If anyone is already scoring in the 160s and higher and wants a good study partner that can help with other strategys reply to this and we can start.

Hey everyone! I am a junior in college and I am just now starting my journey in preparing for the LSAT. I am a division one athlete so time is limited but I am willing to put in the work to get a grade that represents my abilities. I was wondering if there are any tips or recommendations that y'all swear by as I am starting this process!!

I do well on most other stems but MSS is the most difficult one by far on every prep test i get them most of them wrong or all wrong but i do a lot better with every other stem, If you know a decent strategy to help with this please say it below. Thank You

I’m a big anime fan right? So im watching Tougen Anki and it dawned on me..there are so many villains whose entire spill is a different type of flaw. So I’m sitting here thinking about every character ever and comparing them to different flaws lol.

I noticed the You Try questions are not included in the analytics overview by default, but was told by support that you could manually toggle them to be included. I don't consult notes and try to mimic test conditions as closely as possible whether its a drill or a You Try question and when I toggled all of the questions to be included, my drilling accuracy when from 44% to 69%. Happy to see that jump up since the pool went from 17 drill questions to 149 comprehensive questions but wondering how I should understand this information. Did I skew my data to be more comprehensive and useful or did I give myself leeway? ( As I type this out I will say, maybe what I didn't consider was that the analytics may be more useful when I get to my PT weeks and I won't want the You Try data included, but let me know your thoughts!)

side note to dev team: It would be cool to have a select all + filter option to where we could filter for the specific types of q's we want in analytics (ex: able to filter between You Try + PT + Drills and see different cuts of data to help measure performance pre-PT by relying on You Try and Drills, and then being able to just see PT results during PT stage.

Hi everyone! I just moved to LA after graduation and plan to start studying for the lsat starting this month. I like to study at cafes so I would like to have a few people to study together with. I live in Koreatown/Mid Wilshire area! My instagram is @chanellewin_ if anybody wants to dm me!

Hi everyone! First post here.

Decided to write my question here because honestly I didn't know where else to direct my question (that said please let me know if there is a better forum for these types of inquiries.)

My question is: can anyone please help explain how the "Most Strongly Supported" (MSS) questions in LR and "Implied" questions in RC are different? I've been approaching them pretty much as identical question types that can be approached with the same type of reasoning mode (e.g. spectrum of support diagram) but it seems like -- having gone through hundreds of these questions thus far -- there is actually a small but significant difference between the two question types.

Would welcome any advice on this (+ moral support is also welcome!) from my fellow LSATers! Cheers and good luck to all :)

I really love the Smart Drill function! I love being able to confidently answer one question at a time, get my score/stats and review where my logic erred before moving on to the next question.

I think a way to make the function even better is if we were able to program custom question sets for Smart Drills. For example, I have been drilling Causal Reasoning and Necessary Assumptions recently, so I would like to be able to select CausR and NA questions in my Smart Drill. For me, working in this way allows me to test my understanding of problems and the question's logic better, as well as potential strategies for answering different question types quicker than, say, a traditional 5 question drill would (and I don't have to reset after those 5 questions are done).

Of course if there's already a way to do this, I'm sure I look silly, but I think this would be a very useful implementation!

I would like to delete my 7Sage account for this service as well as the previous iteration of 7Sage

Good afternoon everyone. i've been studying for the LSAT for at least a year now and i've been practicing using Lawhub and 7sage. As of now my LR sections barely improved and im still between 10-15 per section. If you scored high, what have you done better that is different? how do you read each question? I got a test coming in January but im gonna probably register for March because that is my last real chance for a good score

Hi everyone! I just moved to LA and plan to start studying for the LSAT from this month and take it in June 2026. I don't know much people here so would love some friends to study together after 5pm at cafes/ online sessions. I live in Koreatown! Would love to connect on insta @chanellewin_

I see how this is possible for drills only. It would be helpful to use this for sections and preptest since I like to do one whole section and review them in one sitting. Or being able to add a whole section to a drill in one click (instead of manually adding questions one by one) would be also helpful.

I use surface pro and its pen. Highlighting works with my pen in lawhub, but not on 7sage. Seems like I have long press to highlight on 7sage and even that I cant drag it to highlight the whole sentence. However, it works nicely on lawhub practice tests and the actual test.

Currently my only high priority LR question type is Conditional Reasoning, and Causal Reasoning is one of my only medium priority.

Are the only lessons on these question types the foundational ones?

So I am doing a WAJ, but how do I use it effectively and when should I review it and whatnot. It would help a lot thanks!

Hi!!! I am looking to make a study group (maybe 3-7 people) in preparation for the February LSAT. I am a recent college grad based in LA and my goal is to score in the 170s. I've taken the LSAT twice but haven't performed as well as I would have liked. I think it would be helpful to work through LR questions and RC passages in a group. Please message me if you are located on the West coast and are interested!

I've been trying to study for the LSAT for a hot minute, but it's been hard for me to get moving by myself. I had a really good diagnostic of 150 like 2 years ago, and after I graduated in May - I tried to study the LSAT solo.

Solo studying with just books was awful for my mental, and then I ended up burning myself out - before procrastinating for months on end.

Now I've slipped from the study plan 7Sage has given me, and I'm just trying to kick my ass into high gear. My main goal is to study well enough to not have any room for regrets.

Here's a discord server I made for us to study together, teach each other, and hang out. So, if you want some solace during the LSAT struggle, feel free to join in and see if we can make a comeback happen.

https://discord.gg/QZEpGw5wYT

If i plan to take the April LSAT for the first time, what should my studying look like right now? I currently have the core curriculum on 7sage and it is set to finish with all the foundations & what not by the beginning of February. Then, I go into practice for 8 weeks and final prep for 1 week before the lsat. Should I be simultaneously practicing drills while doing the foundations curriculum?

I finally am starting to see this all pay off before the January test! Got my first -4 and -2 on BR for an LR section! After an embarrassing slump in the November test, I think we're all in for a treat in January! (Knock on wood). Shoutout the new WAJ feature in the notes, it's been so good to force myself to reflect.

heyy everyone,

Was wondering if there was any groupchat's out there like insta or other platforms for LSAT takers to join? Also, any Toronto LSAT takers? :p // Also leave a comment if anyone is down for a Insta groupchattt

I was listening to the 7sage admissions roundtable podcast last night to hear about application timing and now I’m not sure what to do. They mentioned that Jan. test takers should apply now and mark that the school should wait to use their Jan. LSAT. I was going to apply the second my score released 1/28, especially because I got a 144 in Nov. and now I am pting around 160. Is it too late if I submit on 1/28? Should I wait another cycle for scholarship chances? I emailed my top school (Loyola Chicago) for timing as well. Thank you!

Similarly to how the analytics page will show you your average BR score for PTs, I was wondering if it would be possible to have your average BR per section displayed alongside your average score for each section. I feel like it would be helpful to see the average of how you're doing on BR for each timed section.

relationships

• comparative

• some intersection

• relatas: 

  • cause vs effect

  • paragraph 1 vs 2

  • phenomenon vs hypothesis

• support (relatas: premise vs conclusion)

  • aim: persuasion (subjective)

relationship 2

(clauses linked together to emphasize relationships)

• disjunction

• conditional claims (sufficient and necessary condition)

  • indicators

    • unless

• causal claims (cause and effect)

  • indicators

    • because

• analogies (one thing is like another thing)

  • source vs target clause

  • indicators

    • just as

comparatives

• two things that stand in comparison to each other w one of two coming on top

  • a vs b (what are you comparing)

  • quality/characteristic of comparison

  • identify “winner”

• negative comparatives

• when comparatives have “no” or “not” there may be no clear winner

  • ex: allison is not taller than jake

• implied comparatives

  • no than in the statement

    • ex: tom is feeling better today, cafes are busier during the morning rush

• relative vs absolute

  • comparatives are usually relative without making absolute statements but context can sometimes imply absolute qualities

    • ex: jake is not taller than allison and they play basketball

    • they are likely tall, but it is not absolute

• equivalence

  • i am older than you=you are younger than me

arguments

• an argument consists of premises and a conclusion that aims to persuade

  • support structures the argument, and support depends on assumptions

    • assumptions are a “forgotten” premise that can be subtle

    • less reasonable assumptions render an argument vulnerable to criticism

    • Valid arguments (on the LSAT) require no additional unstated assumptions for the conclusion to follow from the premises.

      • Invalid arguments require at least one necessary assumption.

wonder “what the author wants me to believe” and “why should i believe this”

conclusion indicators (words followed by a conclusion)

• consequently

• therefore

• as a result

• clearly

• it follows that

• accordingly

• we may conclude

• it entails

• hence

• thus

• we may infer that

• it must be that

• it implies that

• that is why

premise indicators (words followed by premise)

• given that

• seeing that

• for the reason that

• owing to

• as indicated by

• after all

• on the grounds that

words that are followed by a premise but also contain a conclusion

• for

• because

• since

types of questions

• Must Be True questions 

• phenomenon-hypothesis

  • causation logic

subconclusion: claim that receives and gives support

• Premise: All dogs are adorable.

• Premise: Fluffers is a dog.

• Sub-conclusion: Therefore, Fluffers is adorable.

• Premise: All adorable things are cute.

• Conclusion: Fluffers is cute.

  • sub arguments make a complex argument

context (used as referent for referential phrase)

• table setting

  • information explaining a premise

• other peoples position

  • an opposite conclusion they claim is incorrect

• concession

  • making the opposing argument before the other can

context transition indicators

• but

• however

• yet

• some people say

concession indicators

• despite

• in spite of

• although

• though

• even though

• even if

• notwithstanding

• while

clause

• subject

  • gerund or noun

• predicate

  • verb/object

subject vs predicate noun modifier indicators

• that

• who

predicate modifier indicators

• of

• by

• in

• for

(where, how, when, why )

predicate object indicator

• the

object clause

• that can be used to make a clause the subject

  • indicator

    • that

  • ex: scientists discovered that the sky is blue

referent

• stands in place of something that appeared earlier

• negative: not that (other/otherwise)

rhetorical questions

• implied declarative statement for dramatic effect (more persuasive)

logic

• formal

  • form of argument matters more than content (valid/invalid)

  • includes

    • conditional logic (sufficient/necessary conditions)

    • logic btwn sets

      • supersets, subsets, intersecting sets, and membership in those sets

  • main concern is what must be true

• informal (typical of reading comprehension

  • all other types of logic

    • causation

    • analogies

    • generalization

    • scientific reasoning

    • rule application reasoning

    • cost-benefit analysis

    • misc

  • subject to be made stronger or weaker

    • how well supported

sets

• set: abstract collection of members

• membership: something belongs to such set

• when a set is inside a set

  • superset: larger one

  • subset: smaller one

sufficiency vs necessity conditions

• subset membership is sufficient for superset membership but not necessary

• superset membership is necessary for subset membership but not sufficient 

• subset is to superset as sufficiency is to necessity

  • if dot is in cat-set, it is sufficient to know the dot is inside mammal-set

  • membership in a mammal-set is necessary for membership in cat-set

    • membership in mammal-set is not sufficient for membership in cat-set (membership in cat-set is not necessary for membership in mammal-set)

conditional argument (formal argument)

• when sufficient condition is true, the necessary condition is also true

• Membership in Set A is sufficient for membership in Set B. X is a member of Set A. Therefore, X is a member of Set B

conditional indicators (logical indicators)

• the idea immediately following the conditional indicator is the sufficient condition

  • If X, Y

  • when

  • where

  • all 

  • every

  • any

  • the only

• the idea immediately following the conditional indicator is the necessary  condition

  • only

  • only if

  • only when

  • only where

  • always

  • must

truth vs validity

• truth is property of claims (true vs false)

• validity is property of arguments (valid/invalid)

  • validity: if (or pretend that) all the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.

“lawgic”

• → establishes a conditional relationship

  • sufficient condition (left side) to a necessary condition (right side)

• subscripts represent membership of set

  • L^J represents Luke's membership in the set of Jedi.

• conditional argument shape:

  • categorical syllogism

A → B

x^A

____

x^B

OR

• modus ponens

sufficient → necessary

sufficient

____

necessary

Not necessarily a feature request, but I was hoping maybe we could get a LR fast track video for conditional translating, walking through some problems and talking about translating whole problems. It is possible that I missed it, as I used the study plan which does skip some lessons.

Does anybody in OC, CA want to start an in-person study group?? South OC preferably, but down to commute a bit :) LMK!