Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 191 Webinars
- 11 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 112 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 641 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
What would you do if messed up an LG?
CinnamonTea
Member
Hi,
We've all been there. What would you do if you messed up an LG? As in, you either realize 3-7 minutes in that you misdiagrammed a rule by misreading or otherwise, or you made an erroneous inference and none of the questions are making sense. Strategies to minimize the harm done, please?
(Note: This is strictly from practice test experiences, but it got me thinking what would happen on the real test... :S)
Comments
Your job at that point in my estimation is to minimize damage. As an aside, I think there are 3 general layers to catch a mistranslation of a rule early:
1.Quickly and efficiently reread rules from the bottom up, checking them against your visual language translation: I do this every single time I write down rules: it is just an added safety feature.
2.If during a standard acceptable situation question you eliminate 3-4 answer choices based off your interpretation of a single rule: chances are you are eliminating answer choices that pass the test of the proper application of the rule and keeping answer choices that fail the test of the proper application of the rule. I cannot recall ever eliminating 3-4 answer choice on a standard acceptable situation question by the use of a single rule. I can recall off the top of my head 1 single instance of zeroing in on an answer choice based on an inference garnered upfront: PT 77 Game 4, question 18, but never an instance where the application of a single rule does the trick of finding the answer. It has been my experience that the LSAT is never this easy: major red flag if the standard acceptable situation question is really really easy.
3.On the other hand, if the questions seem ridiculously out of this world difficult and you are down to 2 possible answer choice that you simply cannot disprove, there is probably a systemic mistranslation of a rule that is causing things to be too hard. LG should be tough, but not ridiculously hard at all times. Be on the lookout if things turn really really hard on an otherwise basic or formulaic game.
The goal is to create safety nets for yourself to catch these things early.
These three rules have enabled me to catch all 12 instances in which I have mistranslated a rule by the third question of the game. At that time, the damage is done and can only be minimized. Your job at that point is to minimize damage, go back, amend things and collect the points. Consider skipping to the next game and returning when you have completed them.
The good thing about going back to the game is you are probably already familiar with 90% that the game has to offer, you are simply missing a key piece of information that should allow things to fall into place.
I hope this helps
David
I once watched a documentary that showed mathematical formulas that proved that the difference between a Tiger Woods drive in golf that went straight and carried for 300+ yards and a terrible drive that someone like me would hit is a literal hairsbreadth difference when the club comes into contact with the golf ball. I have carried that analogy with me during my studies for this exam. If I am struggling, I am probably a hairsbreadth away from steering things in a great direction, this difference could be a mistranslation of a rule that if fixed carries me to a -0 on games or it could be something I didn't consider on a weaken question. Knowing this, panic should slowly subside, if things look disastrous on the LSAT, one might be only a hairsbreadth away from a valuable interpretation/fix/valuable points.
I hope this analogy is helpful
David
Okay so no lie this happened to me on the actual exam. I think because it happened to me a few times on PTs that I knew what to do.
Usually, the first indication is that no answer choice works. When this happens I go back to the question stem or the rules because that's where I usually mess up. I will reread the stem first. If followed the directions according to the stem I will then go back to the games. It really helps to have extra time in the bank and this is built up through practice. You also build confidence this way too. So if something isn't working I know where to go.
You can let this go on for multiple questions but it's best to catch it sooner!
I did this on the Feb test.... One of the games was a sequencing game and on diagram I put one person after another (was supposed to be before). I realized after the third question it was misdiagrammed. Oh, I hope that didn't mess up my score too much -_-.
What was the documentary???
@CinnamonTea I also experienced this first-hand on the Feb LSAT when I discovered an error even after double-checking all the rules. This was a habit I worked very hard to break during PTs.
Similar to what @BinghamtonDave said, one question seemed exceedingly difficult, so I decided to come back to it and look over it after finishing the other games. I discovered the error and did as much damage control as I could in the last 5 minutes, but it is hard to know how bad it ended up being as the test is undisclosed.
For me, my goal for June is not to practice damage control, but instead to address what led to the mistake in the first place. In PT, I took a few extra seconds to refer to the rules and double check them against my master game board. On test day, coming back from break after our 3rd section, I didn't do this on my first game. I let my mind wander, and I may be paying for it in precious LSAT points.
Nonetheless, this was an important lesson for me. I learned that on test day, there is not room to mitigate damage if I want my absolute best score. I am not worried that my score will be bad on this test because of one game, but those would have been easy points had I not made that mistake. For this reason, I think it is really important to look at what you would want to happen on test day. For me, that means making sure that, no matter what, I don't have to fix a game on test day. I plan to sit down with games I have already completed and just work on using the exact same routine for translating games until it comes naturally and quickly.
I know this is not exactly what you were asking, but the topic hits close to home, and I thought I would share my experience with you.
I'm a documentary addict and would also like to know lol. Thanks in advance Dave
Hey,
So for me it really depends on what else is happening. If this is game 1 and I have 3 games left, I would skip the game and do the other 3 first. You want to give all your games your due time. Hopefully because you know you messed up, you will be faster on the other games and come back to this one.
When you do come back, you really have no choice but to re-evaluate how this rule fits with the other rules in the game, and draw out any inferences that it might have on your master and new sub-game boards. Lets say, it only affects a portion of the rules, I would fix that on my game board and only do questions that directly relate and ask me about it. But if it was a major rule, I might have to quickly do all of the questions. At this point, since you have worked on this game a bit, I am hoping you are familiar with the other rules and are a bit faster. I tend to notice when I come back to a game that I had made a mistake in, because I had already done a few scenarios, I am way fast on drawing my sub-game boards the second time around.
The truth is, you might not have enough time to finish this game or correct all the questions. But at least you did not let this mistake effect your other 3 games so it will have a minimal impact on your score.
It really depends, if the game isn't making sense you need to go back to square one, but if you're almost done with the game & you realize you read a rule wrong here is what I have to offer on recent prior experience.
If you're on the 3rd game & you realize by the 2nd to last question you misread a rule, finish the last question & move on to the next game. On PT 7X this happened to me on a game, on one of the rules I read it as consecutive instead of nonconsecutive & I didn't realize it until later. I only missed 1 question but it was due to that rule. Basically, you can miss a rule & still be okay. I do think the hardest part is knowing you read a rule wrong & keeping your cool on the next game. But if you know that you can misread a rule & still get most of the answers right you should be able to relax. Keep trucking & know that the LSAT wants to make you feel that way. Their goal is to waste your time.
http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/articles/stupid-mistakes
This is a good read to give you an idea on how stop those mistakes, helped me along side with listening to J.Y. in his LG videos about circling keywords!
Thank you all!