i'm curious if you could still actually study and practice logic games even after they remove this section from the test. i find learning and practicing these problems are very beneficial in developing analytical skills for law and other aspects of life. i'm not very good at these under time pressure but appreciate the challenge and feel good about showing improvement in my practice scores.

Hi everyone. I have been studying for the lsat for more than 2 1/2 years now. My highest score was a 175 and I am usually scoring between 165-169. I took the April Lsat and scored a 159 :(. I don't know where to go from here now. Im really solid in LR and LG, but Reading Comp kills my score, consistently getting -7. Can anyone help me, or is anyone interested in being a study buddy?

There's still time! Drilling as much as possible before June!

I swear I remember learning in one of the lessons that the lawgic if A then B and C can be rewritten as if A and B then C and vise versa but I can't find that lesson anywhere and am not sure if I just made that rule up in my head. Is this lawgic logical?

Hi,

This is a question about an answer choice like that of PT62 S2 Q20.

It's: The younger a universe is, the brighter the stars are.

Do these relationships work similarly like conditionals, in that only after concluding that the universe is younger, we can say the brighter its stars are?

i.e. you can't see a situation that the stars are brighter, therefore conclude that the universe is younger with this type of relationship?

Thank you.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I see people say they "drill sections" but it doesn't even look like 7Sage has the option of drilling an entire section without actually opening up a whole test. How would I drill, for example, an LR section from an actual test? How do you (person reading this) do it? I get that there are filters on the Practice > Drills but I don't want just random questions with tags, I want to drill a legit section for a test to make sure I don't muddy up a bunch of tests if that makes sense.

I have been immensely stressed about this test. It has monopolized my thoughts since I took it last Nov. and didn't score that well. However, if any of you are like me, maybe it will help to hear this: you ARE capable. Put your game face on, and show these test-makers who the real boss is. Know that your knowledge and preparation will not fail you on test day. The hard work you put in will pay off! Keep striving and keep hoping, because you can achieve anything you put your mind to. Best of luck to all of us next month and to those in months to come. LET'S DO THIS!!!

We've added new lessons on LSAT writing to the curriculum! For those of you taking the test in August 2024 or later, LSAC is making some changes to the writing section. (Here's the official announcement from LSAC in case you missed it: https://www.lsac.org/blog/new-approach-lsat-writing-will-debut-july-31-2024)

In order to help you prepare for the updated writing format, we've introduced three new lessons to the curriculum:

https://classic.7sage.com/progress/#lsat-writing-august-2024-and-later

(NOTE: To see the new lessons, you must be using v2 of the core curriculum. If you're not sure how to access v2, see here: https://classic.7sage.com/accessing-ccv2/)

Lastly, if you're planning on taking the June 2024 LSAT, fear not! The old writing curriculum isn't going anywhere. You can continue using it.

I just finished this test and spent a lot of time on this question. B seems like the obvious correct answer at first (and is the correct answer), but the argument about efforts being wasted on protecting endangered species' NATURAL habitats is, in my opinion, unaffected by the creation of an animal refuge. The establishment of an animal refuge seems to me like an obviously distinct effort than one that is protecting a natural habitat. By it needing to be established and the word "refuge", it seems artificial by definition.

Can someone help me understand this?

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I often have trouble with parallel reasoning and this one is throwing me. SOS

So my April LSAT score was a bust, so going to gear up to take it in June. Any recommendations for a 6 week study sprint? My best section is Logic Games so truly going to be my last time to take the test with the best conditions possible. I studied a couple hours 6 days a week from February - April (with tutoring) and was pretty consistently scoring above what I got on the April test. Think I got tripped up just through general test-day anxiety (and what I thought was a super difficult RC section). Should I just try to take as many PTs as possible the next 6 weeks? Should I do more drills? Go back to some of the basics? Little lost here.

Truly so frustrated by my April score and June will be unfortunately my 4th time taking the test, so any words of wisdom or success stories to make me feel some hope would be lovely.

I Did all the passages in RC. Does anyone have the same issue? How should I study for RC?

Hi! I've been studying for approximately 6 months - I scored a 157 Oct 2023, then a 155 Nov 2023 (my fault, I was burnt out by the time I did the Oct that I wasn't mentally prepared for Nov). My highest timed PT has been a 163, but it fluctuates from 156-163, yet my BRs are usually 165+. Timing seems to be my kryptonite. It's not really a matter of running out of time, it's a matter of rushing and missing vital information whilst timed. Any tips on improving my timed score? I usually spend 2-3 hours per day studying, and on weekends I try to do 3-4. Despite that time allocated, I feel like I barely get any practice in, as BR and review takes up a chunk of time. I believe I understand the concepts, but it all fades away when the clock's ticking.

I've been doing 3-section PTs from the PrepTests section, and plan to do a simulation LSAT 4-section PT (1 experimental) this weekend. I've tried timed and untimed drills, but haven't noticed any improvement. Please let me know if you other methods to improve timing!

LR and RC are the consistent sections throwing me for a loop when timed.

Has anyone read the book LR Perfection? Any thoughts and whether it is worth reading through it before the June test? Thanks!

So I was watching the explanation on 7sage and the person explaining the game said that 1-5 was one game board and 6-10 was another, but idk how they knew to split. someone please advise.

Hey guys I feel like Im able to solve questions but sometimes watching the videos I realize I did not make inferences upfront and split into game boards which would literally cut the time I take to do questions in half.

How can I get better at identifying and pushing out inferences up front from a set of rules?

the argument says that Neanderthals probably preserved their meats by smoking it, citing that burnt lichen and grass were found in many of their fireplaces, and that a fire made of these materials produces a lot of smoke, but not as much heat or light as a wood fire.

the correct answer is B. When I read the explanation, it says that B is correct because it suggests that Neanderthals used lichen and grass out of necessity rather than specifically for smoking meat. The explanation also says that the point of this argument is that Neanderthals used lichen and grass only to smoke meats.

But that is NOT how this argument is written to me. To me, the argument says that the only way Neanderthals preserved their meats was by smoking it, citing burnt lichen and grass in fireplaces, that burnt lichen and grass fire produce a lot of smoke as evidence. So I chose A, which suggests that they also used heat, which is ruled out in the last sentence in the argument.

I do not understand, for the life of me, how the main idea of this argument is that Neanderthals used lichen and grass primarily to smoke their meat, and not that smoking their meat was the only way they preserved it!

Is it me????? Every time I think I make headway on these questions, I get them wrong and it's so discouraging.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hello,

I'm trying to understand why answer choice (a) for this question is incorrect.

I chose answer choice A and am struggling to understand why it's wrong. I understand why D is correct, but I can't get comfortable with ruling out A, and I went back and forth between the two for a while before deciding on A. The tutor in this video said that the issue lies with "all relevant respects", saying that we have no relevant connections to an anteater. However, I would think that we are talking in the frame of mammals - "all species that are similar in all relevant respects" = mammals, all of which, except for the anteater, dream. So, facts about one species of animal (spiny anteater, the specific facts being about their brain size) provide confirmation for hypotheses about all species that are similar in all relevant respects (mammals, the hypothesis being the parasitic connection hypothesis) to the particular species in question (again, spiny anteater). Does anyone have any additional thoughts on why this is wrong / other methods of ruling it out?

[Admin note: Format for posting questions about specific Logical Reasoning (LR) questions:

"PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"; Do not post LSAT questions, any copyrighted content, or links to content that infringe on copyright.]

Hi everyone,

I am running low on untouched, high-numbered PTs, so I was wondering if I could use the new PTs without LG to get some practice in for the June LSAT? Or would that be frowned upon? I just want to make sure it's a sensible thing to do because I want to practice LR and RC more often than I want to practice LG anyway.

So, I understand that the argument is saying that because incidences of the flu were lower during the 6 months of the public health campaign, that means that the campaign was effective.

I chose C - there were fewer large public gatherings than usual during the 6-month period.

But the explanation says that C is wrong because it doesn't address the effectiveness of the campaign, that A is correct because it suggests widespread compliance with the campaign's recommendations of handwashing.

But this doesn't make any sense to me because handwashing isn't the only recommendation of the campaign. Avoiding public places when experiencing flu symptoms is also a recommendation. And if there were fewer large gatherings during the 6 month period of the campaign, then wouldn't that indicate to the effectiveness of it?

The explanation argues that A speaks to the effectiveness of the campaign more than C does because food born illness rates were also low, but what if people were not necessarily washing their hands as a result of the public campaign? Maybe they work in restaurants, where handwashing is necessary. Maybe they work in schools where handwashing vital. And the argument says that the campaign recommended hand washing specifically for reducing the transmission of the flu, what if people were washing their hands to not get sick from food borne illnesses, and the decrease in the rate of the flu was just a by product, which would make it seem like the campaign worked, but it didn't necessarily?

If the public health campaign's purpose was to limit the spread of influenza, and part of the recommendation was to stay away from public places when experiencing symptoms, and during the time of the campaign, there weren't as many large public gatherings, and the rate of the flu decreased...

I mean, I know that C doesn't necessarily mean people heeded the campaign, but neither does A. So how is A more correct than C?

I'm livid because this frustrating! lol

Also, I crossed out A because the argument didn't say anything about food borne illnesses. I also got other questions wrong for doing the same thing... crossing out the right answer because it introduces something new. Maybe that's where I'm going wrong?

[SIGHS]

Someone stick a fork in me, please..

First of all, I'm very thankful this is my problem. It certainly was not a few months ago. I have been getting so close to perfect on LG sections each time I take, but I seem to get nervous and miss an inference every blue moon, leading to scores anywhere from -1/-3. How do I keep calm and make sure I'm not making stupid mistakes for June?

So, I can identify the conclusion and the support for the argument, but I'm having a hard time understanding the relationship between them. For some of the questions I can intuit the answer, even if the connection isn't clear, but for other questions, namely the ones that have a lot of background information, or more than one premise, or has two arguments, for example

city official: ....

police chief: ....

Once I identify the argument, I get stuck trying to make sense of what I'm looking at, and then I fail to understand the answer choices well enough to eliminate the wrong ones or recognize the right one. What usually happens is I get down to two answers, either the right one and the wrong one, or two wrong ones. For the latter, I cross out the right answer thinking it's wrong, and for the former, I choose the wrong answer even though the right one looks right but I don't understand why it's right.

I do go in and look at why I was wrong, and it usually makes sense, but it's like it's not sticking, and it's really frustrating to keep making the same mistake. For very question I get wrong on an LR section, at least one of them is from the assumption family.

I'm using Khan Academy to do drills, and for strengthen/weaken questions, I can't get less than 2 wrong, or even get the all right at the advanced level.

I really want to master this test. I'm aiming for a 165 at least, 170 at most, but I can't defeat these harder questions.

Can someone please help?

Hi I was curious if using indicator words was the best way to identify these or if there was another general way?

Is memorizing the words the only way to achieve this or is there a more general approach that can be taken?

Hey everyone! So I am consistently getting -2 or -3 for LR and LG, but RC is constantly -5 to -8... My scores are usually 165-167, but I know I could be in the 170's (my goal) if I fixed RC. Please give me any and every bit of advice you have. I have a lot of trouble focusing from time to time (think I might have undiagnosed ADHD... runs in my family and I have symptoms, but idk if it's genetic?) and I am usually good at reading but for some reason I keep running out of time and really struggling on the questions. TYIA :)

Study buddy and need help with logic games. Can anyone meet?