Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 2 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 574 Technical Problems
- 280 Off-topic
Related Discussions
Cues for Recognizing Hard Logic Games
katrsumm
Alum Member
I just watched a LG explanation video for a game that JY described as being hard and taking around 12 minutes. It was the first logic game. I am not proficient with logic games yet and under timed pressure I know I would spend the whole 35 minutes on a difficult game. I would like to do easier games first and then come back to a harder game. Any thoughts on how to recognize what increases the difficulty of a game. I know it's not an ideal strategy. I don't want to have to skip a game at all, but if it comes down to it, I would rather get 3 simpler games done right rather than waste too much time on a hard game up front. Thanks for your thoughts.
Comments
I don't think there's a clean answer to this unfortunately. After doing dozens and dozens of LG sections, one of the goals is to learn when you're just spinning your wheels on a game, as well as how much time you typically spend on games based on 1) their type and 2) the number of questions involved.
The earliest you'll know to skip is if you're just confused on the setup. A lot of times these games can turn out to be easier than others once you get the board right. Often you'll determine whether or not to skip as you get past the standard acceptable situation question. The difficult games can be full of universal questions - that's about the only regular clue I get.
Really LG prep is just learning to avoid traps. We might be prepared enough to avoid some small ones (or survive them), but the big ones (the most difficult games) will catch a LOT of people. I don't think there are any tricks once you're confronted with one you couldn't avoid other than being aware of what it feels like when your efficiency tanks and bail sooner rather than later.
As far as my experience is concerned, there are two somewhat decent indicators regarding a game's difficulty: The game (1) doesn't yield many inferences, and (2) makes one swear unconsciously under his or her breath.
There's no clear cut answer to your question. What you saw is a very rare occurrence though: As far as my memory about existing PTs is concerned, at least 94% of the time the hardest game is presented as the third or fourth set. As you analyze a game set you should be thinking about how to dominate it, not about bailing out the moment you (think you) realize the game is going to be difficult.
I agree with the others above. Difficult games can take a lot of different forms. It probably would more involve being aware of how much time you're spending on something and realizing when it is taking way too long. But also, it's definitely an anomaly for the first game in a section to be the hardest.
The biggest clue would just be that you are really confused on how to even set up the game. If it totally throws you for a loop, move on. On timed sections, I like to quickly check my watch at the end of each game to get a feel for how I'm doing on pacing. There's 4 games in each section, so if that's divided evenly, it's 8 min and 45 seconds each. However, we all know that some games take more time than others. So if you're spending 8 minutes on each game, you're going to tank when you get to the inevitably difficult game toward the end.
After doing this for a long time, I also have gotten a pretty good sense for which ones are the easiest games, and JY's typical recommendation for those is 5 minutes. If I spend 7 or 8 minutes on a game that should be 5 minutes, that's also a problem. I'll be more likely to skip a difficult individual question in games like that, like rule substitution questions.
So to sum up, it's really more of a matter of just getting familiar with the games and learning to sense when you're spending too much time on something, whether it's a whole game or a question or 2.
Lots of rules and few rules can be combined and/or represented on the board, complex/confusing/unusual stimulus/board structure, certain types of questions; most of the time but not always if a game has a lot of negations, like "EXCEPT," or "NOT," or "CANNOT."
I'm sure I could come up with more.
This requires getting a little deeper into the game but when I see a bunch of questions without additional info and I haven't already solved for all gameboards or have a good understanding of the constraints that's a decent sign I'm missing inferences/not really understanding the game and need to come back.
For questions with additional info I like to feel like inferences will start falling down like dominoes. If that's not happening it's a sign things could be more of a struggle.
During the setup if you've done enough games you should have a pretty good sense when something is going to be super standard. On the other hand, sometimes games will have a weird little quirk that throws you for an initial loop but ends up being manageable after you've thought about it for a second. If I still feel overwhelmed even after taking a second to think through the setup I may be in for a challenge.
And as others have said the hard games tend to come towards the end. If the first two games were a breeze that may also be a sign that a more time consuming one is lurking.
They're at the end of the section, lol. I think the "hard" games at the beginning of a section are typically just fairly straightforward games, but they have a lot of game pieces, and/or not a lot of inferences. So you have to draw out a long gameboard for a lot of qs. It's not really difficult, just time consuming. I've never relied on trying to figure out whether or not a game is hard and I dont see how it would be beneficial to intuitively figure it out just by looking at the rules. Sometimes easy straightforward games take longer bc the questions force you to draw new gameboards. Sometimes games that appear hard take less time than you expected bc the questions mostly rely on inferences that you can figure out from the rules. If you're at a point where you think you might take 35 min to do one logic game, you just need more practice
There are some tough G1s, imo.
Wow everyone, thank you for all your comments. The majority consensus seems to be that there is no sound strategy for identifying what will be a hard or time consuming game. I appreciate your input. I will continue to practice and do as many drills setting up game boards as I can. I think that's definitely an area where I need improvement because of missing inferences or missing triggers for setting up sub game boards.Thanks again