That’s because your “weakness” is literally just reading comprehension. Lowkey, after 160, your ability to catch minute differences between answers and understanding the passage deeply accounts for far greater impact on your score than particular question types. What you need to to is read slower

Applying in September/October with a 180 is better than August with a 169

It’s definitely going to be a barrier for most schools. You should prepare to be a splitter. So if I were you, I’d prioritize getting a stellar LSAT score because 150 ain’t gonna cut it. But there’s hope. You’ve proven that you have what it takes to lock in when it matters so getting a high 160s maybe even 170s score is not out of the question. Heck shoot for a 180, then you’d have schools begging for you to come. Consider taking a year to get your PTs as high as possible before the official test

When you blind review, the system will

Highlight certain questions that you either got wrong, spent a lot of time on, changed your answer, or sped through and other parameters. If you answer only the questions highlighted, it will reflect the changes on your blind review score. You can change these parameters such that the only questions highlighted are incorrect answers too.

Do one 10 question untimed LR drill and a single untimed RC passage day until you get 5 days of perfect drills. Meaning-0.

Once you get the logic perfect the first time through switch them to standard timed drills.

Once you get perfect timed drills, start doing 1 section a day, alternating LR and RC.

You’re not having a timing issue you’re having an understanding issue.

If you’re getting any of the first 20 questions in a section wrong, you are reading faster than you’re understanding. Read slower, think faster

Stop with the PTs until your timed sections are consistently predicting scores in the 170s

It’s the same test at the end of the day

10 minutes a day of 5-10 LR questions is a great way to get the ball rolling. Don’t focus on speed or the score equivalent. Just focus on trying to solve all 5-10 questions one at a time. Hopefully you’ll start to look forward to keeping your 7Sage streak

What helped me with conditional reasoning was restating If-Then stamens in different ways and learning the difference between if, only if, and if and only if.

For Example:

Rule 1: If you use Kryptonite, then Superman will die.

This can be rewritten to say “Superman will die if you use Kryptonite” but that’s not to say Superman WON’T die if you do use Kryptonite.

Compare that to Rule 2

Rule 2: Only if you use Kryptonite will Superman die.

Now, this means that Kryptonite is required to kill Superman but it doesn’t necessarily mean that Kryptonite alone will kill him, maybe you also need a red sun to do the job.

Finally there if and only if.

Rule 3: Superman will die, if and only if you use Kryptonite. This means not only is Kryptonite alone sufficient to do the job but if you stumble across a dead Clark Kent, you know Kryptonite was used.

All wrong answers are wrong. Not just less correct; wrong. It may be difficult to immediately see why but it’s there eventually. I’ve never seen a solution say that an answer is correct but not AS correct as a different answer. They are just wrong. Unfortunately, correct answers are always right, but they’re not always perfect.

@SusanLeifker I know that this is a joke but to be clear, if something can be done without some supplementary material, then that supplementary material is definitionally not necessary. The games may be helpful regardless of them being otherwise unnecessary.