After 3 weeks of foolproofing games, I'm still having trouble even finishing them...

Gunningfor121

Game 1 from PT 34, for example. I couldn't even set up the board... Is this normal, or am I doing something wrong? I've been foolproofing exactly as 7sage says, even using 10 clean copies for each game.

MissChanandler

How many games have you foolproofed? If you've only been doing a few games per week, then I'd say that's totally normal. You have to foolproof a high volume of games before you really feel super confident in every single game.

Gunningfor121

@MissChanandler I've been doing 2 games a day, so probably about 20 games

MissChanandler

That's only about five PTs worth of games so I wouldn't get too discouraged yet. When people are "finished" foolproofing they've done well over a hundred games. It's definitely normal.

Gunningfor121

@MissChanandler Thank you! I'll keep moving forward

Kermit750

For some it takes time to grasp it. I started out not knowing how to setup logic games too for a long time. Something that helped me was in addition to fool proofing, I drilled by LG type which allowed me to really pinpoint if I was having challenges in general or just with some types (for me that was grouping). With that knowledge, I focused on grouping games while fool proofing, and then transitioned to drilling sections. In the grand scheme, 20 games isn't really a lot. Just keep at it, and I bet you'll see progress.

Ohnoeshalpme

I personally think that the 10 games thing is a little excessive. You should be able to finish under time after the 3rd or 4th attempt if you are really trying. I'd definitely say that after 4 attempts on a single game you should put it aside for the day and come back the next day. A lot of the benefits of fool-proofing come from the diversity of the games in the first 35 PT's. You want to get to as many of those as you can and not necessarily get hung up on the games that take you 10 tries or more. I would also add that if any game takes you 10 attempts to truly master then there is something else going wrong. It might be the case that you have to return to more fundamental lessons in logic and diagramming. Without a solid understanding of these basics, games will continue to be hard.

Gunningfor121

@Ohnoeshalpme How many games do you think is safe to foolproof a day? I definitely want to take my time and not rush through it.

Ohnoeshalpme

@Gunningfor121 I have heard of people doing very well with 8 games a day and others with 2 games a day. I think that four a day 6 days a week is what someone should shoot for so that Fool Proofing only lasts around a month and a half. Obviously you can amend this to your specifications and needs but I wouldn't do more than 8 games in a single day.

Gunningfor121

Thanks for the advice! I think I'll consider upping to at least 3 a day.

Nefertari

I've heard many people say LG "clicked" for them when they began doing them excessively in a short amount of time. For me it took foolproofing PTs 1-35 for me to get down to -3 and below each time I do a PT or timed section. I think I saw the most progress when I started going for 8+ games a day repeated twice (following @Pacifico 's LG Attack strategy). Now when I do new games, I don't start sweating and even when I don't understand the rules I don't start panicking.

Leah M B

During your foolproofing, do you watch the video explanation? The best way to FP is to do the game once on your own, then watch the video, then repeat until you get it under time. After watching the video, do you feel like you grasp it better or are still stuck? Is it that first time through it that you are lost in setting up gameboards?

I think if you're really struggling with these coming to you, you should try foolproofing games by game type. That would also help you cement how to approach the different game types. If you work on back to back one line sequencing, you should start seeing the pattern and picking up how to approach those.

Smorph0u0

When I foolproof for LG, I did 5 PT worth of games a day. I think dedicating a week or two to drill on LG will give you the most improvement. Here's how I FPed and maybe it'll help a bit.

In the morning, I would take 1 PT at a time and note down the time it took me and the # of questions I got wrong for each game. Then I'l BR if I circled any question, if not I check answer and watch video right a way. I would redo the ones I either spent too much time on or got too many wrong one more time before I move on to the next PT. Later, usually after dinner, I would redo all the games I circled (or any particular PT with too many wrong ACs), note down the time and # of wrong AC again. If there are games that I still struggle with, I watch the video again, redo one more time, then go sleep and come back to it again the next day before I start doing 5 new sets of PT games.

Now when I PT under timed condition, I'm able to get -2 or below unless it's those super weird one hahaha. But being able to finish conventional game with lightening speed buy you more time for those miscellaneous games. LG is also the section I BR first and the only section I BR every question, not just the ones I circle. I think that helped me remember what I was thinking at the time and notice at what step I made a wrong inference.

Hope this help!

Gunningfor121

@Nefertari OK, I definitely think I'm going to try to up the number of games I do per day. Honestly, it feels like only doing two a day might be stifling my progress by dragging the process out too much. Thanks for the advice!

@Smorph0u0 You make it sound so easy! I hope I'm able to get to -2 as well. So did it only take you about a week to FP PTs 1-35?

@"Leah M B" Yes, it's just the first time through on my own that I get lost. I attempt the game once and use a stopwatch to see how long it takes me, then I watch the video. I always feel like I understand the game perfectly after watching the video, too. The inferences seem so simple after JY explains it... I'm hoping my current lack of success is due to not seeing a wide enough variety of games (it still seems like each game I look at is totally new in some way) and taking too much time in between FPing new games. I'm essentially doing them by game category as it is because I'm foolproofing each game in the core curriculum as I go through it, and JY seems to teach them (at least roughly) by type, with sequencing first and then grouping. Is that what you mean, or should I do something else?

Smorph0u0

@Gunningfor121 Yea I was on a time crunch when I FP but that intensity definitely helped. 20 games is about 5 PT, you still have 30 to go I think after seeing more of the same layout it would definitely click for you. Maybe try draw out a board for each AC for the question you POE when you BR, too? That might help making the POE process faster if you can't spot the right AC right away. And if doing 20 games is too much a day just do 10. Take all the time you need to really understand the inferences then add on more after you feel like there are less and less game that you need to redo at the end of everyday. You got this!

ExcludedMiddle

@Smorph0u0 interesting approach and thanks for sharing. I think there's a lot of value in doing something like what you did. Let's say someone does Pacifico's method and only LG for 5-6 weeks... if that person doesn't have 5-6 months for prep then that is probably going to be limiting with respect to improving in sections other than LG. The average student would surely not have much energy left in them for RC/LR practice/review after doing 3 sections' worth of games per day with Pacifico's method. It might be better to just cram a ton of foolproofing into a week or two if someone is in a bit of a time crunch. Now, what if someone does 8-10 hours of LG a day on your method?? I'd say it's worth it if it means a good score in LG. And of course you could always mark some particularly tough games from that PT 1-35 set for further redoes down the road. Obviously if someone is already strong in LR and RC and doesn't need to improve there much to get their goal score then doing Pacifico's 5-6 weeks of foolproofing is probably great.