@ I appreciate the feedback. Yeah, I'm starting to notice that Flaw and Necessary Assumption are the keys to the LR section, at least for me. I've never been a fan of drilling types, but at least on these two I can see how beneficial it could be

@ Based on some of your previous posts, it sounds like you had a strong logic foundation outside of LSAT studies. If so, would you say having a background in logic helped you perform to the extent you have? Would you recommend any general books on the matter?

I struggle the most with LR. Though across the board I tend to get -6 on average on each section, I see there's still some potential with RC/LG because my BR is better on these sections. With LR, I hardly improve on BR. Though I circle nearly half of the questions and review, I only manage to correct a few and sometimes end up undoing what I would have otherwise gotten as correct by changing my answer. Although I most often get Necessary Assumption, Flaw, and Weaken and Strengthen incorrect, I really feel as though it comes down to how difficult the stimulus is regardless of question type. Worst of all, even after having spent a lot of time going over the right answer, I never get the sense that I would absolutely not commit the same mistake with a different but similar structure because I always fall in the same habits. It's really impossible for me to discern broad patterns too. Any advice on how you were able to track that? In terms of difficulty, there's no clear or consistent pattern with me. It's all over the place.

@.Dantes I know this is your discussion topic but do you have advice about "change of mentality" or any approach you personally took to get up to a 170? I've been at this for well over a year (almost two) and I seem to be perpetually stuck at the high 150s low 160s despite having gone through the Ultimate course and BR. Any insights?