Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28K LSAT
- 17K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.1K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 26 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 285 Off-topic
Related Discussions
Full Proofing Question
When you're full-proofing Logic Games do you choose a particular game type (Double Sequencing Games, for example) and then cycle through the different game types as necessary? Do you do sets of games or do you do individual games checking the results and watching J.Y.'s videos after each game as necessary? Do you full-proof by Logic Game section (for example PT5 S1 all Games 1-4)? Do you do some sort of hybrid methodology where you create your own game sets based on game type/difficulty/etc.? How often do you return to games that have given you trouble? The next day? The next week?
Just curious as to what other people are up to in this regard and what you've found most helpful.
As for me, I've done a little bit of everything.. I primarily full-proof by game type; I'll spend an afternoon/evening working exclusively on InoSeq games, for example.. I think this helps me to learn the inferences because I see the same inferences again and again and I think this helps to reinforce them. However, whenever I do a new game, I always do it in its 'intended' section format, trying to tackle all 4 games in 35 minutes. I've also created my own 4-game and 5-game sections (once I did like a ~10 game section, lol) to mimic the 'feel' of an actual LG section. As for returning to games that gave me trouble, I try to go back every couple of days but this is just aspirational if I am being honest with myself.
Comments
I fool proof each LG section. I'm noticing my toughest spot is timing (wasting too much on a basic sequencing 1st game for example) and I run out of time by the end of the section. So now I have a stop watch next to me so I can keep track of how much I spend on each game.
I typically take 1 section, BR, watch JYs videos, and then take the same section 3 more times throughout the week. I just make a fresh copy of the LG section on the problem set tab instead of printing them out. I figured that there's no point in getting used to marking up the section since the exam is digital now. I'm keeping a fool proof excel sheet so I write down my times, score, and notes for each LG section.
I will say that it's important to go back and retry games that give you trouble for two reasons. 1st, it reinforces tricky or obscure inferences, game board setups, and proper test taking techniques. 2nd, it really keeps track of your growth and whether or not you actually understood why you made the errors you did so you don't make the same errors in the future.
By far my best section (-4/-3) and what I personally do is focus on questions that I got wrong or took the most time.
If I get it wrong, I'll watch the explanation for it, make sure my board and inferences were good, and follow the flow chart in the syllabus (do the question 5 times though because I have a pretty decent handle on LG).
Once you realize alot of LG (minus the misc games) is just a variant of a previous one, you will see patterns based on rules and if not you'll naturally pair up rules with each other and be able to draw key inferences. It's very rare that I have to brute force a question, but if I do I make sure I catch onto that quick since time is of the essence.
Hope this helps!
FPing by game type is ideal at first, but I think at a certain point it is best to transition to doing sections. IDing the game type can often be a challenge all by itself, and when you drill by type, that challenge is removed from the equation. I returned to games the next day and then again the next week. I modified the Pacifico method and followed my own version of that. If you want to take a look at that, do a search for “Logic Games Attack Strategy.” I’m on my phone so can’t link it right now, but I’ll add a link later if it’ll help.
@"Cant Get Right" Thank you for the feedback! I was able to find the post and it was very beneficial, thank you!