Need your help -- Still struggling

buyorsell912

I took both the September and December 2014 LSAT administrations, and I got a 171 each time. In both instances, I got a -5 on the logic games, which really killed me. I have been doing the foolproof method religiously for 6 months now, and in the weeks before my December LSAT, I was doing 30 games a day. I felt comfortable and really thought I would get a -1 or -0 on the section. Instead, I got -5. The story was very similar for September (although I was only doing about 15 games per day for that one).

In my preparation I did fully simulated practice tests for September 06 onward, and got -0 on games six different times, -1 or 2 five times, and -5 or more on three tests (June 10, Oct 12, and Dec 12). The games seem to have gotten harder for me in some recent tests.

I have done every single game from Preptest 1 onward, and I've done many of those 13+ times. All the games are familiar to me by now. I'm always -2 or better on each LR section, and -3 or better on RC. LG is really holding me back.

I was wondering if you guys had any ideas for how I can get better. I am willing to try anything. I think it's possible that I get time-pressured a bit, and coupled with the pressure of the actual exam, stop making deductions as clearly and resort more to "brute force". Also, there is an intimidation factor of seeing a brand new game, whereas now I'm practicing with games I know I've done before. I'm planning to take the LSAT for a third time in February (I have already submitted my apps), because I know I can do better than a 171 --- my average on 14 fully simulated Preptests was over 176, which included 2 consecutive 180's. One idea I had was to start doing four games at once in only 24 minutes in order to train with the pressure of reduced time. And also maybe do some fake new games I find online. But again, I'm just looking for any tips or insight. I'm willing to try ANYTHING.

jdawg113

do you normally finish with a lot of time? (and i guess the question is more for b4 you started redoing games) like do you have time to go back normally even without having seen the games b4? if you are make sure you just take ur time. when you are taking the test and turn to LG just take a deep breathe and read. don't go through quick, tackle the rules and get started... step by step and understand what you're being asked. and do the same for each question. once you answer the question take another breathe and pretend you're reviewing and just making sure the answer you picked is right by going over the diagram with the rules again to make sure you didn't make a stupid mistake you'd catch right away upon review. idk if it'll help but figured id throw it out there

pritisharma

I have just one thing to say : I would kill to be you :-)

devin.balut

As far as I can tell you're already there if you're averaging 176. Figure out what questions STILL take time for you and drill them since you're at the point where it doesn't look like you have any new questions left to attempt. It sounds like you did everything right, I could only really say might as well perfect the last few problem questions ones if you're this serious.

The new LSAT LGs have trouble being THAT different than anything you've seen before, I know they throw in an oddball most tests but if you know all the previous ones inside out even the tests with radically different games you'll have less trouble with. When it happened in the test I took I panicked, in retrospect it wasn't that bad to set up once I stopped panicking. Focus on the layout you could use for that question, don't try and determine if it's perfect, jot it down without making the inferences and quickly see if the next couple questions would work well with this model. I find having a model already written with the questions really puts the game into perspective and identifies what model should be used if it's not the one you did take (and 90% of the time you do choose the right one). Spending 2 minutes deciding a model sucks, this lets me get to inferences quickly. The good thing about the oddball tests is that in those tests the curve is likely to be higher - the bad thing is that might mean nothing at 175 where people are likely still -0'n it.

I would highly recommend not attempting independent test makers questions. I did that for (especially RC/LR but LG as well) in the beginning and there are questions that just suck. I'll hand it to LSAC, they're tests are almost always immaculate. Almost no ambiguity when taken completely literally, rules that are almost always used at least once each, fairly consistent logical jumps at the high end questions. In my experience this has not been the case for independently made questions. I found them for the most part too easy to feasibly practice with (currently you're likely losing points on the last question of sets and on the hardest set of the section when you do -5 right? No point training yourself for easy tests) and often requiring stupid reasoning or interpreting somewhat open statements as if they had stated something rather than implying something open-endly. Maybe you can find another resource that's decent for LGs, but I wouldn't recommend it. I think some of the LSAC packages include previously released tests (international, February, etc). If you're really thirsting for new questions this might work, but do keep in mind stuff from 1990 probably isn't much more useful than a 2011 test you've already done.

And yeah if you're completing quickly, don't do that. I wish I could complete LG quickly, it's my slowest section and while I don't screw up questions very often, I also can't complete it consistently. Having 5 minutes at the end is nice, but it's not like RC or especially LR where it makes sense to skip a couple hard questions, or best guess them, and then come back to them at the end. Unless you're a machine (in which case I imagine LGs would be your best section) coming back to questions in the LG section is very difficult. You have to return to a question you had trouble with after familiarizing yourself with the problem and the rules, totally blank, and make insights that don't forget any of the restrictions. I would strongly advise you take as long as you need to answer the questions well, and make sure you adjust for the fact that you'll have passing familiarity with most of the ones you attempt at this point.

For test day questions I wouldn't even advise skipping within a set since LSAC often seems to set up a set of questions so that previous ones will force/help make inferences that later questions will need. That said if you have to skip a local question early on in the set, coming back to it after you have tackled your global problems can be a big help because global problems sometimes help point you towards an inference about the general game that often helps with the trickier questions.

Sorry if this is all old hat. You've been at it a lot longer than me and with better results (though I did butcher my LG section), so don't know what I can mention usefully.

Cher____

seriously

jdawg113

@CFloyd1221 shouldn't be a surprise that someone is striving to do the absolute best they can possibly do... remember, the $ difference from a 171 to even just a 174 is huge, let alone 175+

devin.balut

About that - does it really make any difference if you're an extreme splitter? Do most schools value a 3.2GPA 175 that much better than a 3.2GPA 170? I don't think I'd be getting money either way so I'm just curious from an acceptance standpoint.

jdawg113

lol absolutely, idk if i would say extreme splitter, but either way, point increase is point increase... if they'll accept u with a 3.2/170, chances are theres $$$ in it for you if you bump it up another 5 points... 5 points is huge especially in the 170s imo

ddakjiking

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/law-school-admissions-data-the-first-of-2015/

Applicants with 175-180 are down 20% YTD.

danballinger5

Law schools care about their rankings, which are largely affected by the numbers, more than students do. They absolutely care more about a 175 than a 170.

joegotbored-1

@licknee. Your link just made me burn an hour and a half of essay writing time... thanks for posting it.

Sapphire

@buyorsell912, what did you score on your very first diagnostic test that you ever took? I'm curious as to how you were able to get to 171. Im trying to get to AT LEAST 155, AT MOST 160. I'm trying to see what I'm doing wrong. I just bought the cambridge lsat questions and i plan on attacking those like a nut next week. do you have any advice for people like me who are truly struggling here? thanks!

Snowball

I understand the intimidation factor you mean. I'd suggest to try Princeton LSAT Workout and Princeton LSAT Logic Games Workout. I will do some fake new LGs before this Feb's test, just to keep me in a good shape when facing new games.

ddakjiking

I highly suggest NOT doing fake LSAT problems from any company.
Just reprint all LG's from old PT's and do them over.

Snowball

Fake questions are just used to train your mind when you exhausted almost everything, scored high, but were somehow intimidated by new questions for no reason. It's nothing about your theory of real LSAT questions but the nuances of your mentality, which I think could only be resolved by facing something new. Even though the questions are faked, your solid master of the patterns of LSAT won't let you be misled by the faked questions. All you need to do is to win the mental battle.

ddakjiking

OP already scored a 171 on the Dec 2014 with a -5 in LG. That particular LG section was known to be particularly more challenging than average. IMO, if he/she continues to stay fresh by drilling all the difficult LG's from the past, OP could certainly get -2 or better.

[Deleted User]

171??? You should be getting emails from Yale asking you to apply to their school by now. I WOULD DIE OF EXCITEMENT IF MY SCORE WAS THAT GOOD. How did you do so good on LR? Can you tell me pleaseeee because I'm struggling with logical reasoning but I'm doing -0 on logic games. I learned my logic games from 7sage even though my prep company was testmasters. I find it really helpful to redo the logic games over and over until you know exactly what to do for a similar game

devin.balut

@danballinger5
I think maybe my situation is different though, it looks like Canadian law schools don't care about the LSAT nearly as much as American ones. I'm not sure their rankings even use it, they certainly don't like to post about it if they do. I hate how GPA matters so much. It makes sense for a lot of reasons, but they all fall apart if every undergraduate degree from every school is treated the same... which for feasibility reasons pretty much has to happen. Standardizing stuff makes it all so much simpler.

Sapphire

if you're good at writing, i think we'll be fine. My score isn't the greatest, but my personal statements are so powerful and moving i can get into anywhere just on those alone, literally. I had to turn down a medical school THREE TIMES because of my personal statement and their personal application alone. They didn't even have my transcript yet and was being so persistent.