PT22.S3.G4 - exactly six of seven jugglers

Not Ralph Nader

I tried this game for the second time after a five months period, I got all questions right just under the target time but I spent nearly two minutes looking at the conditional rules to find some kind of deep inference which was a huge waste of time. Is it ever a good idea to look for deep inference when there are already like lots of conditional rules. I am not really sure when to stop and hit the questions. Do you have any rule of thumb that could help?
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-22-section-3-game-4/

runiggyrun

I'd just throw those rules on the board - I'd put G and H to the right of the front row, with an arrow pointed at it (that to me means that "if" they are assigned, that's where they go; without an arrow in would mean that they are always assigned and always go there - your notation might be different, as long as it's clear to you"
Then do the same for K and the middle, and L below team 1.
As far as inferences, the only thing that jumps out is that H in 2 sets of a nice chain reaction. H2 front, Q1 middle, which means K can't be in one, and P can't be in one, which means you have to choose 2 out of G, L and N.
But even if you don't get that far, noting that H is a key player should be good enough to hit the questions.
Often one conditional question will bring out a nice inference that can then be used for a couple more questions, so don't worry too much if you don't come up with an earth shattering inference upfront, as long as you took a little time to think how the rules could potentially go together.
Great job getting all the answers under the time limit!

Not Ralph Nader

@runiggyrun your notation is much more visual than mine I should have put down the G and H with an arrow. Thanks for advice, noticing the key player first should be my priority over some deep inference.