When I am doing blind review, I perform 300% better - an ACTUAL stat I am tracking with LR.

Something about the clock is truly impacting my judgement on these questions.

When I do timed sections of RC - I can get two passages with 100% accuracy on the questions. Then I have no time to do the other passages.

This is becoming a major point of contention for me in my study journey. HELP!!!

Before the August test, I was scoring in the high 160s most of the time, with high scores of 172, 174, and 178. Miraculously, I got a 172 on the August test. This is including going to the restroom during a scored section, so I think I could have done better. I need a higher test score in October or November, but I am so tired. Any advice for making that jump? I want a 177.

Hi everyone, I plan on applying to law school this November and while I wanted to write the LSAT before applying, life kinda got in the way so now I am aiming for the November test too. In my application I plan on indicating that I will write in both November 2025 and January 2026, even though I hope to not have to write in January at all.

But in the off chance that I'm happy with my November score, would the admissions committee wait to consider my application fully until after a January score is posted since I have selected it on my application (even though I may not even write it in January for certain)? Or would they just consider my application with my November score if its posted first and good enough, and not pay much attention to whether I do better in January or not?

I am aware that it would be much more ideal for me to just wait until next year to avoid all of this, but I've been committed to applying this year and figured that aiming for November, and being open to January incase something goes wrong (or I get greedy and want to score higher) would be the smartest option. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!!!

hello, I will be taking the Oct exam and was looking for buddies either virtually or in upstate NY/Ithaca who'd like to work together. I scored a 166 on the June exam and I'm striving for 170-172.

Let me know if you'd be interested/if you have any pieces of advice. (-:

rozey

I am looking to have a virtual study group for at least 2 hours tomorrow. Game plan is to work on a set of questions slowly and thoroughly, and then test what we learned with a drill set. Focus will be flaw and weaken questions!

Looking for a small group of 2-3 people, 2-4pm EST.

Happy Labour Day yall.

Hi! I just restarted my LSAT studying and law school options research. I've been preparing with a coworker, but we have a different timeline (she's taking October 2025, I'll be taking mid-2026).

I am wondering if there's already a formed group around the City, or someone is interested. I am in the Upper East Side area and work in Tribeca. I've been religiously studying before work, 6-8AM-ish, with more flexibility on the weekends.

I find it very nice to exchange parsing techniques with my colleague, and I'm a lover of community! if you're interested, please reach out: gertabarentos@gmail.com

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Join Bailey and Rahela as they examine the implications of a simple but powerful fact: for every LSAT question, there’s only one right answer hiding among four wrong ones. Learn how recognizing this dynamic can transform the way you evaluate choices and increase your accuracy.

Hiiiii! Is anyone near or around north Mississppi looking for a study partner? Message me!

I had to withdraw from all of my classes halfway through my third semester of university because of a traumatic accident which left me with a severe concussion and broken collarbone. This fact is described in my personal statement, though it is not the main topic.

Would it be advisable to also explain the 'W's on my transcript from this time through a addendum, or would that be over-kill?

Please email me so we can discuss - for October LSAT briandgoldsworthy@hotmail.com

Anyone else get messed up by this when they PT'd this test? I got owned pretty bad. Watched the video that J.y. put up though

My problem on this Q is that I can exclude the other four wrong answer choices, but I can't find the right answer choice right either.

Here is my thought:

The premise: no free market economy -> the maximum total utility is not assured;

The conclusion: a country is not trying to bring about a free market economy -> the country is not acting in the way most likely to bring about the maximum total utility.

The right answer choice: the argument wrongly presumes that trying to bring about a condition that will assure the achievement of an end -> the way most likely to achieve that end.

However, if I put this presumption back to the argument, what is negated in the argument is the sufficient condition here ( to assure the achievement of an end is not satisfied ). This negation doesn't get to the argument's conclusion, which is the negation of the necessary condition in the answer choice ( not the way most likely to achieve that end). So I feel the right answer choice should be like "wrongly presumes that the way most likely to achieve max utility -> trying to bring about a condition that will ensure its achievement."

Could anyone give some light?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-4-question-23/

Hi everyone,

I posted a discussion earlier in my prep about PT 36 S2 Q16, which remarked on how the right answer inferred from the phrase "discussions of" and the fact that it is a passage regarding science that whatever they are discussing is earlier research. I don't agree with it, but that's the LSAT. And it was still the best answer because the other answers can be eliminated with the text.

http://classic.7sage.com/forums/discussion/113/pt36-s2-q16#Item_3

I just did PT 54, on which I came across a related issue: S1 Q8.

The question says all of the answers are supported by the passage EXCEPT. I haven't graded it yet, but I picked C, which says "there has been some study of the environmental effects of drilling-mud discharges." But E also is not supported, and it is directly a S/N condition switch, which in my experience is frequently tested. (E) says "during the drilling of an oil well, drilling mud is continuously discharged into the sea" whereas the passage merely says that the only time the discharge happens is when an oil well is being drilled, not that drilling always means there's discharge. So that is clearly the right answer. But why is C incorrect? Is it for the same nebulous reason as PT36 S2 Q16? The passage is discussing a science related issue, and I know that hydraulic fracturing has been studied in the real world, and generally facts of the sort that the passage provides would be hard to generate without some sort of study, but specifically that the environmental effects? I'm really not so sure this has support. It's obviously an inferior answer to E, but I wouldn't say that it is "supported" by the passage. I'd say it has some support from the passage but certainly cannot be logically inferred. This is compounded by the fact that the other answer choices besides E can be logically inferred from the passage.

A-line 13

B-line 41

D-line 49

Actually, I just realized at line (23) it says "one problem with studying" which probably means there has been studies, maybe. Not sure. Any thoughts? That line could just as easily justify that no studies have been done since it is so difficult. Am I to assume that all difficult things have been done? Or perhaps that all things that are attempted qualify as have "some" done of it? Probably. This post seems to have sorted itself out, but you'll have another take on it. I'll post anyway.

Anyone recall any games with bi-conditional rules similar to Game 4 in PT69 and Game 2 PT56?

Also, if anyone happens know of any sequencing games that incorporate bi-conditional rules that would be helpful too.

Thanks!

Do you guys scan the answers or just jump right in and try out games?

I realize this is very game dependent. I usually scan the answers choices quickly, but if nothing jumps out I force myself to jump right into trying out all the answers. I found myself wasting time on open ended game boards trying to think about why an answer choice could be correct, and coming up with nothing for all my "thinking" time. So know I try to just jump right into testing the answers.

Today I came across a game, LSAT 10, Game 4 http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-2-game-4/, that has me rethinking my strategy. I didn't make the inference at the start that Y must be in, though I DID make the difference that at least one of X/Z must be out. When I got to question 23, I quickly looked at my master game board didn't come up with any that must be in, so just jumped right in to trying out the possibilities. I got through A and B, before scanning the remainder of the choices and quickly realized that Y must be in.

The game took way too long in general, not just because of this question, but still interested in how you guys handle "thinking" about correct answer choices, or just jumping in and trying possibilities.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-12/

So, what's the deal w/ effective laws? How would you approach this one, in terms of a thinking through it strategy? I chose B originally, though I understood that this was not the contrapositive of the statements in the stimulus. I'm not quite getting how the international police force is a necessary condition for int law to be effective. This may be the result of mental fatigue, so please don't judge me here (:

I always have a difficult time answering these kinds of questions because

A: I'm not sure how to graph these kinds of questions, and

B: The clock is ticking down, so I wouldn't have time to graph anyway.

The assumption is obvious in both questions, it's just that when I get to eliminating all but 2 answer choices, I often pick the falsely negated AC. Is there a way I can improve my ability to spot the incorrect answer in this situation without spending 3+ minutes graphing? Any helpful tips/techniques? Thank you very much!

What do you guys think of this approach?

send me a note. I am hitting it hard and could use a buddy!

From PT24.2.21

a) No effective law is unenforceable

If a) is true can we rephrase .... If not effective then not enforceable?

I know the correct understanding is ... If effective -> then enforceable.

::brain melting::

As is well know, and is often characterized humorously, adults who spend considerable hours working with small children may then speak to other adults in the same language structure and vocabulary as they used speaking with children. Therefore, co-workers who usually communicate with each other with different language structure and vocabulary will sometimes adopt the some of the other person's language structure and vocabulary.

Which of the following statement is most parallel to the above premise's INFORMAL logic:

a) When speaking to other adults, a person studying for the LSAT communicates to others in the same language structure and vocabulary as LSAT stimuli.

b) Humans who effectively communicate with each other sometimes adopt the other person's language structure and vocabulary.

c) I like turtles.

d) When being spoken to by other adults, a person studying for the LSAT is communicated to in the same language structure and vocabulary as LSAT stimuli.

e) Therefore, people who speak to other adults in the same language structure and vocabulary as they used speaking with children should receive extra mental breaks.

_________________________________

Blind Review summary

a) correct answer, even though the LSAT does not test for parallel premises informal logic parallel.

b)Nope, but could be a great answer if the stimuli was for a sufficient assumption.

c)Off topic (in case you don't get the reference )

d) a trap response by reversing answer choice (a)

e) Nope, but could be a conclusion to an inference question.

just wondering if I'm missing it or its just not there

Hi all,

I am strongly considering canceling my Oct LSAT. I feel that I performed no where near my full potential and only took the studying seriously during the last month and a half leading up to the test. I took 18 full PTs and came across this site 2 weeks before the test.

Would you recommend enrolling in one of these courses to prep? Do I have enough time?

Anyone willing to share their experiences/success stories or otherwise, as a December retaker?

Thanks!

Thanks in advance and I hope this helps other people as well. (I watched J.Y.'s video, but I would like to see more strategies that work).

edit