Hey everyone!

I wanted to hear your advice regarding study plans for the last few days. Honestly, I feel I am a little burned out. I've been studying like crazy for the past 6 months (while working full time). I hit rock bottom about three weeks ago when I went from scoring 164 to 155 in a span of 1 week, and just got like crazy depressed. I've been working on chilling and slowing the pace lately, so that I don't feel burned out by the time of the test, and it has worked so far, I'm scoring once again around the161-163 range (my goal is a 165).

Now, what do you think about not blind reviewing as thoroughly in the next weeks? I feel I am no really going to grasp new concepts in such a short time. So I wanted to take as many PTs as I can instead, to get my mindset ready for the test. My schedule would look something like this: Wednesday full PT77; Friday half PT78; Saturday full PT82; Sunday Drilling LGs; Monday half PT 79 and Wednesday full PT 81. Thursday and Friday I would just chill.

This does not mean I wouldn't BR, but I would definitely do it more selectively. For instance, I'm stuck at -6/-7 on RC since I first started studying, so I wouldn't dedicate that much time to that section. As for LR, I would definitely not spend 20 to 25 minutes thinking about a tough question.

Do you think this is a good approach? If not, what do you recommend?

Thanks in advance!

The flaw is very apparent, however the wording in this confused me. Whats the best way to parse out the answer choices under timed conditions?

Hi, I'm currently studying for the December LSAT (20-25 hours a week + a full course load + clubs and a sport). I've changed my studying habits from the first time around I was studying. I began in early May with the expectations of taking the September test. I only depended on the PowerScore Bibles (all 3) and I purchased two PrepTest books. I honestly didn't utilize the best techniques at first and in a strange way, luck was on my side. I got stuck in Irma back home and LSAC moved my test for free to any date. I wanted to take it in December because I wanted to get it over with and I didn't want to keep prolonging it. Anyways, with the whole stress of balancing everything and keeping up with assignments, exams, and papers. Sometimes I'm overwhelmed especially at this point towards the end of the term. I've changed my studying to taking 1-2 PrepTests a week under timed conditions at the library on the silent floor. I'm seeing gradual improvements with fluctuations. I always return to the questions I got wrong and the ones I got correct. For the ones I get wrong, I identify the type of question and I also make note of questions that I narrow the two possible answers and answers that I second guess and either select the wrong answer or I just change the answer completely.

I'm noticing this is my main problem. If I didn't second guess myself, I would score 165+. I'd just like to know if anyone else encounters this and what is the best way to overcome this? I also had this same issue with the SAT but that was so long ago I honestly forgot what it felt like. Timing is really not my problem at this point, it's more an issue of accuracy and self-trust. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Hi guys,

So with about 9 days to go until the Dec 2nd Lsat, definitely looking for some advice regarding how to approach this last stretch. Context: I did a PT on Tuesday and finished reviewing today. The plan as of now is to do PT's tomorrow, Saturday, Monday & Wednesday. Then use Thursday as a logic game drill day to get as much final practice on games as I can. Finishing off with Friday maybe doing a few timed LR, LG or RC problems just to maintain the mindset. My concern is what if I'm not using my time wisely? or possibly burning out before the test. The PT's I have set aside to take are 78, 79, 80 & 82. Don't know if I should change up the PT schedule, maybe drop 1 or drop 2? Use them as timed sections instead. Any advice on structuring the study plan for the final stretch, advice regarding the sections or advice on what I can do to make sure I use these last 9 days as effectively as possible to maximize my score, would be much appreciated. Feel free to lay out a study plan you think will work best. Drills, timed sections, pt's etc.

Stats

Avg PT Score: 165

PT's Since Mid-Sept: 15

Avg per Section: LR - 45 RC - 19/20 LG -16/17 (although whenever I hit 165, LR is 46/47 or RC is 22 etc)

I was BR-ing but it took way too much time while working full-time, so I started just reviewing normally and trying to see why the answers were wrong and why they were right. Don't see how I'd be able to BR the legit way if I do a PT every other day as intended in my study plan.

RC, honestly is my most understudied section. My approach is really just reading each para and answering the relevant questions and continuing through the passage this way and answer any remaining questions, if any. I've tried other methods such as breaking down the passaging, writing notes, reading the whole passage then going to questions and vice versa. The current approach has had a more consistent result so I've been going with that. I doubt changing the approach and trying to learn a new one would be wise at this point. Any tips/advice would be great though. I am always rushing one passage (comparative which I save for last) in the 5min warning if I get to it, If I don't I guess and somehow score the same. RC errors are spread out across the passages, 1-2 per usually when I do get to all of them.

The LG scores are mainly due to timing issues, I almost always only get to 3 games. I rarely get time to get to the fourth game. I want to focus on getting as much LG practice as it's the section where typically most people can make gains.

Can't wait until I never have to look at or solve another logic game, RC or a LR set in a timed setting ever again. :)

With only days before the December test... I am struggling to improve RC.

I have tried every possible strategy to improve my timing on this section and it ranges from -11 to -15 and sometimes -9.

What can I do at this point to increase my RC score? The struggle is real guys... I would like to score min. 18 on this section by test day.

So I 100% understand why A is the correct answer. I don't need an explanation on that.

I need an explanation on how answer choice C, when negated, does not destroy our argument.

P1: Government polices have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel.

P2: Result of increased demand the prices of gas have risen.

C: There is not doubt that the government is responsible for the increased cost of gasoline.

Answer choice C: Consumer demand cannot increase without causing gasoline prices to increase.

Negated: Consumer demand CAN increase without causing gasoline prices to increase.

Okay, so if we place the negated version of AC C into the argument doesn't it fall apart?

If consumer demand can increase without causing gas prices to increase. Then the government policy that increased the consumer demand is not necessarily responsible for the increased cost of gasoline. So his conclusion that there "is no doubt" is completely screwed right?

What am I missing, I feel like it should be obvious but it is not.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-22/

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?