Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.6K All Categories
- 27.4K LSAT
- 16.7K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 109 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 3 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 42 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 18 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.9K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 598 Technical Problems
- 277 Off-topic
Related Discussions
TIME
Lil Broomstick
Core Member
Hello fellow masochists,
After a year of studying off and on, I took the plunge and signed up for September. Unfortunately, I cannot for the life of me get my time down on LR (bad) and LG (worse).
The fundamentals seem to be there, as I'm averaging 170+ untimed (-1 on LR, -2/3 on RC and -3-4 on LG). I have tried everything (skipping answer choices once I find the answer, minimizing rereading, etc.) but still am 3-4 minutes over on LR and 8-10 minutes over on LG. Recognizing the inferences too late in the games is probably the main factor, in addition to my ADHD.
I have burned through PTs up to 58 so far, so about 25 left. It is crunch time now, and I really don't know where else to turn besides maybe redoing the course (completed about 6 months ago)??
Any suggestions are appreciated, and good luck to fellow Septemberererers......yes, I am losing my mind. jk. but actually.
Comments
You don't have to do all the questions (that was an obvious point haha). How many do you get right our of the ones you attempt? Also, I would just focus on the little things that could get you more right answers--do you make worlds in LG? If so, how fast can you recognize how and when to split? In LR, do you understand the terminologies in an Argument Part or flaw question, such as confusing a necessary for sufficient condition, or vice versa? I would just focus on getting better in ways that you can, and that's from just recognizing the questions you get wrong in timed conditions and then drilling the fundamentals.
The problem is that I have the fundamentals. Under timed conditions I end up with the last 2-3 LR unanswered + most of the last LG unanswered - this is clearly untenable.
I does seem like you have strong fundamentals because of your BR score and are applying some sort of skipping strategy. Being 8-10 minutes over for LG usually means there is a need to foolproof games. But It's hard to know just from score and time what exactly you might be doing wrong in LR and RC. It could be that your skipping strategy is not effective and doesn't allow you to pick and chose to miss questions effectively or it could be you need to get slightly better at the easier questions to have time for the harder questions.
I recommend getting a tutor to work with you. You really do seem like at a point where you have put a lot of work in and are stuck. I am completely booked right now but I highly recommend reaching out to @Daniel.Sieradzki and @"Cant Get Right". I am not sure about their availability but they are both excellent.
It sounds kind of harsh, but some of the best advice I've heard is that if you have the fundamentals down but are too slow, you don't actually have the fundamentals down. Especially with LG, your speed increases as you really understand how to do the games. A lot of people can figure things out with unlimited time, but it's the time crunch that shows if you really have it down to being second nature.
I'd recommend trying to do some confidence drills with LR. Basically, take a section and answer the questions as fast as possible. Like, recklessly fast. As soon as you think you probably found the right answer, pick it and move on. Just rush through it. That will show you how good your instincts are. It's possible you're just lingering too long. Maybe you already know the answer but are second guessing yourself, reading through all the wrong answers.
LG is a bit more complicated. That's the one truly that if you are way off on time, it's probably a matter of still needing to up your skills. You're likely missing inferences that slow you down, setting up game boards in a way that takes too long, or having to brute force through too many questions. Have you done foolproofing? You don't necessarily need to do all the games from 1-35, and later on in your studies I think it's more helpful to use more current games. But the repetition and watching the videos I think is really really key to increasing your speed.
@"Leah M B" what do you mean by foolproofing LG? You are probably correct in that the fundamentals (particuarly in terms of inference detection) aren't there yet.
I'm referring to the method in this lesson:
https://7sage.com/lesson/fool-proof-guide-to-perfection-on-logic-games/
Basically the process of repeating a game over and over until you can get it under the target time. You probably need to be focusing more on working on individual games than what your whole section time is for LG.
Thank you, this is helpful.
I cannot explain how helpful this method has been. I used to be getting around eight or nine questions wrong an LG section. I used this method every day for about 3 months and I am now consistently -0 on LG with about 5 mins to spare on average.
I know this method seems like a ridiculous amount of work. But if a game takes you 10 tries to get all right under time, I can guarantee you that the next time a similar game comes about you will wreck that game like it's your job. Do this enough and every game will turn into this.
So you average getting 22 or 23 correct in a timed LR section?
@"Leah M B" --have you done a lot of recent games, such as in PTs 72-81? To me, a lot of these games have innovations, quirks that haven't appeared before, like subvariates that further complicate the organization of the game. I'm saying this because I think foolproofing is a fine and good strategy, because there's always repeating rules, but I also think there's always curveballs they throw at you in these new LG sections, particularly in the one miscellaneous game that every LG section has. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on that.
Yes, I do think there are a lot more miscellaneous game types recently. However, I think foolproofing is learning the fundamentals of how to do LG. If you are prepared to do all the standard games in a small amount of time, you’ll also get better at learning how to do unusual games on the fly. You’ll have a lot more tools in your toolbox. I think it’s important both to foolproof and to practice miscellaneous games that force you to be innovative. Besides those quirkier games though, I also think the more recent LG sections have a lot more really simple games, like easy one line sequencing games. The better you are at those, you’ll also have more time for the 1 or 2 quirky games.
To put it in an analogy, it’s kind of like learning to play jazz. First, you learn how to do all the basic scales and have command of your instrument. Then, you can learn the freer form of jazz, with improvising and unusual scales and meters. But you can’t get there without first learning the basics.
I would start with redoing the LG CC. Skip over anything that you feel 100% confident in and can get in the suggested timeframe, or just do the hardest problem sets. There's little benefit in redoing sequencing board game setups, you know? You (like me) are in a time crunch. Stick with studying whatever your biggest opportunities are for now, and don't waste any PTs-- do them when you notice that you've gotten faster.