@ You are an all-star!! Thank you so much.

@ You are why 7Sage is meta!!

@ I think taking what @ is talking about with a "learning objective" can help you tweak your plan here.

Rather than focusing on being able to write an entire RC passage from memory without messing up a single word, perhaps a better idea is making your learning objective to read a passage and be able to sum it up in your own words - almost in a conversational manner.

Like you read a dense passage about blockchain technology, and then are able to describe what you just read in a way that would make sense to your grandmother. Acquiring this kind of skill would help your RC score much more than the skill you were initially talking about.

And ultimately, the 7Sage low res strategy would be perfect at taking this skill of summarizing in your own words and turning it into a valid testing strategy. Meaning - when the clock is ticking you won't have time to write a full personalized summary of each paragraph/passage - but you will have time to jot your quick low res summaries down. And because you spent time honing your ability to remember and summarize, you will be all the better at crafting your low res summaries.

Does that make sense? Hope this helps.

@ said:

If you haven't checked out the LSAT Lab RC videos, I highly recommend checking them out. They're available for free on Youtube and they totally changed my RC game.

On top of that, I totally agree with @, especially with 5: Worry less about speed and more on comprehension. I improved my score a ton simply by slowing down and making sure that I understood what I was reading.

Hi @ -- I checked these out, can I ask what particularly in them changed your game?

@ I got a TON of value from your insights -- thanks so much! Best of luck in your applications.

Hey Ken -- I guess the question is what is the purported value from doing this?

@ Thanks for the tip!

@ Thanks for the help! I've tried the computer screen cleaning version of windex but it hasn't fixed the problem completely. I'll definitely have to look into if there's a problem with the air quality in the room. It's a basement conference room of an office building, so on first blush it doesn't seem like there should be an issue, but I appreciate your recommendations!

@ I use Headspace and it has worked wonders.

@ Same for you as well! I just took Nov but am anticipating an additional take sometime in 2022. Hbu?

@ I do 2 hours AM and 2 hours PM. Any more than this and the zoning out effect @ mentioned begins to happen. Unless you're going near perfect in LG, I think drilling a game or two is always a great way to start the study day.

@ I recommend using @'s advice in your PTs as I believe it provides a more calibrated reflection of your skill level, but for the actual LSAT, because it's still only 3 graded sections, it will be about a -18 for the 160.

A _ _ B with a box around it and a switch on the A/B, and a mini "Ex" written either above or below the 2 spaces between.

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

Cancel your score and retake in November amigo.

Unfortunately I don't have that option, as the next international testing date is January. By the point I will have to just wait until next year, because I need the better odds of merit money by applying "early." ):

If you in fact get a lower than expected score (which may not even happen), January is a perfectly viable option. While earlier is better, scholarship money generally doesn't "run out." Schools overcommit several times their budget and are constantly getting money"back" as people withdraw, and re-awarding it. Anecdotally, I applied with a January score and am at a T14 with the highest scholarship they offer.

Petition for a retake, then focus on self care until you hear back. Best case, take another shot next week... worst case, kill it in January. Either way (and even if things had gone smoothly this time) holds possible that you both do or do not ultimately get viable admissions outcomes. It could very well be that the extra study time between now and Jan makes the difference... it was for me. Just focus on what's in your control.

@ I agree with @'s take here. This application cycle will be slower than usual as well because of the spillover effect from last cycle, so I think you'll be just fine with January.

That being said if you're really not feeling January, couldn't you board a plane to the US/Canada in November and take the test that way? Might sound extreme to some, but as long as there's not some LSAC rule against doing this (there's not that I'm aware of), then I wouldn't say this is an extreme measure at all. When it comes to accomplishing your goals, there has to come a point where nothing will get in your way.

Cancel your score and retake in November amigo.

@ @ @ Glad to help. Also for clarification on my sequencing advice, something I will do is draw a horizontal slash through the board below each split-board created, just to separate things out more clearly - still takes less time than the individual dashes and numbering each time. Happy studying.

If I had to chose 1 thing: The way JY teaches conditional logic is foundational. Other test prep materials turn this into a muddled mess.

After that, I think the 7Sage Logic Games method is crucial as well - it seems like a lot of students come here specifically for the games lessons, realize how good it is, and venture into the rest of the CC.

The third thing that comes to mind are the lessons in existential logic and valid/invalid argument forms.

Hope this helps.

Reaching out for #help on this gem from PT4.

"A scientific theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements"

When I translate this intuitively I'm getting:

Good theory -> Satisfy 2 requirements

Based on the wrong ACs to this MBT Except question, I think LSAC is hinting at this translation as well.

My problem with putting the "Satisfy 2 requirements" in the sufficient condition like this,

Satisfy 2 requirements -> Good theory

is that even though it was introduced by "if", requirements don't ever guarantee anything, but are simply our must haves.

Another way to look at it is like this:

Good theory (-) Satisfy 2 requirements

But once again I feel this is straying away from the intuitive understanding of what this sentence is communicating. Treating this as a bi-conditional just because we have the "if" and "requirements" together seems like a quick fix to the confusion, but I still think it's missing the point.

I am definitely open to convincing though! Would love to hear anyone's thoughts.

Hey @ , something I do to cut down on "setup" time is be on the look-out for aesthetic tweaks you can make to your game-boards that will not be detrimental to your ability to interpret them. For instance, things I do to save seconds during my setups are:

For sequencing games: only numbering odd slots (1, 3, 5, etc). Putting the numbers on TOP of the slots with game-pieces below, and then placing all my split-boards/different worlds below as well, rather than drawing out the lines and numbers for every single split-board. I just reference back up to the top to ensure I'm dropping pieces into the right spot. (Let me know if you need more clarification on this).

For in/out games: Only drawing the check and X on the master game-board. If you have a decent comfort level with the game, you can also make the call on whether to only draw the individual slots (if necessary), and group close-outs (if necessary) on the master game-board, making the split-boards just completely empty shells and then referencing back to the master game-board for the global rules. This is something I only elect to do on in/out games if they are 1) of the easier type 2) require 4+ split-boards. In this scenario, I believe the time you save by not drawing out all the aesthetic aspects of your split-boards is substantial.

Additional timesavers:

ALWAYS doing the acceptable situation question in tandem with your set-up.

ALWAYS doing the additional premise questions before the others.

If you're not nearly perfect in LG yet, ALWAYS skipping the substitution and equivalence questions and coming back to them if you have time at the end.

Hope this helps!

Hi there, I can definitely relate and my advice would be to cancel your Nov take before going into it, and then regroup and go from there.

I took the LSAT not once, but TWICE, with the same pre-test state of mind you're in now and it went horribly not once, but TWICE. Ultimately I don't think there's a way to ever be 100% prepared for this test. But there is a BIG difference between being 20% prepared and 85% prepared. When you're closer to the 85% level the week of the test, the thoughts that will naturally be going through your mind are things like "OK - I got this. I know there will be curve balls, but I am confident in my ability to handle them. I know it won't be perfect, but I know I can do well!"

This is the place you need to be in before going into an actual LSAT. If a certain thought or someone is forcing you into rushing this process - you have to quell it. This test takes time for some, and postponing your actual take to a later date is more often right than wrong.

Hope this helps!

@ This is coming from a place of love: You are one confusing guy!

To my friendly 7Sagers taking the LSAT this weekend - You got this!!! Put the team on your back like Greg Jennings did!!!

@ Thanks a ton for the insights. I took some notes on what you said about

Recognizing how under-confidence on early LR questions impacts your performance on the rest of the section

Playing the long-game with this test if necessary and not beating yourself up about it

I think you can include it in your essay, but I would focus more on the progress you have made in your adult life to overcome and become a better person. Echoing @ and @.

Hey Matt, miscellaneous games do still show up every now and then. I'd only spend time foolproofing them if you are consistently solid under time on all of the standard types of games.