@ said:

GUYS! I'm taking the LSAT tomorrow (alternate date for religious reasons, can't take the test on Saturdays). Can someone please give me any tips they found helpful on how they stayed focused etc? So nervous!!!!

Hey,

I hope that this is not too late for you:

This is usually what I do - take an easy (three*) passage, three easy (three*) LRs, and one easy (three*) LG before the test - this helps me to warm up and I would not panic during the first section.

Immediate before my test, after I have been assigned to my seat, I would close my eyes and imagine myself floating in a empty universe, where nothing exist but my conciousness - this helps me to relax.

Finally, during the test, nothing is more important than stop thinking about any previous question once I have chosen my answers. And keep reminding myself that I have seen and done the majority of LSAT questions boost my confidence at times of self--doubt.

Hope this helps, and wish you best of luck tomorrow!

:smile:

The author makes an assertion that "we can only achieve A by doing B."

Why?

The author then tells us that "we cannot do C", and "we have to do B."

One of the often recurring flawed method of reasoning is that the author presents a false dilemma.

On contrast, if a dilemma truly exists, the argument is valid. => B and C is an "either/or" relationship.

If a PSA question shows up in the first ten questions, it is likely that it only test our basic understanding of PSA question, which requires us to bridge the P and the C.

However, if a PSA question shows up after Q20, it is more likely to test our advanced understanding of PSA question. The contrapositive of the missing link, rather than the apparent missing link, which is subtle, is often the correct answer choice.

This is another unfair science LR passage: how could we tell the difference between "released" and "falls apart"? It seems like most people (including myself )get wrong because we assume the equivalence of "released" and "falls apart".

As a concertgoer myself, I don't find D convincing at all.

Firstly, does the new concert hall in the well-publicized plan has wider seats and better acoustics? It just doesn't tell me about it. What happens if the plan includes a new concert hall but with narrower seats and worse acoustics? I would rather keep the current one than having a worse concert hall + a public auditorium. One cannot exclude such a possibility by reading Answer D.

Secondly, the reason why I don't want tear down the existing one would either be 1) it is a historic site and the vibes in it are unique; 2) random pop musicians will come to the new concert hall so that there will be less classical concerts in the schedule (which leads me to Answer E).

Well, at this point, I might admit that my passion for classical concerts clouded my reason.

A mini tip: in necessary assumption questions, the answer that has "at least some" is often correct, whereas the answer that has "most" is often wrong.

It saved me many times when I encountered the toughest NA questions but did not have enough time to think through all answers.

For me, A is wrong simply because the subject of the stimulus is LRG's advertising campaign, not competitor's advertising campaign.

Instead, it mentions the competitor's advice.

Thanks for the feedbacks! Can’t wait for the Sep LSAT!

In Q26, E is wrong not because "only one area is lit up" as JY mentions. Rather, it it wrong because it is may or may not be supported from what we have known.

Line 30 says that brain scans reveal well-defined areas, which is plural. This line is what makes E an attractive wrong choice.

Lack of an implied valid inference > A mismatched logical relationship.

Interesting. A sounds to challenge the premise, and thus is an invalid attack on the rationale. But it only challenges the premise if the premise is factually true. Here, A points out that factor 1 does not cause factor 2. Typical correct answer choice for weankening questions.

@ said:

I have been doing at least one reading comp passage each day especially harder ones. There is a r/LSAT reddit post that lists harder RC sections I think, just search for hardest lsat sections. I still have timing issues with RC and LG but now I finish all my LR sections with 30secs - 2mins remaining. What helped me was having an anticipation for every question and once I find an answer which fits it, I move on (and flag if I want to). I used to waste a lot of time doubting myself and seriously considering every answer choice, and I used to end up guessing on the last 4-5 questions every time.

Now you can choose RC with 5* difficulty in the Problem Set function :)

C is another beautifully written answer choice.

I chose D because I was overthinking about this question:

Recognition ---?> (less than 1%) Smoke, thus, no correlation

v.

ME ---?> (not significantly greater) GH, thus, no correlation

However, if one specifies the percentages in D, such as 60% (ME) and 40% (/ME), it is very obvious that D is wrong.

In RC, I was -10 BR on average. Now I am -2 PT on average.

For practicing RC, the first thing you need to do is to have the right attitude. The worst mistake that I made, was that I got intimidated. Later, I found that it was totally unnecessary.

The statistics demonstrate that at most RC has two (extremely rarely, three) difficult questions that are beyond the ability of 150/160 scorers. 95% of the questions are MBT, and 5% asking inferences that you will be able to discern if you understand the Main Point of the passage. Despite some passage are difficult to read, almost all questions are not supposed to be as hard as LRs.

Moreover, each passage is actually very short, and has clear structure. Most of the time, the structure of every passage “rhymes,” if not repeats, previous passages. For example, some common structures are: phenomenon, hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2, evaluation; description, analysis, application, and qualification; a myth, someone debunks this myth, explanation 1, explanation 2; a theory, the reasons why this theory is wrong 1, 2, 3. Pretty much like every standard academic essay. Putting yourself into the shoes of the writer helps to discover the flows of ideas, a.k.a., the structure.

The take-away? First, trust yourself. Second, you need to focus on finding the Main Point. Each passage has one and only one core logical relationship between X and Y that you must understand to answer any of the question correctly. Third, divide and conquer, tackle each question with confidence.

@ said:

Game 1 - 3.8 minutes

Game 2 - 3.7 minutes

Game 3 - 10.7 minutes

Game 4 - 16.6 minutes

I knew I was going to see ownage-tier games from LSAT writers later in the section after I finished the the first two quick lol. Made a stupid mistake in Game 3 which added 2-3 minutes to it, but damn, Game 4 had me sweating. I made the "L must be on 6" inference, and knew that M could not be on both 4 and 5, but didn't push these far enough to get to the PNQ "combo" - fuck me. This led me to having to draw out possible scenarios and cross out the ones that violated rules. All in all, could have been an easier time had I pushed myself to spend more time trying to connect the rules.

4.4m for 20 and 5.5m for 23 alone. Properly salty lol.

This game is a In/Out game disguised as a Grouping game. I have noticed that our fellow 7Sagers who tackle this game as In/Out game have found this game super easy.

I only spent 5 minutes to solve it in the second time after reading xenonhexafluoro’s advice.

The Master game board will have N in on Friday, L in and P out on Saturday. With new rules appear in each question, the game board fills up very fast.

Being Sophisticated ---> Having Internal Coherence

/HIC (unintelligible) ---> /BS

I usually start with reviews of questions that I got wrong before (I prepare the materials the night before) rather than diving into practice straight away. I find it more effective to practice under strict exam condition, even for a section before PT36. My brain is not as sharp right after breakfast.

The argument is that "Marine biologists hypothesize that young harbor seals start with an aversion to all killer whales but then learn to ignore those that do not eat seals."

Answer C is a scenario that the seals turn away from killer whales whose dialects are unfamiliar - that is, they have not learnt the fact that these killer whales do not eat seals, and they react as if these killer whales are predatory. C is consistent with the argument.

In contrast, answer E is a scenario that the seal has learnt to turned away after a terrible experience of getting bitten. And the default reation, as manifested by other seals that do not have this experience, is to ignore. Thus, answer E contradicts the argument and is wrong.

@ said:

L must go on Saturday because if it does not, M does not either. That would force the remaining pieces into Saturday, violating the rule that P does not go in Saturday. Additionally, since we know L cannot go into all 3 days, it must be out at least 1 day. This means M and L must be out on one day so there will be at least one day where it is PNQ. However, L cannot be out 2 days because this would mean Thursday and Friday would be PNQ. That would leave ML on Saturday with nobody else since no piece can be in all 3 days. Therefore we can make the inference that L must be in on Saturday and exactly 1 of Thursday and Friday, with the slot it is not in containing PNQ.

Fabulous explanation, thank you!

@ said:

There are a couple of infrences you can make in this game.

Namely. There is a piece that MUST got on Saturday

Also if you think about distribution you soon see that this game must have a distribution by where 4 of the pieces are used twice and one is used once.

It's wide open but because of the amount of open spaces and the small number of pieces relative to the spaces you are actually quite restricted on how you distribute the pieces.

Thanks for reply. Could you be more specific, please? Which piece must go to Saturday and why?

Edited: Ok, I got it now, with the In/Out method.

@ said:

How did you set the game up?

I treated it as an in/out game with subcategories (days). For each day you have 3 slots in, 2 slots out.

Timed & upfront, the only inference I made was that L must be in on Saturday, because P is already occupying 1 of the 2 out slots, and kicking L out would kick out M too, putting 3 players in the out group.

You also have a total of 9 in slots, with 5 players, each of which can be in a maximum of 2 times (b/c none of them can be in all 3 days). So, 1 player goes in once, and the rest go in twice. If M goes in twice, then L must go in twice, with M. This distribution inference helped me out on a couple of questions (20/23).

Thanks for sharing about the In/Out method. I will experiment it now.

Also, is there any game like this? I have done most of not all LGs, but I cannot recall any similar game.

@ said:

it just keeps showing that the video is loading but it doesn't play. not having issues with videos of other types.

I had the same problem several days ago and I had been using Safari. After switching to Chrome, I have not encountered the problem since.

RCs are harder while LGs are "easier" because the newer games are more consistent due to the exclusion of many miscellaneous games.

It is realistic to have LGs down to -1/-0 if you study correctly (e.g. foolproof).