@CrushLSAT said:
question 19 (which asks for a complete and accurate list of doctors at Souderton) be E (N and P)? Why can't the ~N --> J pair be treated the same as ~O --> J? If we only have N and P, aren't we still good since we have at ...
@"steve-10" said:
The correct answer to Q1, the typical "acceptable configuration" question, implies T — W (where "—" is the usual notation indicating relative order).
Well, it does imply that T -- W is a possibility. T -- W ...
PT 17.3.4
Yes! ... sure if the question below (PT 17. 3. 4) showcases "how ... question from rather an old PT, but I think the skill ... was definitely a good early PT question to look at for ... , we just finished review of PT73 and those point at issue ...
... to poop on a particular PT because it sucks and ... LSAT's remarkably similar from PT to PT and learning to recognize ... didn't do well on PT73. Now you get to figure ... you can do well on PT whatever whose score will ... what you're saying about 73.1.6. The argument has ...
Thanks @J.Y. Ping, i wanna just add that PT73 knocked my socks off abit and i spent close to a week shoring up the weaknesses it exposed and my average went up
By a 2 points!!!, i owe this all to having a hard PT...THANK YOU PT73!!!
... the conditional sequencing game in PT 83,- JY decided not to ... , he did decide to split (PT73 game 1). JY is not ... I pointed out -- PT61 and PT 52 Game 2, my issue ...