> @katehopgood113 said:

> I'm beginning to use Pacifico's LG method. My question here is how many LG do you work on at once? Do you only focus on 1 game at a time through step 3 and then begin to practice another one before the 4th attempt a week later? Trying to figure out how many I should be balancing at one time.

You have make that choice. It depends how much time you have for games. You also have to consider when your next test date is, so you can finish Pacifico's LG method before then.

Because I work on LR/RC during my study days, I have time to do 2 new LG games, and 2 other repeats (if necessary). I choose Monday to Wednesday to do new games, and Thursday for my second attempt (if I failed on Wednesday game).

I think finally understood. My brain was locked, and wouldn't understand lol.

I'm assuming the number of the sales force has decreased in the span of 15 years to the present.

If before (sometime in the last 15 years), the sales force total was 100, the top 1/3 awarded would be 33, and the bottom half not rewarded would be 67.

At present, if the sales force total is 60, the top 1/3 awarded would be 20, and the bottom half not rewarded would be 40.

So at present, people receiving awards declined (because there are fewer people that make up the sales force than before), and the number of salespeople passed over for awards has declined (again, because there are fewer people that make up the sales force than before). The fewer sales force members, the fewer people passed over for award.

Couldn't one of the sufficient right answers be: "the number of salespeople at Wilson's has DECREASED over the past fifteen years"?

@drbrown2259

Thanks, for the explanation.

This might be a silly question. My main issue is I don't understand what the argument is saying.

How can people receiving awards be declining and people passed over for awards be declining, both at the same time?

If people receiving awards declined, wouldn’t that mean fewer people are getting awards than before?

And, if the number of salespeople passed over for awards has declined, wouldn’t that mean more people are getting awards, than before?

So confused. I don’t understand the reasoning in the argument.

Also, I understand that one criterion of receiving the award is being in the top third of the sales force. But, this doesn't help me understand the argument... or should it?

@jmarmaduke96714

Thank you! I finally get it!

@rahelaalam514 said:

@hosnyyhm189 said:

@eugenewrotethis726 said:

@hosnyyhm189 you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

Thank you. But, I still am having a hard time understanding. Are you telling me that if I see "A" sometimes "B", it means If "A" then "B" in Sufficient Assumption questions? Why is that so?

I know the question you posted isn't for me, but I hope maybe my explanation can be helpful to you.

In the stimulus the LSAT writers are using grammar a way that I think may be making you equate "All A's sometimes do B" to "A some B". I think a good way to see the difference would be through an simpler analogy:

Some Birds Fly.

The noun in this sentence is "some birds". Because "some" has a range of 1 to 100, we can only conclude from the first sentence that at least one bird can fly. This sentence means at least 1 bird, maybe all, can fly. But its possible that some of the birds don't fly.

All birds sometimes fly.

The noun here is "All birds". Which means we can conclude whatever follows about all birds.It means I can conclude that all birds at one point will fly. Additionally, I can also conclude that there is no bird that can never fly.

I hope this helps you see the difference. While in one sentence "some" is being used as a modifier to the noun - "Some birds". In the second sentence, "some" is being used as a predicate to the noun "all birds".

So based on that, our sentence "All writers sometimes use words ambiguously". The noun is "All writers". So the sentence means that we can conclude that every writer will at some point use words ambiguously.

I hope this helped.

THANK YOU. This helped me a lot!

@eugenewrotethis726 said:

@hosnyyhm189 you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

Thank you. But, I still am having a hard time understanding. Are you telling me that if I see "A" sometimes "B", it means If "A" then "B" in Sufficient Assumption questions? Why is that so?

When it says 'Any writer whose purpose is personal expression sometimes uses words ambiguously' I thought the lawgic translates to Writers --sometimes--> uses words ambiguously.

Apparently, it translates to Writers ----> uses words ambiguously

Can someone explain to me why I'm wrong? I thought "sometimes" means "some"