I had been working from 62-71 for most of my prep this time and had done 29-38 previously. I meant to order 52-61 to use for some drill so I could work on my weaker sections. But I found that I accidentally ordered another volume of 62-71. Would it be better for me to actually use that and retake some sections of PTs I had done, as my original copy is heavily annotated, or to return it and get the volume I meant to have?

How many letters of recommendation is good? 2? 3?

I need help in understand why D is wrong. I understand why E is correct. My reasoning is below, if you think my reasoning is faulty please let me know!! Thank you!

So I diagrammed the stimulus as such:

SAT --> PCS --> --LPR --> SGM

--SGM --> LPR --> --PCS --> --SAT (this is the contrapositive)

A) This answer choice is going in the wrong direction. We cannot infer anything about squeezing foreign competitors out of the global market, from a country raising prices.

B) Faulty conditional logic. We know a chain of conditions that can lead to a country being squeezed out of the global market, however, we cannot use that condition as a sufficient condition. It takes a necessary condition and makes it sufficient and uses a previously used sufficient condition and makes that necessary. This is an incorrect reversal.

C) I eliminated this because of the clause "their foreign competitors must have adopted new manufacturing techniques", just because they lowered their production costs more rapidly it doesn't mean that they adopted new manufacturing techniques, it could have been because of some other reason.

D) This is what I am unsure of. I said this is wrong because it is comparative, it's bout what happens to a particular country not comparing both countries. However, I think two countries are being compared which contradicts my whole reasoning. So, if someone could help me out in understanding why D is wrong, I would be most appreciative.

E) This is the contrapositive of the first two premises and thus the correct answer.

So, I got this question right and I understand why the correct answer is correct and the others are wrong, but I need a little help figuring out C. Is it wrong because of the word only?

A) Murray never states his opinion on this, he just states that Jane claims this and her criticism is wrong in she does not criticize others.

B) M doesn't say whether it is wrong or right, he is just critiquing J's argumentation. J never says she thinks this is wrong although I think it is implied in her criticism of the politician.

C) I was deciding between this and E, I ultimately went with E because I thought only was too strong and there could be reasons other than her dislike such as the potential principle that it is wrong to accept gifts from lobbyists.

D) Jane agrees with this, Murray we don't know how he feels. All we know is that he doesn't like Jane singling out the one politician.

E) I would say this is true because of both arguments. M says regardless of Senator Brandon's involvement at least others have done the same. J acknowledges that she has not criticized the same point in other politicians indicating that Senator Brandon is not alone in this practice.

So, if someone can help me understand C better or let me know if I am on the right track, I would be most appreciative!

Hi guys, after advanced logic I ended up skipping the logic games lessons because I wanted to focus on just lr. I am now going to start the logic games part of the curriculum (I have just done linear games). I was wondering if I would miss out on anything by just doing the reading comprehension and LR section on the trainer and skipping the logic games (because I want to use 7sage solely for that). What do you think, and are the lessons interlaced in anyway in the trainer?

Hi, what is OPA JY is talking about in passage explanations?

Thanks!

I was just reviewing the comparative passage video by JY for PT 75 and had never encountered the approach of doing questions after passage A and then doing them again after passage B. Does anyone know where on 7sage I can find more about that strategy. I feel like I missed it somewhere. Do other 7sagers like this strategy/find it helpful? It seems like it would take extra time and I struggle with time on RC as it is. But perhaps it is like splitting game boards on LG where you make up the time on the questions?

I'm so incredibly pissed. I started studying in late June with the goal to take the LSAT in September. I know that's not a lot of time to study, but I am a full time teacher and I really have no other choice because I can't split focus between work and studies. So after going through the course, I began recording my LSATs with perfectly simulated conditions. I started from #39. As of now, I just completed #66, so I have 12 left.

Here is the deal, I have been doing so incredibly bad lately. My Average on my first 10 was 164.7, median was 165. On the next 10 my average was 166, median was 155.5. I actually got a 170 on LSAT #51. Now I have finished 8 more, and my average on those is 164.37, with a median of 164. My last test was a 162, and the one before that was a 163. wtf?

My LR has been consistently very good barring a few outliers; my LG went from atrocious, to bad, to slightly better but still bad. My RC has plummeted. I get 3x as much wrong now.

Honestly, it's the worst feeling in the word. I have to finish the next 12 over 19 days, (I'm at least spacing out the last 3 with lots of relaxation in the last week), and I'm starting to feel like I'm doomed to failure. I really want to go to USC or UCLA, but I'd need to get a 167 to have a shot, given the fact that my GPA is so low from my 3rd year of college - Computer Science was not my thing and I had to be my mom's caretaker. I know that I can explain that stuff in the application, but honestly it would be stupid for those universities to gamble on someone because of their situation when they have more than enough applicants that are getting better scores.

Anyways, venting over. I'm sure there are others out there experiencing the same crap.

Hi all, first time poster here!

I've done quite a few practice tests and while there is (happily) a general upward trend between all of them, my last 5 are sort of all over the place with 10 points between the best and worst and no decipherable trend. While it seems like one should be scoring within a certain range (for example, 160-165), I am not sure what the acceptable limits of the range are- that is, a 10-point range seems way too large to accurately predict a potential test-day score. So my questions are:

1. What does constitute as an acceptable range within which one can reasonably get a good idea of what their score will be on test day? 5 points? 6? 7? What is your range from your last 5 tests, and do you feel it accurately reflects your potential?

2. How does one differentiate between a representative score on a PT and an outlier score? (An outlier score being one that is way above or way below the mainstream, and since it doesn't fit in with the general trend, may not actually represent anything of significance.) Example: Did I score 175, which is x points above my average, because I'm legitimately improving, or because I got lucky that day?

3. Any tips on making scores more consistent? All of my sections are usually +/- 5 EXCEPT for RC which is either real good or real bad and never in between...

Thank you all in advance for the help!

.

Anyone in the San Jose/Milpitas/Cupertino/Mtn View/Sunnyvale/Palo Alto area who is down to study together?

Hey Dallas 7sagers,

I am about to register for December LSAT and two test centers that are available within 30 minutes from me are Collin College Mckinney and Bill J priest institute. I was wondering if anybody has had experience with either of them and can tell me more about them. Which one should I pick?

Thank you for your help. :)

Hi all,

I've been reviewing my PT performance, and I seem to be missing the hardest problems in LR (across a variety of Q types). Any recommendations for how to improve on the hardest problems in LR?

Thanks!

I recently did a preptest (PT 42) and scored within my average score (Which is good!) but usually my BR score is 10 points higher (which is always encouraging) but this time around my BR score was only 5 points higher. When I looked through to see what went wrong, I noticed that a large amount of the questions I had originally gotten correct under exam conditions, I then got wrong through blind review.

-I'm just curious if this is a common occurrence?

-Have I reached a point where I can intuitively tackle questions under timed conditions but when I stop to try to figure things out without time limitations then I over think things? -- If so, I'm not sure how to deal with that (a bit of a gamble to hope that my intuition is sound)

Also, I've noticed my RC sections have consistently been horrible ranging from -13 to -11.

-What are everyone's advice on drilling RC?

-I'm trying to use the memory method but I'm not sure how much annotation I'm allowed to do as I read.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Is this allowed? I feel like it will cut down on time transferring answers.

Sometimes when I would study for the LSAT I often wondered what was the history behind the exam and how it came to be. I noticed the first LSAT with a pdf file was in 1991 and I always wondered how did individuals become lawyers prior to the first LSAT. I found a pdf article about the topic and wanted to share it.

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source/publications-(lsac-resources)/history-lsac-lsat.pdf

*Copy and Paste Link*

I have taken lot of PTs old and new and have all of the recent PTs except for C2 (the previously undisclosed test in Superprep 2). I do not want to leave any stone unturned but within reason. $20 for one PT (I already have the other two from Superprep 2) seems silly unless (group 3 negate sufficient) there is a definite benefit. Is it recent (does anyone even know)? Does it have unusual games? I am probably leaning toward getting it but wanted to see what experience people have with it and what advice that experience would generate.

Hi,

Quick question about the above referenced problem. Why is (C) correct, and (B) wrong? I personally disliked (C) because of the word "remain". Stimulus is talking about "being" free (and "becoming" free), not about "remaining".

TIA!

Hi,

I was not sure about D at first because I thought what happened in the past may not be true always...what happened in the past cannot always apply to what would happen in the future.

Why it works as weakener?

Thanks.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-3-question-26/

Hi,

I'm not sure why C is the answer and D is not.

I thought all the sentence before the last one support the last sentence.

It seems like C comes from the second sentence.

In this stimulus there are two "but" and was not sure which is middle-conclusion and which is the main conclusion but I thought it's more natural that the first one supports the second one.

Could anyone explain why C is the answer? And why D is wrong?

Thanks in advance

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-3-question-18/

Why is B wrong?

I thought it's good to know what the businessperson says is true or not...whether it makes sense or not.

(whether his reasoning leads to the conclusion...by providing another example it is but if not, what he said may not be true, may not work.)

Why is B wrong?

Thank you

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-3-question-23/

Hey everyone,

I'm having difficulty determining how the conclusion of the passage is the conclusion. I thought the conclusion was "I was late to my meeting" because it's preceded by a reasoning. I thought the hypothetical conditional "If the maintenance had been done a different day" is a premise because it's trying to justify the reason why the person was late.

Can someone help me figure this out? I'm noticing that I'm having a hard time identifying conclusions for this test (I also got S3 Q. 17 "identify the conclusion" wrong).

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-1-question-23/

Hello! So, I took the 2007 PT and I am checking each answer regardless of whether I got it riht or wrong. Is this a good idea? I feel like it's taking up too much time (I'm behind a week). Should I just check those that I got wrong/skipped?

I wonder why there are no explanation for early PTs. For example, I didn't find the LR explanation for PT1 and PT2.

I 'm doing LR by type after watching the video. Anyone knows/

.