When you finish fool proofing a game that you struggled on or a game that you think is important, save it and do it again the next day. That way you know you actually learned the inferences rather than just memorization.

I wouldn't do this for every game because that's too much of a time sink. If it took you only like 2 tries then maybe your good, but if it took you like 5 tries to fool proof a game make sure to write down what game it is and do it the next day or a few days later.

You will not lose your data, I paused my membership before and my problem sets were all still available

Here is my subjective opinion: Start at the beginning of the Logic Games CC, forget the video lessons, work your way through every problem set and foolproof each game. This is doable from now until the LSAT. By the end of this, you will be at a score substantially higher than -11. When I finished fool proofing the CC I was around -2/-3.

I would spend most of the time doing that, but also make time for maybe 1 section of LR + 2 or 3 passages of RC daily because I don't think completely forgetting about the other two sections is a good idea.

I know most people will disagree with me but I can't look at problems like this and not think the LSAT is atleast partially subjective

If you get a problem wrong, it becomes very high. If you get a problem right, it becomes very low. If you skip a problem, it becomes high.

Thank you guys for the input, I appreciate it! @ @

I'm sorry I was going through a moment of weakness after tanking an RC section when making this post.

Any tips on how I can make atleast a little bit of improvement in the next two weeks before the November LSAT would be greatly appreciated. I'm doing great on both LG and LR, but I just can't seem to get better than -7 to -10 on RC. Sometimes I get lucky and get like 4-6 wrong but that's far and few in-between. Is it possible to get below -5 consistently before the November LSAT?

@ said:

@ said:

Does this have any impact on making it easier or harder to get into the top schools mentioned (for the 2023-24 cycle)?

Possibly. It means that their admissions decision-making processes are untethered from all the things we're used to which have given us even tenuous means of predictability. So if you're below medians with great softs, it's probably a good thing. If you're above medians, it's probably quite bad.

Would you say it's the same for this current cycle?

@ @-1-1

Thank you guys for the feedback!

The advice I got regarding this is that if you can explain your low GPA in an addendum, you should as long as your addendum is not just making excuses. It should in short, tell them the circumstances that effected your GPA and why you are not that same person/why you are more capable than your GPA shows.

I

I'm applying to 14 schools and I might even add more. I'm on the west coast and I just found out that many of the schools in this region have $0 application fees so why not shoot my shot

Personally, I found that there was a noticeable shift in difficulty and in the nature of the questions once I hit the PTs in the 80s. I think it would be a disservice to yourself to not go through all of those at some point before your January LSAT

Do you recommend preparing in any way in the time frame that comes after the LSAT but before you actually start Law School?

What's one thing you wish you knew before starting Law School that might be helpful to someone going into Law School?

Thank you!

Edit: I also watched J.Y videos on 1.5 speed, love his explanations but sometimes it just feels so slow because he gives the most comprehensive explanations (which is why it's worth the money) but that's not really needed once your deep into your LSAT prep IMO.

@ said:

Which section was repeated?

It's different for everyone. Any one of the sections could be repeated

I'm excited. If anyone is having doubt in their abilities, go to the LSAT drill page, click on "all PTs" and filter by "Taken" to remind yourself just how much effort you put into this. I checked yesterday and I've done over 1200 logical reasoning questions, over 120 logic games and over 120 reading comprehension passages. That put me in the right mind frame to force myself to stop studying and relax

When you come across that type of question, for a second ignore the answer choices and just look at that rule. Ask yourself what the purpose of that rule is and what restrictions are being created because of that rule. Once you get that down, instead of immediately brute forcing, take a moment to analyze the answer choices. You'll find that a few aren't even affecting the correct variable or group.

I came across a good example for this (PT 69, Section 2, Game 3, Question 17) because it might be the only question similar to the one you're mentioning that is relatively straight forward. The question asks to replace a rule that restricts variable G from the 4th spot. There were only 4 open slots, and because of another rule G could not go into stop 1. So, the correct answer choice would be restricting the variable G down to the 2nd and 3rd spots. Looking at the answer choices I saw that there was only one answer choice that was affecting the variable G. And what do you know, it turned out to be correct.

Also, in general, taking a second to analyze the answer choices has helped me in alot of different situations. For example, I used to almost always brute force MBF questions in Logic Games. Then when I'd watch the explanation, I'd see J.Y just cross out 1 or 2 answer choices right off the bat because the rules or inferences from previous questions so now I try to be mindful of that. It also helps to do "if" questions first in logic games because they create inferences

If anyone knows if there's an explanation for this game anywhere on the internet please let me know. I was able to work through it but I really want to over it before the November LSAT because it was pretty tricky and similar to the type games that the powerscore guys predicted could be on this upcoming test

@ said:

@ said:

How is PT'ing 2-3 times a week working for you? Currently PTing 1 time a week and wondering if I should increase it

Well... change of plans hahaha. I was doing that but was not noticing a score increase and feeling really discouraged. I just signed up for a private tutoring session and will be speaking with them on the best areas to focus on for these last 4 weeks before the test. Let me know if you have nay other questions!

Yeah I tried to do a PT every day for a while but it was not really that helpful. Individual timed sections have been a lot more helpful

I cut up a plate of of strawberries and kiwis to eat during break

I got this question wrong, and when I came back to read it, I immediately saw "The lemurs are lower primates and the only primates indigenous to Madagascar" which proves why B is correct. It was right there and I still somehow managed to overthink it.

I want to add that misc. games aren't really misc. games and I'm not sure why more prep companies or books don't mention this more often. There have been 25 outlier games (if Powerscore is accurate). 5 of those are circular, 7 of those are mapping games, 13 of those are pattern games.

Yes they're all presented in different manners but they're no different than categorizing games into grouping or linear or in/out. Until I saw the list of outlier games divided into categories I would be so stressed about coming across something crazy and completely bombing an entire game, but after seeing that my confidence is so much higher.

If you feel you have the fundamentals down, then I would go back and figure out what type of questions you get wrong. Not estimate, but literally go back to all your wrong questions and separate them into categories and add up how many wrong for each type. Go back and watch some videos and drill them out.

If you don't think you have the fundamentals down, I would recommend loophole by Ellen Cassidy. There are 13 chapters, if you do 1 a day, you'll still have 3 full weeks before January to use what you learn in that book with drills and timed sections.

170 isn't a decent score, it's a phenomenal score. Only 3% of all test takers out of thousands clear that number. I'm not saying don't aim high, but 160 is also a really good score that will get you into law schools. Obviously we should all try to get the highest score possible but don't get discouraged if you don't score 170 and think you can't apply for good schools.

To answer your question, if you're already close to 160 I would recommend doing two things. 1: Figure out if there are any specific areas that are causing you to miss problems (for me it was parallel reasoning and some/most logic questions). Go back and try to relearn the fundamentals for those parts only. 2: Timed drill + wrong answer review for the rest. I think after a certain point just watching lessons is not worth it, you just have to drill them out.

Once you learn how to shoot a jumpshot and get your form down, the only way to become a great shooter is to shoot from all over the court. You wouldn't go back and keep tweaking your form because you'd never gain the consistency and muscle memory to perform well during the game.

I didn't understand this stimulus argument at all, but I was able to get the correct answer by focusing in on the last sentence. I still flagged it to come back and understand the stimulus but I was actually pretty confident I had the correct answer.

Congratulations and Happy Birthday!!