I'm taking the March LSAT this upcoming Saturday (3/30) but I'm nowhere near ready for the exam. I started studying in January and overestimated how much I could do while working FT and have only completed about 75% of the core curriculum and about 4-5 PTs (I started to try and do PTs since I was fast approaching the exam date).

I'm averaging about 159 on my exams and can get up to 166 on BR (mostly because I can do LGs perfectly untimed but during the timed section I get anywhere from -5 to most recently -9). I don't have enough time to improve my score but I figured since it's my first time taking the test, I should still go and do so. However, should I worry about getting a score that is not reflective of my true ability? I know you can omit the score but I don't know how much it matters since it's evident schools don't average anymore.

Help is appreciated! Thanks!

Hello,

I’m having a bit of difficulty understanding when I should set up my game board as a grouping/sequence game board or an in out one. Prep test 35 game 3 and prep test 60 game 4 seem very similar to me but JY used different game boards for both. Any advice would be greatly appreciated

Hi! I had a complete disaster in January lol I was registered and missed the test by 2 mins because I was late. Literally as soon as I walked up to the proctors they had just put pencils down. My life. Anyway, I'm not taking any chances for March, so I want to make sure I have everything planned. I checked my ticket and it says "Main Foyer" is where we report for the exam. Does anyone else know who's signed up there, or who has taken the test there previously, if that's the building where the gym is/the main classrooms?

Thank you!

I'm falling behind in my studying just a bit and sometimes I need a little extra push (typical millennial) to help me. Anyone else feel to same? Having someone to push me and having someone to push would be helpful. Thanks

Hey everyone! Quick question... What does "appealing to evidence" exactly mean? Does it mean you're using evidence? I can't figure the exact definition of appeal.

Hi all,

I finished the CC earlier this week and took my first PT since my diagnostic a couple days ago. I did quite well going from a 150 to a 160 but my biggest gains were in RC and LG. During the second half of the LR sections (especially the second LR section), I felt like I would read over the stimulus and not be able to digest it because I felt so pressed for time. This definitely showed in my pre-blind review LR scores.

In the CC LR untimed problem sets, I would routinely get 5/5 questions right so I guess my question is in other 7sagers experiences, is there something I can do to help remedy this problem? Or will more PTs/blind review do the trick?

Thanks y'all, I greatly appreciate any input!

In general, for Logic Games execution, I am curious do most write directly on their base diagram or create local diagrams incorporating the new inference specific to the question? For some games when I split the board I don’t see this as much of an issue (although it still can be), but when I have one base diagram I find myself erasing a lot as I move to the next Q which inherently feels like I’m wasting time. Curious if others find it more efficient to draw up a whole new diagram or erase from the base and fill in the new inference for each subsequent Q. I feel like erasing causes me to lose work I can refer back to later, but writing out whole new diagrams feels like it can take up time as well.

Hi there,

Is anyone down to study (seriously hammer out LSAT questions) in the Los Angeles area? I'm in the Cerritos area. I plan on taking the July exam.

I'm hitting 2 games with a few mistakes, but then I get to the third and fourth and I get overwhelmed because I took too long on the first two. Today, I scored a 159 on my practice test because I only got 11 right in LG, but the rest I was satisfied about relative to how terrible my LGs are. (23 in RC, 21 & 17 in LR)

Do I just need to foolproof LGs up until the test day?

Anyone in the area looking for a study buddy/buddies?

[From PT69, Section 1, #20]

"Medical reporter: Studies have consistently found that taking an aspirin Admin note: deleted. copyright issues

"The reasoning in the doctor's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?"

So which is it, medical reporter or doctor?

Can it be the tests are created by human beings? Nah, probably just a glitch in the matrix.

I don't understand how A can be the answer.

A says "no evidence in favor of a hypothesis," but the proponents of the hypothesis is giving us evidence. He explains the fossil thing etc how come this doesn't count as evidence backing up his claim?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-1-question-09/

Can someone please explain to me how the argument is flawed and why the correct answer is B?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-2-question-21/

Hello everyone,

I found this to be an incredibly difficult question. I did get the question right, but I did not feel good at all about my answer choice timed or in blind review. I eliminated the other answer choices because they just seemed outlandish, but I really looked hard at the stimulus and can find precious little textual support for E. Why would it not be possible for the mussels to absorb some of the hazardous waste, but not necessarily become hazardous waste themselves? To me it seemed like that really was making an assumption. I can agree by using my real world knowledge that E would make sense, but in the world of the LSAT where tiny assumptions can separate correct/incorrect answer choices, I really felt that E was just asking me to go much farther than I was comfortable with.

Because of my doubts, I came incredibly close to changing my answer to D in blind review, and even now looking back I can still feel the doubts lingering. Is there something that is just going way over my head here? Does someone else see something in the text that clearly and demonstrably makes E the better answer choice than D?

Thanks so much!

Admin note: edited title

Hi Everyone,

I am facing significant challenges with timing on the arguments section. As of right now, It takes me nearly 20 minutes to get through the first 10 questions on each arguments section. On one section recently I got 10 right but had 8 blank and 7 incorrect.

I am increasing my understanding of question types from the core curriculum but it’s not translating into increased speed/accuracy/right answers when I take practice tests. Does anyone have any tips that actually worked for them and subsequently improved their timing? How did you increase your pace?

Thanks so much 7Sagers!

Hey guys, can someone please advise - If you see two group 4 logical indicators in one sentence - do you pick one idea and negate necessary?

Does it have the same concept as when you see both group 3 and group 4 indicators in one sentence.

Example- If you cannot (cannot- group 4) swim you are not (not - group 4) a Koala Bear-

Do we translate it into Lawgic as [S arrow K] or is it translated as usual [s/ arrow k/]

Thanks in advance

M

I'm trying to improve on seeing the flaw in the premise but I can't seem to break the glass ceiling here. I can do the 1 and 2 star ones pretty well but my problems start to occur at 3 stars and up, and I end up going to the AC's blind which is not the right way to go about it. The easy cookie cutters I'm decent at, but ones like PT58.S1.Q18 give me fits because I can't quite "See it."

Any tips for helping to see it? I've been at this for a couple of years on and off so it is not a "I haven't seen enough", but rather I know its my approach mentally. Just would like a fresh perspective. Thanks!!!

Hey guys,

I have been doing the fool proofing for games 1-35 and wanted to share what I do to save those trees.

I place two games in each sleeves (front and back). I do my drills like 45 mins as many as I can do. Note the time for each of them in the bottom corner. By the end of it. I erase the one that I need to redo and leave the ones I did good. This way you don't have to make 5 copies of each game. Just 1 copy and tadaaa!

I take the information and note it in a pdf sheet. This is a sample of the LG tracker. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L3TW5io8o7AMCoBDLvSFr8HupWJqYynq/view?usp=sharing

Hope this helps!

For LR, I'm officially scoring what I did before starting 7sage in January.

I began 7sage in january and made massive improvements in LR after the core curriculum. From Prep-test 36 through 38, I was getting just one to three wrong a section. On PT 36, however, my BR score (166) was only two points higher than my actual score (164), so I began to blind review in much more detail in nuance, revisiting parts of the core curriculum, and referring to the analytics tab on 7sage to help focus my studies.

However, I noticed that I was becoming more hesitant and more willing to circle questions, and the answers I gave to circled questions were more frequently wrong. I use to end each LR section with over 5 minutes to spare and around six questions circles, one or two of which would be corrected (my best overall performance was on Preptest 38, I scored a 166, with a 174 BR).By Preptest 40, I can barely finish an LR section, circle 8-12 questions, and end up correcting most of them.

I think this is best demonstrated in two timed drills I took from PT 73.

On section 2 in late February, I got four wrong initially, had circled 4, and corrected two.

On Section 4, which I took today, I got eleven wrong (many of which were not circled), and circled 12.

Does anyone have any other LR review methods besides Blind Reviewing?

I'm taking the March test and need advice. I thought I was in good shape when I stopped the core curriculum and truly believed the 7sage method, but now I feel like I wasted this time I took off to study for the LSAT (sorry for the mini rant).

So i’ve managed to improve my LR score to about 0-2 questions wrong per section. On good days I get every LR question right and on bad days I would get up to 3 or 4 wrong in total. I first finish the section in about 30 min and go back to the questions I circled as confusing. The thing is, when I solve questions I usually read every single answer choice (so even if I know that AC A is the correct answer, I would read B,C,D,E just to make sure). Sometimes, when i’m absolutely sure that the one I chose is the correct answer, I just skim through the rest of the answer choices, but I still spend time reading them.

What do you guys think about not reading the other answer choices once I choose an answer that i’m fairly sure is right? This way I would finish the section earlier and would have more time to spend on trickier questions. Right now I feel like i’m too nervous to do it but i’ve seen JY do it in his live commentaries and am thinking about it.

Has anyone tried this and improved their scores? Or should I still at least skim through every answer choice?

Hi Im new to this blog and would like to know if there are any suggestions on how to make accurate and complete (AS MUCH AS THERE ARE TO MAKE :-) ) inferences on this Logic Games section!

Thanks in advance.

Hey guys,

This is a burning question that's been bothering me since the beginning of my LR prep.

If you have seen PT64 S1 Q13 (joggers question) and PT73 S4 Q3 (skin cancers question) or would like to check them out, please continue reading.

In PT64 S1 Q13, the argument concludes that stretching doesn't help prevent injury because the group that stretched before jogging had the same number of injuries as those who didn't.

This is a weaken question.

We have Trap Answer Choice E, which states that in some forms of exercises stretching before engaging in an activity can reduce the severity of injuries. It is easy to eliminate E on the basis of "some forms of exercise" because we do not know that such a case includes jogging. But what if E had specifically mentioned jogging? Would it weaken the argument? Can the severity of an injury be a factor that contributes to the effectiveness of its prevention?

Similarly, in PT73 S4 Q3, the argument concludes that sunscreen lotions aren't effectively preventing UV rays causing skin cancer because the average number of the people who get skin cancer is as great for people using sun lotions as those who don't.

This is a flaw question.

Trap Answer Choice B says that the argument fails to see the difference between the number of cases and the severity of the cases in evaluating the effectiveness of skin cancer prevention.

One clear way to eliminate B is to realize that B does not pinpoint which group's skin cancers were more severe. If B had said that the argument fails to consider that the group without sun lotion had more severe cases of skin cancer, would it be the flaw of the argument?

I think the decision to accept modified versions of both PT73 S4 Q3 and PT64 S1 Q13 depends on how we understand the definition of prevention. To evaluate whether prevention of a disease/injury occurred effectively, is it sufficient to ONLY focus on the number of injuries/disease prevented OR do we also need to take into account whether any reduction in the severity of such disease/injury occurred?

In my opinion, measuring the severity of an injury does matter in assessing the effectiveness of a preventive measure.

If a thousand people who used sunscreen lotion developed stage 1 skin cancer but the same number of people who didn't use sunscreen lotion developed stage 4 skin cancer, the argument would be weakened because the sunscreen lotion indeed was effective in blocking a worse form of skin cancer. It would be unreasonable to say that sunscreen lotion wasn't effective in that case.

All in all, what is meant by effective prevention? Does it have it to be complete 100% prevention (as in no instances of injuries, whether severe or light) to be properly called effective prevention?

Thank you so much for reading my painful thought process. Please help!

Just a general question about NA question. What clues/cues do some of you have to help you determine from the get go if you need to bridge or find a shield answer? I notice I usually freak out in some of these situations. Any insight i deeply appreciated.

I’m taking the June 2019 lsat. I am really good at lg but bad at everything else. Do you guys think I can achieve a perfect score. By June while working and taking classes if I study at least 6 hours everyday. I’ll prolly be doing more. I am just so nervous and I have so much anxiety I can’t even sleep.

I often make the mistake in flaw questions of -choosing an answer choice that's descriptively accurate and COULD describe a flaw, but doesn't describe THE flaw in the argument. For example: LSAT 86 - Section 1 - Question 19. I chose A. Any suggestions on how I can tackle this?? Pleeeease #help. Flaws are my biggest weakness and I'd love to improve.