I'm sitting for the Feb test, and if I could consistently get games to -1 or -0 as so many people say is possible then I'd be hitting 175+ on almost every test. I've read the games bible twice, I've done almost every game from preptests 7-38 several times with 7sage explanations, and yet I still can't seem to adapt to new wrinkles when I see a game for the first time. Time is an issue, as I constantly have to mechanically refer to the rules to check my work on questions. Diagramming any type of slightly unusual game is a huge problem. I'm particularly bad at seeing spatial patterns within games.

I don't know if I should stick with the strategy of repetition or what. Maybe the games will just get easier as I do the newer tests? I just have no confidence on this section whatsoever because my performance is so unreliable.

Any suggestions?

I know lots of us joke about the LSAT turning us into dorks who are obsessed with the minutiae of pencils, but I'd like to stress a seriously important lesson I learned recently: don't use mechanical pencils to take your practice tests. As you might know, mechanical pencils aren't allowed when you take the real thing, and regular wooden pencils do behave differently in an important sense. Specifically, they get more dull more quickly than mechanical pencils do.

This is actually extremely important for logic games, which require you to write and diagram clearly and precisely. I found that my pencils were getting dull by the end of my LG sections, resulting in lighter and thicker marks that actually took appreciably more effort to read and understand. Whereas I could quickly tap a mechanical pencil on the table to draw more lead, I either had to make due with my wooden pencil or switch to another one. This would have been a real, although obviously surmountable, problem had I only started using wooden pencils on test day.

So, as neurotic as this may sound, do yourself a favor and get a feel for the performance of your pencil of choice. The last thing you want to be worrying about are your writing instruments.

:DDD This is all because of you guys

Here's my anecdotal evidence that the 70s PTs are harder (or at least different) from earlier modern PTs.

PTs 54-59, 61, 62, 65, 66 (Not cherry picking, these are just the tests I've done from these series):

Avg. score: 174.5 (high 177 [thrice], low 170 [once])

Avg. RC: -2.3

Avg. LR: -2.4

Avg. LG: -2.6

PTs 70-77 (excluding PT 76):

Avg. score: 171.1 (high 174 [once], low 169 [twice])

Avg. RC: -2.7

Avg. LR: -4.8

Avg. LG: -2.9

For me at least, this is clear evidence that the LSAT has evolved. That evolution has made the test noticeably harder.

A couple interesting data points:

* I once got three consecutive -0 RCs in the 50s. Haven't gotten a single one since.

* I'm now getting twice as many questions wrong on LR. I think it's because they're using less formal logic and more complex grammar forms and/or extremely subtly wrong trap answer choices.

Anyone else seen a similar trend? I found this exercise simultaneously interesting and depressing.

I noticed that the graph in the LSAT Analytics page that displays your section performance over various PTs has two different curves for Logical Reasoning. I don't see why this should be so. The curves make no distinction between the two LR sections on each test, nor should there be one in my opinion. I can't glean any insights from a curve if I don't know what dataset it represents, and there doesn't seem to be any relevant distinction between the two LR datasets. So would it be possible to combine those two curves into one that represents the total amount of LR questions missed on each PT?

I obviously don't want to risk being late to my test center, but I don't want to be so early that I'm left pacing around with nothing but my thoughts and a gallon-sized Ziploc bag as that could lead to jitters. Past test-takers, how early do you think I should get to the test center?

I got the most unexpected and awesome call from a Palo Alto area code yesterday, and it's in large part because of the people who built this site and all those who have made this such a wonderful community. My diagnostic score was a 154. Believe in yourself, be disciplined, and trust in the process. Oh, and watch all of JY's LG videos ;)

I don't know about you, but after each exhausting 5-section practice test I take, I have to do something else to decompress for a few hours. Usually I'll either play some video games or watch YouTube videos, but today I was fortunate enough to watch Middle Tennessee knock off Michigan State. Do you guys jump right from the PT into BR, or, if you take some time off, how long do you take and what do you do?

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/the-lsat-is-rigged-against-the-poor/504530/

Well deserved @"J.Y. Ping", you've made a difference in my life and, I'm sure, many others'.

[DO NOT READ IF YOU'RE PREPARING FOR THE LSAT]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=261392

Thoughts? Specifically wondering what experienced people like JY, Jon, etc think about this.

I'm doing games from preptests that were released before LSAC changed the format of the games to allow for much more space over two pages. Is it ok to use blank pieces of 8.5x11 inch paper to do each of these games? I don't want to give myself too much space and discover later on that I've been fomenting bad habits.

Hello!

I'm doxxing myself a bit here, but I'm really into electronic music --- all kinds, but I love the kind of stuff you'd listen to during the summer --- and I've found that I need all the good vibes I can get during this brutal LSAT journey.

So I really put some effort into a playlist of EDM songs that'll give you warm and fuzzy vibes. I called it "Freedom" because I'm going to listen to it on my drive home after finishing the LSAT haha, so feel free to enjoy!

https://soundcloud.com/charlie-melman/sets/summer-2016

I have PTs 63-77 fresh and ready to use between now and June. Since I want to use all of them, that's about 2 per week. I figure I'll keep doing 1 per week, with the occasional 2 per, through my final exams in early May.

Also, should I use a couple PTs in the 70s to get acquainted with the subtle shifts in test composition that many people say characterize the most recent tests? The pros are the aforementioned, plus devoting substantial time to figuring out the pattern games that have apparently come back with a vengeance. The con, of course, is burning the most useful preptests more than a month before test day.

I know the fool-proof method for logic games is vaunted around here. But I might be the exceptional fool. See, I've done every game from PTs 1-57, most of them several times, and I still cannot consistently get below -4 on new games sections. Sometimes I even get the old games wrong, too. I've been banging my head against this wall since about October, and I just can't learn the damn things! Should I keep drilling and hope for a breakthrough? I thought I had one a few weeks back but then I slid back down to -4 or -5. Maybe I should just put the -0 goal out of my mind and accept that I might have a plateau.

Been trying for several months to tie down logic games. Hasn't happened yet. I'm averaging about -3 on my last several preptests, but that belies big swings. For example, PT 60 crushed me, PT 61 was -0, and PT 62 was -6.

I don't know if I'm very good at diagnosing my own problems. The only trend I can maybe see -- and this might just be recency bias -- is that I struggle with open-ended and even slightly nonstandard games. For example, PT 62 game 2 is definitely a grouping game, broadly defined, but it's a weird one. Same with game 3 from that test. I've done literally every game ever published multiple times but I don't have the pattern recognition necessary to adapt on my first time through lots of games.

Is there any specific remedy for this type of thing? Should I just keep "foolproofing?" I don't want to keep banging my head against the wall if there's something more targeted I can do, because time is becoming precious for us June takers.

Proctors: Exemplary, except they started checking in all 205 people at 12:25, resulting in some serious delays. I was in a room with about 60 people and maybe 6 proctors. One proctor was running his hand down a railing next to me, but other than that things went well. Time was kept precisely, etc.

Facilities: Nice, modern lecture hall. Good bathrooms. Nice building.

What type of room: Toered lecture hall. Important note: Each row of seats has one continuous desk, and people were spaced out every other seat. There is a small, raised microphone implanted in the desk that was in my way and forced me to change my usual placement of my booklet and answer sheet. Just being aware of this beforehand is preparation enough.

Lefties: No idea.

Noise: pin-drop quiet except for occasional faint sounds. I think the room has sound-absorbing walls, and there's a buffer area between the room itself and the hallway outside that probably reduces outside noise.

Parking: there's parking and they said there were discounts for LSAT takers, but I just had my momz drive me so can't comment on parking location.

Time elapsed from arrival to test: got there at 11:30, we probably didn't start till 1:15.

Irregularities or mishaps: none, thank god, except for the brief railing incident mentioned above and the delay checking in. Lots of people brought cell phones for some reason.

Other comments: you're going to have to move your answer sheet further away from your test booklet than usual because of the desktop mics. This wasn't as big a deal as I thought it would be, just be prepared.

When I broke the seal on my test booklet, I accidentally made two small diagonal tears in my answer sheet. They didn't come close to the answer bubbles themselves, but they did create two little flaps of paper on the side of the sheet. Is this going to cause a problem during scoring? I'm assuming the answer sheets aren't so delicate but I'm trying to quiet my worrying mind lol.

When taking fresh PTs, I'm obviously interested in how long each logic game in the section is taking me so I can compare those times with JY's targets. I set my watch as usual, but use the stopwatch on my phone simultaneously, hitting "lap" after each game.

What strategies do you use to get this sort of data on your games? I wonder if anyone has any better methods.

I've noticed that one of my big problems with LG (and there are _many_, are maximum/minimum questions. For example, "the maximum number of Bs that can be in group F is___?" These questions are difficult for me because it's tough to know when I'm getting them wrong. In other words, I don't know when I've done all I can to get to the solution. Now, you might just say, "Run down your rules and make sure you haven't failed anything." Right, OK, but sometimes you do that and you still haven't maximized or minimized because there are other valid solutions that contain more or less of the variable in question. Unfortunately, I don't find JY's videos particularly helpful here because it seems like he just sees the best way to do the problem (and/or he has the benefit of hindsight and an answer key). Are there any actual strategies I can use here, or am I at the mercy of my intuition?

I'm going to register for June and want to make sure I choose the best test center possible. If anyone knows of a quiet place with big desks and good proctors I'd really appreciate it.

Hi all,

I've been spared from receiving spam emails from law schools because I never released my info to law schools via LSAC's Candidate Referral Service (CRS). Now that I have my score, I'm wondering whether I should do so just to be safe -- though I'm targeting t-7 schools and I don't think they need to use CRS to recruit. Still, I suppose there's no risk, except annoying spam. What say you all?

So today, for what might be the first time, I could not even guess what the answer to a question was on BR. It's PT 60, S1, Q21. I've gone over the question every different way I can think of, diagramming and rediagramming the stimulus and all the answer choices. And. Still. Nothing. Is it acceptable for me to write this one off and just look at the explanation? I get that the whole point of blind review is to give yourself unlimited time to figure a question out, but I genuinely cannot envision how else I would attack this question if you gave me another year.