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
- 191 Webinars
- 10 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
1 Like
I am bad at setting up logic games how can I improve?
bensuth25
Free Trial Member
once I get the setup right I can do quite well on making inferences and completing the game. But I am horrible when there are multiple sets that must be assigned. I don't know what the base should be, and I am quite poor at determining if they should be in columns, how many per Collum, or rows. Overall I am just horrible at setting the games up. How can I improve?
Comments
You have no issue with diagramming, but you have problems with making inferences? Is that right, or did I misunderstand you?
How many games have you completed?
No I cant set the games up well. I am good at inferences.
You have no issue with diagramming, but you have problems with making inferences? Is that right, or did I misunderstand you?
How many games have you completed? > @bensuth25 said:
Yeah sorry, I skimmed through that. You clearly said it was a diagramming issue.
What resources have you used to help with diagramming? I think once you have diagramming fundamentals down, you should be good to go.
My diagramming is more in line with Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer. While the video explanations overlap with many of the concepts, there are some subtle differences.
I did the manhatten and am almost done with mike kim. I just dont know how to specifically practice diagram setup. or why I am so poor at it.
7Sage's fool-proof method is by far the way to improve.
https://7sage.com/how-to-get-a-perfect-score-on-the-logic-games/
Essentially, it sounds like you need more practice. The key is found in repetition. So keep plugging away!
The setup is key to succeeding in games. Your note reminds me of when I used to say "I am really great at LR... I just don't have enough time".
I like Kim's book, but there is no substitute for foolproofing games. I have completed over 600 attempts for the games on PTs 1-35 and I will probably end up doing every single LG ever. At the beginning, I had the same issue as you, but that is rarely an issue for me now. My problems lie in the smaller details now.
Once you see so many games, so many times, you'll begin to see past the apparent uniqueness of that game. It was the only way for me to break through that stage of learning.
Best of luck!
should I just be doing lsat practice tests now then? I have done manhatten and am almost done with kims book. I also have all 9 powerscore books, should I skip those books and just do practice tests?
@bensuth25 I would recommend against that if LG are your weakest section. The reason for this is that we take PTs in order to gauge our progress. But if you know that LG are your weak point and they are not where they need to be, then what's the use in wasting a PT?
7Sage Ultimate gives access to all PTs ever. I'd recommend doing each LG from PTs 1-35 until you've mastered each one. That means you're able to get all the answers right in under the recommended time even after a week, month, or more has passed since you last saw it. Once you finish the LG from 1-35 and you are feeling confident in your progress, then take a fresh PT.
Here is a link to how to foolproof: https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy
No, don't just skip and do PTs. You can fool proof anything .... I would just recommend learning and mastering the old games (PTs 1-40) first, however.
I am also having trouble identifying logic games. I took my third practice test today and froze up when trying to set up the logic games. Should I just print out numerous games from each game type and learn how to set the game up based on what is in the stimulus? I didn't even attempt answering the PT questions because I don't want to "waste" those questions and am confused on how to proceed!
@alkherti it requires lots of repetitious work. 7Sage endorses "fool-proofing". that process is described here https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy
Thank you! I'm about to begin repeating games over and over again to try and identify patterns. Appreciate the link to the discussion!
Don'y worry about wasting any early games. If you fool proof them like suggested above then it won't be a waste at all. Many of the inferences repeat themselves so once you master a good amount of the early games, you'll quickly see that your memorizing of these inferences and how they are diagrammed properly will help you demolish games you've never even seen! The fool proof method is great!
I think 7sage is sufficient enough to improve on games, especially if you just watch their free videos. Watch how JY sets up the games and just try to notice the patterns of the game boards for each game type. It takes a lot of practice, but you need to put in that hard work and you will eventually get it.
I think you should develop your own diagramming strategy and employ it repetitiously. You can't just read JY's methods or Mike Kim's method without formulating one of your own. For example, I write out the contrapositive because it's easier for me to see relationships that way, even though that's not standard practice. I would think about setting up more liberally -- not being construed to a particular game board -- and being more flexible. Especially in the newer hybrid games, the conventional setup isn't going to work. You have to tune into your intuitions and write down what you think is the most valuable pieces in the most visibly simple way possible.