I wish earlier in my prep I had started doing questions with premises first. Oftentimes while doing these premise questions first, I am able to eliminate wrong answer choices in other questions that don't have premises. If you have any more questions you think I could answer, let me know! Good luck!

lol

When I negate "not over" in this sentence I think, "for it to be over, I need the fat lady to sing!"

Which is your - O > FLS

I hope this makes sense! If you need more clarification, please let me know!

If you feel you have time, maybe power through Ellen Cassidy's Loophole. It's like $30 on Amazon. It seemed to help me quite a bit.

I have done this question before (months ago). Reading it again now, my own RRE is that maybe extremely valuable items being put in these auctions leads to fewer people bidding on the items. A few people MAY know this, and you'll risk having one of these persons place a low bet that is the only bet (weak, I know, but that's all I could think of). And probably this is what made me gravitate towards AC D.

My reasoning for why C is wrong is that it doesn't seem to explain why valuable items like the Hope Diamond necessitate placing token bids. You'd think rich wackos would still be all over it and that likely every item in the auction would have a token bid that would generate a profit for the owner.

AC E explains the situation by saying, "the rich wackos bidding on these items think that they will have to bid so crazily high that they likely don't even bother biding, therefore making it more likely for them many of them no to bid at all, leading to the possibility that we'll have really low bids on the item."

REALLY hard question. At least for me. I hope my explanation was at least a little helpful. I wish the master, JY, would do explanations on these. However, I like to think of these PT's that don't have explanations as an opportunity to pick your own brain, and hopefully learn something and make new LSAT brain cells in the process.

I think your reasoning is great. I approach necessary assumption questions by negating each AC and seeing if the argument falls apart, so it's nice to look at another persons reasoning reasoning to have an even better artillery to attack NA questions. Here's my negated AC's -

A. WHAT IF - one of the operas is not commercially viable? WHO CARES? We could still have renewed interest in opera over the past 30 years via the remaining 44 new operas.

B. WHAT IF - there were greater than or equal to 45 professional opera companies that had been active 30 years ago and that ceased operations during the last 30 years? ARGUMENT WRECKED! That means we have about the same or equal amount of operas we began with 30 years ago!!! Now it DOESN'T seem like that has been an explosion in public interest over the past 30 years.

C. WHAT IF - There has been a corresponding increase in the number of professional companies devoted to the public arts? WHO CARES? We could still have renewed interest in opera over the past 30 years.

D. WHAT IF - the size of the average audience at performances by professional opera companies has increased or stayed the same over the past 30 years? This arguably could strengthen our argument! Or at least do nothing to it.

E. WHAT IF - the 45 most recently founded opera companies were not all established as a result of enthusiasm on the part of a potential audience? Say five weren't. So what? We could still have 40 that were based on the enthusiasm of their potential audiences.

Ellen Cassidy's Loophole! It's like 35 bucks on Amazon.

I can only approach these hard disagree/agree questions by crossing off each AC after reading only one argument.

Doing this and thinking about AC C, the archeologist doesn't have any opinion on this (risking their lives). It's easy to assume that the archeologist is saying, "Not so" to the entire conclusion of, "under this rule treasure hunters clearly are entitled to keep the cargo from ancient shipwrecks that they risk their lives to save from oblivion in public waters." Still, I don't think he is trying to do that. He is only saying "not so" to treasure hunters getting to keep the treasure under this rule, and his argument rests on the ships being stabilized (not in peril).

Really hard question. Under timed conditions, I would have probably chosen C too.

I really struggled with this at first too. What helped me was fool proofing games 1-35 (after going through the entire LG curriculum). I know this is tedious, but I saw a huge improvement after doing it.

Also, lots of deep breaths helps throughout this process too. There were times I would want to pull out my hair when looking at a game for the very first time and not seeing a way to set it up. Eventually, it will come to you naturally.

I think what is best is redoing each individual question. It's time consuming, but it's where you will learn the most. :)

I'm 11 months into studying for this test. Pretty hardcore studying mind you and while doing a practice test last week I read "emphatic" as "empathetic" while knowing exactly what each of these words mean. I read this word MULTIPLE TIMES and still didn't realize what I had done until watching the explanation video after BR.

I wouldn't be so hard on yourself. My running joke to myself is "as soon as I learn how to read, I will crush this test."

Nope! They are one in the same, just different phrasing. The phrase "main point" is usually used in RC stims while "main conclusion" is usually used in LR stims.

I used Reading Comp Hero's notetaking method. The course does cost some money, but I think it was worthwhile for me.

It seems like you are currently going through the core curriculum. If I were you, I wouldn't worry too much about mental burnout or how many 3+ difficulty questions there will be on the test. You're experiencing burnout after a few problem sets because your training your brain to work in ways it's never had to before (which is exhausting). I experienced the same thing going through the core curriculum. Especially lots of frustration which furthered the burnout potential.

LR will become intuitive with time and your brain will be stronger and much less prone to burnout. Give yourself patience and breaks.