It is you’re right, but is entirely proven that they made LR more difficult and nuanced after they removed logic games. They just don’t have that smooth, predictable difficulty ramp anymore. PowerScore even recommends certain PTs that are closer to the real LSAT, since most PTs are a notch or two easier than the real thing.

Yes nerves play a factor and depending on the person it makes sense to test a bit lower on the actual test. But seriously LR is brutal on the real LSAT. It is no joke.

They made LR and RC harder and more nuanced after they dropped logic games. So yes, the new LR and RC sections are harder than the older ones. Because of this, not much of what we are given to practice is truly representative of the newest difficulty spike, in my opinion. The fundamentals are the same, but the difference between wrong and right answers is much, much more subtle than they used to be. There are very few gimme questions on the actual LSAT from my experience.

when gordy is struggling you know its hard

cooked alive

24

chill gordy

Hey guys on the actual LSAT there are no questions this easy tbh. Like it is usually about a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 split between level 3, 4 and 5 questions. I have pulled a 178 and 179 on practice tests but got a 167 in February

lmaoooo me too man me too

bro on god

started season 1 of BCS yesterday

sometimes the correct answer will be the contrapositive of the rule to make it harder. Only consider it if you hunt and can't find the answer directly stated

Anytime legal jargon is used im cooked is that a bad sign

love you

same

lmao when I get it correct I'm not even watching the vid

math in da LSAT fo today

4 minutes of brain stewing and then vibe-checked D

cooked

5/5 on most difficult, and I used to hate this question type, as it was undoubtedly my worst. Literally I was cooked on these.

Key Takeaways:

1. Find the conclusion. It is usually super easy in this question type's stimuli

2. Find how they are justifying the conclusion. Usually there is one single premise sentence that is the key to this.

3. Think about how you are bridging the gap between the conclusion and the premise you found. What is your brain doing to justify why the premise ensures the conclusion? If you read a stimuli and think "damn this seems bulletproof to me", you missed it. Your goofy little brain made the assumption without you even realizing it.

Don't fall for it, there is always something wrong with these arguments in the stimuli.

4. In the answers, you will usually be able to narrow it down to 2 good looking ones. Once you are there, negate them both. If the argument could still stand after the negation, it isn't right.

5. Remember, "none" or "no" is the negation to "some" or "any"

more than you would prefer

I've done two record LSATs and I've had LR sections with 5+

If it makes you guys feel better the real LSAT is like 25% NA questions in LR. It's awful lmao.

Yep, I thought I was a little LSAT genius picking E too. NA will be the death of me.

As long as the LSAT writers use subtle differences in language to make me

incorrectly assume that "those looking online for medical info" and "those looking online to self-diagnose their own medical condition" are the same people I will hate them with all my heart lmao.

My pick, A, was a bad call though. The correct NA answer will rarely have a proportion/probability word like "most".