Should I do LG Fool Proof Method back to back?

Not Ralph Nader

Hi guys I am trying the Fool proof method and doing like 3 copy of one game back to back, when I reach 6th try it feels like not only I memorized the inferences but I also memorized questions' already. I will write out all the inferences under timed condition and eliminate all answer choices before reaching the correct answer. But when hit target time (normally one minute less than that) I feel its more memorizing than learning. Am I doing something wrong?
Please advise me to how to get the most out of Fool Proof Method.

runiggyrun

No, you're not supposed to do them all back to back. Do them back to back one or two times, with a go through JY's videos in between. Essentially do them back to back until you feel you understand the game. Then do the same game/section again next day, then take a week off and do it again. If you can still do it close to the required time and close to perfect accuracy, you probably have that game down (it's been "proofed").
I'm going to leave @Pacifico 's strategy here, he describes a step-by-step version of the fool proof method.
https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy

allison.gill.sanford

Yeah it's really about memorizing how to make the inferences, and you test that by returning to the same games you have already drilled on another day. Then do it again after two weeks or so - Pacifico's method is pretty solid. You can tweak it for your personal needs.

Not Ralph Nader

@runiggyrun Thank you for leaving the url to Pacifico's method. I just finished reading it.
@allison.gill.sanford thank you for the comment. I personally feel I need at least six try at a game to reach target time. Would you recommend, I do 3 copy of one game in first day and 2 copy on the second day and one copy a week later?

One more question

I am currently in middle of the syllabus,should I fool proof the LG problem sets in the syllabus as I encounter them or just do them once?

runiggyrun

It's never too early to start foolproofing games, especially if you're not naturally good at them. You don't have to have a game completely proofed before you move on to another, if you follow @pacifico's method you'll have some at different stages of proofing (some you've done just today, some you've done a week ago and need to do again, some you've done a month ago and might want to revisit to be sure they are nicely cemented in). His system is great for keeping track of where you are for different games, so every day you have a good idea which games you're scheduled to practice.
As for the times, I wouldn't worry too much about not hitting the times yet, but rather about understanding how the inferences are made and being able to do them smoothly and confidently. Slow is smooth and smooth is fast as they say.... You are still in the beginning stages, and speed will come with practice. For now I'd err on the side of doing more games fewer times (4-6) rather than getting a handful of them perfected.

Not Ralph Nader

@runiggyrun thanks for the advice, I will implement Pacifico's system with 4 copies. I am really supersized how fast I got a response (less than an hour)

allison.gill.sanford

Yeah, if you follow Pacifico's method you'll be in good shape. If you need to drill games more than 4x, do so, just be sure to spread it out. I began to work through the bundle as I learned how to do certain games in the core curriculum (so I would try to proof the game sets for certain types, and then I went back to complete the whole bundle). Attempting the foolproof method on a new game type can really help you learn that type faster in the initial stages. It just forces you to get used to the kind of solving you will soon be very familiar with and adept at.

Not Ralph Nader

@allison.gill.sanford Thanksfor the advice, I got my answer as well as lots of drilling work to do

allison.gill.sanford

You can do it! It is a lot... but remember why you want that awesome LSAT score!