Hey!

I'm looking for a study buddy who would like to take two practice tests a week. I was thinking Mondays and Thursdays around 5:30/6PM.

I work full- time and need to hold myself accountable. Let me know if you're interested.

A lot of people seem to suggest this, but JY doesn't during the question review videos. Do you feel it's worth it or is it a major time suck?

I noticed a common challenge for me is Keeping Track of UnUsed Game Pieces when I'm doing specific game setups.

IE I've filled in the pieces based on the question - then I may have a few left over but it can be time consuming checking and crossing out the ones I used to find the ones I didn't for each set up...

Does anyone have tips for this? Is it just taking the time to write out all pieces and cross out the used ones in order to save time and mistakes in the long run?

Is there anything more effective?

OKAY EMERGENCY:

I started studying for the LSAT in July 2014 and I took a prep course with Testmasters. I am happy with the company I went but they had their weaknesses and strength like any other company. I was supposed to take the test September 2014 but I postponed it to December because I did not feel like 2 month prep was enough. Realistically , I am aiming for high 160s. I never took a practice test besides my cold diagnosis (133) because I wanted to learn everything first. I literally studied from 10AM to 4AM everyday until school started and some drama happened with my courses that I had to end up taking 20 units, which took a whole junk of my time away from LSAT even though I tried very hard to study for it at least three times a week for four hours. Time flew and November month came, I still had not taken a disagnosis. So, I woke up at 8am and took my first diagnosis. I HATE IT...TIMING KILLED EVERYTHING. I got the 13 logical reasoning questions I answered right (maybe missed 1 or 2 for careless mistake) and logic game? I could only manage to finish 1 even though I answered it all right. I got a 125 as my score which is lower than my cold diagnosis. I read LSAT blogs and people were saying your second diagnosis is typically going to be less than your cold one so I calmed down - Testmasters also said the same thing when I was enrolled in their course. So the third time I attempted to take it and once again I hated it....I know exactly how to find the right answer in no more than 1 minute but I AM A SLOW READER I LITERALLY have to go back to a sentence and read it at least twice to understand exactly what's going on....this is where my problem comes into play.....timing!!!! I can master the logical games (-0) reading comp (-3 max), logical reasoning (-8 max) but that's if I had all the time in the world to finish the test...or at least 1 hour for each section. I have taken only 4 diagnosis but graded 3 only because every time I do I get frustrated....I am in the high 140s right now...last time was 149. I just end up guessing on majority of the ones that I don't get to answer that's why it's so low. People and Testmaster instructor keep telling me to do practice tests...but I don't see how that's helping me with timing at all.... I am registered to take December 2014 lsat....should I postpone to February even though some law schools don't accept February score? I have to applying for fall 2015...

Should I read all the answer choices on lsat? My main problem is timing and I feel like reading the other answer choices when I already have one in mind Is time consuming. I took prep course with Testmasters, they said I should read everything

I was wondering what's the purpose in memorizing all 9 valid argument form and all 7 invalid argument forms? Is it mainly for Parallel and Parallel Flaw question types?

Hey, everyone!

I've been averaging a 155/156 on my most recent LSAT PTs and I was wondering if there was anything I could do to bump it up to a 160 before the Dec. LSAT. I know 4-5 points is a lot to jump in 2 weeks, but I'm willing to to work hard, and no life it to reach a consistent 159/160. Anyway, if you have any suggestions let me know!

Why does this question trip me up?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-14/

I go so caught up in the relatively or seemingly complex diagramming that I overlooked the question stem I read initially (violates) and screwed it up.

I find myself doing that once in a while - I read the Q Stem first, then go to the stimulus, get caught up in that, then screw it up because I lose sight of the the Question Stem....

Is it just a matter of quickly re-reading the stem - since I have to focus on applying info from the Stimulus it anyway?

BTW - what's the question type for this Question "violates the rule..."

Thanks in advance!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-11/

This is a challenging question - largely because it hinges on 1 word - permanent.

It's a weaken question, but the word permanent is crucial to it.

If I didn't see that word, I dunno what would happen...

I feel like this may be a pattern for challenging LR - where it comes down to a subtle distinction based on one word....

Any thoughts on how to be vigilant about it?

Perhaps... if you're having trouble with a question, double check for hinge words?

Hello all!

I plan on purchasing the 7Sage course soon and am planning out my schedule until Feb. I have been previously studying for the Dec and postponed due to not feeling ready yet. I'm currently in a Blueprint class set to end in 2 weeks. My first cold diagnostic back in July was a 136...lol. My diagnostic for the BP class on Sept 28 was a 151and I most recently just hit 163 on a PT last week. BP has definitely helped me reach 160 but I feel it does not really cater to the needs of a 170+ scorer.

I plan to complete the 7Sage Curriculum during December and complement with the LR/LG Cambridge Packets for drilling. I'll save the LR/LG "Most Difficult" Packets for January and start section drilling/PT's as well in January. I will drill the RC packets in no particular order, but from Dec-Jan. Can I get some opinions about this brief study plan?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-18/

I had a lot of trouble with this question picking between A/C (reasons outlined below) and am hoping someone could point out the error in my logic.

The stimulus states activities that pose a risk are acceptable if and only if they satisfy any of two conditions

1) the net benefit outweigh the risk

2) the person bearing the risk does so voluntarily

Starting with the answer I chose first

(C) A motorcyclist rides without a helmet and the RISK is acceptable because he's doing so voluntarily. At first glance this seemed to definitely fit as an application of the principle stated in the stimulus. The motorcyclist is choosing to ride without a helmet. However, the answer states the risk is acceptable while the principle is talking about whether the activity that poses this risk is acceptable. One might argue that an acceptable activity necessarily implies the risk is acceptable. However, here all we're told is the necessary condition is satisfied and we can't conclude anything about the sufficient condition.

Therefore, I changed my answer to (A) though I had a lot of reservations:

(A) a salesperson voluntarily and therefore this activity is acceptable. This didn't seem to fit the stimulus too well. How do we know the risk the salesperson, by not replacing his old car with a new one with new safety features, is imposing a risk on his life? I felt (C) was blatantly wrong (stating that the risk is acceptable rather than the activity) while (A) seemed a little less wrong since it didn't seem too large a leap of faith to assume his old car may pose a risk on his life. After all, isn't driving always posing a risk on your life?

Between these two, I ended up picking (A) which happened to be the wrong answer of the two. Could anyone point out what I'm missing here?

Thanks in advance,

Peter

What question types and exams should I ignore?

I'm getting worried about my Logical Reasoning performance since I've discovered a negative trend in my preptests. I tend to do well in the beginning of a section and then do much worse later on in a section. For example, in preptest 63 section 3, I got one wrong in the first 16 questions and then from questions 17-26 I got 6 wrong. A similar phenomenon happened in the other LR section on that test and has happened on other tests as well. I'm wondering if the questions tend to get more difficult as the sections continue or if something else is happening. I also do have diagnosed attention problems and am worried that my attention is slipping as I get further along in the section. Has anyone else experienced this? And does anyone have any advice?

Hello guys,

I am currently 3 weeks away from the LSAT and started self-studying in September. I decided to self-study due to me not having to the financial means to afford a tutor or enroll into a course. I am currently using the PowerScore Bible games for studying. My biggest downfall is second guessing myself and not fully grasping the concept of logical reasoning as it pertains to quickly identifying how to select as answer choice that caters to the particular question type. Do you guys know of any strategies I can use to improve my Logical Reasoning Section of the LSAT. When I took a diagnostic for the first time, I score an 135. When I took one 4 weeks later, I scored an 151. However, that declined once I took one yesterday in which I scored an 131. I am not sure what I am doing wrong. Please guys could you provide me with some feedback and strategies. Thanks in advance!

Hi Guys,

Sorry if this has already been asked and answered! I can't find the answer. I know for logical reasoning questions that you should read all answers to make sure you got the right one, but let's say you have your logic game board and you can see the answer is B, should you just circle it and move on? It would really cut my time down. On the other hand, I know sometimes it could be a confidence error. Some advice would be great.

Thank you!

Hi guys, any LSAT takers in Orange County?

I've noticed for a while now that just about every LG question is stealthfully focused on testing to see if you know a rule or made an inference (without directly saying, and in turn, revealing the inference).

What are your thoughts --Is it worth it to look at a question and try predict/anticipate what rule or inference the question is trying to test?

Thoughts? Does any strategy out there suggest this or do any of you use this on your own?

(FYI - I already spend time making inferences before attacking questions).

Hi All

I thoughtlessly assumed all info in stimuli were relevant or open to use...I noticed a pattern from PT 56 where there's distracting info that can keep a testtaker from finding the critical piece of info that answers the question...

Has anyone else noticed this? Do you regularly look out for it? Any tips?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-2-question-22/

Can someone clarify this for me?

It makes sense now, but I wonder if I'd be able to figure it out if I hadn't seen it before...

How would you approach a question like this that avoids the distractions in the stimulus but helps you get the answer?

I haven't completed finished all the questions in the lesson plan, but I've done enough to figure out that I'm not getting it yet. I keep picking the SA choice, without fail. I do the negation "/NA -> /VA" and it works, obviously. So I circle it and move on. So i've got two problems here.

On NA questions, should I recognize that I need to read all the answer choices on a NA question?

Is there a better way to read through them for time sake?

Is their specific language that I should be looking for in the NA question?

I noticed the SA answer choices for NA questions, that they generally have an All, Every or similar modifier. Should I immediately throw a mental flag when I see these modifiers?

I'm consistently hitting 166-169, and I can't seem to get past that barrier. What I get wrong seems to be really random, for example, in some of my RC sections I get -2 or - 3, but on others I get -7. For my LG I consistently get -3 and for LR I keep getting -3 or -4 with the occasional drop to -7. However, it seems that whenever I experience a huge drop in one section, I make up for it in another (I got -7 on both my LR component today and ended up with -2 on RC and -0 on LG). Is there anything I can do to bring up the consistency on my sections and break that 170 barrier?

Hi All -

Is there any book/course with a really solid strategy for question types on Reading Comp?

Not just main point and inference questions, but more complex ones like Analogy and Prove/Disprove.

As an SAT tutor, I emphasize these question types and specific strategies for them to my students. It makes a BIG difference. But there seems to be limited info on them in other courses (ie power score's RC bible focuses on mp and inference but there's little on the more advanced types)....

I tried using what I teach my SAT students but it just doesn't translate as well to the complexities of the LSAT RC material.

So, Anyone know of where I can a really solid strategy for advanced question types on Reading Comp?

Main Conclusion question.

Chose A, however the OA is B. Confused. Here is my reasoning...

A. Labeled this as the main conclusion. It is verbatim the opening sentence in the passage.

B. Labeled this as a premise. I read like it supported the first sentence and is introduced by the phrase "The reason for this is". To me this always signals a premise

C. Another premise and not the main conclusion

D. Labeled this as the Major Premise/Intermediate conclusion. Starts with the word "Thus" and is the last sentence of the passage (characteristic trap on the LSAT). Also this sentence I thought supported the main conclusion.

E. A twist on a stated premise that brings in outside information.

I am confused and need help deciphering between A and B. Thanks.

It's mentioned in the video that many people missunderstand rule number 3 (I was one of them), but upon reading over it like 5 times it seems to me like it actually doesn't make sense. "Each crew member does at least at least one task during the installation, but no more than one task a day", according to the explanation it means not all 7 need to be chosen but the people chosen must do a one task minimum, however, if someone is chosen then obviously they do a task!( otherwise what els would "chosen" mean?) So how could the "Each crew member does at least one task" be saying: of the members you chose they will at least be doing one??

Hey All!

I'm sitting the December 7th LSAT after a brutal attempt on October 5th (I wrote it in Tokyo, hence the weird date). After a nightmarish 24 hours leading up to the exam (logistical issues, panic attacks, sleeping pills), I wrote the exam in a daze and scored 152. I was averaging 162 on my practice tests so I was pretty devastated.

Anyhow, regardless of the aforementioned horrors, I realize there are holes in my prep, so I decided to sign up for 7sage. I've been studying regularly and diligently since May using a combination of Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer, many real LSAT exams/practice sets as well as other free resources available online including JY's logic games video explanations - which I really loved. I completed the free trail in May, and am kicking myself for not signing up in the first place. But, here I am now, and I'm hoping that the right approach will help me consolidate my knowledge and solidify my skills. After just a few of JY's lessons and drills, I can confidently say: this shit's AWESOME!

I think I have a pretty good fundamental understanding, but timing is my biggest enemy in all 3 sections (duh) and especially in LG and RC. Only having about a month left to prepare, I'm not sure it's possible - nor advisable - to try to work through ALL of the material in the starter course, so I'm hoping for advice on how to structure a study schedule that would be most effective for my situation.

I understand that this is highly subjective depending on numerous factors, but any help determining a course of action would be greatly appreciated.

Domo arrigato!