Howdy, Stranger!

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

Help -13 on LG during test, but -0 during BR

Alice777Alice777 Core Member
edited July 2021 in Logic Games 20 karma

Hello everyone,

This is my first time posting in this forum. I am beginning to get very frustrated with my LG performance. I end up in the -13 to -10 range when I do a full timed LG section but I am able to get to -1 or -0 on BR consistently. Any pointers on how I can improve my performance when timed?



  • Cynthia-2Cynthia-2 Member
    498 karma

    Maybe you are not ready for timed sections yet, maybe try the games without timing until you familiarize yourself more with them.

  • MistaTee001MistaTee001 Member
    105 karma

    Firstly Alice777, congratulations on your excellent blind review score! That's great news that you're getting nearly perfect on a consistent basis!

    One of the best ways (if not the best) to improve your LG score is simply to keep foolproofing the same game (as frenchfyre just provided a link explaining the process) until you have mastered it by getting a perfect score. The most likely explanation for the variance in scores between timed and BR is because that you aren't yet that proficient with the games that you can replicate your BR score when under timed pressure.

    Keep at it! Eventually through sheer repetition and practicing under timed scenarios as well as BRing, you will eventually see your score variation dissipate, as I have.

    All the best, and feel free to message me should you have any further questions.


  • 103 karma

    Great job on blind review!!! I would say keep studying without timing and keep track of the inferences you make. Between every game there are similar patterns and ways of thinking. Once you become familiar with them, the timed sections will be a piece of cake! keep grinding!

  • Alice777Alice777 Core Member
    20 karma

    Everyone, thank you so much for the thoughts and the encouragement. I was feeling pretty low and I needed that. I will keep grinding 🙂👍

  • __0xFF____0xFF__ Yearly Member
    8 karma

    Your BR scores are really impressive. I get the vibe you are just panicking at the thought of timing yourself.

    Perhaps, it would make sense to progressively aim for a -10, -8, -5, ..., -0 on the timed tests?

  • FindingSageFindingSage Alum Member
    2042 karma

    LG was a difficult section for me to improve in. My BR was consistently -0 for awhile before I finally figured out how to match my timed scores. I would suggest looking up Pacifico's fool proof method as a I know a lot of people have been successful there. I personally spent a long time working though PT 1-35, particularly the first 16 Prep tests. I remember getting so frustrated, at time I felt dumb or that I should just hang up the towel because I was not getting it. Having such a dramatic difference sounds like you are approaching the games totally differently timed versus in BR. I am not sure where you are in your prep but it may be that you just aren't quite ready to take full length practice test and would benefit from spending more time in the CC or drilling or another possibility is that you are brute forcing answers. While games can be brute forced if we have all day to do it, it is neither the most efficient way or even likely that you will finish all 4 games timed.

    Here are things I started to do that helped me make improvement.

    • I went back to the CC and made sure the conditional rules were ingrained in my head.

    • I knew that I struggled to see inferences that it felt like other tests takers could see so I started trying to make worlds whenever possible. This helped me not only in pushing out inferences but also in realizing that there is not just one way to approach a game. And like it or not, when we are actually taking the test we don't get to stop and run and watch the explanation video to see the "best" set up.

    • I practiced making worlds with games both untimed and also in BR. When I did BR I tried to make worlds for every game and also tried to chose a rule different than I had chosen timed to make worlds on. When learning this I would watch the explanation video on 7 Sage or sometimes on LSAT Demon which I used sporadically throughout my prep.

    • When I first started trying to make worlds I only tried to make them if I thought that my worlds would be fairly complete. As my prep continued I started to realize that even if I had 2 or 3 partially completed worlds it would often be enough to push out inferences and eliminate wrong answer choices. Rules that are prime candidates for making worlds on are highly restrictive rules or rules where there is overlap with another rule. If "S" is mentioned in more than one rule I am looking to make worlds on the basis of S for example. Conditionals are often easier to deal with when making worlds- set up a world where the conditional is triggered and one where it isn't for example.

    • When reading rules initially turn negative rules into positive rules. A common example of this can be seen in grouping games. Sometimes you will read that N can't go with O and also can't go with H. But who can G actually go with? Is G further limited by other rules or distribution for example?

    • Spend time really mastering the more common game types and "easier" games- not all games are created equal and you really want to bank time for a harder game.

    • For Miscellaneous games they are often not as hard as the look. In fact, they are often very rule driven and sometimes the questions are very easy. LSAC is trying to get people to panic and also catch people who have only drilled "newer" games and will waste their time trying to set up the game board. This is the same kind of mental trap as sticking a five star question in as #6 in LR. LSAC are very very good at knowing how our minds work and laying these traps well. If you encounter a miscellaneous game simply take a deep breath and be flexible.

    The games section overall requires you to be flexible, read carefully and look for the "smarter" way of approaching not only the individual game but the section overall.

  • isdmyungisdmyung Member
    121 karma

    My tutor had me practicing each major type of game for a good period of time. Each game I did, I tried completing in less than 9 minutes. Then I worked my way to solve each game in about 8 minutes. Not every game will follow this rule since some games have more questions than other or could be significantly harder than the others in the the same section. Use your judgement to determine which games are worth going back to. I made a spreadsheet with tabs labeled: sequencing, grouping, and In and Out/Misc. Each tab had columns: PT, Game#, <9 min, Attempts, Recycle, Type, Difficulty level.

    PT/Game# - helps you track exactly what game you're working.
    <9 min - you can change this to whatever time goal you want. It is important to record how long it took you to solve the game. Only record the times where you crush the game with -0. Otherwise leave it as 0000. While intuition is important for LG, I realized pattern recognition helps develop the intuition.
    Attempts - This later becomes handy when you want to review games you commonly messed up on or had to revisit.
    Recycle - Yes or No. No should be for games that were so easy that it isn't worth reviewing again. For example, level 1 basic sequence game where you completed the game in under 6 minutes and got -0. Is that game really worth spending another several minutes to boost your ego or should use the same several minutes wrestling with a more formidable concept(s) you want to conquer in a harder game?
    Type - i.e. SeqDbl, SeqTwist, etc.
    Difficulty level - 1 through 5 as labeled in 7Sage. I eventually was practicing on all 4s and 5s when I started hitting -1 to -3 on PTs. Occasionally, I would pick from a 3 if I wanted to generate a random 4 game section to practice on; every game was at least level 3 or higher. In doing this, I found myself with extra time come actual PTs because usually there is at least one or two level 1 and 2 games in every LG section.

    Having something empirical to reflect back on and track helped me to practice efficiently and specifically target my weaknesses. As a results, I consistently scored -0/-1 on my past several PTs so far. Not every scenario plays the same, so don't be discouraged if all the sudden you have a bad PT day and get more than -3. My last PT, I got -0 on the PT I was doing but -6 on the extra section (LG) I imposed on myself. Once you get proficient, I cannot stress enough that LG is like a muscle: it can atrophy from discontinued use. Just because you get better, don't drop the ball because you will start regressing like the example I gave you on my last PT. That -6 could be a difference of almost 3 points if that was the section that counted.

    On that note, I highly recommend trying to simulate all your PTs like game day as much as possible if you are not already. Depending on your lifestyle or schedule, it may not always be feasible. I try to at least make my Saturdays as realistic as possible while my weekdays are left at the mercy of when I can get off work. For example, my Saturdays look like a test starting noon, waking up at the same time, eating the same breakfast and tackling a PT + an extra section. I've heard advice from a lot of people of how only practicing 4 sections left a surprise on the real test day in terms of stamina.

  • Alice777Alice777 Core Member
    20 karma

    Thank you so much for sharing your process and thoughts in detail!!

  • MotoDuckMotoDuck Core Member
    36 karma

    I actually had to overcome the same problem, and I know exactly how frustrating it is.

    What I find helpful is to really identity what's slowing me down during the timed section. By this I mean, take note of when I'm panicking and spinning my wheels instead of using the strategies I have to move forward when I get stuck somewhere in a game. Like, "how long did it take before I realized I needed to just take stock of what remaining unused elements I had in a game." "How long did it take before I realized I just needed to run through the rules again when I got stuck." "how much time did I waste before I realized only had two possible sub gameboards"

    JY mentions that sometimes if you don't see that big inference at the beginning, the game will force you to see it during the questions. That isn't always ideal, but sometimes you might have to work with it instead of staring at a gameboard at the beginning of the game for too long.

    Basically, whatever part you couldn't figure out during the initial timed run, whatever unlocked the solution during the blind review. What strategy or tool you used to blow the game wide open during BR, is what you have to start getting quicker at using during your timed runs. Like JY always says, remember your reoccurring inferences. That simple idea will save you a lot of time.

    It's a pretty basic concept, but it did help me a lot.

  • Alice777Alice777 Core Member
    20 karma

    dbecerra, thank you!

  • Yes, this is very common. Just let yourself get used to LG over time. If you just keep practicing it'll improve!

Sign In or Register to comment.