Raise your hand if you're not going to enjoy the last few days of sunshine of the year and stay in/study your ass off instead!

I'll start.... ME!!!

I feeling a bit beat down with prep today, and I wanted to tap into y'all's (I'm in Texas. That is a word.) brains. If you weren't a gluten for self sacrifice and never even heard of the LSAT what would you do? Or better yet, what if you studied so hard for the LSAT that your grey matter ozzed out of your ear holes....then what?

I am thinking synchronized swimming instructor....Or maybe a screenwriter for SyFy.

Google keeps telling me it wants to translate the web page into chinese!

@$%@#$%@#$%!

Hi All,

With the October test fast approaching, I've been doing the PTs in the late 60s (think 65-69). Before that I had done every test from 35-55. While these later PTs been in my normal range for the most part (low to mid 160s), the past couple have been awful (158/159-awful in the sense that my scores haven't been this low in a long time).

I've noticed that while I'm able to take my time and understand the questions in BR (last BR I got a 171), I feel rushed and find myself stumbling through the test under timed conditions. This hadn't been such a major problem in the past and I'm not sure what I can do to remain accurate while also maintaining a good pace. During the last PT I took, I actually got distracted during the end of the RC section and had to rush through the last passage :(

Do you think this is just that the PTs are harder or that I'm psyching myself out by thinking that this is what the October test will be like? Is it burnout? What can I do to make sure my score doesn't stay at this level?

Thanks for your help!

I would like some suggestions about how to BR reading comp. I just started the practice exams today (#36), and I am wondering what other people typically do with this section.

Can we please discuss why the answer is C instead of A? :o boggles my mind. I checked out the manhattan prep forum for their explanations but i didn't like them.

From this link :) its the second to last questions. Thnx so much guys.

http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/necessary-assumptions-questions-problem-set-8

Also here:

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-09/

Hello,

I'm currently in the mid 160s with 170+ BRs up to PT 61. I find I am usually -6 to -4 on LR for each section (total -8 to -12 on LR) and -8 to -10 on RC. Most of the time, I am getting 0 on LG. What should I focus more on for a 170+ in Oct? LR or RC? I'm BRing consistently and haven't had much time for anything other than reading articles, PTing, BRing, and evaluation of incorrect answers.

Thanks for the help and good luck to all

Those of you who know me understand how happy this picture makes me ...

Posting for @alexandergreene93 and for all the Bernie Sanders supporters :D

A while back, I posted about how I was severely struggling with logic games. I took about three weeks to do straight logic games every day for hours. All of the logic games I've seen, I can do perfectly now and I can handle every type.

I took a PT today, and I did better than I usually do on logic games. But I noticed some serious issues I had while taking this section. I fumbled a lot. Even knowing that I've seen games like these hundreds of times, I still could not concentrate. If the prompt was to draw 7 slots, I would draw 7 for my master board and then draw 6 each time I had to redraw the game board. I would bunch up all my writing absurdly small in one corner (I never do this during drills). I don't erase any more on my drills, and if I do, I redo the drill until I am no longer erasing. But on actual PTs, I erase and erase and erase because I'm making so many tiny errors.

What can I do? I want to snap out of silly mistakes. Today, I thought I was being extra careful, since I know my weaknesses, but once I drew everything out, I would not notice that I had made a fatal error in diagramming until I discovered an inference through a question.

Even if I read slowly and re-read, my nerves seem to make the words change shape before my eyes... It's like the directions appear so clear and bold and only later do I see that I had fooled myself.

I am now on timed PT's and still struggling with MBT questions and SA questions. I have only taken 3 PT's so far 19,20, 21. I'm BRing in the 160's w.o BRing RC if I were to be BRing RC, I would be in the 170's. Do you guys have any advice for me regarding MBT and SA? Also, is it worth BR'ing RC? When I do untimed RC passagesI don't really struggle considering I have all the time in the world.

Quick question:

How long is an LSAT score good for? Basically, could I take the test in October, work for a year, then apply for the class entering in 2017 with my Oct 2015 LSAT score?

Having some trouble and not sure what to do for BR.

I just had my worst section ever on Games. Do I re-do them before I watch the videos or watch the videos first?

Just floating this out there with no real question, per say. I'm looking into Sport Law schools, and dabbling into research on Entertainment Law schools (not mutually exclusive). Wondering if anyone else around these parts has the same idea.

Top interests right now include UGeorgia (approx 160 LSAT) and UMiami (little lower than that). Georgetown also, but that will likely be my reach school, and with a late application I'm not getting my heart set on it until I do some PTs.

Anyone else have insights/concerns about Sport & Entertainment Law schools, programs, & apps?

I have been working through my PTs and am getting ready to ramp up for the October test. After each one I do a thorough Blind Review, score, watch explanations and go over the material for the types of questions I had problems with. While each one of my tests sees my score reach a new high in at least 1 category my overall score is moving up slowly because I will miss question types that I previously hadn't had trouble with. Does anybody have any tips for a good overall review of the material between PTs?

PT67 BR Tonight at 7pm ET

Join us. Big/awesome group tonight.

This is what I'll be doing until you do.

Note on all groups

just out of curiosity... anyone found the live video of JY doing LR? if so, please share the link! I know there's one by Jon...

What is international law, really? And what is a JD international law program, considering the typical 'international law' degree is an LLM ?

What is the business model of an international lawyer? Do they litigate? Meet with international law clients, like big corporations spanning several countries?

What's the likelihood of an international lawyer practicing law outside of the United States?

I'm getting concerned about timing with my apps. I'll likely take the test in Dec and again in Feb.

I really dont know much about this process, yet. If I take a Feb test, is that too late to get an app together for a few schools in time for the Fall 2016 year start times? Or is that too late, and will instead set me up to apply for 2017 start times?

So, my cold diagnostic was 149, a little over a month ago. I finished the curriculum about three days ago and my first PT was a 156. I went -6 on my two argument sections (missing 2 easy questions on both), -9 on games, and -14 of 27 on RC! I think 149-156 is a decent increase and I think I just bombed the reading comp because I usually never score that badly on it. (FML) Anyway, I'm aiming for Decemebr 5th LSAT, I would be happy to score around 167. Should I pick up the Trainer and complete it in 10 days? (About 50-60 pages per day) Or just say fuck it, and straight PT'ing till December. Or, would you guys reccomend I only do CERTAIN parts of the trainer?! Thanks all.

So I'm currently going on my fourth month of studying, I have seen improvements in analytical reasoning and reading comp, although these improvements have all been untimed, but I cannot seem to get the hang

Of logical reasoning, the most

I've ever gotten correct is 18. I've made flash cards, gone through the techniques used for each question type rigorously. I feel hopeless at this and extremely discouraged. I'm writing in December and I feel like I'll never get the hang of this! Could anyone give advice for how they managed to conquer logical reasoning?!

Okay, I get I look like a sucker for paying $60 for something I could have paid $20 for, especially in light of the watch's very limited purpose.

But please, "hear" me out on this (if you'd rather not, please buy from me my LSAT Max watch). I purchased the watch from LSAT Max after much consideration. Honestly, I didn't want to buy an LSAT watch at all, but particularly after hearing horror stories of careless proctor's messing with much-coveted minutes, I felt it was worth the plunge. But if you're going to buy a watch to save you any from trouble or perfect planning outside of the actual performance on the LSAT, The 180 Watch seems to be the only one comfortably worth your while.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with the LSAT Max watch or others within its price range, but the fact that you have to manually reset your time (with a second hand that does not reset) is a legitimate thorn in the side. Maybe others here will disagree with me, but I would at least caution those who are thinking of buying a watch to consider what the difference in the available selection actually entails.

The 180 Watch is less distracting, given the "second hand" moves less frequently and is actually within a much smaller frame than the head of the watch itself. I consider the strategic markings (such as the longer tick marks at 8:00 intervals) to be helpful but not deal-makers. The fact that the watch can be reset with the push of a button and down to the second is huge. As one who involuntarily obsesses over little things like the first scratch on a new pair of shoes or a video game case, knowing I'm not (at the very least) seconds off in time lets me proceed much more smoothly. Not to mention, the better accuracy is just simply better.

I didn't know this key difference existed between The 180 Watch and its competitors. Now, I have two watches with the same, very limited purpose.

Hey guys I have a question about this question beginning with, "it is clear that none of the volleyball players at yesterday's office."

Is A incorrect because goes from making a statement about all the employees at TRF who were offered the insurance to a conclusion about employees in general.

In short my first question is I see that the answer choice jumps from a statement about "everyone employed by TRF who was given the opportunity to purchase dental insurance" to all employees. The author is assuming that all employees at TRF were given the opportunity to purchase d.insurance. What if some workers had other insurance and chose to keep that insurance; and maybe those employees with the outside insurance chose not to go to the dentist. That could be true, but the choice doesn't leave room for the possibility. Is this why A is incorrect?

2) I am a little unclear on why D is correct. I didn't choose D because I was unsure if I could assume that taking time off= vacation time, (sometimes the LSAT gets you for shifts in phrasing and I didn't want to fall prey to this another time)

Help would be greatly appreciated

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-07/

in my timed approach I was confident w answer choice E however in the blind review changed my response to D. During blind review I thought I was making an assumption about the bones having been examined. Where as D focused more on what was evident just by excavating the tomb. Help explaining why D is wrong is appreciated.

hey everyone,

sorry if this has been asked before. I'm signed up for the October LSAT but I want my score to go up by 6-8 points ideally, so I'm practicing but I don't know what to expect.

Do you guys think taking the LSAT in December will set me too late in the application process coming up? I really want to apply this year, so I just wanted some feedback.

Thanks,

Damini

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-1-question-20/

I got this question correct since C was obviously not relevant to the argument, but during BR, I can't seem to eliminate B or E. Why are these necessary assumptions? Here is my breakdown so far:

This is a necessary assumption EXCEPT question. Specifically, we are looking at the skeptic's argument.

Some people have been promoting some herbs to help treat colds. The herbs have a whole bunch of colorful sounding stuff in them: purple coneflower and goldenseal. This dude with a cold doesn't think that the herbs help. He argues, "Say that the herbs actually did work. Most people want to get better quickly. Therefore, almost everybody with a cold would already be using. Since there are many who have colds but don't use it, herbs aren't effective."

What I am looking for: I know we are looking for a NA, but I always like to break down the flaws in the argument if there are any. The skeptic is all over the place. He conflates "most" with "almost everybody." Certainly "most" includes "almost everybody," but 51% is "most" but would probably not be considered "almost everybody." Additionally, so what of "many" people still have colds? The proponents of herbs never said that herbs have a 100% effectiveness rate. Even worse, the skeptic's conclusion is borderline circular as well. The skeptic says that "almost everybody would be using it." He did NOT say that everyone would use it; there could be "many" or "some" people that don't use the herbs in the skeptic's hypothetical world. Anyway, we are looking for an answer that is a necessary assumption.

Answer A: This is a NA. If this answer was not true, then how could almost everyone be using it? There wouldn't be enough.

Answer B: I don't see how this is a NA. If you negate it: the mixture does have side effects severe enough to make many people with colds avoid it, then how does this wreck the argument? Wouldn't this strengthen the argument's conclusion that the herbs are not effective? The negation seems to do the opposite of wreck the argument.

Answer C: This is what I correctly chose because the argument does not concern itself with anything preventative. This answer does nothing to the argument, and it is totally irrelevant.

Answer D: This is similar to A, and it is a NA. If you negate it: if the herbs are not widely known, then how would people know to use it?

Answer E: This is like answer choice B for me. I don't see how this is a NA. What if there are effective cold remedies that people prefer? Does this mean that the herbs are not effective? I don't see how this affects the argument.