LSAT Prep Test 28 (June 1999) - S2 - Logic Game 3

Martin01Martin01 Member
in Logic Games 343 karma
LSAT Prep Test 28 (June 1999) - S2 - Logic Game 3

As explained in the video, there are so many probabilities on where to put the entities that attempting to make all of the inferences at the beginning becomes an hindrance because too much time is taken up.

I am getting a lot better at games because I attempt to make as many inferences as possible at the beginning.

My question is, what should I look for when a game is designed, such as LSAT Prep Test 28 (June 1999) - S2 - Logic Game 3, to make a person waste a lot of time making inferences?

Skipping making inferences/ not splitting up boards seems to be very dangerous!

Comments

  • c.janson35c.janson35 Free Trial Inactive Sage Inactive ‚≠ź
    2398 karma
    Good question Martin!

    You should always try to make inferences and split game boards accordingly, but sometimes the rules do not play well enough together to be able to do so. In this case, for example, the big inference is only that you have to choose 2 of the 3 restaurants to go into Wednesday, but since the 2 wed slots are not interchangeable, there's too many game boards to try to place SV SZ VZ and then VS ZS ZV into Wednesday. Furthermore, there aren't any cascading inferences that really come about by doing so. The same goes for trying to split the game board off of the G-J rule. This restricts G to three locations, Monday morning or afternoon, or Tuesday morning, because no hotels can go in W. But again, there's so much variability with the rules that doing this doesn't push out any further inferences. And that's ok! You can tackle the game with just knowing that G is limited to these 3 spots for example. Or you can proceed without trying to do this. Basically if you are thinking about splitting, do so, and don't see how the other rules are triggered by the newly imposed restrictions, then just move on.
Sign In or Register to comment.