@ said:

I cannot agree more! I recently had a similar experience. I had my first -0 LG section on my PT on Saturday and that can be attributed to two weeks of drilling... AM, PM, in my sleep, you name it. It works people!!! I was going -12 on LG. It seems hopeless but it can happen!

Going from -12 to -0 in awesome! Can you elaborate on what was your initial trouble and what you most improved to make that jump?

I'm hoping that some RC session host by Sages would come before Sept LSAT. After attending @ RC session, I feel more confident in RC.

+3 here for certain!

My 2 cents on LG's is to prioritizes understanding the implications of each rule and spend enough time with each rule until you have them memorized. I like to do more thinking than drawing game boards. When I see an obvious split, I do it. If I don't, I hit the conditional questions first, then the global ones. The reason I mention this is because it greatly improved my speed on LG's and I think I'm probably slower than most on here. Keep practicing!

At fist, preventing yourself from rereading will force you to read slower. Think of it this way; you only get one chance to understand what this sequence of words is trying to tell me. After some disciplined practice, your reading speed will actual increase because your ability to comprehend and your ability to focus will have improved! It really does work for us "slow readers."

English is my second language as well. A few tricks I use are to visually abbreviate words that are not necessary to the understanding of the passage or argument, like "floccinaucinihilipilification" I would read as "flac" and be confident its context will provide the meaning. Also, a big problem I've overcome is letting my eyes return to the previous word or words. This is a bad habit. So, to break this habit, force yourself to eliminate rereading as an option. It will force you to focus on the words you are currently reading, help comprehension, and ultimately increase your speed. Of course rereading is sometimes necessary, but as a drill not rereading is very helpful. Also, with general practice w/ PT's you will get faster!

@ said:

Honestly revisit Core-curriculum and do drills!

Having a lower score than 160 implies you still have a lot to learn in your fundamentals. Doing PT's is a good way to check if you have mastered the fundamentals but you certainly want to space them out as far apart as possible till you feel you have drilled a lot of your weaknesses out. I think I did two PT's before I hit a 160. But I had done 3 months of hard core core-curriculum and drills and I practically had the Powerscore LR bible memorized.

In conjunction with doing Core curriculum and drills you want to write everything down. Break down each argument in a drill. Do it untimed but make that review 100%.! This is a slow and agonizing process. But when you train for something first you want to force yourself to mechanically get in the habit of thinking the right way. For example, when I first started to learn to play water polo I had to sit on the side of the pool each day and get my legs to get in the habit of treading water a certain way. That's all I did for a week or two for an hour! Then I had to force myself to tread water for 10 min, then increase it to 20 min, then 30 min. Then I had to practice just passing the ball for hours, then defense, and finally the rules of the game. Only after that was I allowed to start playing the game and improve my game.

Did each person have to go through what I went through to learn the game?

Nope. Some people were way ahead of me and knew how to tread water, pass the ball etc. But I didn't so I had to mechanically learn. Similarly not each person will need to know the basics. Some people are familiar with the formal logic aspect of LSAT and need a quick LSAT course and are good to go. Unlike them, I needed to learn all my fundamentals because I did not know it prior to studying for LSAT. My untimed diagnostic was a 155, I think my timed diagnostic would have been in 140s. Each part had to be learnt mechanically for hours at an end before I could do it fast without thinking about it. Your brain works similarly when you first encounter LSAT. It is not used to the new way of thinking. Forcing yourself to write everything down trains your brain to think that way. With time you will not need to write it down and your brain will automatically think that way fast. But it needs to go slow first and do it correctly at that speed for hours before it becomes automatic and fast.

You will not get better advice than this! Bravo and AGREED.

Just confirming what Darth said. I too read the LRB, however, I hit a wall at -3 or -4 per LR section. If I go -0 it's because I guessed correctly. Since I have not completed the 7sage CC yet (which I am going to), I cannot say for sure it's what you need. However, I would strongly suggest doing the CC yourself, nail down the fundamentals, and then be able to have an intuitive plan of attack for each question type. This is what the LRB does not allow for because it offers more "tricks" than leaning how to internalize (still think it's a great book). Once you internalize, your speed and accuracy will jump. This I can guarantee. If you still have ?'s feel free to PM me.

@ said:

"I think ultimately the practice of learning to diagram these out accurately and efficiently can lead to being able to do some of the longer ones in your head! So it's really a win-win."

That is A+ advice. Thanks Alex.

Have you tried reading the questions first? It is not a popular technique but as a slow reader it works very well for me. I do zero notating and only circle names and bracket passage sections mentioned in the questions. Maybe give it a try? I'm -1 or -2 on RC. Was -7+ when I started.

@ said:

"I had a better understanding of the rules"

Don't rush into the game board would be my 2 cents. Keep in mind, the LG section is asking you to analyze and infer, and you cannot do either if you do not understand the situation and the rules thoroughly. Maybe take the attitude that you want a weird game on test day because you're brilliant and a Logic Game Machine:) Also, clarifying rules in your head is not tantamount to "doing nothing", although when the clock is ticking it can really feel like that. You got this!

You are right on point!

"statistical study of automobile theft"

It's a claim

It is a valid correlation NOT cause and effect

What could be a valid confound or 3rd variable to explain the phenomenon?

The only clear explanation is based on statistics

"Automobile owners who have particularly

theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest

incidence of car theft are those who are most

likely to have antitheft devices installed." This is the only answer that addresses the correlation itself. More theft prone cars in high theft prone locations = more of a need for anti theft devices and the greater PROBABILITY of these cars being stolen.

I tried to look this up, but PT17 is LG and no Q25. Double check if you still want feedback.

Just some advice that worked for me. I memorized the 9 valid argument forms until I knew them as well as my phone number (which I know very well). The invalid forms are anything but those 9. It took some time but now it's second nature. Gook luck, there is no substitute for time and practice!

To the OP: Try reading the AC's first. Or at least preview them before reading the passage. I am a relatively slow reader and time is the killer in RC for me. Once I began scanning the answer choices first (not recommended for most), my accuracy and speed drastically improved. It worked for me is all I can say. Also, if you are doing well in LR than there is absolutely no reason that you cannot transpose that ability to RC. Keep at it and you'll get there, I promise.

John will get Sandy's phone number.

NA: Sandy has a phone number.

SA: When John asks for a phone number, he always gets it.

Invalid Argument Form:

A---->B

B

--------------

A

Also, you can use cause and effect confusion to answer this question

@ said:

Feel gutted by the test. It was such a weird mix.

I went perfect on LG -0

I did horrible on LR -8/-5

I did horrible on RC -7

My lowest PT in the 3 months prior to the Sept test was a 163. My highest was a 174.

So here I am. 163 and feeling pretty beat down. Since I'm a splitter obviously I'm not getting into the schools I had hoped for. (2.7 GPA)

I also have a ton of pressure on me so I have to apply this cycle, just not many ways around it...so idk what to do...retake in December and pray? Apply with this score now and pray? Lower my standards considerably?

This test sucks some times

This is the easiest multiple choice question in history! RETAKE IN DEC AND CRUSH IT!

@ AC A is a mess! Yes it is wrong to say. The only "logical" thing would be to say "since there have been no populous fear of environmental disaster than no areas of small progress have been made." Your conditional translation of the sentence is correct. However it is merely a premise.

I would love to join a study group for December's test! My diagnostic was 160 from the June 07 PT. That is the only one I have taken. Been working my way through the CC. However, I would take PT's as early as this weekend it someone could get one started. I have no idea how.

@ What game is giving you trouble? Would be easier to help you with a specific example. The good news is that if you can do a simple sequencing game, a double sequencing game isn't much different. No need to mess w/ PS. It is all well covered here on 7sage.

I'm in! Just finished Argument Part section of the CC. I check 7sage pretty much constantly, so I am always available to answer questions. Please note where you are at will the CC.

I have chickened out twice already and the only penalty is having to carry the piano on your back for that much longer:) You're good!

@ said:

If mark goes to school except Sunday, don't we say that : if mark goes to school, then it's not Sunday? Or if it's Sunday, then mark doesn't go to school?

Yes this is correct but you are using the conditional indicator "if" and simpley using "except" to negate Sunday. Try the same sentence without "if".

@ Thanks for the response! I was curious why "except" was not listed among the grp 3 indicators, hence my confusion. I thought there might be a reason why it was excluded. And yes to drilling! That is what I am doing with all the CC. The last 2 or 3 point jump that I need depends on turning my brain into a computer program and relying less on what already comes naturally. Thanks again for responding!