So I am registered for the August lsat and currently averaging 157/158. I was previously scoring 160 highest being 162 before coming across the more difficult lr on pt 80s and 90s.

I am wondering if I should push my test to sept or if you guys think it is possible to increase my score to 162 range by August test.

I take the exam on Sunday and im in need of some last minute tips. I dont plan on taking another PT but I will be drilling and taking individual sections over the next 3 days.

How do I tackle 4-5 level LR questions? On the PT I just took I got every question right except for the 6 questions that were 4-5 level difficulty. I thought I got them all right but I fell for every trap answer ):

Any suggestions on increasing RC score a couple points? Even if it is new strategies / how to eliminate wrong answer choices? Im awful at this section and have not been able to increase my score consistently. The best I've gone was -6 but just now I got -11.

Re-posting this in a more organized manner so everything is in one place. Here is some context.

Last attempt for this cycle.

150 -> 155 -> 159.

I need a 161 at least to be at the median for my dream school. 2 more points.

Of course most of us feel less pressure / whole different dynamic practice test vs. real thing, but I was scoring 163 - 167 for the last 10 tests I took prior to the October LSAT. Not sure if my brain freezes or what. My average was 164 so I was expecting a 160 at least.

Please help, how can I get these two extra points? What would you do in my shoes?I guess Im asking if i retake all the ones i took and start from scratch 7sage? or focus more on review? obviously with the performance anxiety of it being real doesnt help me but instead is a deterrent, i need this to feel as "fake" and relaxed and possible. what do i do study method wise? Im willing to put in the work next month but dont know what to do study method wise.

Any help or insight would be much appreciated. thank you in advance

This is for JY, if we have another answer choice ‘an activity that is conducive to healthy nation ought to be protected and encouraged by nation’ then, A, also this answer choice can be a right answer or just we are try to pick the bridge between main premise to conclusion. Thanks, lee

Admin note: edited title and added link

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-4-question-01/

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone knew more the less the frequency of Hybrid Games in the Logic Games section of the LSAT??

So out of 4 Games, how many are likely to be Hybrid games? All of them, half of them, maybe one?

As I was practicing the PTs offered here in 7sage, I noticed that pretty much every single Logic Game in the more current exams are a Hybrid of sequencing, matching, and grouping and all of them were quite elaborate. None of them were exclusively sequencing, matching, or grouping. Is this how the LSAT will be? All Hybrid? If so it's fine I just would like to know if anyone has any insight or previous experience.

Hi everyone! I am trying to do a big u-haul of how I approach LR questions. I am trying to have a heightened focus on accuracy and process over speed and results. I'd really, REALLY, appreciate it if someone could give me feedback on how I analyzed/broke down this question and the answer choices (I got it wrong the first time). Thanks a bunch!

Conclusion: Herniated disks and bulging disks could not be the cause of serious back pain for back pain sufferers.

Why?

P: Half of group 1 had these herniate disks and bulging disks, yet they did not experience back pain.

The argument fails to consider something.

Flaws I can see:

These are two groups of people, how can we conclude something based off of two groups with distinct differences (back pain sufferers vs non back pain sufferers)?

Perhaps there are other key differences that cause the herniated disks or bulging disks to cause back pain for actual back pain sufferers.

Answer Choices: The doctor's argument fails to consider the possibility that...

A) This has it really wrong. To make it work, I needs to say the following:

A factor that is in the presence of a certain effect (HD or BG and no pain) may nonetheless be sufficient for a different effect (HD or BG may be enough to produce serious back pain).

This is not what the answer choice says, though. Also, how do we know that HD and BD do not NEED to be present in the circumstance where back pain is present?

B ) Yes, though worded in a way I did not expect, perhaps a third factor and herniated disks and bulging disks all cause serious back pain. This matches the flaw #2 I have above.

C) . This AC has the argument flipped and is assuming the error in the argument- that is the fact that perhaps the herniated disks are present and contribute causally to back pain.

D) This is not the flaw. So what if herniated disks might not occur in half the entire population? The flaw is that they are erroneously concluding something about two different sets of people (back pain vs non back pain and what causally contributes to both).

E- The error is not in the comparative likelihood of herniated or bulged disks' presence when there is pain vs when there is no pain. The flaw is that nevertheless, they are assuming that even if (imo) there are herniated disks present when pain is present, the pain is not caused by the herniated disks. Perhaps herniated or bulging disks and a third factor all together cause back pain.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-19/

Because of all of the problems with the remote August LSAT, should I consider switching to in-person for the September exam? Has LSAC committed to solving the issues that came up? I would just switch to in-person, but I'm worried a change in setting will have a significant impact on my score. I've been taking my practice exams in relatively the exact setting I will take my real exam in, and I was really counting on that helping out with my "test day penalty". What is everyone else doing?

Could anyone explain why the answer for this question is A instead of E? Should we gave gleaned from the stimulus that the fungi turned the logs to dead and decaying rather than them already being in that state beforehand?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Are there any 7Sage, Reddit or other discussions/tutorials/lessons about translating English to Lawgic?

The Lawgic lessons were so easy for me to grasp. Super easy. Then I watch some LR videos where YC transfers English to Lawgic and it doesn’t click what so ever. On super simple LR questions in the CC I would find the correct answer by simply thinking about the words and what I need to do. I then try to transfer it into Lawgic and my markings are not similar to YC’s. When YC chains multiple things it doesn’t click why a sufficient on one would be the necessary on another.

I’ve noticed many comments in the CC of people also having hard time with common threads of “when do I use Lawgic?” As well as plenty of people that totally dismiss Lawgic except in the hardest of LR questions so it seems I am not alone.

When do you use Lawgic in LR?

Do you consistently transfer English to Lawgic when you do?

Are there any resources you recommend?

Or is this simply experience with trial and error?

I can see a significant benefit by translating English to Lawgic but only if it is consistently accurate.

Hi guys so I review my logic games with the 7 sage videos on Youtube, but something I found I have difficulty with is determining or knowing when to use sub game boards. I have found that sometimes I have made them and they dnt require which confuses me. I try to think that of there is a variable that is limited to 2 or 3 positions to create sub game boards, but this has backfired on me a couple times.I appreciate any help or advice! Thank you

So phenomenon - El Niño - is expected to increase in coming years and this thing causes HEAVY WINTER RAINFALL in T.

Conclusion: Average rodent population in T will increase in the coming years.

WHY: Because rodent populations normally increase during LONG periods of suatainsmd rain.

Hope this layout helps you see that the author is probably either assuming that long periods of rain will occur with heavy winter rainfall or that heavy winter rainfall will cause these long periods of rain.

A. UM ok? this doesn't really appear to do anything to the argument

B. Ok but we know there is going to be heavy rain doesn't really hurt the argument.

C. Ok so I think you can't take other situations which are clearly not the same as T to be indicative of what is going to happen in T. Maybe to have more rodents you need the perfect variables which T is going to have thus our argument still stands.

D*. In T winters marked by HEAVY rainfall (the one that's going to be caused by El Niño normally does not mean that LONG periods of rain occur. This hurts the argument a lot, because it pretty much says "yea we are going to see a lot of heavy rain with this phenomenon but it actually rarely occurs for long periods meaning it probably (rains and stops....) which means we probably won't see an increase of rodents.

E. (Was very confused with this one) But this just requires to many assumptions

The global warming caused by air pollution (the same sufficient conditions for El Niño) is going to produce a large number of effects that could affect rodent populations.

Ok for E to weaken you need to assume that these effects are going to affect our rodents in T, also you need to assume they are going to be bad effects and not let them increase the average of rodents. What if the effects make them super human NYC type rodents, what if its a positive affect for rodents and actually increases them more.

I am confused on why B is correct. I originally discounted it because it says "only by discovering the chemical composition of the protoplasm... ." I did not think that the passage reflected that this is the only way, but rather that it is an important aspect. Any help is much appreciated!

Any tips for MSS/Inference questions for RC please.

Especially, when there is a Passage A and Passage B.

Thank you.