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
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 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
- 38 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
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
170+ PT but still sucking at LG :(
luckysat1
Member
Started studying in June 2021. Have been studying pretty hard, especially since August. My diagnostic in June was a 149. Knowing I had an uphill battle to get to my target grade by October/November 2021 (I need to apply this cycle for personal reasons) I studied my @ss off...
- Read all of PowerScore Logic Games (in my diagnostic, LG was by far the worst as I barely got past the first game...)
- Read all of the LSAT Trainer by Kim
- Read quite a bit of LSAT Prep Plus from Kaplan. Not all.
- Got into 7Sage in August. Went through most of core curriculum (I did skip over sections I was very comfortable with and PT-ing well on due to time constraints) and also started PT'ing like crazy.
- Between August and October test I completed all PT's. Every single one.
- Since October and now I have tried to rest up as I was fairly worn out but I'm registered for the November test (wanted a backup) and have started to get back into my studying.
- I am now redoing my oldest PT's. I would estimate at this point I have done upward of 130 full-length PT's since June 2021.
My issue is I'm just not seeing improvement in LG. RC I typically get -0 to -2. LR, I'm between -0 and -4. Realistically, I don't think I can improve those sections a huge amount more between now and November and in any case I would not need to but...ugh, LG...
LG I have achieved -0 before but it's kind of a freak occurrence. My all-time average is -5 but realistically I am very lucky to ever get below -4 and have, recently, got -7 on LG! I also typically always get -0 on Blind Review so it's not like I don't know what I'm doing, it just never quite goes smoothly on the timed sections, generally because I end up rushing at least one game or just falling for some trap answer. Or doing something dumb like splitting inappropriately. Kind of mistakes that I feel I should have overcome by now with this level of practice and stufy.
I don't really struggle on any particular game type other than 'misc', a little, but I'm not sure how one can really work on a 'miscellaneous' game type, because it is miscellaneous. So yeah, I'm really at a loss, especially given how many folks seem to find this the easiest section to consistently perfect and I feel like if I can't get consistently to a -2 then the 170 goal is always going to be out of reach. The October test was brutal for me for LG.
What REALLY annoys me is that this has been the case since at least September and I'm not sure what more I can do about it. I don't think I have time to re-do the curriculum or really spend a ton of time working on it because I work full time and definitely need to continue to maintain sharpness on the other sections so those don't slip. It's almost like I just need a little hack or 10 extra minutes or something. If only LSAC would give me accommodations!
Anyway, mainly just venting ...nd sort of wondering if anyone else is in a similar boat? Or has perhaps got themselves out of said boat? I don't have the best GPA so the high LSAT is really important to me. I'm also an older student, otherwise I'd take a year and get a tutor 
Comments
I took the Oct LSAT (getting scores today - woooo) and I feel like I bombed the LG section because it was my first section after struggling through 45 minutes of technical difficulties just to access the test, which really threw me off.
Here is what I did and what I'm doing: In/Out games are my worst for some reason, so I redid all those problem sets and watched some of JYs explanation videos. Sometimes if I got a couple of questions wrong I'd make a fresh copy and redo the set while watching the video at the same time, or sometimes for a hint I'd see how he set up the boards and then redo the set. I also did all the Miscellaneous games not to LEARN them per se but to get more comfortable when being faced with weird games (there was one on the Oct LSAT and it threw me).
With the last 2.5 weeks before November I am going to redo LG sections from PTs 80-90. Then I'm going to do PTs 91/92 (the newest ones) on the LSAC platform and not on 7sage to get used to that platform (which I also felt I wasn't on test day).
My guy/gal if u could help me with RC I’ll get you to a -0 on LG 😂
If youre already breaking 170 without LG then there's no reason you can't do it on the test. That said, LG really is the easiest, but not because its easy... because all you have to do is not give up. If you can't -0 the section, you simply haven't mastered enough games. There is no way around the volume requirement for games IMO. What people who are done with the test or who have mastered the section tend to leave out is that it never feels like you'll get it, but it is extremely reliable–if you keep at it, you'll get there. If you don't go into the test reliably in the -0 to maaybe -2 range it's because either due to timeline constraints or just giving up, you chose to leave those points on the table. I know it doesnt feel like it, but that section is accessible to anyone.
@canihazJD yeah I think you're right with what you say and not mastering enough games... the question is how many games! I have done every PT and a lot of them I have done twice, so it's not like its a quantity of practice issue, right?
The problem I have with the foolproof method is usually when I redo the game immediately I can nail it, but that seems to go away when the game is a new game (even if it's the same 'type' of game, if that makes sense) and when under timed conditions. So it seems like more of a psychological/comfort issue than a pure technique issue. The questions I get wrong tend to be ones where I could have got it right but maybe snapped at an attractive answer and basically got duped (selected a could be true instead of a must be true, say) or, worse, misread the stimulus.
@luckysat1 if you can't say with confidence that I could randomly pick any released game and you would nail it under time, you haven't mastered it. You want to see what remains internalized and encoded in you head after the game has left your short term memory. Do them enough and they'll be there... or at least the ability to make those same inferences. Not there... you haven't done them enough.
I mean thats the whole test. It's a performance skill. Just like anything else, playing an instrument, driving a car, swinging a golf club... there is a volume of repetition requirement... and it has to be quality practice. Doesnt matter if you've seen every game.
If you feel like study conditions don't adequately stress you... like you can easily -0 any section under time but bomb the test, then inflate the difficulty... give yourself less time, add a game, do all level 5 games or a type that you are weaker in, do all games with rule sub questions, etc.
Your run should feel smooth... like a non-stop flow of inferences and answering. If not, examine your performances and do more.
My suggestion is to develop a skipping & timing strategy. I'm averaging -1 on games, and I never really 'learned' games. I read a few chapters from the LSAt trainer, and just got to practicing after that. This section is not conceptually challenging - but it takes a whole lot of focus to execute. I got better by playing easy games quickly to the point where I can be done with games one and two in under 12 minutes. My reco is drill the easy games and slowly move the timer down before the test. That way you'll have more time for the harder games in the back half of the section.
Moreover, there's usually one or two tougher questions in the beginning of the section. These can be 'how may possible combinations,' min max, rule switch, or some sort of misc section. Just flag those and come back if you aren't at 100% mastery yet. If you're able to move through those games at lightning speed you will have time to swing around again when you have more information & more game boards to answer these by elimination if not by inference.
To your point about splitting - I don't actually think splitting should have that big of an impact on your score/time management. The time it takes you to split can either be done up front or it can be done in each individual question. It's up to you really. Either way you'll have to spend the time somewhere. I personally don't split consistently, simply because I'd rather let the questions tell me when to split, rather than going through the motions up front. Before going into the questions, though, I play around with the game and rules in my head, so I guess that's a type of splitting, too.
Lastly, games is just about mental focus, tbh. I've noticed that when I'm drilling and I'm a little cocky or not 100% tuned in, I can slip down to -4 during a section, but when I'm in the PT mode, I'm consistently at that -0 to -2 mark. It really just is a matter of being ruthlessly focused and diligent with your habits and organization. Best of luck.