For the Sherlock Holmes, I rearranged the conditional statements to:

If Sherlock Holmes visits a crime scene-> then he finds clues

If finding clues-> then leads Mr. Holmes to make useful deductions

If he makes useful deductions-> then Sherlock Holmes solves any case

C: If Sherlock Holmes visits a crime scene-> then Sherlock Holmes solves any case

CPC: If Sherlock Holmes solves not any case, then Sherlock Holmes not visit a crime scene

Would it be correct or incorrect? I saw the connection differently but if it were an LSAT question, would I get the answer incorrect?

@JPMan2598 that makes sense

I understand the premise and conclusion. However, I am not certain about “not an argument.” Any tips?