How many times did you do each game when you foolprooed 1-35 in your original process? Foolproofing implies that you literally do games over and over (sometimes 10x) until you 100% master them. That also means if you finish a game perfectly and in-time today that you can repeat that success in 2 weeks. If in 2 weeks you don’t ace the game, then you have to play it again until you’re getting 100%.

I know this sounds nuts and stupid, but I promise it really works! Trust the process!

I would make sure you can do the unusual games in 1-20 just as as well as the others. But if you’re time constrained, I would focus on the games that are most likely to show up in new LSATs.

If you’re worried about taking it digital for the first time, you should strongly consider taking the July LSAT in addition to September. In July, you can cancel your score AFTER seeing your score which is a once in a lifetime opportunity, and it removes the pressure associated with the digital exam. It’s basically a free trial run. If you do well, great! If not, no worries.

Also, there will be a scratch paper and a digital stylus available for diagraming!

https://www.lsac.org/lsat/taking-lsat/about-digital-lsat

How is your timing? I was in the same boat for a while, but focusing on timing was key for me. If you’re scoring that highly, it could be that you’re rushing the more difficult LR sections (15-~25) and spending too much time on the easiest questions. I tried to limit to one minute per question on 1-15. Odds are you’re first choice for an answer will be correct.

Reading is the most difficult section to improve. I would recommend printing all the reading sections for the early LSATs and just getting reps in.

Finally, see if there is one question type that you’re bad at. I focused on PSA questions for 2 weeks and finally saw some good improvements.

@ said:

@ said

While I found the LG section incredibly difficult and echo what folks on here are saying, I believe there was a key inference that really opened up the flower game and made it more manageable than it appeared on the surface. But, yes, still brutal and it sucked up my time, leaving very little for the last game.

This is 100% right. The game was awful for me but only because I completely missed a very limiting rule. Once I saw the mistake (too late) the game made sense. Still didn’t make it easy but definitely manageable.

Ok yes! Super relieving to read this! I moved through flowers relatively quickly and panicked after reading comments that maybe I made an inference that wasn’t actually there. Still a really hard section, but hoping for a reasonable score!

For the infamously hard LG section, does anyone remember how many questions there were for each game? I’m thinking 12-13 for games 1 & 2 and 10-11 questions combined for games 3 & 4?

Any idea if the personality elasticity for first born children was in the experimental section?

Did anyone with 2 LR sections have a question on Swahili temples?

I think that the July LSAT is a no-brainer, but I am trying to consider how it can be used in conjunction with the June / September exams. My original plan was to take the June exam and use the September exam as a last resort retake if I performed poorly in June. The July exam changes this plan. Basically now there are two exciting options, and I would love advice on what others think is most strategic.

Option A: Take the June exam and sign up for the July exam as a zero risk "insurance policy" for a potential bad score on the June exam.

Option B: Take the July exam and sign up for the September exam if I am unhappy with my score. The ability to cancel the July score mitigates any risk of a bad score but pushes back my application process slightly.

For some background: I originally took the LSAT over a year ago and have a strong (but not elite) score. I plan to apply in fall 2019 as early as possible.

Hey @ first, awesome job on the digital LSAT! I was super happy with how accurate the experience is relative to the tester from LSAC. This is a small suggestion (probably has already been addressed) but it looks like LSAC actually highlights the passage for questions with references to specific lines of text in RC (e.g. “what does the author mean by “profound” as it’s used in line 52”). Occasionally on older tests it’s difficult in the 7Sage tester to find the exact line referenced. What the team has put together is great, just a suggested improvement for the future. You guys rock!

I think the best thing to keep in mind is that you should consider delaying taking the lsat if you don’t think you’ll have enough time to prep. When I took the lsat for the first time, I thought that I would be able to prepare over about 4 months. For me, 9 months was just more realistic given that was working full time. I budgeted more time to prepare this cycle and it’s well worth it!

It is worth reviewing 1-35. From what I have heard, LSAC is just now starting to recycle some strange older game types. A lot of the horror in the September 2019 exam came from the fact that they went weird / retro with the games. There’s a lot of insurance value in foolproofing 1-35 because you could get completely thrown on test day if they break out an old game. That happened to a lot of us in September. I know that’s anecdotal, and I get that you are time constrained, but I wish I had reviewed the older games more!

This won’t work every time, but usually you can eliminate 1-2 answer choices by checking for “some” “most” or “all” in the answer choices. If the stimulus diagrams to “All As are Bs” and you see “some” in an answer choice, it’s likely that you can quickly eliminate that answer. Diagramming 2-3 potential answer choices is a lot faster than all 5!

Don't worry, this happens to a lot of people! If you're weaker in specific areas, sometimes a PT can give you a "perfect storm" of questions that are particularly challenging for you specifically (but may not be challenging for other people that are good at those types of questions). This can result in a big fluctuation in your score.

RC is really difficult to master. Even the highest scorers sometimes struggle to improve there. LR should 100% be your focus given that it's half of the exam. Did you do CC? Check the analytics tool and see if there are particular question types that are causing you to have issues. I feel that LR is incredibly predictable, and if you can find your gaps, you should really be able to limit damage from those sections.

You will probably hit your average on test day and not your personal record. I hit 174 in April, but it took another several months of prep to consistently score 170+. I took the dreaded September exam, so the jury is still out on my score. That said, if you feel confident in your bandwidth to practice and improve your consistency in the next few weeks then go for it!

The only advice on LG is to foolproof and foolproof well. It sucks that there is no easier way to do it, but it just takes beating your head against the games until they stick. I feel your pain on LG!

I am registering for November but remaining optimistic on September! I realize that not everyone is able to burn $200 on needlessly registering for the November exam, but it's well worth it for me if it means getting into my dream school vs. waiting a full additional year to apply!