Atlas (Manhattan) v. Bibles Forum

[jeremysen]

Who knew this thread would turn out to be a Manhattan circle-jerk. Let alone in the holy land of the bibles - TLS.

99.9luft, funny thing - everyone who advocated Manhattan (with the exception of you) has <25 posts. wtf lol

yeah. Interesting theory, not at all true, but interesting.

Do you really think those test companies don't monitor this website?

Test it: Create a thread titled "Choosing an LSAT prep course" or "Question regarding ________'s LSAT methods". Guaranteed response from a test prep rep within a day or 2.

[Kabuo]

I have no experience with Manhattan, but I'll echo what an earlier poster said. The bibles worked wonders for me. 11 point jump after using the bibles for retake, numbers in profile.

[soj]

I think they're both excellent. Manhattan has some useful insights about how to approach questions and the lines of thinking that test-takers should try to emulate. The comments on "How a 170+ tester might think" are the highlights. But useful as they are in their own right, Manhattan books can't touch PS in LR and LG, for which the Bibles are the gold standard.

I think someone who is strong in RC and only needs help for LR and LG can focus on the Bibles and do great, but anyone with room to improve in RC could probably benefit from Manhattan.

I'm not a Manhattan employee by the way. I know it's kind of suspect given my low post count, but I have pretty extensive posts in the June Prep thread that would be very unusual for a Manhattan employee. I also don't think Manhattan books are perfect--I'm very annoyed by a typo in the answer key in the Atlas 2009 LR book, which led me to think one of my answers was wrong when it was correct, and forced me to try to justify the "correct" answer (i.e. the wrong answer that I was led to believe was correct by the typo) that ultimately proved to be an exercise in reinforcing bad reasoning.

Do take my words with a grain of salt because I don't have any real LSAT scores (only PTs) to show for the purported benefits, and even I can't accurately gauge how much of my recent improvements is attributable to one set of books and how much is attributable to another. I also used the 2009 books, not 2010.

Manhattan folks, if you believe the 2010 books are not only typo-free but substantially better (as many publishers claim, though not convincingly, about new editions of their books) than the 2009 ones, I'd be happy to review your 2010 books. Just send 'em to me free of charge and I'll post a detailed review here.

[phx]

I've used both the LG Bible and the Manhattan LG guide. I went mostly with the strategies from the Bible, but I liked Manhattan's strategies for sequencing games and their logic chain diagram for In/Out grouping games is also very powerful when used appropriately.

[rocon7383]

Who knew this thread would turn out to be a Manhattan circle-jerk. Let alone in the holy land of the bibles - TLS.

99.9luft, funny thing - everyone who advocated Manhattan (with the exception of you) has <25 posts. wtf lol

yeah. Interesting theory, not at all true, but interesting.

Do you really think those test companies don't monitor this website?

Test it: Create a thread titled "Choosing an LSAT prep course" or "Question regarding ________'s LSAT methods". Guaranteed response from a test prep rep within a day or 2.

I'm sure they do, that was not what I was questioning. I have more than 25 posts and have actually taken manhattan courses.

[Grond]

I have no experience with Manhattan, but I'll echo what an earlier poster said. The bibles worked wonders for me. 11 point jump after using the bibles for retake, numbers in profile.

Did you re-apply with your new score?

[soj]

Oops, are we talking about books or courses? My comments above don't apply at all to their courses. I only self-study.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

I think they're both excellent. Manhattan has some useful insights about how to approach questions and the lines of thinking that test-takers should try to emulate. The comments on "How a 170+ tester might think" are the highlights. But useful as they are in their own right, Manhattan books can't touch PS in LR and LG, for which the Bibles are the gold standard.

I think someone who is strong in RC and only needs help for LR and LG can focus on the Bibles and do great, but anyone with room to improve in RC could probably benefit from Manhattan.

I'm not a Manhattan employee by the way. I know it's kind of suspect given my low post count, but I have pretty extensive posts in the June Prep thread that would be very unusual for a Manhattan employee. I also don't think Manhattan books are perfect--I'm very annoyed by a typo in the answer key in the Atlas 2009 LR book, which led me to think one of my answers was wrong when it was correct, and forced me to try to justify the "correct" answer (i.e. the wrong answer that I was led to believe was correct by the typo) that ultimately proved to be an exercise in reinforcing bad reasoning.

Do take my words with a grain of salt because I don't have any real LSAT scores (only PTs) to show for the purported benefits, and even I can't accurately gauge how much of my recent improvements is attributable to one set of books and how much is attributable to another. I also used the 2009 books, not 2010.

Manhattan folks, if you believe the 2010 books are not only typo-free but substantially better (as many publishers claim, though not convincingly, about new editions of their books) than the 2009 ones, I'd be happy to review your 2010 books. Just send 'em to me free of charge and I'll post a detailed review here.

Thanks for the review - and your valiant efforts to prove you don't work for us amidst all the suspicion - the latest LR book is significantly different than the edition you read. We just published the 2nd edition and it added 300 pages to the edition that you own, and, alas, with so much new material, there are a few typos which we've sent to the printer for correction. (we had to actually kill an editor as punishment...) We put up an errata list on our forums

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

I think they're both excellent. Manhattan has some useful insights about how to approach questions and the lines of thinking that test-takers should try to emulate. The comments on "How a 170+ tester might think" are the highlights. But useful as they are in their own right, Manhattan books can't touch PS in LR and LG, for which the Bibles are the gold standard.

I think someone who is strong in RC and only needs help for LR and LG can focus on the Bibles and do great, but anyone with room to improve in RC could probably benefit from Manhattan.

I'm not a Manhattan employee by the way. I know it's kind of suspect given my low post count, but I have pretty extensive posts in the June Prep thread that would be very unusual for a Manhattan employee. I also don't think Manhattan books are perfect--I'm very annoyed by a typo in the answer key in the Atlas 2009 LR book, which led me to think one of my answers was wrong when it was correct, and forced me to try to justify the "correct" answer (i.e. the wrong answer that I was led to believe was correct by the typo) that ultimately proved to be an exercise in reinforcing bad reasoning.

Do take my words with a grain of salt because I don't have any real LSAT scores (only PTs) to show for the purported benefits, and even I can't accurately gauge how much of my recent improvements is attributable to one set of books and how much is attributable to another. I also used the 2009 books, not 2010.

Manhattan folks, if you believe the 2010 books are not only typo-free but substantially better (as many publishers claim, though not convincingly, about new editions of their books) than the 2009 ones, I'd be happy to review your 2010 books. Just send 'em to me free of charge and I'll post a detailed review here.

And I'll be happy to send you a replacement for your book! pm me

[Easy-E]

I'm bought the LGB and LRB, I'm currently working through the Games Bible right now. For the most part its very good, but I don't really dig their diagramming style, at least as far as linear games. But the ideas and concepts it teaches seem solid.

Then again, I constantly go to the Manhattan forum to check my diagramming work, so if the book follows the same principles Noah usually demonstrates there, I can't say much bad about either.

That was a useless post.

[nshapkar]

Oops, are we talking about books or courses? My comments above don't apply at all to their courses. I only self-study.

no no, we're talking books only. I want insight on books because I'm not shelling out anymore money on courses.

[tehrocstar]

Manhattan Noah - what's new exactly in the updated logical reasoning guide? 250+ new pages is a ton of new pages. Do you suggest those who went through the Atlas guide to go pick up the new guide?

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Manhattan Noah - what's new exactly in the updated logical reasoning guide? 250+ new pages is a ton of new pages. Do you suggest those who went through the Atlas guide to go pick up the new guide?

I hate to further give the impression that we started this thread! But, since you asked, the new book has a deeper discussion of assumptions, we connect more question types into a general framework (the assumption family), and we delve a bit deeper into principle example questions. These were changes that we first made in our course, and then we updated the books to support that. We also added a few new drills to work on discrete skills (e.g. categorizing an assumption). Finally, since LR is 50% of the score, we decided to throw in a lot more focused practice sets (with explanations) to make it easier to immediately practice the strategy. In general, most people who have read both were glad to have the new one. Anyone who bought an Atlas copy before we released our 2nd edition is welcome to send us their receipt and we'll replace their book with a fatter one as a gesture of good will in these dark and stormy times (and we're now called Manhattan LSAT, though nobody seems to want to use that name).

[Kurst]

we're now called Manhattan LSAT, though nobody seems to want to use that name

Atlas > Manhattan

[privatemf]

I love the bibles.

[mchuynh]

Get Both. They're both useful.

[nshapkar]

Get Both. They're both useful.

should i use them simultaneously or use bibles and then move onto atlas, or...?

[mchuynh]

Get Both. They're both useful.

should i use them simultaneously or use bibles and then move onto atlas, or...?

I suggest reading the bibles first.

[glewz]

Who knew this thread would turn out to be a Manhattan circle-jerk. Let alone in the holy land of the bibles - TLS.

99.9luft, funny thing - everyone who advocated Manhattan (with the exception of you) has <25 posts. wtf lol

yeah. Interesting theory, not at all true, but interesting.

Do you really think those test companies don't monitor this website?

Test it: Create a thread titled "Choosing an LSAT prep course" or "Question regarding ________'s LSAT methods". Guaranteed response from a test prep rep within a day or 2.

@rocon7383
All right, well here's a list of MLSAT advocates + posts. Since my last post many days ago, whosays, fjsms, and tehrocstar have almost unchanged # posts.
rocon7383: 206
whosays: 2
fjsms: 24
tehrocstar: 23
phx: 33
mchuynh: 22
99.9luft: 1982

And on jeremy's comment that test prep companies (esp. manhattan) monitor TLS, we have Manhattan LSAT Noah in this thread.

[glewz]

Who knew this thread would turn out to be a Manhattan circle-jerk. Let alone in the holy land of the bibles - TLS.

OP, I dunno whether MLSAT's books are effective, but I'd take the posts on this thread (and especially your poll) with a grain of salt.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet $ that ITT you have some (not everyone obviously) employees selling a product, as opposed to genuine responses from those who have used the books.

[typ3]

@rocon7383
All right, well here's a list of MLSAT advocates + posts. Since my last post many days ago, whosays, fjsms, and tehrocstar have almost unchanged # posts.
rocon7383: 206
whosays: 2


fjsms: 24
tehrocstar: 23
phx: 33
mchuynh: 22
99.9luft: 1982

And on jeremy's comment that test prep companies (esp. manhattan) monitor TLS, we have Manhattan LSAT Noah in this thread.

You can add me to that list of MLSAT supporter. It's a superior product in my opinion for testing into the 170's. My test day performance was well below my PT average, but with the bibles my actual score was still 7 points lower.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Just for the record - while we like to stay abreast of conversations ("monitor"), and answer questions, it is not our style - nor is it ethical - to post fake reviews here or elsewhere. Plus, it's LSAT season - who's got the time to do this (develop the in-depth back story, forge the paperwork, and leave traces of DNA in relevant locations)?

More importantly, good luck with your final months of prep, whatever books you use.

If anyone has questions, or salacious accusations , feel free to pm me.

[tehrocstar]

I'm just a new user, and just started using these forums as I'm prepping for the June 2011 exam. The manhattan/atlas books are newer, could it just be correlation that those who promote it, happen to be newer members? And isn't there an equal amount of votes for the bible? In any case, i definitely don't work for Manhattan. Don't know how I could prove that.

[Kabuo]

I'm just a new user, and just started using these forums as I'm prepping for the June 2011 exam. The manhattan/atlas books are newer, could it just be correlation that those who promote it, happen to be newer members? And isn't there an equal amount of votes for the bible? In any case, i definitely don't work for Manhattan. Don't know how I could prove that.

Only way TLS will ever take you seriously now is if you take a SS of you being registered for the June exam with no previous score over 173 or w/e Manhattan's cutoff is along with your photo ID. Sorry, but you gotta do it. I guess you could edit out your LSAC #, but then you run the risk of the most paranoid posters accusing you of stealing another person's SS of the June exam registration.

[99.9luft]

I'm just a new user, and just started using these forums as I'm prepping for the June 2011 exam. The manhattan/atlas books are newer, could it just be correlation that those who promote it, happen to be newer members? And isn't there an equal amount of votes for the bible? In any case, i definitely don't work for Manhattan. Don't know how I could prove that.

Only way TLS will ever take you seriously now is if you take a SS of you being registered for the June exam with no previous score over 173 or w/e Manhattan's cutoff is along with your photo ID. Sorry, but you gotta do it. I guess you could edit out your LSAC #, but then you run the risk of the most paranoid posters accusing you of stealing another person's SS of the June exam registration.

That was elaborate, Mulder.
How 'bout a good ol' NO ONE CARES (re him proving his identity).