For the people getting -0 in LG

lsatstudier

For those getting -0 in LG, would you have any advice for strategies during timed conditions? How did you finally make it to -0 in the whole section? Do you get -0 during timed conditions as well? If so, what do you think it was that finally got you there? When studying, I do a lot of drilling and fool proofing, but I still feel like there are so many points left on the table. Thank you!

kimpg_66

I think it comes down to knowing that each answer can be 100% proved. So I do a lot of circling. I go through each game in 5-8 minutes, circling any questions I am not 100% sure of but moving quickly. I then go back through the games, working my way backwards (i.e. game 4, 3, 2, 1) that way the inferences I made in game 4 are still in my mind. And once I've done that--if I have time-- I go through the whole section (1, 2, 3, 4) making sure to double (triple, sometimes) check.

I'm usually able to do this process in 35 minutes. That speed comes from being extremely familiar with games and being able to get through the easier games in 4-5 minutes.

dcdcdcdcdc

I went -0 for my actual LSAT LG section. My biggest breakthrough was thinking about the questions before looking at the answers and developing a tactic in advance. The best way to pick this up is to carefully watch JY's videos on LG.

For example, if you are answering a CBT question and one answer, say D, uses a floater item, check that one first as it is the easiest one to satisfy/test. There are no rules applied to a floater, so in a CBT situation it is most likely to be the correct answer. In this case, I'd test D first and hope that my instinct was correct, quickly moving to the next question.

Likewise, if the question was MBT, I'd only want to test answer choices that have a floater item after I've tried the others, for the same reasons above.

You'll also begin to notice certain standard question approaches and answers. For example, in a sequencing game, you can eliminate answers quickly as some will try to push a piece off the game board and hope you don't notice this problem (e.g. in a CBT question).

The overarching point is to be strategic in your approach to each question once you have a sense of the game. Even if you aren't currently rushing headlong into the choices and working from A to E, you can still benefit from taking a few seconds and thinking about which choices you want to try first. As you develop a feel for this, you will save some serious time and start to really understand the games themselves.

greybrownblue

What does -0 mean?

BinghamtonDave

My general advice would be:
-Know the games really well from previous experience, having memorized reoccurring inferences,
having game type specific strategies, etc.
-Develop a skipping strategy for both whole games and potentially difficult questions, with the goal being to maximize points as efficiently as you can under the time pressures.

I believe these two things are the twin pillars to a really good score on LG. Each can be expanded upon. For instance, a splitting strategy that you are comfortable with is something that would in my estimation fall under the first banner. I will add a more specific note here is that I have done over 2,000 games during my journey with the LSAT and I never aim for a -0. I feel like the pressure to be perfect for me personally can cause me to mess up. I always aim for a -1 and if the -0 comes, it is icing on the cake.

David

10000019

@greybrownblue said:
What does -0 mean?

The number of questions that you get wrong. -0 = you answered all the questions and had 100% accuracy.

dcdcdcdcdc

Agree with the below from @BinghamtonDave

"-Develop a skipping strategy for both whole games and potentially difficult questions, with the goal being to maximize points as efficiently as you can under the time pressures."

My application of this was to skip a game if I read the rules and decided it didn't fit neatly into either a grouping or sequencing framework / if I felt it would take much longer than a typical game. I would skip this game entirely and return at the end as the section usually had 3 easy/medium games that you could snag a bunch of points on and then sink your remaining time into the difficult one. Don't count on having the time sink game show up as the last one in your section.

On a question by question basis, this means skipping over rule substitution/equivalence questions and either returning to them after you have completed all questions on that specific game or, if you are really stuck, at the end of the entire section. On more standard question types, like a MBT, I'd skip these difficult ones and return at the end of the other questions for that game because by then you have either more time to think or have a better understanding of the game and so can crack it open.

These approaches are all about maintaining momentum and stopping you from just spinning your wheels as the clock runs out.

Alex

In the journey to my very irregular -0 on LG, I have found having a consistent approach to games very important. Many of the mistakes holding me back from the -0 range have been ones that have been largely fixed by following a set procedure for each game. For example, making sure my game boards are neat and numbered. Taking a moment after diagramming the game to pause and reflect on the rules and make any additional inferences. Something as simple as writing the rules out and immediately eliminate questions on the standard acceptable situation questions has been a big help. This not only saves time, but allows us time to re-consider the rules and think about how they interact. I admit that many of these things seem obvious and minor. However, if you've been practicing games for a while chances are you may have gotten a bit sloppy or careless with your fundamentals.

I have also found that sometimes I was doing games on autopilot mode. I'd be fool proofing games and after the second or third attempt, I became much less deliberate and not really engaging with the rules. So when you practice playing games, make sure you're really thinking deliberately about the rules. Once I made sure to make every game attempt deliberate and careful, my score got more consistent. This was especially important in order to get the easier games done more quickly and give myself more time for any challenging ones.

A turning point for me occurred when I took a few blank sheets of paper and wrote out every rule/game board from all my past games that gave me trouble. I then studied these rules and game boards in order to help make sure I could face any challenge a game could throw at me.

@BinghamtonDave also makes some great points. Especially this idea to "never aim for a -0. I feel like the pressure to be perfect for me personally can cause me to mess up. I always aim for a -1 and if the -0 comes, it is icing on the cake."

I think we often get so used to watching JY's amazing LG explanations that we have to remember you do not need to be perfect to go perfect on games. I actually think this is something Mike Kim mentions in The LSAT Trainer. We put so much pressure on ourselves to get a perfect -0 and we think that means we have to diagram and solve the same in the same exact way we see in explanations. The truth is, you can go -0 on games and still not do everything single thing perfect. Just kind of internalizing that thought did a whole lot for my confidence.

dcfaulcon66

I spend up to 5 minutes doing the set up. Granted some games do not take me this long. But I try to do as much work as I can up front, diagram, inferences, etc. Usually get rewarded with 1-2 points per game and it makes questions go by rather quickly.