I know this sounds counter intuitive as this method seems to be dedicated toward LG but this was my thought process.

I attended the recent webinars (AMA) and everyone seems to say that I should fool proof RC because it would help in increasing your score. So I took their advice and now I’m fool proofing an entire RC section every day for all the PT’s that I’ve taken so far.

So their recommended method was to

Gustavo Fring etc.),

Do you think there is something I’m missing out in this process?

Anything I should add to ensure my fool proofing method is good?

Any advice would be welcome at this point because RC is a real roller coaster for me (-10 ~ -3)

Thank you!

Hi guys,

I am having trouble understanding JY's reasoning behind choosing correct answers in the above problems.

PT73.4.19 is a necessary assumption question and PT34.2.2 is a sufficient assumption question, and their premise - conclusion reasoning is essentially identical:

We should do A, so the author concludes that we should do B.

In PT34.2.2, the correct answer was (E), which says A -> B.

However in PT73.4.19, the correct answer was (B), which says, B helps A, which kind of sounds like the typical reversal answer choice. I understand how the correct answer choice was necessary for the argument to make sense, but if (B) said A helps B, would this be incorrect answer choice?

On a side note, how should I approach a conditional statement containing the word, "do"?

In PT34.2.2, JY draws a conditional diagram using "Do it," because the stimulus says "the city should always do what makes good economic sense," whereas in PT73.4.19 JY does not, even though the stimulus says "we must do what we can to prevent this loss of motivation." I understand either approach can lead to choosing the correct answer, but what should be the rule of thumb?

Any help would be appreciated.

Joining in the chorus of people who are gearing up for December 2nd! Here's where I'm at right now:

PT scores 165-167

BR scores 177-180

Average per section around -4 each LR, -3 for LG, and (gulp) -6 to -8 or so in RC.

Obviously RC is my biggest weakness, but don't think I could get significantly better in that during the next 2 weeks. My biggest problem with LG is speed (I rarely answer incorrectly, just run out of time before getting to the last few questions).

Speed is a factor in RC as well, usually hit the 5 minute warning right as I turn the page to the last passage. Also inferring perspective questions, ughhhh. Probably 95% of the RC questions I get wrong (but did have time to answer) were inferring perspective questions.

Thoughts? Drill drill drill LG to try to improve speed? Drill LR to try to push that even a bit higher? Try to tackle RC?

Thanks!

Hi everyone!

I have been studying since June and took the test in September and scored a 163. My test was not disclosed (Irma makeup) but I felt like I did the worst on the LG because I had a bit of an anxiety attack during the section and had to guess on the entire last game. I have been foolproofing games nonstop (doing at least a section a day) since I received my score. I have also

done the LG curriculum twice. Because of this, I have seen my accuracy go up--I can get minus zero on any section during blind review, and I understand LG patterns/inferences a lot better now--but I have yet to see a significant improvement when it comes to speed. I am still going about two minutes over the target time for the medium/harder games.

If anyone has any personal tips/tricks they used to get faster with games, please share! I am looking to really cut down time in the next 11 days and am really open to any suggestions!!

Thank you so much in advance!

Hey all, I don't know if this is allowed, so moderators please step in if it isn't--I just wanted to see if anyone could provide an explanation (especially a simple diagram) of the NA question on PT 82 from September regarding homophones and computer voice-recognition technology. I've been looking over my test and having trouble getting to the right answer. Thanks!

For those getting -0 in LG, would you have any advice for strategies during timed conditions? How did you finally make it to -0 in the whole section? Do you get -0 during timed conditions as well? If so, what do you think it was that finally got you there? When studying, I do a lot of drilling and fool proofing, but I still feel like there are so many points left on the table. Thank you!

For those of us taking the test in December, how much of an improvement in your score are you hoping to see from now until then? I would love to consistently be scoring around 3 points higher than I am now, but that's probably pretty unrealistic.

So I've been getting pretty low scores on my PT's before BR, but my BR scores are significantly higher: 10+ points. Clearly, I grasp most of the material. It seems I just am having trouble executing under timed conditions. How should I study for the next 2 weeks before the December test?

This is for the Ultimate and Ultimate+ers out there. I wish I could provide the link, but I don't have access to it...

Here's the deal. Sentence 1 we're given the context. Sentences 2 and 3 we're given separate conditional relationships.

I fell for trap answer (D), knowing fully well it was the "oldest trick in the book" (i.e. switching sufficient and necessary conditions), but still believing it was MSS. I knew it was weak, and I gave (B) -- the accredited response -- another look-over before committing to my answer, ultimately rejecting (B) because I felt like the conditional relationship from sentence 3 did not suggest unique use of plants.

(B): the people in question used plants in a unique way at the time

Sentence 2's conditional: If plants were cultivated --> the people discovered agriculture before anyone else

(yes, this would be unique)

Sentence 3's conditional: If plants were uncultivated --> the people ate a wider variety of plants than did any other people at the time

(unique? questionable...)

Here's my issue with sentence 3's conditional and thus its support for (B) -- let's say there's 5 different plants. In the whole world. 5 plants. Let's say the people in question ate 4/5 of those plants and everyone else in the world ate 1/5 of those plants. However, in my "LSAT bubble" brain, I did not conflate this scenario with saying that, of the people around the world eating 1/5 plants, none of them altogether ever ate any one of the 4/5 plants these people ate (e.g. the people in question ate plants 1, 2, 3, and 4; another group ate plant 1; another group ate plant 2; another 3; another 4; heck, another group ate 5, the elusive plant that the people in question did not have).

Thus, (B) would not be true. Granted, this is a MSS question, which means that I have incorrectly gauged the plausibility of (B) and (D) by assuming (D) is more likely in my thought experiment. My question, above simply "why is (B) the right answer" (which is still at the heart of my question), is why is (D) wrong? Are all answer choices for MSS questions that flip sufficient and necessary conditions traps? Or does the context make (D) wrong in this case?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-4-question-09/

I've been over 160 for over a month now (highest 164) (BR ~170 and on untimed drills I get -4 to -1 on LR/RC, -0 on LG). Working too much, trying to study part time, improvement has been slow. If I had another year I know I could reach 170, but I just don't want to put this all off. Anyway, I'm registered for the Dec. test to get apps out in January. I have important work and life experience I think will really help my application. For my target schools, I think 163 is my safe zone and anything past that will help me get financial aid (which I really need). I expect to get a boost of urgency and clarity under the final test pressure that will help, but some practice sections recently have got me uneasy.

I did an LG section today where I flipped a W upside down to an M while translating my rules, costing me that whole game and left me with no time for the fourth game. I've been finishing 3 games consistently with a little time to attempt the 4th game, but only one time have I finished all four.

I have tests 76-81, 46-51, and few 20s and 30s PTs untouched.

What should I do?

Drill games like mad and hope for my usual 18-21 on each of the other sections?

I don't want to burn out.

Hey guy's, are there any especially difficult or abnormal games that you've come across from PTs 60/70 to Present?

Hi there,

Does anyone have any tips on how to answer an LR question that has a passage that you simply can't understand? This happens infrequently, but it is quite troubling for me when it does happen. When this happens, I will know how to attack the question (according to the question stem) using the strategies learned from the 7sage CC, but if I don't understand what the argument is, I obviously will be unable to use this strategy properly.

Should I just guess on these questions and move on?

Thanks,

Michael Elliott

Hey everyone! Up until this past week I have been consistently practicing between 18-20 correct on RC... this past week I did two recent tests PT74 and PT75 and really struggled.. In both cases I had about 6 or 7 questions that I had time to attempt and was unable to decide between two answers... Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can improve on this? Main point questions seem to be one of the questions I consistently find myself narrowing down to two answers, unable to distinguish the correct from the incorrect. If I am getting down to two answers and can't decide, is it because I am going too quickly and don't understand the passage?

Any suggestions would be great!

Typically I go -2 to -0 on LG, -4-5 on LR, and -2-5 on each LR. Right now my schedule looks like this:

Sunday: 1 LR & LG timed section; BR

Monday: 1 LR& RC timed section; BR

Tuesday: 1 LR & LG timed section; BR

Wednesday: Full PT; BR

Thursday: 1 LR & RC timed section; BR

Friday: 1 LR & LG timed section; BR

Saturday: Full PT; BR

I'm also a full time student with a part time job, so I probably miss one day a week, but I kinda see that as a mental day off tbh. For those of you who have made the 170 jump, do you remember when it clicked? If you had been doing anything specific?

Hi. Could anyone tell me why (c) weakens the arg? Isn't it irrelevant that it talks about errors of the data? Thank you in advance!! Happy studying everyone.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-3-question-26/

Hi everyone,

I'm on the LR part of the curriculum, specifically just finishing up strengthening questions.

I'm super confident with the first 4 or 5 drills, and without BR, I'm getting 4/5 or 5/5 on the questions. Unfortunately, as soon as I get to the 6th drill and above, where the difficulty gets worse, I continuously bomb each drill.

It's really frustrating to study causation theory & strategy for 6 hours and then barely see any results when doing weakening & strengthening. I guess I'm having difficulty because when J.Y. does the questions in his videos, he doesn't really use a 'strategy' to do strengthening questions. He simply figures out the assumption the argument is making and exploits it. I, however, cannot seem to pinpoint the assumption very easily. Is there a strategy for this or is it just something you get good at with practice? Does anyone have any advice on how they mastered strengthening/weakening questions?

Appreciate any advice or simply relating :)

I took a look at the September LSAT and what questions I missed in the logical reasoning section. I scored a 147, and I would like to raise that score to a 155 or higher. I think that these questions are the key to that improvement.

Missed questions as follows:

Parallel Argument- 5

Flawed Reasoning- 3

SA- 4

NA- 5

Weakening- 3

MBT- 2

I was wondering if you could look at the question types that I missed and maybe help me pin point a few of the problems that are causing me to miss these questions types? Like am I not focusing on relationships or assumptions? Really, anything would help me.

I look at the questions and I think the issue falls somewhere between the SA, NA, and weakening questions. I know those questions are connected is similar style, but I am not sure how and why I am missing them. Thank you for the help.

On the first LR section or first section in general, I always seem to score lower than the rest of the sections.

I have tried doing some questions before starting a PT to warm up... nothing is helping.

Tips?

I'm at PT 26 now and I am struggling when I see a new game for the first time. It usually only takes me 3 attempts to "fool proof" it but when I see a new game, I struggle to increase my speed or even be close to the target sometimes (typically range between 1-4 mins over but every once in a while am WAY over).

I get the logic behind the games. My mistakes I feel are timing issues. Examples being when a questions reads like I will have to brute force and I hesitate, not being able to see how an AC works in my head quickly/having to write it out to see it. This becomes extremely frustrating when JY does a quick strategy that makes it look like a cake walk.

I feel so close to breaking through but my speed and seeing a couple steps ahead with the rules quickly in my head is killing my speed. Thoughts?

Hi,

I'm aware that the correct answer is A, but while PTing I thought that the wording was too extreme. I do agree that the main point is to focus more on narrative than the characteristics of the novel, but what let me to confidently cross this out was due to the word "purely."

Where in the passage does it imply that the "best" approach is to focus "purely" on narrative? Why not 90% on narrative and 10% on the characteristics of the novel? Who is to say that a clear dichotomy can be drawn between the two? Any help is appreciated! Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-4-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-4-passage-3-questions/

With the CC almost done and the LSAT in December, what is the best thing to work on to improve my score?

What info do you guys need from me to best answer my question?

I've been averaging I'd say 160 on PTs, around 165 as of now for BR?

Thanks

I'm taking the December exam. My last PT was a 172 with -2 on every section (PT 78). This is pretty representative of what I do on individual practice sections and on PTs lately, with the exception of games, which is generally -0/-1. What should I focus on in these last few weeks? What do I do to refine? Obviously shooting for a 180 ;)

Should I supplement with the LR Powerscore Bible, Manhattan Prep, etc. if I'm not thoroughly understanding something? Would a tutor be a better idea? There are a few sections where I can't even get all of the 4/5 difficulty questions correct. I understand them when I listen to JY's explanations, but I can't seem to get them right on my own. Would another approach from a different angle that I might understand be a good idea?

In all seriousness, I have managed to get good at every LR question except for this one. I am hovering at 70%. I believe my problem is that I have memorized the list of recurring flaws, and after I read the stimulus, if I do not immediately recognize the flaw, my prephrase is screwed. Any advise on getting my flaw questions close to 85-90% would be greatly appreciated.

Hey I was wondering if I could get some help making the logic game videos play. When I try to open them it says it can't play them.