Looking for anyone that may have an old copy or extra copy of the Loophole that they are willing to sell. Will pay for shipping costs etc! Would really like to get my hands on this if possible so let me know!

Thanks in advance

As the title said i am only breaking into the 170s when i take the 130s? i am in the 165-168 range in other tests, does anyone have any idea why this could be ?

Hi! Taking the August LSAT, there were a couple questions that IMO ended up effectively being small logic games. I won't go into specifics, but I was wondering on strategy for these types of questions-- I wasted lots of time on one question and still couldn't figure it out. I would love to DM if anyone feels similarly!

Looking to find people to work with on PT review and drilling for November LSAT. Preferably evenings (full-time college student) currently testing in high 150s looking to get to mid-high 160s.

Howdy y'all! I just joined the 7Sage platform to study for the October test, which I didn't expect to be taking. Just took September (after Blueprint's 170+ live class) and I don't know if I actually broke 170, so here we go again.

I know that my biggest weakness is conditional/formal logic in LR... I have the basics down but kinda freak out when there's a 5-6 sentence stimulus that you're expected to diagram to find the missing link or what must be true.

Anyway... for the seasoned 7Sage studiers... what lessons/content do you recommend?? I don't want to go through the whole curriculum; I just want the full-fledged 7Sage take on complex diagramming LR questions. Tips/Recs? What materials should I read/watch/review?

In advance: THANK YOU!!!!

I feel like I have been struggling a little bit with these questions, especially with the new core curriculum compared to the old one. Does anyone have any advice on how to approach these questions, especially when it comes to causal logic?

I am and have been stuck at 165 for awhile now. I can see a big issue for me is I can't even do medium level conditional logic. I often make mistakes like not taking the contrapositive, applying the wrong translation rule, and not connecting my chains. How can I learn, practice, and master conditional logic? I have watched the 7sage material several times but it just does not stay with me.

Hi,

I am currently at a plateau of 152 and I noticed that in timed conditions I struggle quite a bit with pre-phrasing, especially with inference-based questions, NA, WSE and RRE. I find that with WSE and RRE specifically, it is very difficult to pre-phrase because there is such a wide range of responses, and somehow I get quite a bit of NA questions wrong in timed conditions. Sometimes also, I just look at a question and struggle to see the "loophole" or the inference. I tend not to diagram because it slows me down too much and confuses me more in MBT/MSS questions. Sometimes I even "pre-phrase" an inference and then find it in the answer choices and it was wrong.

Also, I noticed that I perform consistently and significantly better on timed sections than on full PTs. I make more mistakes in full PTs than in timed sections -- especially in the first 2 sections of the test. Any ideas on why this may be?

I am aiming for between 157-160 and would appreciate any advice on pre-phrasing strategies, getting better at coming up with the right inference and consistency in test performance.

Here's the link that a bunch of other 7sage members and I have! Looking to kick it off this week.

https://discord.gg/JCKBH4BkEp

Hey guys, so I graduated undergrad about 2 years ago, and a majority of my classes ended up being online at the time due to Covid, although I have already emailed a few Professors I had in person asking if they would be willing to write me one, I have gotten denied. At this point I feel really stuck and Im not sure what to do. I could ask an old boss but I have only worked retail jobs during my gap year or didnt work at all. Any advice? Is it possible to apply without any letters? I know its a stretch but im freaking out.

So I’m getting ready to take the October LSAT and I’ve realized I’m not even close to ready. My entire time drilling, I’ve only ever done LR. I’m in a bad spot. I’ve barely touched on RC but I am hoping my stride for mastery of LR will help my skills on RC. I suppose this leads me to ask what is my best strategy to getting prepared for this test? How many questions should I be drilling per day? To add to the frustration, I’m not sure I’m getting much better at the question types that I most struggle with. I’ve only done a few practice tests since I feel like drilling would be more effective because it’s targeting my weaknesses. Any advice is appreciated.

If anyone can help explain this I would truly appreciate it!! I've been trying to understand it for the past hour but still can't grasp why the right answer is right. I've watched the explanation video on 7sage and read power score's explanation but don't understand their conditional diagrams.

Conclusion: Thus, without increased funding from sources other than profit-driven institutions, the chemistry department is unlikely to gain the prestige that only achievements in basic science research confer.

Evidence/Premise:

Diagram explained by Power-score:

Premise: Advances in basic research -> More money

Premise: Gain prestige -> Advances in basic research

Conclusion: Gain prestige -> Money from sources other than Big Pharma.

Assumption/Pre-phrase: More money -> Money from sources other than Big Pharma

This is my new Diagram while reworking the problem:

SABR = Significant advances in Basic Research/ Only achievements in basic research confer

SFBR = Secure Funding for Basic Research

GP = Gain the Prestige

IF (NP) = Increased Profit from Non profits and non Pharmaceutical companies

Premise 1: SABR -> SFBR

Premise 2: GP -> SABR

Conclusion: GP -> IF (NP)

So here is where I am lost. I originally only had Premise 1 and the Conclusion diagramed because I thought "that only achievements in basic science research confer" was a part of the Conclusion. But I am assuming because of the necessary indicator "only" we need to add another premise and thats where premise 2 comes in? But I'm confused where we connect the pre-phrase/missing link/assumption because there are 2 "GP's". If anyone can please help explain because I know understanding this will be helpful towards future questions with the same difficulty and concept. I tried understanding it without conditional diagrams as I would approach it like any other NA question, but that was difficult as well.

I have been doing a couple of NA questions and I have noticed that the right answer choice sometimes sounds stupid but most of the time is linked to something said in the conclusion. Would this always be the case? Is the right answer for NA questions always linked to something that was mentioned in the conclusion?

Does anyone know how the exact strategy for weakening questions? I've listened to every approach but continue to get the the most easiest Weakening questions wrong.

I feel like i have been getting these confused. Could someone explain the approach to solving these? I know the NA has to be true but what does that even mean I think im overthinking these questions.

Hi I am looking to start a group chat with people who are interested in having study buddies/accountability partners for the November LSAT. The discord link is right here: Hi sorry I have been bad at responding I made a group me link feel free to join. Right now there aren't any members in it but it will fill up super soon as I have a lot of ppl interested! The group me link is right here: https://groupme.com/join_group/103075166/sH9h2wYR

I need help understanding why the correct answer choice (A) is correct for this question. I understand that all the other answer choices are terrible (leaving A as the only answer choice), but I still feel like A is too strongly stated to be a necessary assumption for the argument.

In my thinking, a necessary assumption for the argument is that the econ explanation and psychological explanation are mutually exclusive from each other. Answer choice A seems to go way beyond this and say that the econ explanation is excludes all other explanations (not just the psychological one).

What's wrong with my thought process? Thanks!

I've been having issues with Link Assumption and Conditional Reasoning questions. Does anyone have any good resources (7sage live classes, syllabus, outside books, etc.) they suggest to improve on these questions types?

Hello,

I know that iA —most→ B → C, then you cannot conclude most A are C. But if it becomes:

A —most→ B → C→ D

can you conclude that most A are D?

Hi all,

I took my first LSAT back in April, and after getting my score back, I realized I wanted to brush up a little more and take it again in the fall. With that, I'm scheduled to take it this Friday.

The thing is, I haven't taken a real, sit-down practice test since I was studying for my April exam. This summer, I started using 7sage and focused on getting the lessons and drilling. In terms of timing, I've been pretty good. I know it's a bad idea not to have taken any PT, but also, I'm scared to take a PT and get a bad score and feel discouraged for my real exam this week.

I guess I just need someone to second my opinion, or if anyone else is in the same boat as me, you're not alone.

Good luck to everyone taking it this month!

Hi lovely people, I need some advice on how I can improve my score from high 150s to 160s for the October LSAT. My average score right now is 159.1. My best score is 163, but I haven't been doing well on my most recent PTs.

I'm struggling a lot with Flaw questions. The problem I have seems to be that although I managed to identify the flaw from reading the stimulus, once I moved on to the ACs, the wording confused me and I ended up picking the wrong AC.

Also, my RC score has been fluctuating from -3 to -9 and I don't even know what I'm doing right or wrong.

I have been doing BR and keeping a wrong answer journal from the beginning. I don't know what else to do. What should I be focusing on now? Keep doing more PT? Review Flaw questions and do more drills? Taking untimed RC drills?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

I got a 156 on the August LSAT, lower than what I got on PTs while I was studying. I'm retaking in October and really would like to be in at least the mid 160s. I am so lost on how to study to make this happen. I did PTs and drills for the first test with a wrong answer journal but felt like I was not improving. Any advice is super appreciated!

Don't need an incredible score, just need a solid base in October in the high 150s. Any advice is helpful. I'm just struggling for the last few months in a study rut.

Hi everyone, I'm looking for a copy of Ellen Cassidy's Loophole and it seems to be unavailable everywhere. I'm in Canada but can pay for shipping from wherever. Please let me know if you have a used copy you want to part with.

Thanks,

D.

I took the August LSAT and received a score back today lower than was hoped or expected. I’m registered for October as well and I know I can do so much better than I did. Should I keep my score so law schools can see the progress made or is it better not to report it so that they don’t judge me based off that score?