I've been really looking into sufficient/necessary flaws lately. A particularly difficult way in which the test writers described the flaw appears on PT A section 4 question 20.
... undisclosed but mostly likely a PT from the 60s series. ... then I’ll take PT C2 before taking PT 83.
... from PT 1-29 2) one full length PT in ... the 20s
3) PT C2 ... the week or two after PT 83, very light / minor ...
... the conditional sequencing game in PT 83,- JY decided not to ... , he did decide to split (PT 73 game 1). JY is ... pointed out -- PT61 and PT 52 Game 2, my issue is that ...
If this is the only way you'll have access to more problem sets then it's def not a bad idea. If you already have access to PT just use the question bank to figure out which questions and level of difficulty and print.
Here is a _very_ partial list of correlation-causation flaws:
PT20.S1.Q10 (★★★), PT20.S4.Q14 (★★★), PT30.S2.Q25 (★★★★), PT31.S2.Q9 (★★★★), PT64.S1.Q5 (★), PT65.S1.Q8 (★), PT66.S4.Q25(★★★)
... them. You can revisit the question(s) after you learn more ... point us to a specific question or two that you particularly ... or telling us the PT number,section, and question number. Perhaps we ...
3:44: "Or, maybe they did in fact have a HUUUUGE boner for Homer but there wasn't enough Homer to go around."
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-21/
If my schedule holds, I'm taking PTs 73, 79, & 83 whole and PT55 split into sections (as I'll be on a west coast vaca that week). FWIW, I would not try to get too cute with trying to figure out "what LSAC is doing." Just learn the material.
... and probably of virtually all question types, so you should go ... over your most recent PT and compare each question you missed to ... that covers that kind of question. Ask yourself what gave you ... difficulty on that question and then compare that to ...
... example, on my last PT, I got 2/3 hard NA wrong ... your glaring weakness first. 2. If your target score is ... (if it's more than 2 or 3 points away), then ...