jdelbosco

Joined: Jan 2026
Subscription: Core

Admissions profile

LSAT

Not provided Goal score: 180

CAS GPA

Not provided

1L START YEAR

2027

Discussions

PrepTests ·

PT137.S3.Q6

jdelbosco

12 hours ago

One issue I have with the answer descriptions:

For C:

The difference between 2 and many is cited as the reason this answer is wrong, which conflicts with the LR Lessons regarding the relationship of some/many/most/all, chiefly that some and many should be considered the same (or similar) and some is 2+ (the exact lesson was framed as the LSAT does not expect you to make distinctions on this basis, "I have never seen them do this", etc).

IMO the stronger reason this question is wrong (and how I eliminated it during drill) is the following discrepancy:

-C Premise: Reviewers who ENJOYED novel didn't want sequel

-C Conclusion: Next reviewer won't want sequel

--ie C Premise refers to a subset of reviewers who enjoyed the novel, whereas C Conc. does not put the next reviewer in that subset

Compare this to the Passage:

-P Premise: Pilots who flew plane didn't have difficulty operating

-P Conclusion: Next pilot who flys plane won't have difficulty operating

--ie both Premise and Conc. refer to the same set of pilots

Lessons · Purpose of Passage Question (Greek Dramas)

jdelbosco

Monday, Mar 2

Was the Z. Barbu perspective just thrown in there to trick people into picking E? ie you just read the last sentence and then think its philisophical?

Lessons · Fast Track - Necessary Assumption

jdelbosco

Tuesday, Feb 24

@Ssss One thing that helped me when I was first starting with conditional logic is to map out every single question and answer that uses conditionals.

I would take a practice question under normal time control (ie try to answer efficiently), then on blind review, I would diagram the question, understand from that diagram what piece was missing that I should be looking for, then diagram all the answers, and understand why the wrong answers didn't fit/interact with the diagram of the question.

This will help you actively expose yourself to sufficiency/necessity, and you will soon be able to "diagram" mentally and see the missing pieces without having to put pen to paper.

Lessons · Lesson 1 - Jocko the Chimp (W)

jdelbosco

Edited Saturday, Jan 31

The Inception of 7Sage LSAT lessons

Lessons · Some Before All - Formal Argument #4

jdelbosco

Thursday, Jan 22

Another good visualization is combining the venn diagrams from previous some sections with the set & superset visualization from the beginning of foundations:

A and B have overlapping venn diagrams.

--- ( A () B )

B is also a subset of the C superset.

--- ((B) C )

---Where the parentheses are the subset within superset bubbles used in previous videos

This means that A is overlapping with C in the same way that A is overlapping with B

--- ( A ( ( ) B ) C ) [kind of hard to illustrate without the actual circles]

LSAT · Unique Situation - Seeking Advice on Study Plan

jdelbosco

Monday, Jan 12

@Kevin_Lin Thank you for the recommendation!

LSAT

•

Monday, Jan 12

jdelbosco

Unique Situation - Seeking Advice on Study Plan

Hi everyone!

My name is Jackson, and I have a little bit of an unorthodox path.

I'm 27, and have worked in Corporate Finance for the last 5 years. For a multitude of reasons, I have committed to a career change, and am now studying for the LSAT, with plans to take the test in June, apply in the fall, and begin in Fall 2027.

I took a timed practice test with no prep prior to building out a study plan and scored a 165 (LR -7, RC -9). With that, 7Sage recommended 19 weeks of Just Practice, meaning no lessons, just answering/reviewing/analyzing questions. However, I am a little worried that I don't totally understand the underlying concepts and am getting by on intuition (e.g. Upon reviewing questions I got correct, I don't totally understand the underlying analysis/explanation).

Should I opt for an Accelerated path to ensure I have exposure to the fundamental concepts? Should I supplement that with PTs on the weekends during the Non-Practice phase for a hybrid approach? Or should I just go with the Just Practice approach?

Thank you for spending the time to read through this. Any and all feedback is appreciated!