Hey,

I am having trouble paraphrasing/anticipating the flaw in flaw/descriptive weakening questions that do not possess the typical or cookie cutter flaws.

I read the stimulus, isolate conclusion and premises, and yet i cannot pin point what is exactly wrong with the stimulus.

Again, this is more so for the questions that do not fall under the typical flaws we see time and time again.

I should note, however, that once i get into the answer choices, i seem to do a good in applying the 2 step flaw test which leaves me to getting the answer choice correct or at the minimum , i am left with two possible AC's.

Now with respect to paraphrasing or anticipating the flaw, Is this something that some of you experience as well, or is it just me?

also, do a lot of you simply rely on the 2 step test for flaws or are you paraphrasing/ anticipating the answer choice most of the time?

thank you.

lawlz so this question is a monster, but watching JY's explanation helped.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-2-question-24/

He explains that the larger argument pattern is:

A --> absurd

not(absurd)

-------------

not (A)

This really helped clarify what I was seeing here. BUT what I can't really fully understand is why we even need to further connect A-->absurd. Isn't A--->absurd already spelled out to us as a premise? Shouldn't we just accept that is what we're given and prove that the necessary assumption is not(absurd)? I understand how "popular" connects "intending pleasure" to "sales figures" but am failing to understand this on a larger level, I think.

w00t for last minute fine tuning with monster questions!

thanks in advance for any clarification here!

Hey! Does anyone have a list of outlier logic games and LR questions from PT 60-78? For those writing in September but don't have the time to go through all those PTs. I'm still unsure if I'm taking the September test. Time is ticking :( I'm planning to take PT 72 this saturday before I make a decision. Thanks in advance!

Hey everyone,

I just wanted to get different ideas of how I can possibly go about reviewing LR questions that I have done during a timed test that I was either unsure about or I got wrong. Here are a couple of ideas I have.

1. Re-do a unmarked copy of the stimulus. Mark premise and conclusion. And if possible write down the pre-phrase of the anticipated answer.

2. Write for each answer choice why you think it is wrong/right.

3. Watch JY's video. And compare how he solved it vs. how I solved it.

4. Write down if either system was better or what you learned from the video.

5. Write down how you would do it differently in the future to avoid the same mistake. I think this is key.

Feel free to add recommendations and let me know how all of you guys do it! Or what works and what does not work :DDDD

I think it is hard for new PTs, but what about those PTs I have already done?

Should I still take time, like 2 or 3 days for re-do the questions and review them?

And, if I want to re-do the questions, should I just re-do the ones I missed or all questionns includin the ones I got correctly before?

Thanks,

WE ARE UNDER 10 DAYS TO GO UNTIL SEPTEMBER TEST DAY. HAIR IS ON FIRE.

One of my favorite things about 7sage is the analytics section for viewing trends and trying to understand the data of the test and the group of PTs as a whole for each individual 7sager.. But I was wondering if there were analytics or a way to have some indication as to what to expect from upcoming tests. As an example, I suppose it could be that, historically, the hardest tests are December tests, or that an experimental section question makes a real test appearance after (x) amount of tests, or that a test with a lenient curve is followed by an easier test with a stricter curve. Has anyone looked into this? Are there any broad analytics that can give us an indication as to what we should expect? Any advantage is one worth pursuing as far as I'm concerned!

Thanks for your insight,

James

+1 if you get the reference in the title

Hello,

When you draw sub-game board or mini game board for questions that add new rules, do you draw "X cannot be here" or "X must be here" rule each time? Or do you just refer to the original board for those rules?

Thanks

Hi guys, I was helping my friend out with conditional logic today because I thought I had a grasp on the material but it turns out I dont....

So there was a statement from one of his textbooks he asked me to help him out with and I got it wrong.

Dmitry might play volleyball or squash, but he cant play both.

(edit meant to say might play not, might can)

So I thought great this is a bi-conditional because I see or but not both.

So I made it into: (~V (---) S) & (V (---) ~S),

But it turns out in his textbook the answer was (S -> ~V) & (V -> ~S).

So is this a different way of showing the same relationship, if so do you prefer one method over the other?

I have just upgraded to ultimate+ from ultimate for the sake of newer PT explanations. I was almost finished with my core curriculum in ultimate account and now the progress bar rolled back.......

Lost some patience/confidence when I logged in again. Wish there could be a function to let us choose the lower account material only.

Hopefully there is enough time for Dec Lsat.

Just wondering out of pure curiousity haha I chose to take it at Vanderbilt because of great reviews and because Nashville is awesome

--

I have started my senior undergrad year, and can only study around 10 hours per week instead of 20-30 that I was in the summer. My PT score has decreased over the last few tests! Is it because of the decreased time spent on studying??

I have not done PT 67 and 68 and am stuck between saving them in case I need fresh PTs for December (if I need to retake) and using them so I am familiar with the games in them. What do people with experience in those PTs think? I know from discussion threads I have seen (and from looking at the games categorizations) that 67 and 68 both have an unusual game in them. Will I be better off looking at those games or saving them? I certainly feel prepared for a good showing on this exam but with the LSAT you never know. I might be needing to do it again come Dec.

Hey everyone,

I'm sure some of you have seen discussions about this too. Can anyone provide conclusive evidence that the writing sample must be written in cursive? I have been told that it needs to be, but I can't find anything that suggests this from the LSAC or in the directions for the writing sample. I really would rather not have to write in cursive, so if someone could put this to bed, I'd be very appreciative. :)

I am taking the December test. Or, at least that is my goal. I began studying towards the end of June at a 10 to 12 hour per week state. My initial scoring was 150-ish. I am finally pt-ing near the 160's now, but that is not good enough. My ultimate goal is to score in the 170's ( 3.2 gpa in undergrad, want/need to get into UT Austin). Anyway, I just signed up here a couple of days ago and am on a three month plan. It definitely is a LOT to cover, but I do have a background in some of the things I am currently listening to. With that said, am I okay pushing a three month study plan in order to succeed? Should I play that solely by feel to see if I am PT'ing in the range that I want?

My main worry is applying in February. I am not sure how significantly my chances are diminished even if I score in the 170's if I apply in February.

What do you guys think?

I am taking the December 2016 lsat! What are the best books to purchase in order to start studying asap?!?!

Hi Friends :)

I'm feeling pretty good and ready and confident for 9 *HOLY COW* days from now. Not feeling terribly enthusiastic about taking another PT this weekend. Not sure it'd be that useful. But still might for routine's sake.

What're your thoughts? Are you going to take a PT this weekend?

A few thoughts and questions on my LSAT process so far (started studying in July):

1) Reasoning - I've been doing a lot more of this recently and have found that I'm consistently weak on MBT, Sufficient and Necessary Assumption, Parallel, and Method of Reasoning questions. I've started doing sections untimed just to focus on prephrasing and writing out what I need to look for, etc and that has helped a lot. However, my scores still go up and down - last weekend I went through a section and got 3 wrong, then got 10 wrong in another section the following day. Any consistency is around the 5-8 wrong range, which is too high if I am going to get above a 160. I'm hoping things will come together and start to click before too long. Any strategies or ideas on the weak points I mentioned above? I'm trying to do extra practice questions on those types but not sure if it is just something that has to come with time. A mentor of mine just suggested that I start diagramming the stimulus and every answer choice for all of the types of LR questions that I struggle with.

2) Games - my scores go up and down. Last night I did a section with 5 wrong and the other day I did a section with 10 wrong. I have a feeling it just depends on the difficulty of the section, but then again there are games that JY says are easy and should take 5 minutes and they take me 10 minutes, as well as some games that he says are insanely difficult and I breeze through them. Overall it is hard not to get discouraged when I repeatedly do LR and games sections and get 10 questions wrong, don't finish the games in time, etc. I'm trying to remember that I need to focus on gaining a complete understanding of everything I'm doing right and wrong so I can efficiently improve, but right now it seems like I'm plateauing. I'm assuming this means I just have to keep pushing through and trying to gain understanding until I make a breakthrough? Any tips on breaking through a plateau?

Hello! After reading through many topics about LORs, I was hoping that someone could help/offer me your opinions.

I am 4 years out of university and I have one letter in the LSAC system from a professor. I had planned on getting a second letter from another professor that I had worked closely with (2 classes + 2 independent studies), however, due to some health issues and oversight from him... I don't feel comfortable asking him for the letter for a third time. (I had asked him twice, followed up each time, but his response to any request for the LOR is to ignore... if I email him about anything else, life updates, etc. he's all ears.)

Therefore, is it okay just to have one letter from a professor whose class was negligible to my credit hours?

Also, is there a specific type of class/professor I should be looking to get a letter of rec from? (I went to an engineering school, so I figure I should be looking towards the humanities professors.)

Side note, after working at a fortune 500 company for a bit, I moved back to my home state to work for the 'family business'. Is it in poor form for me to get a letter of rec from a colleague (unrelated to me in any form; we have a great working relationship/have worked on many projects together)?

Apologies in advance for how awkwardly worded this is... but thank you for any insight!

My PT average has dropped from roughly the high 160s/low 170s on the older PTs to reliably the lower 160s on the PTs in the 70's. I'm planning on taking in Sept. and this shift in my performance is unnerving especially this close to gameday. Has anyone experienced this before/have good advice on ways to change my mindset in approaching the most recent PTs?

I would like to bring together a group of anyone that has questions with specific problems on LR sections on PT 70-77

Any takers on someone hosting a webinar like this for this week/weekend

Hey guys, @GabrielMarquez sent me an email the other day that I thought you could help her out with. If you can, post here or PM her please!

----------

I am from India and in my city there is no one who has gone to a law school in USA

If it is not too inconvenient, can you put me in contact with someone who has competed for the top 14 law schools recently, preferably, Harvard or Yale. I can really use some guidance.

Wondering if there exists a cheat sheet for biconditionals? I know there isn't that much to learn but it's helpful to have one to refer to when you're trying to cement those skills!

Can someone please explain in a real simple way I read the explanation but I just don't get it with these types of questions

Thank you in advance

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-2-question-18/

LG is consistently my worst section on PTs. When I try a Logic Games section without the pressure of finishing in 35 minutes, I usually do pretty well (maybe 2 or 3 wrong answers), but when I do a timed section, I'm getting 8 or 9 questions wrong and sometimes I run out of time completely.

I think my problem is keeping track of the time, though I don't have this issue with LR or RC. I feel confident in my ability to make inferences and diagram games, but I'm sure there are ways to improve that as well.

Any tips on keeping time/moving quickly through logic games? Am I just being impatient? It's just frustrating because I can see improvement in every other area that I'm working on.