 minutes to have 10 minutes left over to do a second pass on 3-5 questions that were skipped on purpose?

I find that this technique really helps me prioritize my time in LR sections and think it may also benefit me in RC. I realize that because of the reading time can vary for each passage on RC, that this technique may have to be a bit different than LR. But I do notice that when I get to the last passage with ~ 10 minutes left, I tend to freak out a bit and it becomes difficult to finish on time.

Thanks!

The videos for In/Out Grouping Question 1 Game Setup and Questions are missing

I'd like to drill the inference valid argument relationships, specifically the most/some's, because the advanced drill really had me struggling to draw inferences quickly. I've made flashcards but even that isn't enough. Any resources or drills would be appreciated!

If I am really struggling with the most advanced weakening questions should I stay on the lesson until I am able to perform better or should I move on to the next lesson in the schedule and come back to weakening questions later.

Thanks

Hey 7 Sage community,

I have been trying to improve my timing strategies in LR overall but one thing I noticed I've been doing during timed section runs is skipping the sufficient assumption questions that show up deep in the section that often incorporate a few conditional statements/ formal logic. Usually during BR, I get them correct but I noticed during timed pressure my nerves kick in when I realize I'll have to diagram it all and I have other questions to do. (Same usually applies for certain par/par-flaw)

I've been working on getting more comfortable with cookie cutter argument structures and diagramming but I was wondering what else I could do to build more confidence.

I was also curious what practical steps I could take to get to the level of not having to diagram at all.

Do top scorers just see it all in their heads? It gets really hard for me to keep track of everything in terms of comprehension until I can see the structure laid out in lawgic.

I can't seem to figure out a way to keep these questions under 2 minutes and its been frustrating. I'd love to turn these into a strength as I like how they can be reliable points.

I would appreciate any insight.

Thank you!!

Sometimes scoring 5/5 without BR

Sometimes scoring 3/5 with BR or

5/5 with BR

My track record for MSS are all over the place and I can't find the underlying theme or thread for why I can't be consistent in my scores.

I found that with MP questions I was able to figure it out and find a strategy that worked but are there any tips on this?

I think I'm just not understanding MSS..

(even though I've learned that the stimulus holds the premise and the answer choice holds the conclusion)

I'm concerned - any thoughts anyone ? :$

Hi,

I understand why the answer here is B (because this shows that it is possible that the person knew Drew well and sent Drew roses to piss him off), but I can not quite pinpoint why A is wrong. Most traditional explanations for why A is wrong include the line of reasoning that it is perfectly possible that "most" people may not include the person that sent roses to Drew; but how is this line of reasoning consistent with B being correct? After all, it is also perfectly possible that "some" of the people who send flowers for reasons other to please may not be the person who sent the roses to Drew.

Thus, I feel that there should be a better explanation for why A is wrong, but I have trouble pinpointing it in my head.

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-2-question-19/

Hi guys,

I feel like I have a good grasp of how to improve in the LG and LR sections, but not necessarily the RC section. I'm a scientist so the science passages are quite easy for me. I know that I need to improve on art and law passages.

What I have been doing:

So far, I have been printing off art and law RC sections, doing them individually timed (8.5 min) and BR'ing them right away from PT 36 - 41. I've been working on developing my skipping strategy more, where on my first pass I note any questions to return to on my second pass. I tend to have a mix of questions to return to, some are the ones that I nailed down to 2 ACs and need to choose the one, but some are the ones that I read all ACs and just had no clue, and some are the ones that I needed to refer back to the passage and would take a bit of time to do so. At the same time, I try to identify any questions to be my "loser" and try to focus the remainder of my time on questions that I can get right. I just started developing this more consciously on both LR and RC.

My reading time for the passage is generally between 2.5 - 3.5 minutes. I tend to get -1 or -2 wrong per passage, which would be -4 to -8 in the RC section. Not good enough for what I want... I seem to struggle a bit with inference and most strongly supported type questions.

How do you think I should structure my studying to go forward? I am not completely certain that just doing more passages with thorough blind review will help improve my score. My goal is to try and get consistently -4 per RC section or better.

Hi,

Does anyone know what LSAT's RC sections mean by the word "issue" (ie PT30.S3.Q25 mentions "issues surrounding a study are discussed")? Asking because "issue" could have 2 meanings-- topic or a point of disagreement, both of which I feel could be relevant in RC.

#help

Thanks!

Hi,

Based on what I have read from answer explanations so far, this logical reasoning question seems to break the "cardinal rule" of there only being one truly right answer because both A and B here seem to strengthen the stimulus-- A just happens to strengthen it more, and thus is the right answer. Does anyone have a better explanation for why B is wrong?

Thanks!

#help

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-4-question-20/

Hello JY

I had a q regarding LR. What if we have a different reasoning to why an answer is correct than the one you mention in your video but still get the right answer choice? Does that mean we have thought about it incorrectly and should re-wire our brains to think differently?

e.g.

Practice test 7, S3 Q21 - I have the same reasoning another student posted, quoted below:

"B) Yes! This shows that we do not NEED to raise cow on grain – so even if the grain yield is going down, we can still raise them on grass – which renders it possibly less morally unacceptable"

But this wasn't the reasoning you used .. so are we incorrect for picking the answer on that basis?

(and generally should we adapt our reasoning to yours? This isn't the first scenario I encounter like this)

If anyone else wants to chime in, more than welcome ! :D

In Logical Reasoning sections, LSAC loves to test us on how we interpret studies. For example, a study is described, a conclusion is drawn, and it becomes our job to evaluate how well the study supports the conclusion. These questions are common and come in the form of: flaw, strengthening, weakening, necessary assumption, sufficient assumption, and if they are feeling really ambitious: resolve reconcile questions.

These questions mostly turn on how well the study is controlled. This video below takes you through what it means for an experiment to be controlled and why it is fundamental to "good" science.

Next time you do an LR section, notice how much the controlled experiment comes up, and how you must understand what makes it better or worse!

Hi everyone,

Hard question here: can anyone explain why answer choice A is completely incorrect? I can see how, based on the passage, "standardizing traditional languages" is "sometimes unnecessary" from lines 39-42, but I still can not find textual evidence for how "standardizing traditional languages requires arbitrary choices". The rhetorical question raised in lines 36-38 express arbitrariness, but I don't understand how we were supposed to know that this arbitrariness was "required" by standardization. No need to explain B,C,D, and E.

Thanks!

#help

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-2-passage-2-questions/

Hi everyone,

This might sound like a dumb question, but would anyone be able to explain why C is wrong in this question?

I thought C could be correct here because:

Thus, while I understood why the answer was A (since "all but impossible" = very difficult to make possible), I had trouble fully eliminating answer choice C because I thought that since we understood the obstacle that "sometimes" prevented us from perfectly converting oral language to written language (aka "exact match"), taking away that obstacle should make that goal "attainable".

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-2-passage-2-questions/

Hi,

I am totally stuck here between B and C. Can anyone help explain why C is wrong and B is right?

#help

Thanks!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-2-passage-2-questions/

I'm doing the RC problem sets of the core curriculum currently and it seems like the RC passages are taking me a while. For passages that are 5 questions it takes me 10 minutes to complete that passage, and for passages that are 7-8 questions it usually takes me 15 minutes to complete.

How do I get faster at this? And what is a good time to aim for for each passage?

Hey everyone,

I been looking at this argument for a couple days and can't find the flaw. Can someone please help me find it. Thank you.

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-2-question-15/

Hello! This is my first time posting here, I am feeling shy but thank you in advance for any advice you may give!

I've been taking some full PTs as well as using them as problem sets and I find myself constantly overthinking LR questions during BR. I'll get the answer right timed, but when I'm untimed I often linger and fall for the trap answer. I feel like this happens more often in the easier questions too than in the more difficult ones, so I'm stumped lol. I'd greatly appreciate any tips on where to begin in kicking this bad habit. I'm taking the test in July and LR is my weakest section. I'll also be re-reviewing the CC but there's little consistency in which question types I miss so it's not easy to pinpoint.

Thank you and I hope everyone is studying the best they can while prioritizing personal safety in our current climate.