@ said:

@ what is the Pacifico Method?

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy/p1

I didnt print anything and used a spreadsheet instead. Happy to share but can't upload here

@ said:

Wow this is incredible - congratulations! Did you feel like taking so many tests back-to-back like that is what helped you the most? I've been debating trying this or just spending more time drilling instead. Did you notice gradual improvement using this method or did something just kind of "click" for you after you hit x tests into it?

I also went up from 155 diagnostic to 176 in the July test in about 3 months and did 1 month of Core Curriculum and then 2 months of PT every other day or every day at times. I know it is not a popular opinion but I definitely think this is what helped me the most. Especially once you start getting very few questions wrong and it doesn't take long to review (I still did very thorough reviews of any question that I got wrong or had any doubts about and marked).

I definitely feel that the constant practice drilled into my instincts how to get through most of the questions and how to predict traps almost immediately. It was not as much of a click as a gradual increase of my average score (of course there was fluctuation but after the core curriculum i was consistently at mid-160s and after a month at low 170s with occasional spikes. It was probably after a month and a half that my scores stopped spiking up and down and started settling at about 174-175 and by the end I was PTing at about 177.

I would definitely do this again but I think you have to be very motivated to avoid burnout and even then it is unavoidable at times. I did take a couple days off a few times when my energy was just too low (or I was working long hours for my job). I did see a couple big drops (high 170s to 169 more or less) later in the game but it was more for lack of focus and burnout. However I think these were also good learning experiences to focus more on how I was feeling during testing and how to best bring my best game on during test day. One of the things I started doing consistently was to meditate for focus and did a variety of 'pre-game' routines to pump me up (think pump-up music, walking out of the locker room style moves, getting my heart rate up doing some air-punches, strategy visualization for each section and question type...hahah). Seems stupid but it is definitely what helped me both bring focus and energy to every test and also simulate test conditions where you will be more nervous and have your heart racing. Since I was doing the FLEX I knew I would be able to keep these routines, especially the ones for focus, for the real test.

I was weakest at LG at first so on top of tests every other day I alternated with drilling with the famous Pacifico Method :) Other than that, thorough BR and review geared towards strategy development for different questions types, trap types, etc. and periodic updating and review of these. At first my 'review' notes were all over the place but after a while I saw patterns and developed them into strategies that I pretty much ingrained into my head by repetition. Writing things down helps me personally so all my review I wrote out by hand and then had a takeaways sheet of paper with the main strategies I missed or needed to emphasize more. Also did this prior to every PT.

Anyways, this helped me and might not be ideal for everyone but let me know if you're interested in any more details!

Didn't try but even with a big screen it is going to look exactly the same as it looks in LSAT hub so I would test that there and get used to that setup :)

In my case it is more of an art than a science (cliche, I know). I have a range of approaches from a pure attack method (trying to find the answer and moving on once I find it) and a pure elimination method (going through each choice).

As a general guideline I know that I should be more comfortable with a pure attack method in the first 10-15 questions in the section. I will say, though, that I am flexible and only go for this approach if I succesfully prephrase and find exactly that answer. When I get deeper into the section I try to be more cautious of traps and range from a quick skim of answers if I am fairly confident to a slower process of elimination for the toughest ones.

To your question on specific types, I generally don't check all choices or do a very quick skim for MP or AP questions since at a relatively early point in your preparation you should be very good at breaking up an argument. In terms of other types, I can also be quite confident of MBT, Necessary Assumption, and easier RRE questions.

@ said:

so 'the week of July 12th" does that mean we could have up to the 18th to take it?

The message on the LSAC account said Sunday and Monday for most tests except for special proctoring cases (not sure what this means but I assume most people will take it Sunday June 12 and Monday June 13).

Thank you everyone! I think you all have very good points. I think too that it can burn me out to do too many tests in a week, they are definitely marathons. I will focus more time on BR and trying to master each test.

@ said:

I just did this very thing on the May LSAT-Flex. You're correct to be concerned because there is an "additional monitor" rule that says you can't use multiple monitors.

I verified this with a ProctorU tech support person the night before the test. My case, like yours, was that my laptop's monitor does not produce an optimal image and that I turn the attached (laptop) monitor off and connect an alternate monitor. The spirit of the rule (I guess) is that you cannot have multiple displays of the test running simultaneously. But as long as you turn one off, and have only one monitor running, you are not violating that. Just make the case yours is an "alternate" monitor, not an "additional" monitor. They let me do it with no problems.

Thanks! This makes sense. As long as I turn the laptop screen off and have the monitor be the single screen there should not be two active screens. Thank you for confirming!

Essentially the argument boils down to: We cannot say direct mail advertising is bad for the environment because if people buy this way (online / phone), they don't drive to the store and therefore that is pollution that doesn't go into the environment.

The core of this argument is that DMA is preventing trips to the store. They will try to trick you, at least they got me for a bit, with thinking that all that paper for useless ads was bad for the environment. This put my eyes on D for a couple seconds. "Targeting ads seems to help prevent waste of paper and ads..." BUT THAT ISN'T THE ARGUMENT BEING MADE! Once you focus on how the premise is supporting the conclusion you narrow it down to this driving trip prevention issue and if it holds.

The logical assumption therefore is that consumers were going to make that trip in the first place, otherwise it is not prevented.

This was a strengthen question so even if B does not guarantee that the use of paper for this kind of advertising, for example, outweighs the reduced pollution from people not driving to the store, B still strengthens the conclusion by protecting it from the attack that people actually were not going to go to the store anyways and these ads are actually just adding to pollution (delivery, paper...)

Awesome thanks for confirming! Was a bit worried you'd have to be tracking down things

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

Can we use an external monitor for the rest?

I would assume so considering that you could have a desktop computer. When I asked proctor u support about it they said the proctor can tell if you have two screens so as long as you close your laptop and only one screen (external) is active then you’re fine. Still a little nervous about it but hopefully it’s fine.

If you close your laptop how does that work with webcam? Do you have to buy an external cam?

Yeah would not work. I had an external cam laying around so going to use that.

@ said:

Can we use an external monitor for the rest?

I would assume so considering that you could have a desktop computer. When I asked proctor u support about it they said the proctor can tell if you have two screens so as long as you close your laptop and only one screen (external) is active then you’re fine. Still a little nervous about it but hopefully it’s fine.

The LSAT is now fully digital even for in person tests (they use a Microsoft Go tablet and give you a pen that has one end that is a stylus for the tablet).

The LSAT flex is literally taken on the LawHub website so it is exactly the same format as those practice exams they have on there. The Digital LSAT is pretty much the same but in a tablet format so horizontal instead of vertical and no mouse.

You will not be able to annotate on the question itself other than those highlighter and underline tools, just the same way the 7Sage digital PTs are. I suggest you practice this and get used to it since it is what you will see (either on your laptop or on a tablet at the test center).

Unfortunately paper tests with full annotation flexibility are a thing of the past :neutral:

Very sorry to hear Christina! I would try to contact LSAC about it and explain the situation. They might not want to help but I think it is worth trying. In any case, if you have to take the next exam it might delay your application cycle a bit, but many schools are pushing their decision timelines due to Covid and applying super early seems like it won't have as much of an impact this cycle. Good luck!

Interested!

The key here is a trap that the LSAT enjoys regarding comparisons.

A, B and E are easy to eliminate and it is tempting to eliminate D as they have drawn you to the trap by using the temporal comparison (before versus after the debate). However, C is wrong because the answer does NOT include anything about the people who liked Lopez. The comparison that is important for the conclusion is between Lopez and Tanner fans. C only said:

"The people who watched the televised debate were more likely to vote for Tanner than were the people who did not watch the debate."

This just compares likelihood to vote for Tanner in two populations. It does NOT relate it to Lopez. Being more likely to vote for tanner than other people does not mean you are more likely to vote for Lopez (the first group could be 2% for Tanner and the second group 3%, both groups still being biased in favor of Lopez)

This is hard I believe because D never specifies that the people in the two surveys are the same or that they both are representative samples, leaving a shed of doubt. However, C is definitely wrong.

No worries! :smiley:

Sorry! I think I made this way more complex than it really is. You are correct in the way you are thinking through it so don't worry about it.

In a normal situation v -->/z would be exactly as you put it. If V is in, then Z is in the other group. If Z is not in, we cannot say what follows, V and Z could both be out (basic rule that you got right, satisfying a necessary condition produces no inferences).

Now imagine the following situation:

We have two groups, Group A and Group B.

We have the following elements: V, Z, X, Y

All the elements can be in only one group and must all be utilized

Rule: If V is in a group, then Z cannot be in that group (V-->/Z)

This is a "camouflaged" biconditional. Essentially, since both letters must be used (in one of the groups, does not matter which). When V is in one of them, Z is in the other. And when Z is in one of the groups, then V must be in the other. What this rule really is:

Va ->/Za and since we only have two groups, Va -> Zb (Za ->Vb)

Vb ->/Zb and since we only have two groups, Vb ->Za (Zb ->Va)

making it a bi-conditional:

Va (-) Zb

Vb (-) Za

Since we only have two groups where we can place the items (binary setup), were both groups are treated the same, they must always be in the opposite group to one another, making it a biconditional.

The rule itself is NOT strictly written as a biconditional, but since it just specifies a "group" and both A and B are groups (the only groups), it is camouflaging a biconditional relationship. Having to use all elements and having only two possible groups (both of which are treated the same), puts you in a situation where V and Z are always going to send the other to the opposite group.

Now if I said:

Rule: If V is in group A, then Z cannot be in that group (Va-->/Za)

Now I do NOT have a biconditional

Hope this helps!

Good to know, knowing this will definitely impact my strategy. Was a bit bummed with this flex format considering my best section is LR and I still struggle with LG so was more willing to go for it if this was the case.

Will we be required to use a computer or can we use a tablet if we have one?