Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Still Troubled by LG

Eric FuEric Fu Free Trial Member
edited September 2013 in General 73 karma
Hey guys,

So this issue has probably been beaten to death already with the answer of the Fool Proof Method. For the most part, I've been able to see a major improvement in my LG section with it and I've been Fool Proofing ALL my games and I've done practically every game in existence up to the PT I take each time. However, I still seem to be stumped by some of the more recent random games. The first time seeing them places me off balance since they seem different. A good example would be Game 3 from PT64, which I just took today. I did the other 3 games in about 6-7min each and this one I spent the rest of the section's time on and still couldn't finish. How do you Fool Proof for these unexpected games? Or are they not unexpected and I have an issue involving recognition? I always seem to find one really hard and unfamiliar game in every one section of two PTs -- so one game every other PT frustrates me (this trend started from PT 58 onward for me).

Any ideas or tips would be much appreciated, especially from those of you have been consistently getting -0 in the recent PTs (60+). This is pretty much my last section to really improve on as LR and RC are pretty much set for me. And I've heard that LG is supposed to be the one you are the most easily able to practice and achieve -0. A lot of people have also said that the newer games are easier, but I honestly don't believe it.

Thanks, guys.
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • EuripidesFanEuripidesFan Free Trial Member
    83 karma
    Yes and if someone could shed light on when to split the game into multiple subgameboards before attacking the questions that would be really helpful. Thanks.
  • J.Y. PingJ.Y. Ping Administrator Instructor
    14213 karma
    For the newer, harder games, I probably wouldn't have the foresight to see how to split them. Probably would just brute force through the questions. That just my approach. That doesn't mean it's the optimal approach.

    Sometimes, I am able to see how the game board neatly splits into subs. When that happens, I always spilt them into subs.

    High restrictive rules are the initial splitting nodes. Rules that govern where boxed items can go (e.g. either 1 or 3 or 5 would spilt into 3 subs). Bi-conditionals in In/Outs.

    I'd say the maximal number of subs that's manageable is probably 4-5. Beyond that, it's all clutter to me.

    Subs are just a way to more neatly organize and visually represent information. You don't have to (and often you can't) fill out everything on a sub. I often write the remaining rules that have yet to trigger next to my subs for organizational clarity.
Sign In or Register to comment.