Is the LSAT-at the worst (or best), a lotteristic exam (Game Theory)

Matty-San247

Hi Fellow 7sagers,

So I understand that while a few gifted few of us score within the 99-90th percentile-however it has come to my realization that at the very least the LSAT may as well be a gamble of an exam.

Case and point with the LSAT logic games section there is, and practically speaking so; a strategy of “skipping the Substitution question”- which at least seems to me to be a bit oddly peculiar when compared with other standardized exam formats. That is to say, after all there no other exam other than the LSAT has such a mechanic in place. Mind you I understand that as a future lawyer most of our work will consist of attention to detail, problem solving and lots of reading-however at least technically speaking the LSAT exam is at best a gamble-more particularly the Logic Games section. All this said, I am proud to announce that I have completely MASTERED the substitution question type granted my utilization of test prep materials such as Powerscore and 7sage-however I still find it to be a problematic case that the “skip this question due to time concerns” phenomena occurs-granted the livi tied time feature of the exam. Now bear with me I am intelligible enough to understand what rupees of arguments are bickering and at the very best complaining but I am convinced that I have hit a significant concern granted the evidence that most substitution questions warrant a person scoring in the high 80-90th percentile considering the performance curve. Therefore my question as a matter of this circumstance stands as-would anyone feel inclined to agreeing that the LSAT ought to seek a reformatting in the coming future? Perhaps an exam that consisted of just the Reading Comprehension Section and Logical Reasoning Section (2 major components of being a successful lawyer) would suffice as a legitimate test for law school admission. Any thoughts. Thanks.

Law and Yoda

Just gonna put this here...LSAC announced some time ago after a lawsuit that it was going to research and develop alternative ways to assess analytical reasoning skills over the next four years.

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lsat-will-change-for-all-would-be-lawyers-as-a-result-of-blind-mans-lawsuit-settlement

https://www.kaptest.com/study/lsat/lsat-logic-games-changes-and-updates/

Matty-San247

copy.

andycast1234

You have an interesting perspective; I do not share your opinion concerning the LSAT being a sort of gamble, however. You noted yourself a sense of mastery that has come with working on substitution questions. If you can put organized effort into something to obtain a particular result that hardly sounds like a gamble. The percentiles indicate that overwhelmingly often than note, you will not score in the 90-99th percentile. That is OK. If a holistic concern pertains to obtaining the highest possible score on the LSAT, you should consider working/strengthening your other parts of the application process as well. LSAT is one, albeit arguably one of the most important, measures to which gauge your strength compared to others. Just food for thought.

Matty-San247

thanks. got it.

yang9999

I don't think the logic games should go away, particularly because they do in fact test logical reasoning ability (conditional rules, for example). And the dreaded rule-sub question is really a veiled way of asking "are you sure you haven't missed a critical inference/deduction?". The extent to which the test is a "gamble" is that you may strike out and have a particularly difficult set of games on test day -- but you may also get a more generous curve (the test is quite standardized, so local variations tend not to make a ripple overall). The variation in scores also tends not to stray far from +/- 3-4 points from PT averages for most people.