I was in a similar position to you. I took the August LSAT and was testing consistently in the 165-170 range and scored an 168 on the actual test. There is obviously a chance you can hit a 170+ on test day but my experience and the experience of others seems to be that typically you end up scoring within your prep test range.

I obviously don't have any advice for you on how to improve your score, but I'd like to remind you (because I sure needed it around the time I took the test) that should you score around your average of 169, you will score in the top 4-5% of test takers. This is ELITE. Though 170 is a nice square number, you still know this test VERY WELL and should be VERY HAPPY with your score. You will end up at a great school with considerable scholarship money. FOR SURE. So don't kill yourself trying to crack 170.

Damn, I got this wrong because I didn't get the implication because there's only one issue important to her that there aren't other unnamed issues she doesn't have opinions on.

So I spent the whole blind review being like "they didnt provide enough information!" lol

J.Y. casts aside D as the wrong answer because he says we don't know if very few simple organisms live in the ecosystem mentioned in the stimulus, but doesn't A also require us to make a similar assumption (or bridge a similar ambiguity)? How do we know that there aren't shrimp or oysters in the ecosystem(s) at issue?

Additionally, even if there WERE shrimps or oysters, the answer choice doesn't specify where in the life cycle the parasites need to use shrimps or oysters as hosts. It could be that they're needed after leaving the stingrays bodies! In which case, the presence or absence of oysters and shrimps has no bearing on the presence of parasites in stingrays.

Have I lost the plot? #help!!