In great need of advice! Still horrible at logic games after working on them for 3 weeks straight

art.heart

Quick Context: I’ve been working through the core curriculum for about four months and had originally planned to take the August LSAT. However, since I’ve been “stuck” on LG (my weakest section) for about 3-4 weeks and haven’t even really dived into learning about RC, I think I’m going to have to postpone.

Current problem: I’ve been fool-proofing ordering logic games (all those from PT 1-35) for about three weeks straight and am feeling very discouraged as it seems I have not made any real improvement in my ability to tackle “new” ordering games. For instance, when attempting a simple sequencing logic game for the first time, I either take forever (often 3x as long as the target time) in order to get a high rate of questions right OR I rush through and get a lot of questions wrong because I’ve made stupid mistakes (in reading and/or diagramming). And with some, I take too much time and STILL get the majority of questions wrong. Should I take a break from LG and skip to RC? I’m honestly at a loss as to what my next step should be since I really have faithfully completed the fool-proof method—even Pacifico’s famous version of it—for all ordering logic games and a few in/out games from PT 1-35. I’ve heard that most ordering/sequencing games fall on the easier spectrum of logic games, so I’m not sure if it would be wise for me to move ahead with grouping games. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

vichinsky

Maybe you should try LSAT unplugged and Law School Admissions Podcast. I have been using it for the June 2007 Logic game section and it has worked wonders for me.

shaybaebee

Hi, try pushing time restraints on your fool proofing. Try doing the very easy games under 5 mins and -0. Memorize inferences if you have to. Repeat until you can do it in a very short time. Try this for all basic games, when you have that down turn up the notch. Do medium games in less than 7 with -0/. and so on

sydneykhorner

hi I think its 100000% okay to take extra time (even if its 5x longer) to get the hang of it, thats exactly how we learn its science! also u have tried a lot of methods I see but maybe its just not how your brain works. I say this because I had to come up with a really unique way of thinking about the games and my own unique set up, because the step by step logical process isn't what works for me. I dont know if this will make sense over a comment but I have to use the spatial pattern part of my brain like my parietal lobe over my front lobe because LG literally make no sense. but just know youre not alone because these are really hard. I can also elaborate or talk to you outside of this to see if the way I think about it helps! im no teacher or anything but I could try

art.heart

@vichinsky said:
Maybe you should try LSAT unplugged and Law School Admissions Podcast. I have been using it for the June 2007 Logic game section and it has worked wonders for me.

Hi Vichinsky,
Thanks so much for responding. I've actually watched a couple of LSAT Unplugged & Law School Admissions Podcasts' Youtube videos for more general LSAT advice, but I'll definitely try looking at more of his Logic Games specific videos! Were there any specific videos from him that really helped you and you would recommend I watch first?

Thanks again!

art.heart

@shaybaebee said:
Hi, try pushing time restraints on your fool proofing. Try doing the very easy games under 5 mins and -0. Memorize inferences if you have to. Repeat until you can do it in a very short time. Try this for all basic games, when you have that down turn up the notch. Do medium games in less than 7 with -0/. and so on

Hi Shaybaebee,
Thanks so much for your advice! I'll definitely try your method! Would you mind sharing though what you mean by "memorize inferences"? While fool-proofing all the ordering games from PT 1-35, I think I struggled partly because I had memorized the inferences almost "too well." In other words, I would often easily remember what specific inferences I needed to make in order to solve a game way below its target time, but would then take too long to recognize similar inferences in a new game. So, even though I think I've become very familiar with the common inferences that can be made across ordering games, it's like the superficial differences of a "new" game (one I'm seeing for the first time) really throws me off. Anyway, that may just mean I really haven't memorized the inferences...

art.heart

@sydneykhorner said:
hi I think its 100000% okay to take extra time (even if its 5x longer) to get the hang of it, thats exactly how we learn its science! also u have tried a lot of methods I see but maybe its just not how your brain works. I say this because I had to come up with a really unique way of thinking about the games and my own unique set up, because the step by step logical process isn't what works for me. I dont know if this will make sense over a comment but I have to use the spatial pattern part of my brain like my parietal lobe over my front lobe because LG literally make no sense. but just know youre not alone because these are really hard. I can also elaborate or talk to you outside of this to see if the way I think about it helps! im no teacher or anything but I could try

Hi Sydneykhorner,
I really appreciate your encouraging comment! Yeah, I'm starting to feel like my brain just isn't wired for logic games (I'm a visual person, but not very spatial. I also love thinking about abstract principles and theories over trying to keep track of random numbers and letters), but I don't want that to stop me from improving as much as I can! Definitely would be open to hearing how you approach logic games—I'll private message you.

hotranchsauce

My first official lsat I scored 0, as in 0 correct, in LG (141 overall) because LGs was basically just a foreign language to me. I'm still progressing for sure, no where near perfect, but I've made some progress.

For an idea, in an untimed setting I can now complete most all LGs I came across, as in 0 errors. Though I'll qualify that with the fact that I'm not mainly focusing on timed practice tests now or previously. I'm still pretty slow. My most recent timed PT I completed 3/4 games with like 2 wrong between those 3 games I completed and, obviously, 0 correct on the game I was not able to get to in the allotted time (I don't guess on questions I don't get to or don't know on practice tests, as to not inflate my score with guesses, but that's besides the point).

Anyways, when I first started studying for the lsat in earnest, I started with LGs (through KAPLAN, btw 7sage is much better IMO). However, for me, instructional videos or study groups did not speak well to me regarding study for LGs, and I ended up just using their PDF explanations (they had downloadable PDFs with written breakdowns of each problem). I would do one game at a time and if I EVER ran into a situation in which I was not 100% sure was the correct path, I would stop my attempt and read the explanation up until that question (which would include setup, basic inferences that I should make, etc).

But, for example, if I was stuck and was about to check the pdf guide, I'd sit there and just look at the game and my paper for as long as I could until I was literally out of ideas on how to continue (sometimes when I hit a roadblock I'd just sit and look for maybe upwards of 20 minutes).

I did not learn the exact game types during this initial phase, which in hindsight was probably not the best way to go about it, but I just focused on (for the most part) setting up the game correctly from the onset. I guess I'd consider the setup phase where you create the main board, internalize the rules, write them out in a intuitive way that you understand. That kind of thing.

Anyways, so yea, it was not uncommon for me to use (not kidding) 30 sheets of paper on each new logic game (whenever I made a mistake, I'm throw the paper on the floor and start again). By the way, this was not over the course of weeks we are talking, more like multiple months.

This is turning into rambling, but I guess I want to conclude with saying LGs were, and still are, hard for me, but I made my most progress by being extra super critical of each tiny mistake I made, and by using diagraming that was intuitive for me.

Oh yea, I forgot, but after completing an individual LG I would physically print out the question stem (meaning main stimulus) and then staple my work behind it once I completed it flawlessly a few times. The stapled packet would go: clean printed stimulus, black stock paper, then work page. The black paper was so that I could quiz myself by looking at the clean stimulus and then trying to imagine what the rules and game board would look like without accidently peaking through unintentionally to the written gameboard behind. So I'd look at the clear stimulus, guess in my head what it should look like on the paper, then flip to the completed "flawless" work product for review.

Mind you, flawlessly during this time meant that I could complete 1 game within an hour with no major mistakes. All of this practice was untimed of course. Back then I could not DREAM of completing 1 of them within any reasonable time frame, let alone multiple.

Finally, this was not a placid process. Some days I'd throw my clip board (breaking it, I've gotten multiple clipboards now, thanks lsat), break pencils, maybe even shout a bit. haha yea, good times.

andrew.rsn

People may have already mentioned this, but I would recommend that you drill only setups for a while. For example, take a fresh game and practice writing out the gameboard/rules/and inferences, until you think you've exhausted everything - do that a couple times, then watch J.Y's explanation and see if you found all the inferences that he did.
Then do the setup again and move onto the questions. Use this method for all types of games.

studyingandrestudying

Not sure if this is helpful, but be grateful it wasn't a live test on the record. This test is very difficult. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be here. Maybe start with one and two star games and see how that goes. Also, sometimes people redo the LG Core Curriculum and it helps. Don't give up. And, you'll probably find that there are some rule representations that work for you and others that don't. It can take at least a few months to sort this out. That's OK.

dulcepaz123

You should take a diagnostic, do blind review and do it 3 separate times until you get a 100% each time

art.heart

@businesskarafa said:
My first official lsat I scored 0, as in 0 correct, in LG (141 overall) because LGs was basically just a foreign language to me. I'm still progressing for sure, no where near perfect, but I've made some progress.

For an idea, in an untimed setting I can now complete most all LGs I came across, as in 0 errors. Though I'll qualify that with the fact that I'm not mainly focusing on timed practice tests now or previously. I'm still pretty slow. My most recent timed PT I completed 3/4 games with like 2 wrong between those 3 games I completed and, obviously, 0 correct on the game I was not able to get to in the allotted time (I don't guess on questions I don't get to or don't know on practice tests, as to not inflate my score with guesses, but that's besides the point).

Anyways, when I first started studying for the lsat in earnest, I started with LGs (through KAPLAN, btw 7sage is much better IMO). However, for me, instructional videos or study groups did not speak well to me regarding study for LGs, and I ended up just using their PDF explanations (they had downloadable PDFs with written breakdowns of each problem). I would do one game at a time and if I EVER ran into a situation in which I was not 100% sure was the correct path, I would stop my attempt and read the explanation up until that question (which would include setup, basic inferences that I should make, etc).

But, for example, if I was stuck and was about to check the pdf guide, I'd sit there and just look at the game and my paper for as long as I could until I was literally out of ideas on how to continue (sometimes when I hit a roadblock I'd just sit and look for maybe upwards of 20 minutes).

I did not learn the exact game types during this initial phase, which in hindsight was probably not the best way to go about it, but I just focused on (for the most part) setting up the game correctly from the onset. I guess I'd consider the setup phase where you create the main board, internalize the rules, write them out in a intuitive way that you understand. That kind of thing.

Anyways, so yea, it was not uncommon for me to use (not kidding) 30 sheets of paper on each new logic game (whenever I made a mistake, I'm throw the paper on the floor and start again). By the way, this was not over the course of weeks we are talking, more like multiple months.

This is turning into rambling, but I guess I want to conclude with saying LGs were, and still are, hard for me, but I made my most progress by being extra super critical of each tiny mistake I made, and by using diagraming that was intuitive for me.

Oh yea, I forgot, but after completing an individual LG I would physically print out the question stem (meaning main stimulus) and then staple my work behind it once I completed it flawlessly a few times. The stapled packet would go: clean printed stimulus, black stock paper, then work page. The black paper was so that I could quiz myself by looking at the clean stimulus and then trying to imagine what the rules and game board would look like without accidently peaking through unintentionally to the written gameboard behind. So I'd look at the clear stimulus, guess in my head what it should look like on the paper, then flip to the completed "flawless" work product for review.

Mind you, flawlessly during this time meant that I could complete 1 game within an hour with no major mistakes. All of this practice was untimed of course. Back then I could not DREAM of completing 1 of them within any reasonable time frame, let alone multiple.

Finally, this was not a placid process. Some days I'd throw my clip board (breaking it, I've gotten multiple clipboards now, thanks lsat), break pencils, maybe even shout a bit. haha yea, good times.

Hi Businesskarafa!
I apologize for my late response! Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to my post and share your journey—I find it very relatable and super encouraging to read! I'm definitely taking your advice to heart and trying to be not only very aware of what mistakes I'm making, but also why I'm making them and how I can avoid repeating them—even if takes me a while to replace my bad habits with good ones.

art.heart

@"andrew.rsn" said:
People may have already mentioned this, but I would recommend that you drill only setups for a while. For example, take a fresh game and practice writing out the gameboard/rules/and inferences, until you think you've exhausted everything - do that a couple times, then watch J.Y's explanation and see if you found all the inferences that he did.
Then do the setup again and move onto the questions. Use this method for all types of games.

Hi Andrew.rsn,
I'm sorry for my late reply, but thank you so much for your advice! It makes so much sense. Wish I would have been able to follow your advice for all the sequencing games from PT 1-35, but I will definitely do it for grouping games and mixed games.

Thanks again!

art.heart

@lsatplaylist said:
Not sure if this is helpful, but be grateful it wasn't a live test on the record. This test is very difficult. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be here. Maybe start with one and two star games and see how that goes. Also, sometimes people redo the LG Core Curriculum and it helps. Don't give up. And, you'll probably find that there are some rule representations that work for you and others that don't. It can take at least a few months to sort this out. That's OK.

Hi Lsatplaylist,
I apologize for my late response—I've just been taking a small break from 7Sage LG to try to solidify my understanding of the fundamentals through Powerscore's LG book. I don't know if it's working yet, but I really appreciate your reply to my post. You are totally right. I should just be thankful that the games I'm doing right now aren't making up my official score! I also plan on giving it some more time so thanks again!

patra5cg

I think practicing games by-type would help. I wouldn't recommend taking the whole game section if you are still missing many questions on LG. If you can master each game type, it wouldn't take you long before finishing a game section with accuracy.

In terms of game type, I would just loosely divide them up into linear games (linear; relative ordering), grouping games (each member must exist once with known/unknown group size; each member exist at least once with known/unknown; each member don't need to appear with unknown/known group size), and in/out games. Though all types are testing some ideas in the same way, each type do require somewhat different approaches and strategy. You kind of need to know how to tackle the game right after reading the rules. In my opinion, you can start to do more specific drilling based on game type...

Hope it helps!

LSAT_MIAMI

Take your time. I answered 2/23 correct on my first LSAT games section. Reading Comprehension came very quickly to me but I was still not comfortable diagramming 2 months into prep. I had never interacted with formal logic or anything remotely similar to a LG. I attempted to take the exam without fully mastering the section because I just wanted to test and get my application in last cycle. Test day did not go well and I ended up stressing out and mechanistically forcing the games. Didn't finish the section and scored in the mid-160's in November after having aced the other two sections. Felt like a total waste of 2 great sections and 3 months worth of studying. I took a month off of LSAT prep and then casually did some games every other day or so. Read the LG Bible again and watched a lot of these videos. I just tried to let it come naturally and opted to pass on the January LSAT because I wasn't confident. One day, it just inexplicably clicked. I started to see all of the patterns and similarities between games. I realized that they are doable and many of the questions I was missing were silly. LG became fun and when I took the test again it was a more comfortable experience and I did much, much better. So, seriously, take your time and don't test before you're ready. Confidence can be key

art.heart

@patra5cg said:
I think practicing games by-type would help. I wouldn't recommend taking the whole game section if you are still missing many questions on LG. If you can master each game type, it wouldn't take you long before finishing a game section with accuracy.

In terms of game type, I would just loosely divide them up into linear games (linear; relative ordering), grouping games (each member must exist once with known/unknown group size; each member exist at least once with known/unknown; each member don't need to appear with unknown/known group size), and in/out games. Though all types are testing some ideas in the same way, each type do require somewhat different approaches and strategy. You kind of need to know how to tackle the game right after reading the rules. In my opinion, you can start to do more specific drilling based on game type...

Hope it helps!

Thank you so much, Patra5cg, for your advice! While I definitely think 7Sage's curriculum and JY's explanations are truly the best, I've been working through PowerScore's LG Bible and think I'm finally starting to understand why, as you said, certain strategies can be used across all games as well as what makes different approaches actually "different."

art.heart

@LSAT_MIAMI said:
Take your time. I answered 2/23 correct on my first LSAT games section. Reading Comprehension came very quickly to me but I was still not comfortable diagramming 2 months into prep. I had never interacted with formal logic or anything remotely similar to a LG. I attempted to take the exam without fully mastering the section because I just wanted to test and get my application in last cycle. Test day did not go well and I ended up stressing out and mechanistically forcing the games. Didn't finish the section and scored in the mid-160's in November after having aced the other two sections. Felt like a total waste of 2 great sections and 3 months worth of studying. I took a month off of LSAT prep and then casually did some games every other day or so. Read the LG Bible again and watched a lot of these videos. I just tried to let it come naturally and opted to pass on the January LSAT because I wasn't confident. One day, it just inexplicably clicked. I started to see all of the patterns and similarities between games. I realized that they are doable and many of the questions I was missing were silly. LG became fun and when I took the test again it was a more comfortable experience and I did much, much better. So, seriously, take your time and don't test before you're ready. Confidence can be key

Wow, not only does your story make me not feel alone in my struggles, but your advice hits the mark! Thank you, LSAT_Miami!

vspicy23

To start I think you should stop focusing on timing yourself (if you havent already). This way you can focus on getting everything correct at first. Then, once you master getting the questions right, you can start drilling them and timing yourself. Some tips I can offer you are to read the rules super carefully! If you misread one rule it can set you off for the rest of the game. Once you have all your rules down start making inferences. That is, start deducting where each "letter" can/cannot. Once you do that it will be easier for you to get a sense of what goes where. Then once you have made all your inferences, split the gameboard into two parts, sometimes even three so that you can easily see all of the possible scenarios. If you arent sure what I mean by splitting the game board I recommend you go to the core curriculum and do all of the logic games problem sets that are offered AS WELL AS watch the videos before hand. These videos will help give you an idea of the best way to diagram certain games and show you the fastest and easiest approach to get to your answer. Once you have mastered all of these basics you can start timing yourself and you will be a pro in no time!! Also, make sure you review the answers you got wrong and WHY. This will give you an idea on what you need to work on! Good luck, and remember that the logic games section is the section that can always be improved the most! You got this!!

nandini

hey there!
I love LG with a passion... and usually tend to be good at it, though I'm trying to solidify my knowledge. I tend to work intuitively, which can have a margin of error. If you have a problem with any specific questions, I'd love to go over them with you as study buddies. I think it can be helpful!

Nonetheless, overall, my technique is to just map it out if I'm not easily finding an answer - I just start writing out all the possibilities and that can help. Symbolizing the rules efficiently is super important imo and sets the base for how well you do later. Divide your time effectively - sometimes that can mean spending loads of time to make inferences as good inferences can save time in the long run.

This is super random, but before I even thought of going for law school, I did the Einstein's Riddle (which took me a longgg time to do), but it was lowkey similar in structure to LG games. This just made me comfortable to the ways of thinking in LG and making tons of inferences. There's a high chance it's totally not helpful for you, but that showed me a lot of different types of inferences that can be made. I think spend as much time as needed to do it if you do attempt it, it just wires your brain right haha!

jammy.kay.sams

I couldn't do logic games for the life of me until I hired a tutor. Within a few quick sessions with a good tutor, I improved significantly at games.