Hi! I took the June 2013 LSAT and got a decent score but I know I can do better. I did the Kaplan online class, which didn't really help me all that much. I was wondering if this is different enough from Kaplan to help raise my score? I don't live close to any in-class options so I can only do online anyways. Any suggestions on other study material would be great! thanks!

I really appreciate the LG videos. They have been very helpful. Thank you! I am feeling very confident about setting up a game and making inferences. My issue right now is that it takes me FOREVER to go through the questions, especially the first question on each game, those where there is tons of language. The dinosaur game comes to mind (Test 57,game 3). I was able to set it up correctly & got all questions right but it was "painful" to go through each question and answer which contained so much convoluted language. I would like to know if you have tips, general information, or tutorials on how to approach LG questions/ question types with the goal of moving through them quickly without losing accuracy?

Many thanks in advance!

Hello,

So I just recently (i.e. last night) registered officially with 7sage. I had been working with the Powerscore Logic Games bible, got uberly confused with some games, and turned to some of the 7sage videos online. Much easier to digest.

I wrote the June LSAT last year after just studing for a month and a half (some stuff came up) and managed to score in the 150s. I've been browsing through these blogs, and it seems like everyone's been on 7sage since April. I'm beginning to freak out. Is it too late to be studying for the October, wanting to own the LSAT?

Anila

I took a PT last Saturday and based from the question stem analysis of the test grader (extremely helpful guys), flaw questions gave me the most trouble. What is the best way to approach them?

when making multiple hypotheticals like he often does in the videos, when I am using pencil and paper do I make these two "Main" diagrams with the 2 hypothetical situations (IE: P must go in either spot 3 or spot 1), then erase when I am done with a certain hypo for a question? I hope I am clear, I think i worded this terribly

Hey guys, I am posting this to share my experience on answer choice A.

After doing about 20 PTs or so, I have reached a level where I can sort of see what the LSAT writers are intending to do with our minds.

I must say that these guys truly are the masters of their domain.

They have all sorts of tricks up their sleeves, and they UNDERSTAND how our fragile minds work.

Specifically, I have had this weird feeling that they not only employ mind tricks with us with answer choice E, but also with A.

On early parts of LR sections, most answer choice As look very attractive, IF you do not have a full grasp of the stimulus.

The writers usually give you some useless information that disguises the true core of the argument and include specific words from that part of the stimulus in the answer choice.

On the other hand, for some really crazy convoluted questions, there is a surprisingly high frequency of A being the right answer.

I think the psychology behind this is that when people face a really confusing stimulus, most of them panic and try to rely on POE without really knowing what they are looking for.

But the problem with POE without a good understanding of the stimulus is that the writer can throw in even more confusing answer choices and virtually pull you apart in all directions, ultimately leaving you more confused, and precious time ticking away.

So my takeaway from this is to be suspicious of As for easier questions as they are likely to be wrong, and for the really hard ones later on, give more attention to A being a contender.

By the way, my experience is definitely not conclusive.

Try it out for yourselves :)

First of all, I'd like to apologize if this isn't the correct place to ask this, but in the lesson J.Y. said to ask someone who knows more than you, or your instructor so here I am.

I did the first LR section (section 1) of PT 7.

Actual timed go: 14/25

Blind Review: 20/25 (very happy! )

However, I got 5 where I spent a ton of time trying to figure it out, and got the wrong answer still. Some were I picked the wrong answer initially, and also picked a wrong answer to switch to.

They are: 3, 4 , 7 , 10 , 23.

Would be extremely happy if someone could help me through these questions - and how you figured them out.

Thanks everyone in advance!

Take care. KY

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum.

So I recently watched the "Foolproof Method" video for LGs and it seemed to me, that the 10 copies were supposed to be done back to back until memory kicked in for all inferences? I'm concerned with memorizing the answers and subconsciously not utilizing any inferences. In that case, should I, perhaps, wait 24 hours+ in between repeating the same Logic Game?

Thanks for the input, guys.

Hey guys, I was going over my old PT's and I still cannot get a full understanding of this question.

The stim basically says:

"if violation of explicit rules are routinely left unpunished, chaos results. Therefore, we ought never to allow any explicit rules to go unpunished."

Well, this is a typical

A->B

/B

-----

/A argument structure.

I can see that the author assumes that we do not want chaos, but I don't think LSAC is that crazy to think that it is a flaw.

The answer choice hints at us that the actual flaw of this stim is that there is a flawed jump from "routinely" to to "never," but I don't see how this works.

Any thoughts?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-22/

Help! I can't wrap my head around this one AT ALL. I'm not even sure what the conclusion is.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-24/

I have been doing a good amount of practicing with logic games this past week or so and I been noticing that grouping games with more than two groups have been giving me a lot of trouble. Is there any way to approach them without having to resort to creating a sub-diagram for each question?

For the logic games where the question asks you to replace a rule with another rule to maintain the same effect on the game...

I know that you can't replace it with a new rule that allows for a possibility that the old rules would not allow (wouldn't be the same effect). But, is it also true that you can't have a new rule that is a subset of the old rules? As in, the old rules allow for more possibilities than the new rule. That wouldn't be the same effect either, right? So you would have to find the same set of possibilities?

If that makes any sense..

When I am taking my practice tests I often come across questions (in LR sections, specifically) where I am certain that 3 of the answers are wrong, but am unable to clearly distinguish between the other two. For time's sake I usually put the answer that seems best and move on. Somehow, at a percentage that seems mathematically impossible for a 50/50 scenario, I miss almost every one of these questions. Is there any tricks, or specific things to look for in order determine the better of two decent answers?

Over the past year I know that some people have mentioned seeing grouping games with elements reused. I know this isn't a recent trend (many of the older games have multiple groups 3+ with each group getting at least one or up to 3 items).

However, the game type I am referring to is your standard in out game (2 groups only) but just because one element is in the "in" column, it doesn't necessarily mean it can't be in the "out" column. Nowhere in the scenario does it say that "each element will be used exactly once." Basically, the elements can be "reused." Also, the number of elements aren't limited to just 3, but range from 5-7.

Some ppl have told me that the test put a twist by splitting the elements into 2 subgroups (i.e., women vs. men)... and adding in a weird rule (i.e., chairperson in group 1 can't be in group 2)...

What is the best way to prepare for this type of game? I recall seeing this type of game just once (PT25-S3-G1), but its a very straight fwd grouping game with a twist in which there must be at least one member shared...

Wow, I did everything on this question and got sucked into answer choice E but had no idea to interpret the word "that" the way JY explained it. Are there others words that indicate "and" or sufficiency that are worth knowing?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-19/

Anybody knows any tricks or tips to ace the games section?

How I read the stimulus was: say we let Q be the statement "create virtuous people"

Glen: I believe Q is most important because P (an alternative) is not desirable

Sara: But Q is more dangerous than P

I can't seem to get past why answer choice C is wrong. Glen's closing sentence states he endorses law's primary role to create virtuous citizens implying there is negligible danger in making Q the most important. On the other hand Sara counters by saying this is more dangerous than being overprotective of individual rights, thereby implying she believes there is an inherent danger in the government deciding what constitutes virtuous behavior. Wouldn't this point be something they directly disagree about?

So E summarizes Glen's argument, but Sara simply disagrees by stating Q is more dangerous than an alternative and seems to imply Q may not be the most important. But I feel that the level of interpolation to go from Sara's argument (Q being more dangerous) to Sara believing Q is not the most important is the same as that for C.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-2-question-17/

An Eagle's Eye for Detail is needed for this one.

I understood the question.

Study people easily angered--> more likely to have permanent high blood pressure--> More likely to get Heart Disease

Conclusion: Heart Disease can result from psychological factors (Anger)

I see E and look at it, and think it says "Psychological factors" cause both anger and high blood pressure. I then, think to myself, well, that wouldn't weaken the argument because that'd essentially cement the conclusion that "Psychological factors" caused heart disease.

Then, I looked at E again, it said "PHYSiological" which are different from "PSYchological" factors.

To summarize, have an eagle's eye for detail.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-55-section-1-question-22/

Hi, general question about strategy here. I can manage to solve almost every game in practice, but my problem is doing it fast enough to complete an entire section.

I think I have the understanding down; I suspect the problem is being too thorough (ex.double checking each answer on a CBT question, drawing all the possibilities when I don't need to).

Does anybody have tips/habits on how to go faster?

Would it be possible to get some advice on this question? I'm lacking a way to do this problem methodically and quickly.

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

Not quite sure if this is the appropriate category to ask this question, but here goes...

I just finished the "Intro to Arguments" lesson and wanted more practice, so I returned to the June 2007 Practice Test. As I went through Section 2, I came a cross a few questions where I wasn't sure how to parse out the Premise (P), Conclusion (C), or Context. As you can probably tell, I'm new at this, so if any of you find it easy to explain one problem or another, any help offered will be much appreciated. :)

#5. --- (My problem = P? C? Is this an argument?)

#11. -- (My problem = is the first sentence "Context" or part of the "Argument (P)?")

#18. -- (My problem = what is P and C here?)

#20. -- (My problem = where does Context end? with "citywide opposition." or with "opposing the new water system,?")

#22. -- (My Problem = where does the C start? with "This has the effect..." or with "which in turn discourages...?")

#24. -- (My Problem = Is C missing?)

I tried to diagram the premise in this question and I get R-->BOC. I picked an Idea "not rational" and negated it and made it the sufficient. But this is quite different from what you give in the video explanation (not BOC -->R) . What am I doing wrong? HELP

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-3-question-26/

Hello, I was hoping you could help me out with this question. I originally had it down to C and E and chose E for the following reason:

Wouldn't answer choice E strengthen the conclusion in that companies that obtain would be more likely to perform the actions the economist says they will? More specifically, should E not be true, then would the argument possibly fall apart? The stimulus claims that companies CAN do this and that, which in turn benefits the consumer. Yes the companies can perform those actions but what if they don't? Doesn't answer choice E bridge the gap and make it more likely that companies will actually perform the actions they have the ability to do due to the monopoly?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-67-section-4-question-04/

On could be true questions, I can't find the exact question, but I remember it having an answer choice that provided a Must be true answer, and one that provided a could be true answer.

The must be true was incorrect, the could be true was correct.

However, other could be true questions I've experienced had a correct answer that was Must be true.

Would someone please help me on this?

The only way for me to make sense of it is to assume that when both a must be true and also a could be true answer are provided, select the could be true. In cases where there is only a must be true, select it.

I'm confused because I've read that could be true covers 1-100% which would include must be true answers, yet it was incorrect provided that a less certain answer choice was present.

Two weeks til the test.. anyone got a list of 5-10 Logic Games that are unordinary or very difficult? Want to make sure I don't get thrown off on Test day.

Thanks!