Advice from anyone who has mastered LG?

dmcdevit

Hi! I’ve recently started my LSAT journey and I’m working through the LG section of 7Sage. However, I’m still missing -2 to -3 on a lot of games and I’m just not sure how to improve (besides continuing to work through practice games of course). Everyone says it’s the easiest section to learn, but I’m really struggling and I don’t know many people who have taken or are taking the LSAT and actually did well on LG. If anyone consistently gets -0 to -1 I would love to chat and hear any advice or tips and strategies that work for you!

x

Steven_B-1

Interested to hear any tips. LGs scares the crap out of me.

lalune2020

Try foolproof a game until you get every question right and with under target timing!

What I used to do is after doing a set or PT and learning the explanation thoroughly, group about 3-4 games into types (sequencing, grouping, in/out, etc) and create them as a problem set. Redo the set over 4-5 days until you have -0 with only using like 70% of target time. As you do the same games over and over, your make inferences without thinking, complete all sub-game boards within seconds, and this helps to hone your skills to face a new game with confidence. The key here is not to skip any steps (i.e. skip reading the rule and create the board, skip q question by simply picking an answer you remember without actually doing them) but do it fast and learn how to be accurate and save time.

HopefullyHLS

@dmcdevit said:
Everyone says it’s the easiest section to learn

It's important to realize that this is is a comparative statement, and easiest does not mean easy. All sections of LSAT are hard, so is LG, therefore you should not have the expectation that you will become proficient over night.

To your question:

The only way to consistently score -0 on LG is following JY's foolproof method (watch relevant video). Before starting full-length PTs, I did that for every single LG from PT 1-35, and also from every PT I did.

What is extremely helpful: write down every single LG from all PTs with 4-5 bubbles of difficulty, and foolproof it.

A game-changer for me was that I was too reliant on figuring every inference out and creating all possible sub-gameboards before diving into the questions. However, this is not always possible/efficient, and sometimes makes one even more prone to mistakes. What helps many times is doing a game with two methods, one with and one without creating every single sub-gameboard up-front. In that case, you are pretty much forced to develop a strategy of prioritizing/de-prioritizing answer choices, especially at questions without additional premises (e.g. seeing what items are floaters/interchangeable, what AC is the most restrictive and therefore the first one to try out, is there anything most AC have in common etc.), instead of simply reading the answer from the sub-gameboards.