Overall didn't feel any harder than any other PT. Praying that those perceptions were an accurate representation of the reality of it, and that i performed accordingly.

RC - LR - LG

Decreasing in difficulty in that order

RC - African Culture/European Forests/Comparative Passages on Legal Theory/Fish Cell Theory

RC... what can i say... it is substantially more difficult to predict outcomes in RC than the other sections. I'm going to go ahead and predict a positive outcome. There.

LR and LG felt ok.

I felt like LR wasn't more difficult, necessarily, but i did feel like there were more attractive trap AC's that caught my eye than normal. I'll go ahead and predict a positive outcome here too.

Lots of Setup in LG so had to power through, but finished on time.

There was one question in Game 4 that gave me sh*t and i skipped to review the other games, hoping that works out. It was a legit tough Q so i'm not mad at myself. Positive outcome is probable.

12 had me scratching my head because A seems so obvious except for the "Scholar" part. Stared at it for like 30 seconds wondering what kind of treachery they are up to, like i guarantee if i pick this they will be like --- HAAA an economist! Scholar is a ridiculous assumption!

He is an economist.... who plays video games... and came to a conclusion.... Scholar? Dude seriously that makes 0 sense as an assumption. Being an economist doesn't make you scholar any more than it makes you a sushi chef.

Why not sub out "scholar" for "deep sea fisherman" --- This doesn't say analogy

Idk how the test makers decide when its ok to make a completely unsupported assumption and when it isn't.

5 - Uhg i don't like this inference, its a stretch for AC D

It says "success and reputation" are OFTEN bestowed by the literary establishment

and

The work of Mexican writers is OFTEN cosmopolitan

This DOES NOT mean ALWAYS or even USUALLY --- it is entirely possible that "parochial" and "regional" writers are OFTEN supported by the establishment as well, and we have no reason to assume this doesn't happen. This is not an A or B and not both situation!

This would not be an inference we could have acceptably made in LR

This question takes advantage of our predisposition towards inferring conditionality. Problem is if we don't see that "consistent" with doesn't imply any conditional relationship, and really is just means that two things can exist together, which is essentially useless information, then you pick C.... also like JJLstlouis mentioned below, negating the RE "slump for some time" doesn't mean the RE market is "healthy"

11. This was a rare question that i got right the first time through, but changed to a wrong AC, B, in my BR.

First paragraph says that the Hopi names "often refer to historical or ritual events..."

Reading this and anticipating the argument and then going into paragraph 2 made me see something that wasn't there.

Well played LSAT writers.

A and E seem to be almost interchangeable to me. I see what they did and this is a dick move by the LSAT writers.

This is a really good example of why we need to look VERY carefully at terminology. For AC E, using age group made me think they meant generation, but they didn't.

We all read the stim like ok man... obviously you are not considering the fact that young people generally vote less and will more as they age, regardless of which generation. This is the flaw.

A - compares an early stage of of gen to late stage of another - ok perfect

E - overlooks the possibility that voting patterns among age groups will change in the future - yea what same thing?

what is A doing? saying that we shouldn't judge the early stage of one and the late stage of another... why? because the behavior of a group might change as they age... wait isn't this what E says? that voting patterns may change as they get older?

Yes and no.

It is certainly interpretable that this is what E says if we look at it as we have been baited to by the writers.

E - It overlooks the possibility that voting patterns among "Age Groups" AKA each "Generation", "will change in the future" meaning - a generation that is young will vote differently when it is old.

Is a generation an age group? Yes and no. This time they went with no.

Sometimes making this kind of assumption will yield the right answer, and sometimes, like now, it won't, which is why the writers are dicks.

I think what they are doing is saying that an "age group" (e.g. the 18-30 demographic) is not the same as a "generation"(e.g. millennials), and "will change in the future" doesn't mean "will change as the constituents age".

I think they are trying to get us by lack of language sensitivity... because technically we could interpret E to mean that in the future, and like JY notes, in a perhaps predictive and existential sense, the voting habits of "age groups" as in, people between 18-30 for example, will vote differently in the future, when this group is composed of entirely different individuals. This is obviously not the right answer, because it doesn't affect the argument that the author is making, which is not predictive.

Also, anyone feel free to correct me if i am wrong, actually please do!

In case anybody fell into the same trap i did, was stuck between A and D

If you are like me, you saw A was good, but you have a habit of second guessing and always assuming A is an attractive trap answer, sometimes your gut knows.

So: The computers can be offered for free (A)

Why? because of the increased sales(B) resulting from the precise ads that play continuously along the screen.(C)

A, because of B that results from C

If we take away C then we don't get B and we don't get A right? NOPE C is a sufficient condition, not a necessary one!

C → B → A

Negating C doesn't mean we can't still have A

Further, even in everyday logic, it seems like what JY was saying makes sense; that we can just change one word, "continuously". This is enough to break the AC, maybe playing 75% of the time is sufficient.

I think maybe some people fell for D because it seems to be supported by the stim, whereas E supports the reasoning

"i was excited to learn about chemistry then they started talking about covalent bonds and i wanted to shoot myself in the face"

hahahahahahaha -- actually laughed out-loud on that one

Also, E addresses the trending decrease, which A, C, and D don't mention

I think if C, for example, said that there have been more and more students entering in recent years with uncertainty it would have been better, still not great, but better.

I will qualify this by starting with a disclaimer that i know very little about admissions. But, it seems that it if we are concerned with percentages rather than absolute quantity, it is perhaps conceivable that if an admissions department has a requirement for X% Race A and Y% Race B, if you include your identity as Race A then the respective percentages are affected. While on the other hand, if you do not disclose race, then they can admit you without raising the proportion of A's.

Does this make sense?

This is worth noting:

https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

This will link you to an LSAT score breakdown by race from 2007-2014.

Interestingly the highest scoring group is the group that didn't provide racial background. What does that tell you?

I posted this elsewhere but then saw your post:

It helps me to think about the Big Picture. We all know how hard this beast is. Some people get it right the first time, other people get knocked down, even kicked when they are down, but keep going, keep fighting, and when they reach their goal the story is so much better, and their victory so much sweeter.

You are not alone. Scored well beneath my PT average as well as my expectations. Kind of sick to my stomach. I guess our experience with this exam will continue. Gotta keep pushing, sharpening, and pray that we meet the November exam a little better prepared, and lady luck smiles a little more in our direction.

I'm with you. Sucks. Devastated. Sat for a while after my exam and tried to set some expectations regarding the possibilities for my score. Was sure that i scored somewhere between 165-170. The vast majority of my PT's fall in this range, and i actually felt better than normal afterward so was thinking it may have been toward 170 or even possibly above. Have been slacking the last 3 weeks. Scored similarly to you. Time to get back on the horse.

Some people get lucky, some people get punched in the face and have to claw their way to success. The later is a better story any way right?

@ said:

Just got my score. I’m honestly devastated by it. I thought it went pretty well and I consistently scored above that in my prep tests. I need to raise my score by at least 8 points in order to even be considered anywhere given my low GPA... ugh. Withdrawing from October and signing up for November. I’m just worried that November will be a little late in the cycle?

It helps me to think about the Big Picture. We all know how hard this beast is. Some people get it right the first time, other people get knocked down, even kicked when they are down, but keep going, keep fighting, and when they reach their goal the story is so much better, and their victory so much sweeter.

You are not alone. Scored well beneath my PT average as well as my expectations. Kind of sick to my stomach. I guess our experience with this exam will continue. Gotta keep pushing, sharpening, and pray that we meet the November exam a little better prepared, and lady luck smiles a little more in our direction.

If you build it they will come brother! --- Also in my opinion, if its possible, keep your style. I know the curriculum is serious, but you managed to keep the LSAT study material some how casual and comfortable while still immersive and informative. I've listened to you so much at this point it sometimes feels like we are just hanging out and you are explaining stuff to me -- keep that! i'm sure others feel the same way.

This is an interesting contrast from my own approach so I'm curious --- What are you averaging in a given AR section?

Are you stressed because you are not going -0? or are you scoring like me even though we have taken different routes?

I have never fool proofed a game, but i have taken about 35 PT's at this point. My technique is to BR and then warm up before the next PT with the games from the previous PT. So i pretty much take each game 3 times and normally get through the 3rd time perfectly, with a few exceptions. This method(or lack thereof) has gotten me to about -4 per AR section, generally i miss one or two due to random errors that i can't believe i made, such as misreading a stem or AC, and i'll miss another one or two because i run out of time in the last game, usually.

To the rest of you guys who are fool proofing, is this breaking you into the 170's? I have only hit 170 and really wanna keep pushing higher but I wasn't sure if foolproofing is really worth the time investment, or if its enough to just take each game a couple times until it feels good enough and move on.

@ said:

Hi guys to everyone who had LG-RC-LR order on September 2nd in the afternoon

Does anyone remember how many questions were on the last logic game? I didn’t get to it and had to guess but I can’t remember how many questions I could have potentially missed on that game!

It was the same section with people who played piano violin,

And the grouping game with mosaics

Pretty sure it was 5 questions, maybe 6 tops.

@ said:

@ said:

Hi All,

This was my first LSAT so excuse the new guy question please :)

I'm accustomed to BR and always want to see which questions i got wrong after taking an exam.

Will LSAC allow us to review the questions on this exam at any point? Can we identify which questions we got wrong or right? If not is there any way to make sure we have been treated fairly?

Thank you!

Unfortunately, all the LSAT-Flex's are undisclosed, so we only get score and percentile, nothing else.

Fairness wise, I think it's safe to assume that LSAC is fair in the grading proceses.

Thank you :)

Alternatively, are we allowed to get together to try to remember the questions and see if we can conclude what the best answers were from our collective memories?

I want to reaffirm the importance of Blind Review!

You will begin to recognize patterns in LR and increase speed.

Also, rep out logic games frequently, noting the common deductions you can make from the rule sets; they tend to repeat.

Hi All,

This was my first LSAT so excuse the new guy question please :)

I'm accustomed to BR and always want to see which questions i got wrong after taking an exam.

Will LSAC allow us to review the questions on this exam at any point? Can we identify which questions we got wrong or right? If not is there any way to make sure we have been treated fairly?

Thank you!

LG - RC - LR

Take a deep breath y'all. We did it. Hopefully we got all our flagged Q's right and hit our goals! It's easy to be pessimistic, but in reality odds are just as good that you surpass your expectation as they are that you under-perform.

LG - Not super tough as far as LG sections go, but there was some important deductions right away in games 2 and 3 that were crucial to going -0. I missed one question on game 3 for sure, i noticed it in review but ran out of time before i could fix it... needed 1 min longer! Hopefully i didn't miss anything else because of that error. This section could be -1, or could be -5 if everything goes wrong. You know how it is.

Game 1 - easy

2 - Piano/Violin - moderate

3 - moderate/hard

4 - Viewers/Printers - moderate/easy

RC - overall this was the hardest section for me. As far as RC difficulty goes, I'd say this section was maybe in the 65%-70% percentile - harder for me than the usual PT, but not by a lot. My primary concern is that i didn't get to review my many flags... more than usual for sure. Really hard to gauge this, especially passages 3 & 4. Could be -3 could be -9.

Comic strip - easier

Finance programs for the poor in underdeveloped countries - not super hard, but time consuming

Theories of Dark matter and universal expansion - hard and time consuming

Legal theories of ownership - medium/hard

LR - Didn't feel super tough, hope that means it wasn't. A couple unsures. I didn't like the Greek architects question and PR was a bit of a time crunch. Between -1 and -5.

Lots of tech support/proctor issues. Proctor was kinda a d*ck about it. Took probably 30 mins before starting.

I think a fluctuations are normal to a certain extent. Low scores for me tend to be when everything goes wrong and most of my gambles didn't turn out, and high scores are when everything is good and i get a little lucky. I try to be honest with myself about the fact that, while learning LSAT skills are crucial to scoring higher, there is just going to be a degree of uncertainty. If you take 10 PT's you probably deserve to score around the average. We all want to get lucky and score our highest, but the odds of that are no better than scoring our lowest.

If you scored a 165, then its very likely that you will score a 160+ tomorrow. If you average 160, that's what you can expect, and i hope that probability would manifest with a 160. Don't panic in the exam. Remember that you have done the work it takes to get a 160, and the only way you won't get it is if you are unlucky.

If it makes you feel better i scored a 156 on a PT this month, but i also scored a 170. My average is like 165-166. So thats what i expect. I can score -0 and -1's on each section, and have many times, but i don't expect fate to be gentle. By the same token, don't expect fate to kick the sh*t out of you either.

Remember you can always retake, and even if you don't hit your goal score, you will still be a lawyer, have a great career, and a great life :)

Q 11 is a beast. "Testing Reading Comprehension" is a gentle way of putting whats happening here.

Thanks JY! --- went from getting it right via POE to understanding100%

21

B is clearly the best answer, but the lines referenced in the stem don't say ANYTHING about the quality of the music, merely that it is secondary.

It really helps to just use POE here, because frequently the right answers kinda suck.

They got me on 15

I eliminated D because nobody said anything about "artistic effectiveness"

Guess that is an inference that RC doesn't think is an issue. They are more laid back.