I've been caping out at around 4 times to go over a single game because I feel like I begin to actually memorize all inferences, I know that this is the point but sometimes I feel like I'm not really thinking too hard to come to my answer choices even though they end up being correct most of the time. Is this the goal with fool proofing? I don't know whether I'm finally breaking through that threshold of understanding where things just "click" or if my memory skills are just carrying me through because I've seen certain games before. Any advice from others who may feel/felt this way towards fool proofing ?

Hello. I am on the free trial portion of the 7Sage course. I am on "Introduction to Sequencing Games 1." I have a few questions.

First, here are the rules:

O is after N but before P.

S is after O.

K is before M and N.

Z is before M.

J is before K.

I was wondering if for sequencing games if we should write out ALL possible sequences on the test and when practicing. Should we also write out all the relationships in the sequence game? Here are the sequences that I have so far:

JZKMNOPS

JZKNMOSP

JKZMNOSP

JKZNMOSP

JKZNMOPS

KZJMNOPS

KZJMNOSP

ZJKMNOSP

ZJKMNOPS

How many more sequences are there??

Also, do Z and K have a relationship? If Z and K do not have a relationship, then why do J and P have a relationship?

Why do P and S not have a relationship? I am not fully understanding this based on the explanation in the lesson. (I am not fully understanding the backwards rule.)

Sorry if I am posting this in the wrong place; I just need some help.

What type of Question is this?

I chose (B) as an answer but the correct answer is (C).

I anticipated correctly but chose the wrong answer. Why is (B) Basis wrong? Their basis of intention is both different.

I am entirely uncertain on how I did for Dec test. This is my first time taking the test. I studied intensely for months.

LR (25) - RC - LR (25) - LR (26) - LG

1st LR - took longer than normal to get through. Guessed on about 4 answers. Panicked a bit which did not help.

RC - weakest section. Guesses on Chinese prompt. Thought Social Darwinism prompt was confusing

2nd LR - blew through that section. No problem

3rd LR - did not think it was too tough. Took a bit longer than 2nd LR.

LG - what the actual eff was that last game? The second game took me 15 minutes. I answered the first game in 5 minutes - moved really quickly, didn't check. I am so uncertain. Normally I max at -2 on games. I have NO idea on this section.

I feel manic about this LSAT. On one hand, everything could have been fine. Yeah, I guessed on about 8 questions, but those are the areas I tested weakly on in PT. On the other hand, everything went horrible. I messed up every section and hope for a 154 in my wildest dreams.

HELP! Does anyone else feel like this?

Hey everyone!

Has anyone had success speeding up their time on inference questions (MSS/MBT) questions? While I don't miss too many of them, I notice that they tend to be time sinks for me, especially the harder ones (I do have a strong grasp of conditional logic).

I'm specifically drilling these types now, which I'm sure will help, but was curious if anyone else had insights on getting through these in a more efficient manner.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-11/

(B) None of the films released in country Z in 1992 were based on books other than novels.

My hunch tells me the answer is B, and I am pretty sure it is the answer, but I need some clarity. Because it didn't really match my prephrase that "if 1992 films, then no more than 25% based on books from 1991. I see how B could be a missing premise, but I don't see it as a sufficient assumption, as it able to make the argument valid.

This is a paragraph I got from the tips on the logic games section under the syllabus section of "Resources for Taking LSAT"

"If you encounter a question that you cannot solve quickly, skip. Come back on round 2 if you have time. Clearly, something faulty is happening in your reasoning and it's blinding you to the right answer. You want give yourself some time and space away from that reasoning. Let it "go to bed" so to speak. Come back on round 2 with a fresh perspective."

The part I'm confused about is the last bit that I bolded. Lets say you're on game 1 of a LG section and you get to question #3 and you can't get it. In this scenario you would skip the question but does the "skip" referred to above mean that, you skip #3 and go do #4 and #5 and then go on to the next game, (coming back after going through all the other games, similar to a LR type of skip) OR does the "skip and come back on round 2" mean that you skip #3 go do #4 and #5 then come back to #3 before moving to Game 2?

If someone could clear this up for me that would be great. I wrote the Dec. LSAT and I'm confident I tanked the games because of panic, not because of a lack of understanding. So I'm reviewing for Feb and I just want make sure that my overall testing technique is much more improved (as in getting the lowest hanging coconut on all the sections). I feel that if my technique for taking the test is better, the knowledge I have of in/out games, sequencing games, all the different LR type questions, etc. will be implemented better on test day, and make me feel as confident as I did doing PT's in a library lol.

Thank you in advance

This MBT question really threw me for a loop because of the bi-conditional. In this particular question I think it is the "unique, whenever" that indicates that it is a bi-conditional. I am aware of these 4 indicators from the core curriculum:

-if and/but only if

-...but otherwise

-....except

But since this question didn't utilize any of these,-- I am now wondering if there are any other bi-conditional indicators not listed here? Also, does anyone know of other logical reasoning questions that use bi-conditionals?

Thanks so much!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-82-section-4-question-23/

Anyone else get an undergrad degree in something other than philosophy? I know this test doesn't require outside knowledge, but I'm sure knowing some aspects of formal logic definitely helps. Any thoughts on this? If anyone sought outside logic sources, what were some good books you've read?

TWO QUESTIONS TO ASK! Thank you in advance!

/N->P

/O->P

/K->P

/N->J

/O->J

.

.

.

.

.

So I did write the December test but I have already registered to write the Feb one.

RC has been my weakest section and I honestly thought I had it down until I started doing some of the newer PTs.

How would you guys recommend going about this? I was planning on doing one to two passages untimed for the next couple of weeks and then start timing in January. I was fairly decent on doing the earlier RC passages untimed (-3/-5 on a section) . Though, I noticed a drastic change in my score when approaching the 60s and 70s.

What do you guys recommend? What has worked for you?

I started this LSAT journey with a quick pass through of the Kaplan logical reasoning approach and, honestly, there were still some pretty gaping holes in my comfort with logical reasoning translation. At first, I felt like the 7sage approach helped a lot... it is much more mechanical and requires memorization of those four groups and the translation strategy. This worked well for me while going through the initial lessons, but now that it's all mixed together, I am realizing that it's just not intuitive for me to translate the group 3 and 4 words so mechanically.

For example, I find it much easier to treat UNLESS as a logical indicator for the necessary term. Then, I simply replace the word "unless" with my arrow and negate the sufficient term (this was the part I often forgot while doing the Kaplan practice problems). However, Kaplan's way definitely made things easier when the sentence also contains a negative, so a group 4 word. In that case, it means what it is... that term is just a negative term. I don't have to flip things or rearrange the sentence to translate it.

My question is, if I treat "unless" and "without" in the way that Kaplan explained it to me, do I need to ignore the whole entire 7sage translation system? Or, I guess to say that differently, I am specifically wondering about translating in groups 3 and 4. Has anyone else found these two approaches conflicting or am I just looking at it the wrong way?

Hey! I’m starting to foolproof games now and I was wondering if and why it’s necessary to keep your old game papers and setups as opposed to just the data? Do you ever go back and look at ur game setups ? Thanks!

I have studied with power score in the past and have taken blueprint as well. Powerscore LR says to read stimulus first and then the question but blueprint is the other way around ( read question then stimulus). What is your take/suggestion?

I'm pretty sure I didn't do very well on the Dec LSAT. My average PT score dropped 10 points a month before the test (I was devastated) and it didn't vastly improve before test day. I'm wondering what my chances of getting in my back-up school are if my GPA is over their 75% and LSAT is under their 25% (by two points, which is where I'm thinking I'll land after scores come out). My resume includes a lot of volunteer work, leadership awards and positions, and work experience. I worked through undergrad and am currently working full time as the HR coordinator of a large physicians practice (I'm interested in health care law).

Any thoughts or advice? Is it even worth applying if my LSAT ends up under the school's 25%?

If I don't decide to cancel, and I submit some applications now, but then later find out that God forbid perhaps my December score is lower than my previous one, would that affect how the admissions see my application?

Does anyone do the Blind Review Method without getting a second copy of the test? Or is the method more effective with a second copy?

Like many, I hate RC. It's my worst section. I was wondering if any of you have any advice on how to isolate and focus on RC studying between weekly preptests? For LG, I fool proof past games and for LR, I just review old questions and target problem areas/question types. These two methods seem to be working well for me as I've made considerable progress.

However, besides using the memory method, I have no idea how to begin isolating RC practice. Feigning interest in the passage topic somewhat helps a little bit but it's not enough for me to really speed up my reading and increasing my accuracy when it comes to tackling the questions. Currently I'm more so worried about accuracy and confidence during RC practice rather than speed.

Any pieces of advice are welcome! Xx

PrepTest 23.Section 3.Game3.Q18 (https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-3-game-3/)

Questions like 18 always get me confused. I was able to narrow R down to 6 and 7 fine, but after that, I just didn’t know where to go. None of the other rules seemed immediately relevant, and then I started stressing out because I didn’t know where to go from there.

The way JY explained it made complete sense but it would have been a huge time sink for me. I.e. making the inference that if R goes into 7, then we remember our rule that S can’t go into 6 or 4, which means P & S must go into 1 and 3, which means T won’t be able to go before F or after R. As I am very new to logic games, interpreting or making all those inferences in my head in a short amount of time has been really hard for me. This did not come naturally to me and I was completely stuck -__-

Does anybody have advice for a question like this where, once you get to a certain point it becomes very open-ended (i.e. multiple slots open with no immediately obvious rule to jump to)? Is it really just trial and error?

I am aware that this is a relatively easy game but I am struggling with LG in general lol

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone took yesterday's Sabbath observer test and if yes if anyone knows which RC was real

?

Hi! Need some advice what you think would be better? I’ve been studying for some time now so I’m not new to games and for the most part my games section score is usually between -2 and -5. I’m starting studying again now for Feb so I would like to set up a game plan. Thanks all!

Hey everyone!

I hope everyone is recovering from Saturdays test well... I feel so lost not studying!

I was wondering if anyone could tell me what the protocol is for issuing a complaint about a proctor and their assistant?! I wrote in Ontario, and my proctor and his assistant were so bad and so so disruptive... I'm so disappointed because I'm so worried that I couldn't focus on my second section (LR).

Basically what happened was the assistant walked out of the room during the test and somehow got locked out... and when the proctor tried to go let them back in, he couldn't. So there was a bunch of banging. If you imagine yourself trying to pull open or push open a door that is locked, multiple times, then thats exactly what happened during Saturdays test. I couldn't believe it... and I still can't!

Any and all help would be greatly appreciated :)

Trying desperately to figure out which of my LR sections was experimental. Those of you who had only two LR sections: do you remember having a Justify question about how kids aren't going to grow up to be into literature b/c of the prevalence of T.V.?

Is there any real difference for translation of typically vs often? For example:

"Typically, winners of Nobel prize for science are not motivated at all by love of discovery."

"And unlike professional scientists, who are often motivated by economic necessity or a desire for fame, amateur scientists..."

I've been translating both as "some" but I'm sort of questioning if it's a stronger "most" or even "all"?

So, I'm foolproofing LG and I am doing it by difficulty. So, I'm starting with simple ordering and am almost finished with that section. I feel like I'm getting better but that's not showing in timing and accuracy wise on the first attempt. So, when did you all who foolproof started doing better?