@ Everything you said makes absolute sense to me. I think I'll be doing something similar and accepting a (really really low ranked) school in my area, although I'm waiting to hear back from more schools before I'm totally sure.

Some questions: is the school you accepted a regional school? How much lower of a rank is it than somewhere like Cornell? Did you have to negotiate with them to ask for a stipend for living expenses? How did you make contacts with PI lawyers in your area to ask their opinions on your choice?

Also---thanks for sharing your decision! It's always nice to hear dissenting opinions.

> @ said:

>

>

>

> > @ said:

> > > @ said:

> > > Hey! Question when you do the BR do you make another setup or just go through the questions again with same board? Thanks

> >

> > I make another set up. Blind reviewing is done on a clean copy so your old work under time does not influence what your knowledge is capable of achieving without time. That way you can see the difference.

> >

>

> just to get it clear that means doing the games with @ strategy requires you to do the game 4x on day 1? 1x then BR then again and BR again?

The way I do the Pacifico strategy splits the game attempts up. At minimum, if you get the game perfectly, under time, and you feel great, you'll do it 3 times. 1st on the first day, 2nd on the next day, and 3rd a week from the next day (i.e. Monday, Tuesday, and next Tuesday.)

If I don't get it perfectly, which happens like 99% of the time for me because I'm terrible at games, it goes to more times. 1st on the first day, then as many extra times as needed on that first day till I'm doing perfectly. Let's say it's just one more time because after watching the video I get it -0 in under time. Then I continue the schedule, but now I'll be doing the game a total of four times instead of the three above (i.e. Monday, Monday again after watching the video, Tuesday, and next Tuesday.) This four time schedule is the most standard, and I believe Pacifico used it exclusively, so that's why he recommends four copies.

Of course, sometimes it may take me more than twice on that first day, even after watching the video, to get the game down. So I'll play it a total of 5, 6, or 7 times, with three or four of those times on Monday, until I get it perfect and under time, and the remaining 2 on schedule (the next day, and a week from the next day.)

You may find that when playing that game again the next day, or the next week, you screw up. Then you watch the video and add extra plays again, until you get it all right and under time. In my mind, screwing up is sort of like a reset button and you go back to the beginning.

I also used 7Sage for LSAT prep and think they are really the gold standard for test prep...I'm disappointed that none of the other companies seem to really take the approach that they do!

I did decide to purchase Barbri though, mostly because I've liked their lectures during law school, but I plan to focus on 7Sage for MBE.

@ said:

I love the fact that you can highlight the word on a question and it finds where that occurs in the passage. That basically takes care of the notations if I am understanding this correctly. : D

Unfortunately, no (at least in my experience...it may be that we had slightly different interfaces?) If a question referenced a specific word in a reading (i.e. In the above passage, the use of the word "clowns" means....) that word was highlighted in blue in the passage. For me, it made it marginally easier to find than a numbered line. You don't have the option to select a word and have it highlighted everywhere it appears (like a computer search function.)

You all are SO helpful! I was feeling discouraged and now have actually been excited again to attack LG. Thank you so much.

Due to the wonderful advice I ordered the Trainer and am soon going to dive into it. Since I have Powerscore's LGB and I'm already more than halfway through, I'm going to finish that out quickly in a skimming sort of way----taking notes and doing the exercises but not beating myself up too much if an approach they suggest doesn't feel intuitive.

I have the earliest PT books (7-39 with those random exceptions) and I've made some lists using the 7Sage question bank by type/difficulty so I can do some practice drills, which I'm planning on doing daily, while I work through reading the content.

I will probably purchase the starter a bit earlier than I originally planned--I noticed now that the access can be extended beyond 3 months with little extra cost--but it probably still won't be until after I get through the Trainer just because logistically it is a lot easier for me to read than to watch video right now.

I just took the pilot today and have to agree with previous commenters--I really, really hated the format, I think it puts people who use any kind of notations at a HUGE disadvantage, and I am completely disheartened to take the test now if they plan to use tablets exclusively in September or December. When I asked about a survey for our opinions, I was told this was pretty much a done deal so no surveys were necessary, but I'm not sure what that means in terms of a timeline.

The only real pro I can think of is the (digital) timer at the top right corner which negates the need for a watch, but honestly that was almost a con because although you could hide the time you couldn't hide the time progress bar, and it was really distracting. It also gave you a forced 5 min warning you had to manually dismiss, which could be a pro or a con depending on how you look at things. Other pros would be for those with accessibility issues, like color inversion, color blindness stuff, contrast, text size, etc., although those were all irrelevant to me.

The huge, huge con was the clunkiness of the software. I was expecting something akin to J.Y.'s videos on here--a program where you can freely write on/around/under/on top of the prompt. You can't. You get a stylus but you can't "write" on the test at all. The scratch paper is completely blank, not a printed copy of the test. This made LGs very, very difficult, as I've become used to checking off/crossing out rules, and having the diagram immediately underneath the game situation. It definitely sucked looking from one to the other, and like another person posted, I wrote a rule down wrong, which pretty much never happens, so I think the possibility for error is huge. The point of notations is to empty out your brain to just focus on the questions, and I found flipping from one to the other to kind of negate that.

The software isn't quite as terrible for LR and RC, although as someone wrote earlier, you literally only get the choice of 3 different color highlighters and an underlining function, which is just enough notation for a person who really likes to mark up the text. No circling option? No cross out option? Very frustrating. In LR it made little difference for me.

Funnily enough, the best part was writing because you get a keyboard, but that's completely irrelevant as no one cares about the writing sample.

Another huge issue I have with this is economic accessibility. I do think my own hatred of the tablet is because of the notation-heavy style of test taking I'm learning here, but there's a chance it's because I've never owned a tablet and due to financial reasons, absolutely will not anytime soon. Sure I'm computer literate (7Sage is my favorite way to study,) but until I see tablets in most courtrooms I think it's a not-so-subtle advantage to those who are intimately familiar with these sorts of toys. And I absolutely despise when standardized tests blatantly make things less standard, giving those on the bottom less of a chance.

I had three LR sections, and have a terrible memory, so I can't be of much help. Two were 25 questions and one was 26. I do know that the first section seemed considerably harder than what I had prepared for (I was scrambling to finish and it was a 25 question one), but I am allowing room for my brain just being slower to catch up to working quickly on that first section. I think I did best on an LR section that had a nuts and overweight question....anyone with a better memory know if that was a real or experimental section?

It was pretty meh. I read somewhere that this test was an older PT? Anyone know if that's accurate, and if so, which one?

Thank you all for your thoughts! You've really given me a lot to think about and added some motivation to my personal goals :smile:

@ Thanks for the pointer about the logic, after going through it I can definitely see how it's essential for the games.

@ I do really appreciate all the advice, and I know I technically don't HAVE to, but for various reasons I think it's best. I originally was supposed to test in June, and already pushed it to September, so at this point it's kind of a must, and I'm excited to work hard this summer for it! :smile: I know it's an uphill battle but hopefully I'll be one of the one's back here afterwards to say it is doable.

@ Thanks for the edit. I'm fully planning on doing the CC completely, and so far I haven't felt a need to rush very much, but I do want to shift the games earlier. I've gone through the Lawgic and valid/invalid but I definitely have some reviewing and memorizing to do, so I'll keep hitting that before I move on to the games. Thank you.

I very much appreciate the genuine advice, but I think I was fairly clear. I am totally aware of the risks, downsides, ill-advice, etc, but I must take in September. That's a non-negotiable for me. I may be able to retake in December, but given that I have to at least sit in September, I may as well aim to do the best I can. I do completely understand the importance of doing my absolute best on the LSAT (I lurk on these forums far too much not to know), but for me, it has to be within limits. If this means I don't do well and I don't make it to a top school that makes it worth it to go to law school--I just won't go. I'm ok with that. (And I do have a job, due to other money stuff I'm doing the best I can but I can't pay rent without a second job, and with a second job I wasn't studying.)

I was lucky to have a fairly high diagnostic and I did really well in both LR and RC. I lost most of my points, by far, on LG. I only made it through two games. That's why I'd like to prioritize it.

I should have added in my original question that I read through PS's LGB and did all of their exercises. I also have gone through all of the Argument and "Lawgic" portions of the CC. I'm just having trouble sitting through hours of RC and LR knowing that my toughest section is still ahead of me. And I need time to be able to FP those games, so honestly I'm surprised they're placed so late anyways. And I love using the games to warm up, but I'm out of sequencing/spatial games....so all signs are pointing to yes I should skip to the next game type while moving ahead in the CC, unless there is a specific reason not to?

That being said,

@ said:

ETA: Downsides to skipping to the other games? Yeah. I think you will almost certainly miss some important exercises and lessons that prepare you for those games. when rules trigger, diagramming advanced rules, etc.

Do you know specifically what lessons you're talking about? I'll gladly watch those before I skip ahead but unless I am very, very mistaken, I don't see what, let's say, the "Intro to RC" section on the CC has to do with skipping to Grouping Games....I'm assuming diagramming would be discussed in the game's own section?

@ Not OP but in my case I just submitted a form on their website requesting a campus visit and checked off what I wanted from the options listed (they had a meeting, tour, and classroom visit available.) They then emailed me to set it up. I have noticed that actually well-ranked schools are not nearly as accommodating so your mileage will definitely vary depending on where you want to visit.

@ Haha oh gosh if only

I just had a meeting like this yesterday at a regional, unranked or very low ranked (can't remember) school.

The meeting was just a quick informational conversation. She talked a bit about the school, asked me "Why Law?" and expected me to have questions about the school for her. I asked about employment outcomes and a specific academic program. It was very comfortable and felt a lot less like an interview than an informal conversation. She did not take any notes, for example, at least while we were talking. Afterwards I sat in on a class.

I erred on the side of formal for attire---wore a black skirt, low black heels, and a white button down. I definitely felt overdressed in the class and slightly overdressed in the admissions office, but was happy to stand out in what I hoped was a positive way by showing how serious I was about the school.

I hope that helps a bit!