Those are the five diagnostics I've taken. I've got about 5 weeks.

I'm pretty consistently about -5 on RC, when I got a 169 I got -1 and -2 on LR, on the others that has fluctuated around -3/-4.

LG usually around -3 > -5.

Do you guys think I can hit 170 in five weeks?

If so, what steps do you think I should start taking?

I know I need to get my LG to -2 at most, hopefully I can do a bit better on RC, and if I can reduce my mistakes on LR to the -1/-2 that I've achieved, I think I'll be in good shape. I just can't seem to remain focused throughout the entirety of the test enough to consistently score well in EVERY section, like I do when I just do individual sections.

How do you tackle logical reasoning statements without having to read it three to four times just to comprehend what the statement is saying? Should you read the statement first then the question or the question then the statement? Am I the only one who keeps reading it over and over again?

Can somebody explain to me why answer choice (b) is the correct answer? I can't understand how renovating the houses would be the choice that precludes the possibility of trying the other approach. Isn't it the other way around with demolition?

Please help. Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

Hey all,

In every single practice test I've taken, I've had a significant difference in score in my first and second LR sections. First section I average between 5-8 wrong, second section between 1-3 wrong....there's no pattern with question type. Thoughts on why this might be happening? I don't feel like I go faster in the first section so I'm not sure that it's rushing...Thanks!

Erased because of forum rule of not posting info direct from PT's.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-3-question-16/

Admin note: edited title and added link

Dear Community,

I have been a reader for a long time and owe a lot to the writing I've seen on the forums. I am signed up for June 2018 and was hoping some readers might be willing to provide opinions on my LSAT situation.

I took a full-fledged live course back in February, and have been practicing for about 1.5-2 months using 7sage and my copies of the tests in between then and now. I scored around a 161 in the middle of the live course. By fool-proofing, and practicing individual sections of RC and LR (based on question/passage type), I have been able to get to a point where I've scored 170 on two consecutive 5-section tests and feel ready to break towards an even higher score if I can lock down a perfect score on LG (both 170s had 5-6 LG wrong because of a minor setup mistake that screwed up one game, my LG skills improve with each test).

The "rub" is that while I'm happy with my diagnostic scores on 5-section LSATs, I really haven't taken that many full-length tests. I think I've taken maybe 7 total since starting the full live course. While I'm happy to rely on timed sections and weekly full tests for practice, the hunch I really want to test is whether there is a large benefit to be gained from taking, say, 15 more tests rather than 3 or 4 more, which is all I'll have time for with my schedule if I take June.

Basically, my options are as follows:

--take in June, have time for 3-4 more full tests, have time for 10-20 timed sections of LG plus other practice (or more tests if I can pull off taking a test after work — that is a full work day and then 3.25 hours of LSAT).

-delay to July or September, have time for 15+ additional full tests

Obviously, no one will ever turn down additional time. I fully understand the argument that "there is no reason to not take more time." My goal is to apply in the fall no later than immediately after the September test, so basically I have June, July and September. I won't be taking the test later than that unless for whatever reason I test way below what I am practicing at.

The one hunch I have is that even if full tests don't necessarily increase one's score, they do increase the chances that one is able to achieve their practice scores on test day. That is the worry that I have about skimping on tests.

Thanks, ya'll.

The correct answer is A. I see why it is correct but I wonder if this answer choice makes an additional assumption that is not explicitly stated.

(A) says "failure to prove a claim"

We're only told that "these studies... seriously flawed in their methodology." We aren't explicitly told that therefore this experiment failed to prove the claim. Aren't we making an additional assumption that flawed methodology = failed to prove claim? Or even more, we're assuming that these independent scientists were can actually be trusted?

I can see why B, C, D, and E are incorrect. But aren't we making additional assumptions for (A)?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-38-section-1-question-23/

Should I start taking the time to practice diagramming LR (especially SA) questions in my head more than actually writing the diagram down? Anyone have any experience with this?

Hi guys,

can anyone explain why the answer choice (a) is right for this question? I can't seem to understand it at all...

Thanks so much!

Admin note: edited title

Can somebody please help explain why the answer choice (a) is the correct one for this and not (d)? I don't think neither side is arguing which one would violate people's rights less so I immediately crossed (a) off the list...

Admin note: edited title

I don’t know why but I’m struggling with SA. During the quiz exercises I’ve done pretty well, but then I get to the problem sets and it just seems to take forever. Anyone else experience this? What was your remedy for this?

So, I've just finished the instructional videos for the Necessary Assumption lesson. This is the first time since starting JY's lessons that I feel sorta lost. I've gotten ~5-6 of the instructionally-led questions wrong, which is a little disheartening...

Before I hit the practice sets, I want to get a sense of the strategies that are out there for tackling and (eventually) fool-proofing NA questions. That way I can apply them when I'm practicing to figure out which approaches I jive well with.

All tips are appreciated!

Hi all,

Sorry for not posting this in the question itself. I have premium so I'm not able to access all the explanations.

I’m not understanding the answer to S4 number 4. The problem reads:

I don’t understand why D is right and E is wrong. I do understand the logic of D, but “eradicate” means to kill off entirely. If the black spot and tar spot returned after the pollution decreased, the two diseases were not actually eradicated. For this reason, I selected E, which while imperfect was the only remaining option that strengthened it.

Would love some assistance if anyone can help me out. Thanks! :)

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-04/

So it seems like for MSS, Main Point, and Weakening/Strengthening there doesn't seem to be much need for using Lawgic language (ex: A some B -> C, therefore A some C). However, when it comes to validity, MBT/MBF, Sufficient/Necessary Assumption there is a large need for Lawgic language. Should we only use Lawgic language for those types of questions, or is there a strategy for this? Can Lawgic language be used for all questions, or only some (in the name of efficiency)?

Hi All!

I’m slightly freaking out...I’ve been relentlessly preparing for the June LSAT and I’ve been so busy working and studying that I missed the deadline to register, and now I don’t know what to do. Is there a wait list I can get on to take it ? Or a late registration fee I can pay? I really didn’t want to go another month to wait and take it in July :(

I have only completed two preptests (yes i realize I am extremely behind for someone writing in June). I intend to write 3 a week from now until June 11. I just wrote my second preptest the other day and I scored a 154 (I was disappointed because in timed individual sections I was scoring in the low 160s). However, the next day I blind reviewed all the questions I had circled and I scored a 166. It was bittersweet because I was excited to know that I have more in the tank but also frustrated when I look at how large the gap is knowing that I have about five weeks left to prepare. I guess the purpose of me coming on here is I wanted to know if anyone was able to significantly narrow the gap between their PT score and BR score and if they have tips for doing that. Ps. I cannot postpone writing the LSAT. My personal and financial situation does not grant me that option so it's now or never kinda thing. So advice that I can use within the next month would be greatly appreciated.

Hello everyone,

For some reason, I always thought that the difficult questions (4 and 5 level difficulty) are packed at the end of an LR section. So I have been trying to do like the first 14 or 15 questions in the first 18 minutes, and the remaining 10-12 questions in the remaining 17 minutes. But now I am noticing that many of the difficult questions are also in the first part of the section. Which one is right? And is my strategy a bad one? I always find myself not having enough time to answer one or two questions, so I am trying to find the best way to use my time. Note: I am taking the June Test.

Thanks in advance!

I’m not starting CC until next month but I want to practice LG with JYs videos until then, does anyone know which year to start going back from so as not to interfere with practice working through CC (and obv. not burning PTs)

Side note: I’m taking June 2019 so I plan on taking a minimum of 40 PTs over the next year

I decided to skip the early sets (1-20) since I figured they'd be significantly different from the more recent sets. I've been doing the sets from PTs 40-60 but decided to go back to the early ones to save some fresh PTs for later. I usually go -0-1 on LGs with at least 5 min left but I've been struggling to finish the whole set on time mainly due to not understanding the rules and not knowing how to begin my setup. Does anybody else find these games harder than the more recent ones? How often do the weird games show up on the newer PTs?

So far, I have treated Only A is B as B-->A. So far so good.

Recently, I have come across this question:

Does the statement "only A is B" deny other necessary conditions?

If so, does that amount to A--> (anything not B ) a false statement (such as A-->C)?

Here's why I pose the above question.

The word 'only' seems to imply exclusivity. Take this example: "Only you are the winner of this competition."

(and in this competition, it is possible to have multiple winners. It just happens to be that you are the only winner

I lay this down to rule out 'context' issue)

To me, this sounds like "winner of this competition --> you" and nobody else.

This would logically mean that winner --> (anyone who is not you) be false.

Similarly, if I were to say

"Only A assures B"

For example, Let us assume C-->A; given the statement above, would saying C-->B a false statement?

Related to this question is does this amount to bi-conditional? My gut tells me no, but I am uncertain.

Assuming (only A is B = B-->A and no other necessaries) is true, this does not necessarily mean A = B, since there could

be other elements within B that is not A.

Core c. completed twice , slight increase in over all score (without doing PT's second time) just a post diagnostic. Comprehension has increased but I'm not seeing a huge difference in sore. I've heard of the lsat plateau-- may this is the situation right now. Ive also taken notes on the material twice.

Goal is 155plus (average for school I want in)

current 145 give or take untimed

I've been prepping since mid jan with a PT job.

Now the plan is to focus only on lsat.

I registered to take the june one, but now I am thinking to do a date change for july since I already paid.

I'm not seeing a huge increase - hence I'm getting bored of prep.. and I've already put off law for long enough.

I really want to get in for this cycle. Ive been focusing more on the material then doing PT's.

Question -

-what did you guys find really helped your score - reviewing or doing more questions , timed, untimed .....

-Do I have enough time from now until the july lsat to get to where I need to be ?

is it realistic ?

-And when all is said and done and I get a mediocre score should I still apply ?

Does anyone have experience with a list of all Premise and Conclusion indicators that can be made into flashcards?

Looking to make a set for studying purposes.

Any help would be much appreciated!

So the section I’ve had the hardest time improving is by far reading comp. I’m inconsistent (2-8 points off) and right now I’ve just started doing at least one timed reading comp section a day (I work full time so fitting more studying is unlikely, plus I don’t want to just burn PTs). I was thinking of subscribing to a newspaper or something, probably the Wall Street journal or the economist, to get used to the density of the language. Any suggestions on which may work best?

Where can I find the schedule of the upcoming classes that JY will be offering this month. When I logged in I saw something about online videos that will be from 9pm-12am.

I've been taking prep tests almost every day, and my score hasn't budged by more than a few points from an average of 162. Most of my mistakes are in the Reasoning sections, and I know I need to speed up my Games time, but no matter how I study for the Reasoning I'm barely showing improvements there. I'm taking notes on the kinds of questions I miss most so I can review them again, but does anyone have tips on how I can go about fixing this trend?

Thank you!