I heard JY mention that there are 8 types of game boards. Is there a place where that is described in a consolidated manner in the syllabus?

Hi all,

I find myself on these forums everyday because everyone is so helpful :). I've recently experienced a 7 point jump from my diagnostic! Which I am so keenly happy about. Mainly, this is because I'm doing well in RC and LG (avg -5 and -2 respectively).

But where I'm really struggling with is LR! When I first started (before learning methods and question types), I would get 5-8 wrong. Now I consistently get 10-11 wrong! It's really disheartening. I've read the Powerscore LRB once through, and I'm thinking about going over it again. Does anyone have some good advice on how to improve LR? Anything helps, considering I'm getting 56% on each section! Alot of people mention drilling too. Any advice on how to drill well?

I should also mention I can never finish a full section in 35 minutes. The highest I go is question 23, and even that is a struggle. The first 10 questions, I can normally complete within 10 minutes. But after that, it slows down alot. By the time I'm at question 15, 20 minutes have passed.

I have become used to minimal to zero diagramming in LR. I can usually keep track of the argument premises and conditional reasoning in my head (I always bracket the conclusions and circles "some" "most" "all" etc). However, since I have been getting the LR questions with long conditional chains either incorrect or I guess correctly, I have been starting to diagram. Now my brain feels like a bunch of tennis shoes in a washing machine whenever I see a conditional chain longer than 3 variables. My question is this: Do you feel continued practice without diagramming is more worthwhile than learning a new technique specific to long conditional chain questions? I know it's a bit of an ambiguous question, but I feel I'm at a crossroad and want to make the best use of my studies/practice.

Thoughts?

Hi everyone,

Can someone please explain why AC E is wrong? I understand why D is the correct AC but I am having trouble eliminating E, more importantly I am having trouble understanding what E is saying in the first place. Thank you!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-4-question-20/

Hi all--

I took the June LSAT and for the 6 practice tests leading up to it I started scoring between 0-2 wrong on every game section, almost regardless of difficulty. I only got 1 wrong on the games section of the actual test.

I need to retake the test in September. This 0-2 streak endured for the first 6-8 prep tests, but about a week ago my games scores started slipping significantlyI can't seem to shake the issues I seem to have picked up with games and it's pretty significantly affecting my ability to score above a 166. I think I've chosen Some hard tests to practice with (in order to make sure my games skills can endure through hard games) but today I took a preptest with a games section that wasn't particularly difficult on its face, and I still got 4 wrong.

I've tried slowing down, I'm watching all of 7Sage explanations of anything I miss (and before I do, I go back and try to complete the game myself without time constraints or help). Do you have any advice?

The tests I've done recently are:

52 (4 wrong on games)

62 (5 wrong on games)

71 (9 wrong on games)

70 (5 wrong on games)

23 (7 wrong on games)

64 (3 wrong on games)

I have been studying for the LSAT and I was doing great on the logic games however I am still practicing and have not taken timed exams of the entire PT. I would like to know your opinions on repeating PTs not necessarily limited to logic games but rather the other sections as well.

(P1) Get your nutrients from natural foods and not supplements.

(P2) Carrots give you beta carotene but it can only be transformed into Vitamin A if you eat them with some fat.

(P3) Fat in one's diet is generally unhealthy.

(C) Eat carrots wth some fat, but not too much fat because that is generally unhealthy.

It seems that the statement that "fat in one's diet is generally unhealthy" is mentioned as the reason to moderate the dietary practice of eating carrots wits some fat. But the AC says it is mentioned as a reason for adopting a dietary practice. Am I missing something?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-2-question-19/

Can someone expand and maybe give an example of the AC "offering an alternate explanation of the correlation cited"

I'm planning on taking the test in September. I already did all the core curriculum. I have also gone back and review sections where I need help. But, I am not improving very much. I am scoring147-152 on timed PT. During blind review 160, which is around the score I want. During my reviews things make sense to me, but once I am taking a PT test, I feel everything I know goes out the window. I know I don't know everything, but most of the time I just make stupid mistakes. So, does anybody have any tips as of how I can study in a way I can see improvement. I feel what I have being doing in the past its just not helping, since my score is not improving!!!

Hi,

I've found a post that lists PT sections with live commentary videos but I am looking for real time videos where 7sage students (Leia, Natalie, etc) solve logic games.

Does anyone have a list for such videos? Thanks!

@"Dillon A. Wright" Also, I think the live commentary videos for 59.1.Game 4 are not working; the first video shows the message "video file not found" and the 2nd one stops in the middle of the video (@05:41)

Does anyone have a list of the hardest and most unique games that they have encountered?

I have recently spent a ton of time perfecting flaw questions and I have improved immensely on them. For most questions, I can adequately predict, articulate, and attract out the flaw into an AC. For some odd reason though, all of this work on flaw questions has drastically made my NA accuracy and also my understanding of them, decease. This is a bit alarming, as I have done a tremendous amount of them already.

At the moment, I just feel lost when I am answering a NA question type. I went back through the CC and refreshed my knowledge on blocking and bridging types. But even after this, I almost never can guess the nessesary assumption, regardless of the difficulty.

I can very much see how NA and flaw are related. Because of this, I was wondering if anyone who does well on NAs treats them like a flaw question when it comes to identifying the gap. But then the difference between the two would happen in the answer choices. I.E.- flaw (describe the flaw) and NA (go a bit more concrete and bridge the flaw into the argument or block the cantropositive of it).

I made this post specifically because, although NA questions aren't necessarily new to me, I feel as if there is a tiny wall that is preventing me from this "ah ha" moment and I just don't see it yet.

Any advice on how to view a NA question type would be great. Thanks!

Hey everyone,

So I'm in the final stretch of studying for my second LSAT in September. I've been doing really well, but want to polish my miscellaneous games skills over the next 3.5/4 weeks. I know I can get access to all these games by buying the Ultimate package, but I'm way too late in my preparation to invest in that, especially considering I've completed and reviewed the core curriculum months ago. What's the next best option for getting access to these games? Because the majority of difficult miscellaneous games are from early tests, the best I can seem to find is to buy the first volume of preptests on amazon, which comes with PTs 7, 9-16, and 18.

Any other suggestions? Also good luck to those in the final stretch, we're almost there!

Thanks!

This may just be me, so take it for what it is worth, but I think changing the LG foolproof bundle to include all LG games from 60s and 70s would be perhaps more useful that games from 20s and 30s. I mean they are ALL good practice, but I think the 60s and 70s (and 80s) games are more reflective of current games and are the best ones to foolproof. The "minus or add a rule" that was common on earlier games doesn't ever show up in the 60s and after. The substitution question (which has been a bitch for me to get the hang of) shows up on nearly every test from the 60s on and will likely show up on the next test. I wish I'd spent my foolproofing time on the substitution questions rather than the minus or add rule, the latter which will probably be irrelevant on the next test.

Just saying for me I think foolproofing later games is potentially more valuable (particularly 60s onward). I think there are some great weird games in the early tests worth doing, but also some that seem pretty unrepresentative of current tests. So I think doing early games is a great idea, but I think focusing foolproofing on later games is smarter.

Any thoughts?

I have been studying for the LSAT for less than one year and would like to further improve on LR. I have read that many people have learned to identify each question type and apply unique strategies for tackling that particular question type. Currently, I am not employing this method and I am unsure if I will see great results if I learned this technique. If necessary I have no issue putting the time and work in to learning this method, but I am unsure how helpful it will be. If you have used this method, has it had a positive impact for you? Do you believe that learning this method is necessary in order to perform well on LR?

Im talking about intensive review. How do you guys tear apart an RC passage?

When Foolproofing LG after the Core Curriculum, do you start at PT1 and work your way up -- or would it be better to Foolproof the Games that JY teaches in the CC (sequencing, then In-Out, then Grouping, etc.), assuming you didn't do that while going through the CC?

Hey guys,

i'm using the cambridge drills to practice SA questions, I'm wondering if someone has access to them and could help me out? It's question 15 and question 16. They are from prep test 2 S2 Q17, and PT 3 S2 Q12.

Cannot for the life of me understand what I did wrong. Not sure what the rules are with writing out problems that aren't posted in 7sage, but if someone has these drills, could you DM me? (or post the explanation here, if that's allowed)?

Thanks!

I'm not using the modern tests yet but I just encountered my first Eval question on PT 36. Do these QTs appear more or less often on modern tests? They don't seem to be covered in the cc.

Hi All,

Does anyone have suggestions for external sources for logic puzzles? I've been noticing on the newer tests that the unfamiliar games are seriously tripping me up.

I usually am paralyzed by them during the test; however, immediately after I finish the test, I will take a fresh look at it and be able to solve it with little, if any, issue. I know a lot of this is psychological, so I want to get as familiar as possible with new logic games and become comfortable with thinking on the spot. Every logic book I looked at does not even sort of reflect the type of scenarios I see on the LSAT. The puzzles don't have to simulate the LSAT questions exactly, but I would like become familiar with unusual puzzles that are at least somewhat relevant to the newer games. My research has led me to the conclusion that there are not many resources out there for this.

Has anyone come across anything that might be helpful OR does anyone have any other suggestions for fixing my logic game paralysis problem?

Thanks!

I've tried a whole range of RC strats, from intense annotating to virtually none at all. RC score just hasn't seen any consistent improvement. Score fluctuates between -3 to -9. I also notice that I spend way too much time on the first passages, not because they're more difficult, but because I try to maximize the # of questions I get on easier passages. I'm also poop soup at inference questions. For testers PTing with PT70+, what RC strats have been most effective for you?

Rest of breakdown is:

1-3 per LR,

0-1 LG,

3-9 RC

It's the problem about sales representatives. I've read several explanations about this one on the Manhattan/PowerScore boards and sort of understand them, but am still really struggling because I just don't get how B is the correct answer. I can see how the other four might be wrong, but I'd at least like to know why this one is RIGHT as opposed to the other four being wrong.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-1-question-22/

Do you answer every question by the 25 minute mark? Or do you skip some?

How do you pick which questions to re-do in your extra time (obviously if you haven't skipped any questions)? How do you know which ones you made mistakes in? Do you gauge importance based on your confidence level?

I need some clarification on this because I'm applying demorgan's law and it's not making sense to me how this works.

So, the final rule in the game states: "If it is not the case that the park contains both laurels and oaks, then it contains firs and spruces"

I translated this as: /(L and O) --> F and S

The contrapositive I got was, /F or /S --> L or O

But, apparently the correct understanding of the contrapositive is /F or /S --> L AND O. Can someone explain where I'm making an error, because I thought flipping and negating "and" means it becomes an OR, not remain in its "and" form.