I think that's a great idea because honestly, despite all of the LG prep I've done (considering I can often go near perfect on RC and LR as it comes naturally), that LG section today felt as bad if not worse than the first logic game I ever did, before I even knew how to properly diagram the easiest of games. I'm curious as to whether there any other PTs of recent memory where there is not 1 but 2 either extremely hard or totally unorthodox games.
My advice: do the LG sections in the old tests; all of them! PT 1-40, especially. That's how I started learning LG, and every section I would get something bizarre. All of the tests in the 60's and 70's were a breeze in comparison (including the December LG section I just took this morning )
Shooting for a June 17' take here, I look forward to seeing today's LG section when it comes out. I have spent considerable time on LG and have completed more than 1,000 copies of games. My recommendation, and I think this will become the eventual prevailing wisdom, is to do every section of LG that you can possibly get your hands on 2-3 times timed. Including A,B,C, Feb 97 and C2. Coupling this with the videos on 7Sage. Given the last year or so, I don't think any game in LSAT history is a waste. If not for any other reason than preparing oneself for the element of surprise the section often brings.
With that being said, often, certain games make me feel like I have never done LG before. They just have something a tiny bit different about them. For instance PT C Game 2. Here we have a regular linear game but the spots are not ranked the way all of us are used to. The spots seem to be ranked from "1" best to "7" worst, meaning if something is "ranked higher" then it appears to the left of another piece. Translating the rules adds another layer of difficulty to this because the way we have translated basic linear rules 100 times before yields a standard acceptable situation question that is exactly backwards!
I don't think I've seen a list, but I think it's a great idea to start one. Here's some to start it off:
1. LSAT 15, Game 2 (Map of Zendu with 4 regions that can intersect) 2. LSAT 41, Game 4 (Circular game) 3. LSAT 67, Game 4 (Subzones) 4. LSAT 72, Game 4 (Work week) 5. LSAT 77, Game 3 (Employees selecting offices) 6. LSAT 79, Game 4 (Virus game)
PT 77 game 3 PT 79 game 4 PT 72 game 4 PT 62 game 2 PT 65 game 4 PT 67 game 4 PT 70 game 3 PT 1 circle game PT 41 game 4 PT B circle game PT 2 game 3 PT 2 game 4 PT 27 game 2 PT 15 game 2 PT 40 game 3 PT 29 game 2 PT 33 game 3 PT 31 game 2
Comments
With that being said, often, certain games make me feel like I have never done LG before. They just have something a tiny bit different about them. For instance PT C Game 2. Here we have a regular linear game but the spots are not ranked the way all of us are used to. The spots seem to be ranked from "1" best to "7" worst, meaning if something is "ranked higher" then it appears to the left of another piece. Translating the rules adds another layer of difficulty to this because the way we have translated basic linear rules 100 times before yields a standard acceptable situation question that is exactly backwards!
1. LSAT 15, Game 2 (Map of Zendu with 4 regions that can intersect)
2. LSAT 41, Game 4 (Circular game)
3. LSAT 67, Game 4 (Subzones)
4. LSAT 72, Game 4 (Work week)
5. LSAT 77, Game 3 (Employees selecting offices)
6. LSAT 79, Game 4 (Virus game)
PT 79 game 4
PT 72 game 4
PT 62 game 2
PT 65 game 4
PT 67 game 4
PT 70 game 3
PT 1 circle game
PT 41 game 4
PT B circle game
PT 2 game 3
PT 2 game 4
PT 27 game 2
PT 15 game 2
PT 40 game 3
PT 29 game 2
PT 33 game 3
PT 31 game 2