LG Foolproof - Sections or Game Types

Comments

• 2 Likes

  hopefulling Member

  November 2020 edited November 2020 905 karma

  I foolproof by game type and I find it helps to really see the inferences more clearly, especially when doing a lot at a time, to see how different setups handle the same general type situation. I got to '0' pretty quickly. I started by working the 1-stars (getting used to it), and then working through the games to the 5-stars. Then when I finished the games in that list (2 rounds: then move on, but when I'm done 'rounding' with the other types, I repeat until I've marked off all the games - I figured that it takes me about 2 rounds to get the inferences I first need before moving into a new type; it also takes at least a week to finish the entire list of games so that I have a fresh mind), I'd move on to the next 'major type.' I started with sequencing and then moved to in-and-out and then grouping. I also within each major type, sorted them by easiest sub-category to hardest sub-category. The 'easy' games become a bit of a warm-up for the harder games.

  I wanted to treat them like a true problem set, for that type. Eventually mixing up the stars for a type, but for the same 'type.'

  And then, when I PT, that allows me to practice them in the jumble, just like practicing question-specific LR types. And, I can always make a unique problem set that mixes together some of the troublesome games that I've tagged. I mark games with 'interesting/tricky' rules so I can use them as PT warm-up. Or at the very least, to do those a LOT more beyond mastering them.
• lsatdiva333 Member

  November 2020 227 karma

  Hi @hopefulling thanks for your reply!

  Sorry I don't really understand what you mean by this sentence haha. Would you mind clarifying? (:

  Then when I finished the games in that list (2 rounds: then move on, but when I'm done 'rounding' with the other types, I then work more rounds until I'm completely marked off - I figured that it takes me about 2 rounds to get the inferences I need before moving into a new type; it also takes at least a week to finish the list and come back to the same games with a fresh mind), I'd move on to the next 'major type.'
• 3 Likes

  hopefulling Member

  November 2020 edited November 2020 905 karma

  I made sure to do two FULL rounds of each game sub-type before moving on. Specifically as well to have two full rounds for each TYPE done before moving to the next type. It helped to form the inferences (and I'm hoping/thinking) to keep them in my mind.

  ---

  I have a spreadsheet printed that sorts the games per main type, then by sub-type, then by star rating. I could fit four attempts (with time and missed columns) on each page - I've only had a few games that needed more than four attempts to master.

  I started with Sequencing - Pure, then worked -One, then -Conditional, etc. I FP'd PTs 1-40 (to blend in my first PTs), so my 'pure' list has 6 games on it (4-1, 6-2, 33-1, etc). On a side note, I entered the time in off by the game PT & number, because that number kept changing and I had a bunch of games that I could have marked off, as I was just over the originally recommended 5-minutes. Now I don't have to look anything up as an added benefit.

  So with my first FP day, I worked through those 6 games of Sequencing - Pure, marking my time and missed, and then watching the videos for the games I had gone over on time and/or missed questions. End of the first day . The next day I started Sequencing - One, so that I could keep working through the list. I think I spent 2 days on the first round (17 games). Then I went back and did a 2nd round on Sequencing - Pure. Then a 2nd round on Sequencing - One. Then did this for the other sequencing games, trying to do 16 a day in the 'round' (or less if there were fewer - then I just worked on RC or LR drills). I didn't want to intermingle game types in these first few rounds, because I wanted to really think about that type specifically. I also wanted at least 3 days to separate the 1st and 2nd rounds of each game. I worked like this through two rounds of the Sequencing games and then moved on and did the same for the In-and-Out subtypes. Then Grouping and Misc. It took about a month to finish the first two rounds of the entire list.

  Then additional rounds for the games I hadn't mastered, just working down the list now (but still sticking within sub-game / main-game types). And about two weeks later, I can do a 4th round. I had a huge chunk of the games crossed off by now. Now, with these 'stragglers' I'm just sticking with the main type to finish the main type off.

  I do try to redo some of the games I finished in the 1st round, to double-check that I wasn't just 'lucky.' Mostly as a game-subtype refresher. Especially if I've already 'mastered' that sub-type already.

  I made the mistake of PT'ing right after finishing the CC, but I stopped a few PTs in, because I felt like I was wasting games. So, I took a month off from PTs and started FP'ing. Then, as I started PT'ing, I would do a FP day (PT day, review day, FP day, repeat ...). Then, after crossing into 'phase 2', I switched to every-other-day PT'ing. I could FP on the in-between PT days (especially since I can review my test the same day as the test). And, as I run into a PT game that I mess up, I add it to my PT list, to do rounds on it.

  Hope that helps to clarify.
• lsatdiva333 Member

  November 2020 edited November 2020 227 karma

  @hopefulling Thanks for the comprehensive break-down!

  When you say 4th round - are these mostly games that you felt were still tricky / that you felt like you haven't mastered yet? Or do you do another full round of all the games you've FPed?

  And also when you started PT'ing, do you just set one day for FP logic games (and do nothing else?) So FP would not fall under "review day"?
• 1 Like

  hopefulling Member

  November 2020 edited November 2020 905 karma

  When you say 4th round

  Yup, that's exactly it!

  when you started PT'ing, do you just set one day for FP logic games (and do nothing else?)

  When I first started, I ONLY FP'd - I stopped working PTs. Well, I started to try to do both, but I needed to really concentrate on FP'ing. (After watching this and realizing I was "doing it wrong:" https://7sage.com/webinar/post-core-curriculum-study-strategies/ )
  Then, I would at night read my notes and I picked up a copy of Weston's A Rulebook for Arguments. I would occasionally run through a LR drillset on a problem type.

  Only after I'd worked through the list of games twice (well, excluding the games I'd 'mastered' in their 1st round), did I start PT'ing again. Then I had a FP day like you mention - as a review day (with a PT every 3rd day; so a FP day every 3rd day also.

  I was SO CONFUSED how to FP at first, but the forum answered my questions and Pacifico's post was SO phenomenally helpful!! ( https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy/p1 ) I actually printed out one set of each of the games and sorted them into 'to do' and 'done' binders by star rating (I think my 'tactile' mind like seeing all of the work I needed to get through). I wrote out the inferences (and answers) on the back of the sheets as I worked the games so that I didn't have to keep watching the videos. (Plus, my Mom finds the games fun, so I have a hand-me-down recycle plan )

  When I'm completely done with FP'ing and PTs, I want to go back and take the LG sections from PTs 27 & 34 (they're, along with PT88, tagged as the hardest), to check myself with a really hard game section. ... Although, I'll also be running into PT88 along the way as an additional 'check.' I'm taking the test in January and that's my tentative pre-testday plan.