I took that exam, saw that game, and figured it was a joke. Just insanely difficult to solve in a normal amount of time.

Yes

I would cancel. If you know you can make 170s, then a 164 really does not show what you are capable of. Just my opinion.

I didn't have a clue how to set that up. I kept thinking there was some trick that I was just not thinking about. Then I kinda froze. I guessed on at least 4.

I wonder if anybody who does Logic Games well would be willing to do a Zoom lesson where you solve these logic games from the Flex Test? I know this is a hail mary, but I've been hoping they'd be solved here, but it looks like they won't be. I'd love any help I can get.

I love this question. There's so much going on here that learning this question means you've learned the ins and outs of sufficiency/necessity at a very high level.... with unspoken necessity relationships... and with trap questions. Good practice!

Do we know when explanation videos will be released for the May 2020 flex exam on LawHub?

Same.

Did anybody use Firefox?

If I were you, I'd concentrate on the 70s and 80s.

I had the exact same thought, too. If the bones of an animal that is clearly impossible to ride (a tiny goat, for instance) had the exact same mortality pattern as the horse bones, it would suggest that Olsen's hypothesis about the horses being both domesticated AND ALSO RIDDEN is an incorrect hypothesis. Because you would then be able to say, "Why did these tiny goats have the same mortality pattern as the horses? Clearly, they weren't being both domesticated and ridden."

Overall, I think this is a poorly written question.

I read this, and all I could think was, "This person is going to be totally fine when they take the next exam." Just think of this one as a practice test where things went south. It happens to all of us. You can TOTALLY, 100% do this next time. I wouldn't be surprised if your next test was at least a 165. Do not sweat this! Let me repeat. Do. Not. Sweat. This. You should not be discouraged by this one test. You have been consistently getting in the 160s on your PT, and mark my words, that's what you'll do in November if you keep the right mindset! Good luck!!!!!

I think in general you should be prepared to skip any question that is a time sink for you. That time sink question is worth one point, and if you skip it, you can take that time to get three or four more points. The same goes for RC. If you find a passage on which your eyes are glazing over and you have literally no idea what it's saying, then it's time to move on. Concentrate on the other questions and then come back to the hard passage after the others have been done.

I wonder if there is a list of SA questions that are similar to this one -- where the lawgic is very strange and the question doesn't lend itself to a normal diagram...

You might want to explore accommodations if your GI medical condition substantially limits your life activities. If so, you may qualify for being allowed to stop the clock to excuse yourself to go to the restroom.

I would approach PSA and Strengthen questions similarly. Look for something that goes a long way toward fixing the argument entirely. Most of the time, the language in the correct answer choice will be quite strong. This is why Loophole categorizes the correct answer types as "powerful." NA questions require a little more analysis. They language of the answer choice is usually not nearly as strong. I've also noticed that NA answer choices that have conditionals need to be looked at extra carefully. Often these choices are wrong.