Pro Tip for logic Games. Anyone else do this?

LSATKingsman

Right after I transfer all the rules into Lawgic I go straight to the first question. My reasoning:

1. I am less likely to make mistakes because my paper is not written on yet.
2. When I split I like to represent my rules on my boards like JY and at times I would forget what the rule was.
3. Doing question one first is my insurance policy. If I take 3 minutes to split my boards and go to question one only to find I misread a rule I wasted all that time splitting on boards that aren't real.

Thoughts?

Nicole Hopkins

@LSATKingsman said:
Thoughts?

This is interesting. The ASQ (acceptable situation question) often works as an orientation question. I've considered whether doing local/"if" questions before splitting would be a more efficient use of time; then again, I often answer local questions based on the split boards. And there's a nice rhythm to the conquest of splitting boards up front. I know I have that whole entire game between my teeth. But, as you say, the ASQ is often unique in the way it makes you interact with and check every single rule.

I think for now you might as well practice in this way and you might stick with it long term; but as you progress in LG notation errors will become very rare (so you might find yourself no longer needing this check if that's the primary motivator). But then again, I don't think it hurts anything so you could very well do it forever and rule -0/-1 land with it as your scepter.

stepharizona

I do almost the exact same thing @LSATKingsman When I do BR groups people think I'm crazy, but I too like to save time and move right to Q1.

I should say I do a little more than just the rules I have a "main board" but I'm actually diagramming all of that as I read.

As soon as the last rule is written (and crossed off) I missed a rule in Oct so I do this every time now.

I move into questions. I think the time I save upfront good because when I did multiple boards and inferences up front I spent a lot of time in boards I never used. Just like you mentioned.

Now I think my early time diagramming multiple boards was worth it to expand my thinking, but now in games j go right into it and make them as needed.

I finish most LG sections early or have ample time to spend on a difficult game and usually go 0 to -2 if I rushed an acceptability question.

I think you have to do what works for you. I think this system works well for me and you're finding great success as well.

Some people can clearly get through setting up game boards quickly ahead of time... And it can pay off in the questions. I always seem to continue looking for possibilities... Creating my own time suck.

Moving right into it stopped that for me.

twssmith

@LSATKingsman Thank you for sharing, I am going to give this a shot!
I have found myself mis-reading a rule and/or spinning down the time-suck vortex of over-splitting boards as well. I also agree with @stepharizona that splitting boards and expanding my diagramming skills was helpful in my early stages of prep. There are some games that I am still going to want to split up front but I like the stop-gap to verify that my rules are accurate with the ASQ before splitting.